TENNIS: US Open 2025 week 2
Sep. 8th, 2025 05:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllI didn’t mention the controversy about the grown man caught on camera stealing a hat that a player had clearly passed to a child, getting named and shamed online. His ensuing apology made the early evening news.
There was a fourth round upset in that Vondrousova was the winner in the battle with fellow Wimbledon champion Rybakina, who had been plaing so well, until Vondrousova won the third set. Krejikova and Muchova were also through to the quarter finals, so well done, Czechia! But THE fourth round women’s match might well have been Osaka outplaying Gauff and finally getting in deep to a slam again – and everytime she’s got into the QF of a hard court slam, she’s won it. (It was more about Osaka playing well than Gauff’s serve collapsing, apparently.)
On the men’s side, Auger-Aliasseme backed up his win against Zverev by also winning against Rublev, while Sinner thrashed Bublik.
Quarter finals: Alcaraz continued the form that meant that he hasn’t dropped a set this tournament against Lehecka, Djokovic won for the eleventh time (to nil) against Fritz, setting up a tasty semi. Pegula continued not to drop a serve this slam in her win against Krejikova, who ran out of steam, although it’s less impressive in best of three than best of five. Most unfortunately, Vondrousova had to withdraw from her QF against Sabalenka, having seemingly injured herself in practice.
In the rematch of the women’s Wimbledon finals, Anisimova turned up and was able to play, beating Swiatek in two sets at home, which will do her the world of good, reminding us of all that was said in the build-up to those finals about how good she could be. Swiatek was a lot of people’s favourite to win here, and I had her as my second favourite, I think, going in, even though she was up and down all tournament. Apparently, in preperation, Anisimova rewatched that final (and a match that she’d won) to see where she went wrong. Her reward will be to face fellow ball-striker Osaka in the semis. Sinner was scary good dispatching Musetti, who has had a good US Open after a less good few months, while Auger-Aliasseme continued his return to the serious end of a grand slam, beating de Minaur in four.
Semi-finals: Respect to all the women in the semi-finals, because both matches went to three sets. Osaka won the first tiebreak, but Anisimova won the second, and went on to win the third set, getting to the final of the next grand slam and a chance to rewrite that story. (I didn’t know who was likely to win that match, because Anisimova had been playing better for longer, but we all knew how good Osaka was at her best and she seemed to have reached that level again. I didn’t know what their head to head was.)
Pegula was up on Sabalenka in the first set, and only a set away, but that seemed to rouse the tiger, and Sabalenka – who generally beats Pegula, as she did in last year’s final – found a way, setting up an intriguing women’s final, because both finalists have scar tissue over grand slam finals. The crowd will definitely favour Anisimova, but Sabalenka has experience of that and more in general, but has a winning head-to-head against Sabalenka, which is not something that many players can claim.
I heard a bit of the Alcaraz vs. Djokovic semi-final on the radio (the sound went a bit funny) from the end of the second set onwards, where Alcaraz had made up a 0-3 deficit and it was on serve, then went to a tiebreak, which the younger player won, as he’d done the first set. Alcaraz wasn’t necessarily playing his best, apparently there were a lot of unforced errors, but after breaking in the third set, he relaxed, and having lost the second set, having tried everything he could think of, Djokovic was drained. For the third slam running, he’d been beaten by Sinner or Alcaraz. He might still be the best of the rest (having beaten Fritz here, Zverev elsewhere) but the youthful titans have become unbeatable since the Australian Open. Alcaraz continued his unbroken streak.
In the second semi-final, Auger-Aliasseme made it more of a match than expected; perhaps galled at losing the first set 6-1, he won the second, and proved he’s been playing better here than at Cincinnati. But Sinner won in four, setting up the final that everyone wanted/expected.
I read an article pointing out that tennis is the most popular sport on TV among women in the UK. There was some blether about men having more free time, but then, you never know how long a tennis match is going to take. Of course, it is one of (if not) the best sports on gender parity, and has had female stars going back to Suzanne Longlen – and I imagine most women are perfectly happy watching athletic young men like Jack Draper etc play too…
Women’s finals: I listened to much of this live and then the rest on catch-up. A better start from Anisimova, except she lost the first two games, but broke back, held and had a brief run that showed how she’d got to the final and had won Sabalenka in the past, so it was much better than the Wimbledon final. But Sabalenka fought back and won the first set, as Anisimova started complaining about the lights, getting negative and talking down her serve. She settled a bit, and there were a few breaks, but Sabalenka’s experience showed. She was leading 5-3, serving and two points away from the win. There was a horror of an overhead, and suddenly Anisimova was playing brilliant tennis again. Sabalenka kept her control and forced it into a tiebreak – she has a good record on tiebreaks of late, and she was on the attack, her reward being five championship points. The first two were on Anisimova’s serve and she won those, but the first that was on Sabalenka’s serve, she got.
