#kdanalysis

[itskubra]

H2H #2 : Sinner vs Alcaraz

Simply, why does Alcaraz largely keep beating Sinner?

With the head-to-head currently standing at 10-6 in favour of Alcaraz and him winning 7 of their last nine matches, it makes you wonder why a matchups of two players so even in level has been largely dominated by one guy.

One funny thing I noticed was the person who would've been considered the better player against the field at a given time, would be the one losing more - e.g Alcaraz 2022 period or Sinner 2024

I think the very first 2 matches they played do a good job of demonstrating the dynamics between this two on the most simple level so lets start there!

Paris Masters 2021 - Alcaraz d Sinner (7-6, 7-5)

Sorry to the famous Alicante Challenger match, but I'm going to start here; their first official tour level meeting.

This was a pretty close match like the scoreline suggests. And with both of their serves pretty underdeveloped at this point, there were a lot of rally exchanges. So, how did a then no.30 something Alcaraz find an advantage over a top ten Sinner?

Well, after 2 breaks of serve in the first to games, they both held serve into a tiebreak that Carlos won 7-1 where he outclassed Jannik with a superior toolkit and improvisational skills.

Where Carlos was better, was everything that wasn't foundational; forehand, backhand, serve, return.

At 0-1, Jannik hits a 1st serve wide, Carlos hits a backhand slice return down the middle, Jannik has a forehand swinging volley that he hits down the middle and Carlos hits backhand lob crosscourt winner.

Jannik should've finished here; he was in an advantageous position with a ball right on top of the net but he doesn't place the volley well and Carlos comes up with the lob.

Compare this to the 3-0 point; Carlos hits a 1st serve wide and gets a shallow backhand return crosscourt. They exchange backhands crosscourt and Carlos changes direction down-the-line. Jannik hits a forehand crosscourt and Carlos uses a forehand drop shot down the line. Jannik digs it out with a backhand slice crosscourt and Carlos finishes with a backhand swinging volley down-the-line winner.

When the point moved out of a standard baseline rally, Carlos was the one able to improvise and find finishes. Sinner ended up 10/26 at net - an inability to do enough with volleys, especially against Carlos' speed and improvisational skills

In the second set, they both hold until 5-5, and with Jannik serving for 6-5, he makes 4 forehand unforced errors. It was an entirely uncharacteristic game (esp in the context of the player he is now), but I felt like Carlos' speed and defense put a lot of pressure on him, causing him to go for too much and Alcaraz ultimately served out the match.

Generally, Carlos was more stable on serve, winning 80% of his first serve points vs Jannik's 61%. He faced 2 breakpoints and saved one, while Sinner faced 11 and (impressively) saved 9.

Wimbledon 2022 - Sinner d Alcaraz (6-1, 6-4, 6-7, 6-3)

This might have been the single best, or at least one of Jannik's best career wins at that point.

Sinner did almost everything at an extremely high level - serve, return, groundstrokes. The main thing that didn't work for him was really only his volleying.

His main advantage and real key to winning, was his return. Carlos won only 45% of his first serve points in set 1!

Jannik was able to make neutralizing and sometimes even offensive returns off of Carlos' first serve. He was Djokovic-like in his ability to get a lot on his returns even when stretched out. It was a real exposure of the serve weakness of Carlos that not many had been able to take advantage of.

The backhand dynamic played a big part - When Carlos was standing deep, Sinner would hit his backhand short and angled, forcing Carlos to slice, and if he was standing on top of the baseline, Jannik would hit with lots of pace and depth, rushing Alcaraz.

The pace of play was also a huge factor - Carlos had a lot of trouble dealing with the quicker paced grass courts, especially against a hard hitter like Jannik and his forehand very much struggled to absorb the incoming pace.

So, for anyone new, you can see the cliches of the rivalry pretty clearly in these first two matches - Jannik wins fast-paced baseline exchanges and the bread and butter rallies by rushing Carlos, while Carlos disrupts with variety.

Obviously, Jannik is good at net and Carlos can hold his own from the baseline, especially compared to back then - this is simply putting their matchup advantages in the most simplistic way.

Still, it doesn't answer the essential question of why Carlos has largely dominated the matchup since 2024.

