Sinner Medvedev Second set

During the last game of the first set Med changed up his patterns and hit some redirects down the line.

-He saw an opportunity to alter his patterns and it paid off.

-For Sinner, he focused on wearing down Med’s legs with stretches.

People can focus on his first serve % being low, which it was, but if are relying on that, it takes away from the overall strategy.

As a college player, I remember running “Hot” on my first serve and dominating. I also remember during those matches running “Cold” and freaking out, getting pissed, losing focus because second-serve kickers were just getting the point started.

(Now, depending on who I’m playing, I use a modified second serve, sometimes it’s even two firsts.

The rewards can outweigh the negatives.

Hitting your second serves a little bigger has its perks.

First game of the second set.

At 40-0, Med comes in on his two-hander again to Sinner’s backhand.

It’s a probe.

At least for me.

It’s designed to “check” the positioning of your opponent.

Based on the near miss by Sinner, it means Sinner positioned in the corner pre-contact.

This is where I get cranky sometimes.

As a kid, growing up watching Wayne Gretzky and Barry Sanders and listening to interviews about them talk about their process was amazing.

They talked about mental pictures.

Wayne could look up, by what he saw, his mental picture, he knew where his players would be. His stats are ridiculous and probably won’t be touched.

Barry talked about “ignoring” the first tackler that was coming and focusing on the next one.

In tennis, we can do the same thing.

I used to put tape on the garage and I couldn't take my eyes off of it while I hit 30, 40 etc in a row. I’d make it difficult. I wouldn’t make it easy.

“Didn’t you see the player is cheating over?” I would ask students.

“No.”

“How? When you have a sec, peek.”

But, when players are taught to focus on the ball too much, how can they see?

Like a dog chasing a stick.

The ball tells you nothing. The swing tells you what’s coming.

Just like after you contact the ball, the players body and position tell me more than the ball.

Yet, over the years, I hear coaches tell players to keep their eye on the ball.

At the club level, it’s problematic.

They’re easily fooled.

**Anyway. Based on Sinner’s near miss alone, Med needs to re-establish another option the next time that situation arises. The problem is if that situation arises at 30-all, 30-40 or 0-15, 0-30 etc. And it will. What will you do then? Will you make the right choice?

This is why it’s super important to stay on top of your patterns or you will get burned.

The second game is interesting.

On back-to-back points…Med’s first break point and the following Deuce point, he attacks down the line and catches Sinner.

On the breakpoint, he loses it as the point goes on.

In the following point, he wins and gets another break chance.

Sinner holds though.

-Yes, all the crosscourts have set up opportunities for the down-the-line attacks. But, from my viewpoint, this will run dry as the match goes on (especially during a three out of fiver).

Pros should have three packages of attacks…(like three boxing, middles, first to box 1, first to box 4, (+1) alterations, etc….and each package should have variations to keep things fresh.

A lot of sports have this.

Why not tennis?

I never thought about this as a player but as a coach, it has crept in over the years. The thought that there have to be more patterns to choose from than the basics.

Stats don’t are a by-product of game planning.

If you focus on the stats, you will hit roadblocks.

Create your game around a few packages and the stats will follow. Whatever they are.

**I always wondered if there was a way to plan a game around your opponent’s drops. Like, if they hit the center of the court…boxes 2 and 3, I will be using ???. If they hit Box 4, I will be using ???. etc.

**Another side note. There are differing opinions on a lot of things going around. Live ball vs fed ball etc…at the higher level they do less fed ball because you want to play outcomes. And you don’t want “pre-determined” outcomes getting stuck into muscle memory.

Do you remember playing video games and toying with the computer?

I used to think I was a decent gamer (there was no online back then) until I would go to a friend’s house and he would do the “wrong” things.

-I fell into the “practice world” and not the “play world.”

-At differing levels, fed ball will dominate. I use fed ball for specific shots, but I want the feeder to try to trick me. Not feed the same pattern over and over (this is half true. I do like some old school repetition fed ball from time to time…1) for comfort….like comfort food 2) if I’m missing a shot and need some timing…3) as a get my game back…a little fed ball is ok…4) if its all you have to train with (but once it gets hard-wired in…your stuck).

**Post match interview Medvedev**

Talked about changing a few things in his game. Most notably moving forward. He was happy with himself and saw the positives to take from the loss. This is huge for all players. It’s one thing to know you have to do something different. It’s another thing to do it. It’s a radical form of acceptance. At 27, he is still evolving on his timeline. (Loki). Not anyone else’s (Isn’t it so easy to point fingers at everyone else instead of the person in the mirror?

-Watch Zverev’s post-match semi-interview (other than the fact that the journalists are assholes for bringing up non-tennis stuff).

Both players are at different stages in their life. As much as Zverev says it doesn’t bother him…it does. The proof is in his answers. The tone. Etc.

I don’t care about that.

What I do care about is watching Zverev grow as a person and use that to win a Major.

One of the biggest problems players have in their development (or lack of) is accepting losses.

Another big problem is the lack of forgiveness towards self.

At least, that’s the way I see it.

If you can’t forgive yourself, how can you forgive others?

How can you grow?

Tennis players are looking external and not internal.

That’s the problem (so isn’t everyone else in life).

That’s where the roadblocks are.

OK!

Moving on!

At 1-5 in the second set, the match turned. Medvedev came into the net with the patterned backhand approach to Sinner’s backhand. As you can see, he wins the point but the turn has been made. The passes are getting closer.

I’ve played matches where I have missed a few big shots…but started feeling really good…Lose the first set and almost laugh it off and say, “This guy is dead meat.” Then I run hot for half a set and build a lead and eventually the next set before I come back down to Earth.

That was before box training.

Way before.

Back when you played on feel, and emotions, and banked on your training.

Now, I break ze mind with pattern manipulation.

Sinner’s coach commented in Italian.

It had something to do with basically, letting go and moving forward, to free himself up for the match.

After the match, I would study the end of the second set and see what I could have done differently to keep Sinner from freeing himself up.

-Important note.

(+1) Winners do have value here.

So do Serve and Volleys.

This is why you see Alcaraz employ these. To break up the other patterns.

Have you ever thought about how important it is to mix short points, with long points and medium points during the match?

Have you ever played a serve and volleyer or someone who comes in early in the match? And can back it up.

It’s unsettling if your timing is off.

It doesn't allow you to get into the points.

It’s in your face.

It’s immediate.

At the same token, it’s hard for the serve and volleyers to switch back to groundstroke comfort.

The art is in the flow.

I need to play a certain amount of groundstroke points to keep tuned up at the baseline and sprinkle a few serve and volleys in.