The world no. 1 and defending champion won, but there was so much more to it than that, after losing two grand slam finals, and losing a semi to this opponent. It must have been super sweet and changes how she’ll think of 2025. Tough for Anisimova, but it was more competitive than Wimbledon, and there were flashes of play where she showed she could well win a slam final. She’ll now become world no. 4 and deservedly so. It’s probably mental in that she got down on herself and didn’t think to engage the fans (as Gauff, say, knows how to do.) But credit to Sabalenka for learning from the rest of the year, apparently she brought Max Miyrnyi into her team this month (and now the pressure goes back to ‘Can she win a slam on other surfaces?’) Also credit to American women’s tennis, as it’s been all Americans (twice Anisimova) against Sabalenka or Swiatek in finals this year.
Men’s finals: I listened to this live.
Regardless of any other reason(s) why the US Open crowd might boo this American President, pushing the final back 45 minutes and the extra security meaning that people still couldn’t get in (some missed the first two sets!) for the hottest (and very expensive) ticket at the US Open because he’d turned up (and skipped most of the third set and some of the fourth) isn’t going to be well received. Because I was listening on the BBC, they reported that there was booing.
Anyway, to the tennis! Alcaraz chose to receive, and after the first two points, unleashed his tactical gameplan: offence at the first chance, mixing in all kinds of shots, which we knew he had to, but most especially the slice backhand because it was awkward for Sinner to respond due to his grip. Alcaraz broke. He backed it up with strong serving and tore through the first set.
But in the second set, Sinner did respond, celebrating every point, bringing his own firepower. Alcaraz wavered, the first serve percentage went down, even as Sinner punished the second serve, and it was a bit of Sinner giving him his own medicine. Sinner won – the first set Alcaraz had lost all tournament.
With whoever started off a set playing better winning it, the start of each set was crucial. Alcaraz found his way back to his original tactics, and Sinner didn’t like it. There were more signs of frustration than usual from him, as Alcaraz got better and better and very nearly bagelled him.
He didn’t quite, but Alcaraz stuck to it. The variety continued along with the big serving. Even Sinner, but especially a rattled Sinner, could not live with him. He managed to make Alcaraz serve it out, he even won two Championship points, but then of course Alcaraz threw in a drop shot at a key point and smiled when he set up another match point with a beauty of a shot. And won!
There were several points where everyone gasped. It might not have been the all-time classic that was the French, but, just like the Wimbledon final, it has added another chapter to this generation’s outstanding rivalry. After the French, we thought we knew the script ‘Alcaraz’s highs are higher, but his lows are lower, while Sinner is consistently better, however Alcaraz is the better on the more uncertain footing.’ Well, Sinner winning Wimbledon voided that. His sickness at Cincinnatti meant that we didn’t have recent information about hard courts. Yes, Alcaraz has had an amazing run for months, and yes, he has the better head to head, and yes, he’d played better overall this tournament…
But what was clear was that Alcaraz and team studied and learned from Wimbledon (didn’t Dimitrov expose Sinner’s weakness to the slice? And I’m also thinking of the final.) The fact that there were fewer blips of concentration on the hard courts suggested that he’d learned there, and he is only 22 and maturing. There have been grumbles about his match management and shot selection. Well, he realised what he had to do if he didn’t want to lose a final to ‘his greatest rival’ again – and he’d been starting to think of Wimbledon as his – and he was able to do what he had to do. Sinner didn’t respond all too well on the day. He’ll come back, it’s exciting to see what lessons he learns. He was mostly ready for the drop shot and he was good at the net. Neither of them like it when the other overpowers them. Alcaraz is about the only one who can against Sinner at the moment.
Alcaraz took the US Open from the defending champion, and – quite right that this was up for grabs – the no. 1 spot. He’s won all the slams he’s won already twice and goes ahead of Sinner (who would have equalled his tally had he won) – equalling players like Edberg who was watching. I beg his pardon for making Sinner favourite (in my defence, I always want Alcaraz to win, but I was trying to be objective.) He’ll want the Aussie Open, as Sinner will want the French, although really I think they also want to beat each other, and it is such a tasty rivalry because of where they’re almost equally matched and because of their differences. They absolutely have distanced themselves from the rest (having both beaten Djokovic, who at 38 is heading the rest, at the slams recently) having split the grand slams for the past two years already and are making each other improve as both are still under 25.