Obviously, the numbers are numbers, but i think its very disingenuous to frame the head-to-head as "wow, Carlos always beats Jannik, it's not even close!" Like, did you watch these matches???

Practically all of them have felt like they could've gone either way, only a few big points making the difference.

But still you may ask, if all these matches felt 50-50, how come they've gone one way? What is it about Carlos that Jannik can't get past?

Lets look at their closest match;

Roland Garros 2025: Alcaraz d Sinner (4-6, 6-7, 6-4, 7-6, 7-6)

To keep this concise, lets examine the deciding moments.

I think the real difference maker (if you can even call it that) in the 5th set were the forehands; mainly, when Jannik had an attacking forehand, yes, he would hit it very hard, but it was always too linear, and Carlos would neutralize it - this happened on one of the championship points.

His return earned him an attacking forehand, but he didn't create enough width, and Carlos neutralized

Vs Carlos, who would create angles and drag Sinner off court.

The true climax of this match - especially in hindsight - was the 6-5 game in the 5th, with Carlos serving to stay alive in the match. I think this game is the truest case of Carlos Alcaraz making miracles happen and that being the only thing that stopped Sinner from winning the 5th 7-5 with the way he was returning.

Ultimately the TLDR of all of this is the reason why Carlos has won so often is his ability to throw is his entire toolkit at Sinner in the biggest moments. He disrupts Jannik and takes him out of his rhythm with changes in height and speed and angles, stealing away crucial points.

It also buys Carlos more time, allowing him to express the full breadth of his offensive repetoire and defend better, lowering Jannik's conversion rate from offensive positions.

When Jannik wins e.g Wimbledon, its because he successfully rushes Carlos out of variety, allowing himself to thrive in the largely one-pace, extremely fast, rhythmic baseline rallies.

I think the matches in which Carlos has created the most seperation - Rome 2025 and US open 2025 - are the biggest proof of this

When Carlos hit the higher, loopier shots, Jannik would miss.

When he used the slice, Jannik would be pulled out of position, giving him plenty of court to hit into.

Carlos' hyper-aggressive mindset helps too;

When points get to neutral, while Jannik is more than happy to remain in neutral and slowly gain control, Carlos is much more trigger-happy, turning 50-50 points firmly in his control.

Jannik gets good depth and pace on the penultimate shot, but Carlos' has a much looser definition of what is 'attackable'

~~

To the point of a possible 'mental block' for Jannik, I personally think his tightness in some of these matches has had more to do with occasion than Carlos, e.g US open, ATP Finals (cuz despite winning, i do think he was tight, esp early on).

These are big matches with a lot on the line, and he just happens to be facing Carlos on these occasions - I don't think he comes into the matches feeling like he can't beat Alcaraz.

I do think there is merit to the serve thing though - I think he is hyperaware that his 1st serve percentage has been low against Carlos so when he plays him, its in his head and he serves below average.

Also, I just really don’t see this h2h being this extremely one-sided thing - like of course it’s possible, but I think they’ll continue to have close matches that go either way.

Ultimately, this is a fun rivalry between two great players that I’m very excited to watch and I just wish more tennis fans would be able to actually think clearly when discussing them😭

[itskubra]

So close, yet so far

H2H #1 : Alcaraz v Fritz

My fav side-plot of the year

Now this is obviously not the headline rivalry of the season, but it's one I have found the progression of really interesting this year.

With all the buzz about who will challenge Sincaraz, and Taylor as a contender for 'best of the rest' in most minds, their matches serve almost as a measuring stick for Taylor - a standard for how good he needs to be - but, especially in 2025, time and time again, he's come so close, yet he remains so far.

So why is that?

Lets take a closer look at why Carlos keeps coming out the better, why Taylor seems to be right there, but hasn't come good when it matters.

Wimbledon 2025: Alcaraz d Fritz (6-4, 5-7, 6-3, 7-6)

The first thing I would like to say about this match is that it genuinely made me question whether I like servebot Alcaraz😭.

Taylor was very close to taking this match into a 5th - how?

Fritz upped the ante in this match by being very aggressive on second serve return and going huge on his own second serve. It's a strategy that goes against his philosophy against most opponents; don't miss.

It's very common to see Taylor readjust and go for less when he's missing a lot, especially against lower ranked opponents.

