TENNIS: ATP Finals 2023
Nov. 21st, 2023 08:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllThe ATP Finals are held on a fast indoor court in Turin these days, which only makes the WTA Finals look worse. It also meant the matches were on at a better time for me. I heard that Zverev had beaten Alcaraz and Sinner had beaten Djokovic, but that was in the group round. So, I sat down to watch a replay of Alcaraz vs. Rublev, which was always going to be an easier match despite Rublev being higher ranked than Zverev. It would be the first time they’d play each other.
It soon became apparent that Rublev wasn’t 100% physically. Alcaraz was serving well, and when he broke, as he’d threatened to do – okay, he was helped by a wrong call at a bad time – Rublev started to really lose his cool. A couple of racquets got it, and then most disturbingly, he hit himself repeatedly in the knee, drawing blood. Which the camera kept returning to. Alcaraz was a set up and not going to back off, Rublev kept expending energy on explosions of frustration after losing points and ceded the second set more easily. (But Alcaraz’s next opponent, who I think he has to win to get through to the knock out stages will be Medvedev.)
I watched most of the first set and most of the second set of the live Zverev vs Medvedev match. They’d faced each other six times this year, and Medvedev had far more wins. But Zverev has the better record in these finals. Zverev clawed back a break and was the better player for most of the set, until errors started flowing from his forehand in the tie break. Medvedev (of the legendarily deep returning position) was looking to make it a back of the court contest, and doing enough to keep it equal when I gave up battling doziness (because if Zverev won the second I wasn’t going to stay up for a third set.)
I watched the first set of Sinner and Rune’s match – where Italian Sinner was the clear home favourite. More importantly, he was playing well from the outset and a rushing Rune really wasn’t. There were signs of him improving by the end of the first set, and I saw that he’d made it a three-set match, before giving up. (Sinner would be going through to the semi-final regardless of the result.)
It turned out that Sinner did win in three, and he and Djokovic would be progressing to the semis from their group.
I watched the replay of the Alcaraz vs Medvedev match to find out who would join them. Medvedev was already through, but the Amazon pundits’ consensus was that he’d put in the effort as a downpayment for future matches against rival Alcaraz. Alcaraz needed to win to stay on.
From very early on, it felt like a heavyweight contest. When Medvedev pressed in a service game, Alcaraz served brilliantly, and there was one point where he unleashed. And then there came The Game where he won one point brilliantly and played the rest of the game at that level, meaning he broke Medvedev. So, he took the first set.
Could he maintain that level? Did Medvedev have it in him to adjust just a little with his extreme returning position, perhaps on the second serve? Well, the Russian seemed to gain confidence from coming through a tricky game, until Alcaraz was at it again. He broke, and perhaps at this point Medvedev started thinking about the next day, but Alcaraz served it out fairly straightforwardly.
Tactically, it was obvious that he’d learned from losing to Medvedev at the US Open and how Djokovic had beaten him in the finals there. Alcaraz’s movement and variety of shot making shone; Medvedev’s discomfort at being brought forward was highlighted. The Amazon team have been banging on about how the run from Queens to Wimbledon shows he’s a quick learner, and the improvement from complaining about the speed of the surface, beating an unwell Rublev to the quality needed to beat the world no. 3 did back it up.
So, the top four players will be competing in the semis, and one of them is Italian to the home crowd’s exultation. Sinner vs. Medvedev, and, tantalisingly, Alcaraz vs. Djokovic.
I caught the end of the ‘dead rubber’/match between Zverev (the better player, but occasionally lucky) and Rublev (anguished.) The latter may want to erase this tournament from his memory, the former will want to build on 2023 in 2024.
The first semi featured home favourite Sinner vs. Medvedev. Medvedev used to have something like a six-love record against Sinner, but the young Italian had won the last two matches, and we’d keep getting stats showing in which areas he’d improved. They both started off hot, Sinner’s serve was excellent in terms of variety, even though he was only getting his first serve in half the time. Medvedev’s game suddenly faltered, and Sinner broke and won the set to the joy of the crowd.