There was a fourth round upset in that Vondrousova was the winner in the battle with fellow Wimbledon champion Rybakina, who had been plaing so well, until Vondrousova won the third set. Krejikova and Muchova were also through to the quarter finals, so well done, Czechia! But THE fourth round women’s match might well have been Osaka outplaying Gauff and finally getting in deep to a slam again – and everytime she’s got into the QF of a hard court slam, she’s won it. (It was more about Osaka playing well than Gauff’s serve collapsing, apparently.)
On the men’s side, Auger-Aliasseme backed up his win against Zverev by also winning against Rublev, while Sinner thrashed Bublik.
Quarter finals: Alcaraz continued the form that meant that he hasn’t dropped a set this tournament against Lehecka, Djokovic won for the eleventh time (to nil) against Fritz, setting up a tasty semi. Pegula continued not to drop a serve this slam in her win against Krejikova, who ran out of steam, although it’s less impressive in best of three than best of five. Most unfortunately, Vondrousova had to withdraw from her QF against Sabalenka, having seemingly injured herself in practice.
In the rematch of the women’s Wimbledon finals, Anisimova turned up and was able to play, beating Swiatek in two sets at home, which will do her the world of good, reminding us of all that was said in the build-up to those finals about how good she could be. Swiatek was a lot of people’s favourite to win here, and I had her as my second favourite, I think, going in, even though she was up and down all tournament. Apparently, in preperation, Anisimova rewatched that final (and a match that she’d won) to see where she went wrong. Her reward will be to face fellow ball-striker Osaka in the semis. Sinner was scary good dispatching Musetti, who has had a good US Open after a less good few months, while Auger-Aliasseme continued his return to the serious end of a grand slam, beating de Minaur in four.
Semi-finals: Respect to all the women in the semi-finals, because both matches went to three sets. Osaka won the first tiebreak, but Anisimova won the second, and went on to win the third set, getting to the final of the next grand slam and a chance to rewrite that story. (I didn’t know who was likely to win that match, because Anisimova had been playing better for longer, but we all knew how good Osaka was at her best and she seemed to have reached that level again. I didn’t know what their head to head was.)
Pegula was up on Sabalenka in the first set, and only a set away, but that seemed to rouse the tiger, and Sabalenka – who generally beats Pegula, as she did in last year’s final – found a way, setting up an intriguing women’s final, because both finalists have scar tissue over grand slam finals. The crowd will definitely favour Anisimova, but Sabalenka has experience of that and more in general, but has a winning head-to-head against Sabalenka, which is not something that many players can claim.
I heard a bit of the Alcaraz vs. Djokovic semi-final on the radio (the sound went a bit funny) from the end of the second set onwards, where Alcaraz had made up a 0-3 deficit and it was on serve, then went to a tiebreak, which the younger player won, as he’d done the first set. Alcaraz wasn’t necessarily playing his best, apparently there were a lot of unforced errors, but after breaking in the third set, he relaxed, and having lost the second set, having tried everything he could think of, Djokovic was drained. For the third slam running, he’d been beaten by Sinner or Alcaraz. He might still be the best of the rest (having beaten Fritz here, Zverev elsewhere) but the youthful titans have become unbeatable since the Australian Open. Alcaraz continued his unbroken streak.
In the second semi-final, Auger-Aliasseme made it more of a match than expected; perhaps galled at losing the first set 6-1, he won the second, and proved he’s been playing better here than at Cincinnati. But Sinner won in four, setting up the final that everyone wanted/expected.
I read an article pointing out that tennis is the most popular sport on TV among women in the UK. There was some blether about men having more free time, but then, you never know how long a tennis match is going to take. Of course, it is one of (if not) the best sports on gender parity, and has had female stars going back to Suzanne Longlen – and I imagine most women are perfectly happy watching athletic young men like Jack Draper etc play too…
Women’s finals: I listened to much of this live and then the rest on catch-up. A better start from Anisimova, except she lost the first two games, but broke back, held and had a brief run that showed how she’d got to the final and had won Sabalenka in the past, so it was much better than the Wimbledon final. But Sabalenka fought back and won the first set, as Anisimova started complaining about the lights, getting negative and talking down her serve. She settled a bit, and there were a few breaks, but Sabalenka’s experience showed. She was leading 5-3, serving and two points away from the win. There was a horror of an overhead, and suddenly Anisimova was playing brilliant tennis again. Sabalenka kept her control and forced it into a tiebreak – she has a good record on tiebreaks of late, and she was on the attack, her reward being five championship points. The first two were on Anisimova’s serve and she won those, but the first that was on Sabalenka’s serve, she got.