It's necessary to go big against someone as good as Carlos though, and it ultimately payed dividends; the big second serves allowed him to hold at 5-5, the aggressive returning allowed Taylor to break and take the second 7-5, especially with Carlos making errors from the back of the court.

A good deep return that rushes Carlos and prevents him from being aggressive on the +1, then Fritz goes for it on the next shot

In the 4th set tiebreak, Taylor found himself up 6-4 but lost 4 points in row and ultimately lost the match. Here's how they went;

6-4: Fritz hits a 1st serve down the T, Alcaraz hits a deep backhand return crosscourt. They hit backhands crosscourt before Fritz changes backhand down the middle, Alcaraz hits a forehand approach shot inside-out, Fritz goes backhand down the line, Alcaraz hit a forehand volley (stop volley) crosscourt and Fritz misses a forehand crosscourt -forced error.

5‑6: Carlos hits 1st serve to the body. Fritz puts a backhand return down the middle on the baseline, they exchange forehands, Alcaraz hits backhand crosscourt - forces the error into Fritz's forehand inside-out.

6‑6: Carlos 2nd serve to body, again Fritz puts a backhand return on the baseline. Carlos goes forehand down the middle, Fritz hits forehand approach shot crosscourt, Carlos goes down the line and Fritz nets a volley.

6‑7: Fritz hits a 1st serve down the T, Carlos makes a deep forehand return inside-out. Fritz goes backhand crosscourt, Alcaraz changes down the line and forces the error.

Game. Set. Match. Alcaraz.

In these four points, Taylor - the second most prolific serve holder in the world - makes his first serve, and he also makes two ultra-deep returns. And lost.

When asked what he would've changed tactically, Taylor says;

"The thing is a lot of the things that I would have changed, um, I think would have only helped me for a point or two and then I think Carlos would have just made an adjustment and I don't think it would have been a long-term, uh, answer."

Truly, that's what it felt like - Taylor doing all the right things but Carlos just coming up with goods, especially when it got down to the wire.

Their next match however, turned out quite differently.

Laver Cup 2025: Fritz d Alcaraz (6-3, 6-2)

A result no one had on their bingo card.

A first (and only) win for Taylor in this head-to-head. One that generated a lot of discussion.

Tactically, Fritz hit bigger than normal, and was ultra aggressive. He also came forward and finished with startling efficiency - for him, at least. It felt like Alcaraz was always behind the 8-ball.

It's what he tried to accomplish at Wimbledon - combined with the net-rushing, he had much more success.

It was also not a great forehand day for Carlos, which is the best kind of day if you're trying to beat him.

I personally regarded this match as an isolated event - a great match and result from Taylor, but one that happened in specific factors unique to this event, and in of itself, was not indication that Taylor was a newfound prospect for slam titles, at least not more than he already was.

Meaning, if Taylor Fritz is a Slam contender - which is a more then reasonable take on someone who has made a major final and makes semifinals - this specific match and outcome can't be cited as the proof of that.

I do still think this match has some significance however, because I think it gave Taylor some serious clarity on how to play (and beat) Carlos.

Which I do think he knew before - I think most players do - but actually getting over the finish line is still important.

A proof that he could do it and a guide on how to do it.

So, what next?

Tokyo Open 2025: Alcaraz d Fritz (6-4, 6-4)

With a one-legged Alcaraz as his opponent in the final, Fritz copy-and-pasting Laver Cup and beating Carlos again - this time in a more 'legitimate' setting - seemed more likely.

This did not come to fruition though, the main factor standing in the way of that being Carlos himself.

A big adjustment he made was taking his backhand down-the-line more often; seeing as Fritz has such a powerful and precise backhand, Carlos taking his down-the-line allowed him to create more forehands instead of being stuck in backhand rallies.

In the second set, Taylor began to feel pain in his leg which hampered his already not great movement. Carlos jumped on this weakness by employing the dropshot. Three times to finish the match is crazy work

Fritz was unable to recreate the Laver cup play but he certainly tried; he hit the ball with more pace and aggression, but it caused him to miss more (an unfortunate but necessary tradeoff) - a big factor in the break at 4-4 in the first set. As Taylor said; "Against Carlos, if you’re not perfect, you’re dead"

But was that it? Was Laver Cup just a fluke?