The second set was a closer affair, with swings in momentum. By the end, Sinner seemed the more tired – after 20+ stroke rallies, which Medvedev tended to win. The Russian won the tiebreak, but to everyone’s surprise went off for medical attention, giving his opponent time for a breather and a think.
He was soon throwing in drop shots, but to test his opponent (Medvedev does not look comfortable coming in) rather than cut the points short. Sinner was coming in more himself, playing more aggressively and got his reward in the second game of the set, where Medvedev handed him the break with a wild second serve. A few points later, after Sinner had played far too good a shot, the older player lost it properly, flinging his racquet, getting into it with a crowd member and getting a deserved warning. Sinner would not let him off the hook and Medvedev’s first serve deserted him. A second break, an excellent service game and Sinner was through. The Turin crowd were delirious.
The second semi was probably the one the tennis world was more interested in. World no. 1 versus no. 2 and a resumption of the tasty rivalry between a man who’s established himself as ‘the greatest’ and the much younger man who has the potential to be great. Djokovic had beaten him when last they met, but before that Alcaraz had spoiled Djokovic’s calendar grand slam.
Alcaraz came out all guns blazing in the first couple of points. Djokovic retaliated, and the first twenty minutes were very interesting as they tried different things out to counter the other’s strengths and adapted. (I would take the view that many of the ‘unforced’ errors were forced by the opponent.) Sitting courtside, Tim Henman noted Djokovic’s intensity. And then Alcaraz, who had been winning his serves quite easily, had a dodgy game, and couldn’t find many first serves against The Best Returner Ever. It was a break, and Djokovic became impregnable, while Alcaraz started complaining that the balls were flying on him to his team.
What could he do? Soon, Alcaraz’s serve was under pressure again. He got broken, and was fighting to stave off a double break. This roused his fighting spirit, and there were about five lengthy rallies in the second set that were breathtaking in the punishing demands the players made of each other. Alcaraz won two (Djokovic had mostly had the better record the longer the rallies went), but Djokovic won the others, and more painfully for Alcaraz, the other points too, meaning he got broken for a second time and Djokovic took the match in two sets. The consensus was that Djokovic was playing some of his best tennis and the apprentice had just been shown how to do it by the master. (I would quibble that Alcaraz was playing at this tournament, with this unusual format and in these conditions against the best players on the tour, for the first time. Meanwhile, one of Djokovic’s motivations is to win this thing more times than Federer.)
So, Djokovic would be out for revenge for the defeat by Sinner in the group stages too. Obviously, the crowd would be backing the Italian. Would Djokovic be quite as good as he was in the semi? But then, did he need to be, given how weary Sinner was in the second set of his semi. It was a pretty tasty prospect.
I beg Djokovic’s pardon. It turned out that he could and would improve on how he’d played in the previous match. It was soon obvious that he was serving even better and hitting his forehand even faster. Admittedly, if Sinner had challenged a bad call, he wouldn’t have been down his first break point. But it would probably have come soon enough. Sinner was soon thumped in the first set, and when the figures came out (Djokovic dropping only two points on his serve) they just confirmed the dominance we’d seen in rallies and the scoreline.
This dominance continued through to the second set. Djokovic broke and was looking to break again to lead 3-0. What could Sinner do? Not much, it seemed. It was in fact Djokovic missing what should have been an easy putaway that stopped him from getting that double break. Sinner was able to serve a few bombs and win a few rallies. The Italian crowd tried to help by whistling to put Djokovic off his serve (bad form), but, although he got increasingly tight, he kept resetting, playing the right shot and playing well enough that he was still the stronger. He broke again, and won on a Sinner double fault.
The manner of his win and the way he’d lifted his game to his highest heights, some of which were the familiar redirection of shots, brilliant returning and defence, some of which were those improvements he’s kept making, were unquestionable. Sinner’s inexperience at this level maybe told, but the win, like that in the semi, was mainly about Djokovic’s level. The two young would-be-rivals were put in their place for the start of next year, and Djokovic’s adaptability stood as a rebuke to Medvedev too. He just showed that he’s the greatest of all time and the greatest right now. [Edited for typos 16/1/26.]