The world no. 1 and defending champion won, but there was so much more to it than that, after losing two grand slam finals, and losing a semi to this opponent. It must have been super sweet and changes how she’ll think of 2025. Tough for Anisimova, but it was more competitive than Wimbledon, and there were flashes of play where she showed she could well win a slam final. She’ll now become world no. 4 and deservedly so. It’s probably mental in that she got down on herself and didn’t think to engage the fans (as Gauff, say, knows how to do.) But credit to Sabalenka for learning from the rest of the year, apparently she brought Max Miyrnyi into her team this month (and now the pressure goes back to ‘Can she win a slam on other surfaces?’) Also credit to American women’s tennis, as it’s been all Americans (twice Anisimova) against Sabalenka or Swiatek in finals this year.
Men’s finals: I listened to this live.
Regardless of any other reason(s) why the US Open crowd might boo this American President, pushing the final back 45 minutes and the extra security meaning that people still couldn’t get in (some missed the first two sets!) for the hottest (and very expensive) ticket at the US Open because he’d turned up (and skipped most of the third set and some of the fourth) isn’t going to be well received. Because I was listening on the BBC, they reported that there was booing.
Anyway, to the tennis! Alcaraz chose to receive, and after the first two points, unleashed his tactical gameplan: offence at the first chance, mixing in all kinds of shots, which we knew he had to, but most especially the slice backhand because it was awkward for Sinner to respond due to his grip. Alcaraz broke. He backed it up with strong serving and tore through the first set.
But in the second set, Sinner did respond, celebrating every point, bringing his own firepower. Alcaraz wavered, the first serve percentage went down, even as Sinner punished the second serve, and it was a bit of Sinner giving him his own medicine. Sinner won – the first set Alcaraz had lost all tournament.
With whoever started off a set playing better winning it, the start of each set was crucial. Alcaraz found his way back to his original tactics, and Sinner didn’t like it. There were more signs of frustration than usual from him, as Alcaraz got better and better and very nearly bagelled him.
He didn’t quite, but Alcaraz stuck to it. The variety continued along with the big serving. Even Sinner, but especially a rattled Sinner, could not live with him. He managed to make Alcaraz serve it out, he even won two Championship points, but then of course Alcaraz threw in a drop shot at a key point and smiled when he set up another match point with a beauty of a shot. And won!
There were several points where everyone gasped. It might not have been the all-time classic that was the French, but, just like the Wimbledon final, it has added another chapter to this generation’s outstanding rivalry. After the French, we thought we knew the script ‘Alcaraz’s highs are higher, but his lows are lower, while Sinner is consistently better, however Alcaraz is the better on the more uncertain footing.’ Well, Sinner winning Wimbledon voided that. His sickness at Cincinnatti meant that we didn’t have recent information about hard courts. Yes, Alcaraz has had an amazing run for months, and yes, he has the better head to head, and yes, he’d played better overall this tournament…
But what was clear was that Alcaraz and team studied and learned from Wimbledon (didn’t Dimitrov expose Sinner’s weakness to the slice? And I’m also thinking of the final.) The fact that there were fewer blips of concentration on the hard courts suggested that he’d learned there, and he is only 22 and maturing. There have been grumbles about his match management and shot selection. Well, he realised what he had to do if he didn’t want to lose a final to ‘his greatest rival’ again – and he’d been starting to think of Wimbledon as his – and he was able to do what he had to do. Sinner didn’t respond all too well on the day. He’ll come back, it’s exciting to see what lessons he learns. He was mostly ready for the drop shot and he was good at the net. Neither of them like it when the other overpowers them. Alcaraz is about the only one who can against Sinner at the moment.
Alcaraz took the US Open from the defending champion, and – quite right that this was up for grabs – the no. 1 spot. He’s won all the slams he’s won already twice and goes ahead of Sinner (who would have equalled his tally had he won) – equalling players like Edberg who was watching. I beg his pardon for making Sinner favourite (in my defence, I always want Alcaraz to win, but I was trying to be objective.) He’ll want the Aussie Open, as Sinner will want the French, although really I think they also want to beat each other, and it is such a tasty rivalry because of where they’re almost equally matched and because of their differences. They absolutely have distanced themselves from the rest (having both beaten Djokovic, who at 38 is heading the rest, at the slams recently) having split the grand slams for the past two years already and are making each other improve as both are still under 25.