ATP Finals 2025: Alcaraz d Fritz (6-7, 7-5, 6-3)

This was Fritz doing a rather impressive Jannik Sinner impression.

It's yet another Taylor Fritz match that you leave feeling 'if only he had played that one point better'

He really did everything right - and still lost. Again.

His average groundstroke speeds were way up and he was consistently putting good, aggressive returns in play (Jannik Sinner-ing, if you will. Fr tho his average groundstroke speeds were insane.) The only way for Carlos to counter the aggressive returning, was with great serving - which he was nawt doing, his first serve percentage in the first set was 58.2%, giving Taylor all the chances to jump on his second serve.

And Fritz took advantage, snatching the first set in a tie-break and looked thoroughly in control.

So, what changed? Two things;

Carlos moved back on return

Carlos put more damaging first serves in play.

Moving back on return allowed him to make more returns in play, which is good for him because with his speed, he can recover quickly and stay in points. He can also make very good, deep returns from far back.

This really didn't come to fruition till the third set though - in the second, Fritz was still all over Carlos and there were 2 big points that perhaps if Taylor did a little better on, he would've come out this match a winner (probably would've served for it at least).

2-2, AD Fritz: Carlos hits a drop-shot, Taylor gets there and hits a chip down-the-line. Carlos throws up a lob which Taylor lets bounce before hitting an overhead. They have a backhand exchange before Carlos hits a forehand approach shot and finishes with a volley.

Now, I'm aware this is nitpicking, but small things matter. Although Carlos turned the point around and finished on his own terms, Fritz should not have let the ball bounce because the moment he did, he lost the upper hand.

We'll never know what would've happened had he taken it out of the air (he was more likely to miss), but it was chance to really put his stamp on this match.

Can i just say when after this game, you thought Taylor might get broken and he held in like, 2 secs, i was gaggedddd, like that was so cold fr

4-4, DEUCE: Fritz hits a great backhand return and gets a sitter from Carlos, right on top of the net, and he hits it right at Carlos, who hits it cross-court for a winner.

Again, did Carlos end up ultimately just come up with an impressive finish? Yes, but Taylor did have the upper hand, and his forecourt skills let him down, which was a pretty big thing in this match, with Taylor going 18/30 (i think, i literally counted) at net.

So many times Alcaraz would drag him to the net and he couldn't quite come up with the goods - though a lot of that was Carlos anticipating insanely well.

"I don't know if there's probably ever been a match where someone's picked the right side on on short balls, uh, against me more. And that's obviously why I say it's - it can't all be luck, you know. He's a great mover and he anticipates really well" ~ Taylor Fritz

And at 5-6, Taylor goes down 0-30, with a bad forehand miss and Carlos getting lucky with the net, and in that moment, you could feel the vibe shift - with so many missed opportunities throughout the set that you felt would come back to bite him at some point. And with a backhand slice to draw an error and a great passing shot (another net point lost for Taylor), Carlos breaks and takes the second 7-5.

In the third, at 2-3, Taylor misses a forehand and double faults to go down 0-30. Carlos makes a great return (standing far back) to draw a backhand error and at 40-15, hit a great backhand to force an error.

Just some little things, in big moments, that made a world of difference.

And in what were optimal conditions for him to pull off an upset (the fast, indoor court being the perfect place to try rush Carlos and accentuate his serving advantage), the result must be even more deflating for Taylor.

I've been intrigued by this head-to-head because of the 'narrative' of it all;

Taylor Fritz, a player who works so hard and dreams so big, who is endlessly disciplined, who is extraordinarily hard on himself, who does everything right, who has come close so many times, but still hasn’t gotten there.

Will he ever?

And getting a win in this head-to-head would serve as 'proof' that he was there, that he could do it.

But the question remains;

Will he ever?

Ok, that was very dramatic, but I am very excited to see what happens next year with them coming off the offseason!!

I've quoted Fritz a lot - He gives reallyyy good answers in press conferences so talking about him is quite fun and easy. Also there's this podcast i found he was on in 2022 and he talked about Carlos, winning Indian wells and lots of stuff.