It soon became apparent that Rublev wasn’t 100% physically. Alcaraz was serving well, and when he broke, as he’d threatened to do – okay, he was helped by a wrong call at a bad time – Rublev started to really lose his cool. A couple of racquets got it, and then most disturbingly, he hit himself repeatedly in the knee, drawing blood. Which the camera kept returning to. Alcaraz was a set up and not going to back off, Rublev kept expending energy on explosions of frustration after losing points and ceded the second set more easily. (But Alcaraz’s next opponent, who I think he has to win to get through to the knock out stages will be Medvedev.)
I watched most of the first set and most of the second set of the live Zverev vs Medvedev match. They’d faced each other six times this year, and Medvedev had far more wins. But Zverev has the better record in these finals. Zverev clawed back a break and was the better player for most of the set, until errors started flowing from his forehand in the tie break. Medvedev (of the legendarily deep returning position) was looking to make it a back of the court contest, and doing enough to keep it equal when I gave up battling doziness (because if Zverev won the second I wasn’t going to stay up for a third set.)
I watched the first set of Sinner and Rune’s match – where Italian Sinner was the clear home favourite. More importantly, he was playing well from the outset and a rushing Rune really wasn’t. There were signs of him improving by the end of the first set, and I saw that he’d made it a three-set match, before giving up. (Sinner would be going through to the semi-final regardless of the result.)
It turned out that Sinner did win in three, and he and Djokovic would be progressing to the semis from their group.
I watched the replay of the Alcaraz vs Medvedev match to find out who would join them. Medvedev was already through, but the Amazon pundits’ consensus was that he’d put in the effort as a downpayment for future matches against rival Alcaraz. Alcaraz needed to win to stay on.
From very early on, it felt like a heavyweight contest. When Medvedev pressed in a service game, Alcaraz served brilliantly, and there was one point where he unleashed. And then there came The Game where he won one point brilliantly and played the rest of the game at that level, meaning he broke Medvedev. So, he took the first set.
Could he maintain that level? Did Medvedev have it in him to adjust just a little with his extreme returning position, perhaps on the second serve? Well, the Russian seemed to gain confidence from coming through a tricky game, until Alcaraz was at it again. He broke, and perhaps at this point Medvedev started thinking about the next day, but Alcaraz served it out fairly straightforwardly.
Tactically, it was obvious that he’d learned from losing to Medvedev at the US Open and how Djokovic had beaten him in the finals there. Alcaraz’s movement and variety of shot making shone; Medvedev’s discomfort at being brought forward was highlighted. The Amazon team have been banging on about how the run from Queens to Wimbledon shows he’s a quick learner, and the improvement from complaining about the speed of the surface, beating an unwell Rublev to the quality needed to beat the world no. 3 did back it up.
So, the top four players will be competing in the semis, and one of them is Italian to the home crowd’s exultation. Sinner vs. Medvedev, and, tantalisingly, Alcaraz vs. Djokovic.
I caught the end of the ‘dead rubber’/match between Zverev (the better player, but occasionally lucky) and Rublev (anguished.) The latter may want to erase this tournament from his memory, the former will want to build on 2023 in 2024.
The first semi featured home favourite Sinner vs. Medvedev. Medvedev used to have something like a six-love record against Sinner, but the young Italian had won the last two matches, and we’d keep getting stats showing in which areas he’d improved. They both started off hot, Sinner’s serve was excellent in terms of variety, even though he was only getting his first serve in half the time. Medvedev’s game suddenly faltered, and Sinner broke and won the set to the joy of the crowd.
The second set was a closer affair, with swings in momentum. By the end, Sinner seemed the more tired – after 20+ stroke rallies, which Medvedev tended to win. The Russian won the tiebreak, but to everyone’s surprise went off for medical attention, giving his opponent time for a breather and a think.