[itskubra]

hi!!! i've been loving all your player profiles so far!!! if you have the time or the interest to wax poetic about janniks return game I would love to read more of your thoughts about it :))

- janchalant (idk if I can send asks from a sideblog)

Heyy, I’m so glad you like themmm. I was worried my attemps at humor were falling flat😭😭

Now, generally speaking, the atp top100 all have a good serve+1 -maybe not every last person but you get the point - a serve and a forehand get you very far in the men's game.

The serve is an offensive shot that ideally wins the point outright -aces, unreturned serves - or puts the player in prime position to do so (an opponent off balance/dragged off court) so great defence is key to winning return points/games. Jannik is great mover/defender, but he isn't a De Minaur or Alcaraz, his return shot itself, makes up for the miracles his legs can't perform.

In terms of his positioning, I'm pretty sure he started doing this around clay season this year, on 1st serve return, he starts out standing diagonally, before then taking a first step forward, then into split-step position a la Nishikori. When asked why he basically just said it felt better and that it gave him more rhythm. Technically, it doesn't necessarily make a difference but you could get better forward momentum and more energy? 🧍‍♀️It’s telling he only uses it on first serve return - it probably just makes him feel quicker.

hopefully the visuals help cuz I was not being articulate 🫩

On second serve he does the more 'traditional' ready stance.

On the shot itself, I already spoke about his forehand/backhand technique - simple strokes which make for efficient returning. And his impeccable timing, which allows him to get into more points and rush an opponent on their +1 (the shot after the return).

He gets his returns deep (is also good at redirecting and using the pace of the serve against an opponent-thank you, short backswings), which can knock players off balance and take away the potency of their next shot. Now, Jannik finds himself in control(if he really whacks it) or more likely/often - in a neutral baseline exchange, which is all he really needs or wants, especially against a big server.

With the point extended, we enter the territory Jannik is the best in the world at. Insert long essay about his pace generation, shot selection and tactical prowess.

Anywayyy sorry this took a bit, school’s been killing me lmaoooo

[itskubra]

H2H #3 : Elena v Aryna (pt1: 2026)

Big Babe Tennis Extraordinaire!!

Where T-serves rule, serve/return+1 dictates, and matches are never quite straightforward.

Miami 2026 - Sabalenka d Rybakina (6-4, 6-3)

Following up a classic match that happened just eleven days prior is a pretty difficult ask, so perhaps a more straightforward one was to be expected.

keeping this one short and sweet as i was nawt tuned in to miami

Outlive and Outlast

Especially when returning 2nd serves, Elena was very aggressive and put some very great returns in play. However, if Aryna did manage to hang in the point, she had much better rally tolerance.

Servebot at work!

Aryna was incredibly effective and efficient on serve, mixing up her placement really well - 59% of her first serves went unreturned. Once again her T serve was incredibly effective as well as her serve out-wide. In contrast,

Also, I feel like Elena's forehand was just...nonexistent.

Indian Wells 2026 - Sabalenka d Rybakina (3-6, 6-3, 7-6)

Eerily mirroring their 2023 arc, where the loser of the Australian open final found redemption at Indian Wells, Aryna looked to put an defy her occasional finals' vunerability and perhaps, a newfound Elena issue.

Set 1:

A lost return

Aryna struggled in the return department, especially off of second serves, leaving Elena to win 82% (9/11) of second serve points. Her body and wide serves were particularly troublesome - Aryna making errors on her 'return+1' but also missing several returns outright.

Serve+1 struggles

Elena was much sharper on the other hand, securing a break at 3-2 with some quality returns, causing Aryna to falter on the +1

It didn't help that even in the longer rallies, Elena outperformed, coming up with quality shots (or outlasting an error-prone Aryna, who was perhaps feeling the pressure)

Set 2:

A blistering beginning!

Continuing from where she left off in the first set, Rybakina broke out the gate with some quality returns And a stressed out Aryna double-faulted on break point.

Rock bottom theory

With a likely defeat staring her in the face, Aryna reels off 4 games in a row and forces a third set. She mixed up her serve more, changing up speeds and placement - more kick serves and more body serves - improving her serve+1 effectiveness The forehand to forehand dynamic also proved fruitful for her - Elena coughing up errors.

Set 3:

Plot twist galore!

Elena was one point away from the title despite being broken early in the set; holding easily after being broken, making use of T and Wide serves that proved very effective and breaking Aryna serving for the match with some stifling returns.

Match point #1

On Elena's match point, Aryna came up with a backhand return crosscourt, which had been troublesome for her throughout the set, including the first game she got broken (at 1-1) and thus, saving matchpoint

Match point #2

On Aryna's own matchpoint, she came up with a killer T serve, winning her the match.

Australian Open 2026 - Rybakina d Sabalenka (6-4, 4-6, 6-4)

A, what felt like a long time coming 2nd Elena Slam, and another lost final for Aryna.

Set 1:

Hot fore(hand)play! (...how many times have I used this pun)

Starting a match with seven (7) consecutive first serves and getting broken…doesn’t bode well, does it? 5 of those serves were aimed towards Rybakina’s forehand, but after warming up with the first 2 points, Elena’s return was fired up, blasting off two return winners off that wing and ultimately earning the break.

Wide-ning the gap!

A hold to love after, featuring wide serves that would give Aryna nightmares, including on the only 2 break points she would generate for the set (remember this!)

67% (...laugh...i dare you) 2nd serve points won for Elena this set, the AD court 2nd serves out wide playing a big role

Set 2:

T(ee)-ing off!

Despite being broken first game of the match, Aryna goes this whole set not even facing a break point, and winning 95% of 1st serve points ~ bow down to the almighty T-serve

Sabalenka made 13 1st serves down the T; 2 of them were ace/service winners, 2 were very short returns, and 6 forced errors into Elena's return.

A forehand cooloff!

5/8 of the unforced errors Elena made were from the forehand, 2 of those in the 4-5 game, ultimately costing her the set; an attempted volley/dropshot into the net and an errant crosscourt flying wide.

Set 3:

Quick start!

Coming out hot, Aryna races to a 3-0 lead; what had been Elena's weapon in the first set had seemingly abandoned her, missing spots on her 2nd serve out wide, allowing Aryna to hit 2 return winners and get the break. She does face a break point the next game, however, she called upon her get-out-of-jail-free card; The T-serve

No more T...guess she didn't want to cross the line (i apologize deeply)

Sabalenka gets broken in two consecutive service games (at 3-1 and 3-3) because of an honestly, pretty confusing change in the use of serving down-the-T, which is to say, she barely used it. In the match, she hit 30 T-serves and won 25 (83%) of the points, why abandon such an efficient weapon? And payed for it, getting broken twice.

We back out(wide)!

From 0-3 down, Rybakina wins 5 games in a row and does not get broken, 2 things; Backhand Beauty Caught fire down the stretch, remaining solid but drawing errors and producing winners

The return of the 2nd serve out wide Now returned to its previous quality and effectiveness, it even bails her out of a precarious moment at 2-3

[itskubra]

Roland Garros 2025: Coco v Aryna (6-7, 6-2, 6-4)

let's throwback!

A match infamous for low quality and "70 unforced errors" but one that deserves a lot more appreciation for its showcase of perseverance, tactics and well, I think gritty tennis can be good tennis, so that too.

This is a match that started off extremely well for Aryna, racing to a 4-1, 40-0 lead in about 20 minutes that were characterized by a low unforced error count and high drop shot efficiency.

In contrast, Coco was not having a good time these first 20 minutes, struggling just to keep the ball in play and making 10 unforced errors.

But from being on the verge of a 5-1 lead, Aryna gets broken, how?

Mainly, Double Faults (ironic, huh?): Despite ultimately double faulting less than Coco, Aryna's double faults were arguably more costly - happening at crucial moments, such as this game

And Coco produced a gorgeous drop-shot to win the 40-15 point.

On break-point, Aryna would net a backhand (a shot that played a big part in her loss).

This would serve as a turning point for Coco's level upping despite losing the tiebreak (in which Aryna produced some fabulous winners from 3-5 down), but what really turned in her favour?

Strategy:

Well, Coco and Aryna had opposite strategies in the match; while Aryna was targeting Coco's forehand (she ended up hitting 58% of groundstrokes as forehands), Coco was doing the opposite and looking to make Aryna hit backhands (she hit about 61% of groundstrokes as backhands).

And this was a battle Coco won; she hit 13 winners and 11 unforced errors (+2 differential) on her forehand, while Aryna hit 14 winners and 33 unforced errors (-19 differential) on her backhand.