He was soon throwing in drop shots, but to test his opponent (Medvedev does not look comfortable coming in) rather than cut the points short. Sinner was coming in more himself, playing more aggressively and got his reward in the second game of the set, where Medvedev handed him the break with a wild second serve. A few points later, after Sinner had played far too good a shot, the older player lost it properly, flinging his racquet, getting into it with a crowd member and getting a deserved warning. Sinner would not let him off the hook and Medvedev’s first serve deserted him. A second break, an excellent service game and Sinner was through. The Turin crowd were delirious.
The second semi was probably the one the tennis world was more interested in. World no. 1 versus no. 2 and a resumption of the tasty rivalry between a man who’s established himself as ‘the greatest’ and the much younger man who has the potential to be great. Djokovic had beaten him when last they met, but before that Alcaraz had spoiled Djokovic’s calendar grand slam.
Alcaraz came out all guns blazing in the first couple of points. Djokovic retaliated, and the first twenty minutes were very interesting as they tried different things out to counter the other’s strengths and adapted. (I would take the view that many of the ‘unforced’ errors were forced by the opponent.) Sitting courtside, Tim Henman noted Djokovic’s intensity. And then Alcaraz, who had been winning his serves quite easily, had a dodgy game, and couldn’t find many first serves against The Best Returner Ever. It was a break, and Djokovic became impregnable, while Alcaraz started complaining that the balls were flying on him to his team.
What could he do? Soon, Alcaraz’s serve was under pressure again. He got broken, and was fighting to stave off a double break. This roused his fighting spirit, and there were about five lengthy rallies in the second set that were breathtaking in the punishing demands the players made of each other. Alcaraz won two (Djokovic had mostly had the better record the longer the rallies went), but Djokovic won the others, and more painfully for Alcaraz, the other points too, meaning he got broken for a second time and Djokovic took the match in two sets. The consensus was that Djokovic was playing some of his best tennis and the apprentice had just been shown how to do it by the master. (I would quibble that Alcaraz was playing at this tournament, with this unusual format and in these conditions against the best players on the tour, for the first time. Meanwhile, one of Djokovic’s motivations is to win this thing more times than Federer.)
So, Djokovic would be out for revenge for the defeat by Sinner in the group stages too. Obviously, the crowd would be backing the Italian. Would Djokovic be quite as good as he was in the semi? But then, did he need to be, given how weary Sinner was in the second set of his semi. It was a pretty tasty prospect.
I beg Djokovic’s pardon. It turned out that he could and would improve on how he’d played in the previous match. It was soon obvious that he was serving even better and hitting his forehand even faster. Admittedly, if Sinner had challenged a bad call, he wouldn’t have been down his first break point. But it would probably have come soon enough. Sinner was soon thumped in the first set, and when the figures came out (Djokovic dropping only two points on his serve) they just confirmed the dominance we’d seen in rallies and the scoreline.
This dominance continued through to the second set. Djokovic broke and was looking to break again to lead 3-0. What could Sinner do? Not much, it seemed. It was in fact Djokovic missing what should have been an easy putaway that stopped him from getting that double break. Sinner was able to serve a few bombs and win a few rallies. The Italian crowd tried to help by whistling to put Djokovic off his serve (bad form), but, although he got increasingly tight, he kept resetting, playing the right shot and playing well enough that he was still the stronger. He broke again, and won on a Sinner double fault.
The manner of his win and the way he’d lifted his game to his highest heights, some of which were the familiar redirection of shots, brilliant returning and defence, some of which were those improvements he’s kept making, were unquestionable. Sinner’s inexperience at this level maybe told, but the win, like that in the semi, was mainly about Djokovic’s level. The two young would-be-rivals were put in their place for the start of next year, and Djokovic’s adaptability stood as a rebuke to Medvedev too. He just showed that he’s the greatest of all time and the greatest right now. [Edited for typos 16/1/26.]