"One more ball" mentality:

Coco used her speed and defence to lengthen rallies. Her anticipation and refusal to let Aryna put points away flustered Aryna, drew unforced errors, and allowed her to 'steal' points even after leaving a ball short.

Dropshot fall-off:

Partly a side effect of the Coco defence, what was once a hyper-effective weapon for Aryna in the first half of the first set slowly became a desperate attempt to shorten rallies, especially in the third set, during which she would win 0/5 points on her drop shot attemps. It would also cost her the decisive break at 3-3.

And the match point ended up quite representative of the match; Coco made a forehand that looked like she would miss, catching Aryna off-guard, and her ultimately winning the point.

[itskubra]

I have a question! When it is written that Jannik is changing his game, it almost seems as if he is completely replacing his game with another type of game, when I believe that this is not the case... It almost seems as if the word “change” is being used as a synonym for “replacement”, when in reality he is not replacing his old game with a new one, but is making adjustments as all players do before each tournament and, in addition, is adding variability to become more unpredictable. In my opinion, we should talk about addition, not such a marked change, because his game remains the same, at least for now, or am I wrong?

Sorry for the long question, but there aren't many people I can ask on Tumblr

Hey anon, don't worry, i am more than happy to answer a long question!

First, let's look at why subtle adjustments/additions are being talked about like he's trying to turn himself into Corentin Moutet or Bublik.

I think there are 3 main reasons;

The US Open quotes:

When we look at what Jannik said in the press conference that started all this and especially how he's quoted, what he implies does seem drastic.

"... I'm going to you know aim to you know, um, maybe even losing some matches from now on but you know trying to do some changes, you know, trying to, uh, to be a bit more unpredictable as as a player..."

Saying that the changes you're going to make might lose you matches, especially as someone who wins ~90% of his matches and basically 100% against people who are not Carlos Alcaraz, does imply some pretty drastic changes.

Obviously, this is coming in the immediacy of a pretty chastening loss, and there were other clear shortcomings to work on, but people love to take things and run with it.

Jannik's identity and reputation buildup in tennis;

Is hitting a few drop-shots and coming forward a bit more often the biggest changes in the world? No, but you have to remember that Jannik is the guy well known for hitting really big from the back of the court and not really changing things up - he led the tour in core shot percentage.

From Tennis Insights Instagram - Compares a players' use of "core shots"(regular topsin groundstokes) to their use of variation (slices, dropshots, angles, etc)

So despite the fact that his improvement in the forecourt isn't all that new and has been a work in progress, tennis takes a long time to catch up, so seeing the guy hit a (succesful) drop shot does envoke a feeling of "woah! who's this guy? this is new!" because he's quite literally known as the guy who doesn't do that.

The Carlos Rivalry:

Anon, you are correct in pointing out that making adjustments is something all players try to do, but you have to consider the 'why?" in this circumstance.

Carlos being the main catalyst for these changes and also being the guy we always compare Jannik to, causes our interpretation of 'adjustments' to shift.

With Carlos being one of the best embodiments of 'unpredictable' tennis, especially in the way Jannik described (s&v, drop shots, etc.), "trying to be more unpredictable" shifts into "becoming more like Carlos".

And this not wrong by any means - varied ways to earn points is very much a "Carlos trait" - but the two players' identities are very different to each other.

So when we think "Jannik is becoming more like Carlos" that does seem like huge change because becoming like Carlos would require Jannik to revamp and replace his whole game and identity.

~~

Now, having laid out reasons for why replacement is used instead of addition to describe Jannik's changes, lets answer your original question.

No, anon, I don't think you're wrong - Jannik is not entirely revamping his game, he is more rewiring his decision making in certain moments and refining certain skills to allow him to do it.

'Replacement' is hyperbole because Jannik's core identity and style remains (rushing and beating you from the back of the court) and he is simply adding variability in the way he can apply this pressure.

And even though there are clear reasons for it, discussing Jannik adding new elements as changing who he is, is fundamentally incorrect.

When Jannik starts hitting forehands that fly 50m over the net, slices, and drop shots more than 3 times a set (especially against someone that is not called Carlos Alcaraz), then maybe we can talk about him 'replacing' his game.

[itskubra]

…how do you guys make gifs?