Served with Andy Roddick
Roland Garros Finals Preview - 2024 FRENCH OPEN
Keep up with us on socials!
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/servedpodcast/
X: https://twitter.com/Served_Podcast
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@served_podcast?_t=8jZtCnzdAnX&_r=1
Watch the Episodes on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0k_--YLuTNuDvq1Dw4zHmw
Keep up with us on socials!
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/servedpodcast/
X: https://twitter.com/Served_Podcast
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@served_podcast?_t=8jZtCnzdAnX&_r=1
Watch the Episodes on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0k_--YLuTNuDvq1Dw4zHmw
What up? Welcome to another edition of Served. I am Andy Roddick, techie Sean, producer Mike. We are just kind of checking in. Hard for me to stay on the sidelines this entire week with the excitement that has taken place at Roland Garros. Wanted to jump on and do a bit of a semifinal preview Women's side, men's side. Tell you what I got right, tell you what I got wrong, tell you what I think. Moving forward, disappointing news that we wanted to address. We released our latest episode a couple days ago and we had shot it right before. Basically, novak had pulled out and pulled through the match that he was in against Sorindolo and then pulled out with an apparent knee injury and since then the updates haven't gotten much better.
Speaker 1:There was an issue. You could see he was hurting, you figured, watching it it felt like it was buildup from finishing at 3 am and then another five-setter. See, he was hurting. Uh, you figured, you know, at watching it it felt like it was build up from finishing at 3 am and then another five setter. Uh, his schedule was an absolute uh for this tournament and the way it was kind of organized and when he got scheduled was an absolute pile of shit. Um, you know you can only deal with so much as a tournament. When the rain stacks up like it has, or like it did for the first week of the French Open, someone's going to pay the bill physically at some point because you have to fit matches in along a certain timeline and if you don't put them in to get them finished, you know, by 3 am, then all that does is mean that someone's gonna have to play it back-to-back. I don't know what's worse. So, no fault, you can't control weather. And when you're basically only playing on two courts, uh, for the entire first week of a tournament, it builds up and it's shitty. Um, and you know Novak uh recently said that, um, it had been, this knee had been bothering him for you know, unknown amount of time, but at least a couple weeks, which might help explain his form coming in.
Speaker 1:I think it's a mixture of lack of match play, obviously some turnover inside of his team that messes with preparation. I don't think his body has been reliable this year and that's not a knock on anyone, it's more of a testament to. It's amazing that it's taken this long for Father Time to at least hint at being a significant part of Novak's life for the future, obviously. Producer Mike just told me, before we went on, that the latest is that he had surgery this morning for a meniscus tear. A lot of it will depend on how bad the tear is when I was 17, tore my meniscus Obviously that's a younger body, but I played on it for like four or five months, did it again last year and was able to kind of just rest and let it heal. It's imperfect, but it's still there, difference being I don't have to play Wimbledon in a month. It's still there, difference being I don't have to play Wimbledon in a month.
Speaker 1:I think this surgery, at least based on every kind of recovery I've seen from this type of injury, including my own, puts the Olympics out, puts Wimbledon seriously at risk, barring some miraculous recovery, because it's not just okay, my knee is okay, good enough to play in a month, you have to train right and I you have to put in yards, especially Novak, your, your special sauce is being able to grind people down, stay in rallies, switch directions, ask the question over and over and over again. This isn't like an Isner type where, or even a Roger type, where you can decide you're going to come forward a bunch where you're going to shorten points. Novak needs his wheels, he needs his defensive skills probably the best defensive player in the history of tennis. You know defense, you rely on your legs. His leg is, you know, has just had surgery.
Speaker 1:So you don't want to be alarmist, you don't want to be, uh, hyperbolic. I don't think it's crazy, um, to have the thoughts in the back of your mind and listen. As, as our friend Paul Anacone says, bet against the greats at your own peril. Uh, you'll end up carrying the bag more often than not. But when someone is 37 years old and the body, even in Monte Carlo, struggling for breath, looked like the fitness wasn't quite there. A Herculean effort at the French Open to get through on a knee that was torn. If it was torn today, it was torn three days ago. That's just the way it is.
Speaker 2:He said it's been bothering him for some time. He said that after the match.
Speaker 1:Unbelievable effort to even get through those matches when you're 37 and you start having surgeries on your knees. It's not the same surgery that Federer had. Federer's was much more serious and became much more serious because it became a problem that wasn't getting fixed. Meniscus, a torn meniscus in your knee is not like a massive thing when you're 24, 25, 26 years old and you have time. This is the worst possible time because it's the shortest turnaround time between slams. The timing of it sucks, couldn't suck worse, especially Novak. Even if guys are gaining on him on hard courts, even if they're gaining on him on clay courts, on grass it's a different animal. His ball flight stays low. He can control the middle of the court. I'd say grass is probably his best surface right now and probably the worst surface for a lot of his uh, the guys he's going against, but the most uncertain surface. So couldn't be worse timing. Uh, for novak, we obviously hope uh, he gets better soon.
Speaker 2:Um, go ahead, mike when does he uh, you know, when does he make the call? Right? Is he going all the way up to july? First, yeah, he will when do they typically have to make the call?
Speaker 1:I mean the draw morning if, if he, if he pulls out in two weeks, then it's, it's, it's bad and I think that puts, you know, the us open in jeopardy. Right, do you just call it a wrap on this year and say, hey, listen, I'm really going to try to go really healthy, really big for one more season, um, but like he doesn't have to pull out, you know he, probably like the classy thing to do would be if you, if you don't, if you know you're not going to play, if you, if on you know the monday, before you know the wimbledon starts, you know there's no chance you're going to play. You haven't hit a tennis ball, you haven't been doing fitness, you have, like, you can't win the tournament, which for no, like it's different with some people it's like, hey, if I get in and two matches, that's a paycheck. That matters. With Novak, that that shit doesn't matter. Like, at this point, it's like slam or bust, right? Uh, the the the best thing he can do for the field is to pull out, um, before the draw is made, right, cause then that puts the entire thing into an upheaval. If one of the top four, uh guys pulls, then the slots are filled, but it's filled with someone weaker, that all obviously becomes a bit of a weaker section which stacks other sections.
Speaker 1:So if he knows he's not going to play, you normally see players at least have that sort of awareness. Um, we hope that he can play. It's a tall order. Um, from where I said and obviously I'm no doctor, I'm not in the room, I'm reading the same reports as everyone else. I'm just basing this off of personal experience and what I see with other players and age is is not nothing right, because he hasn't been hurt this far. It doesn't mean that at 37 he is immune to to prolonged absences. He's fought it off as well as anyone in history. But this is a huge ask what's up?
Speaker 2:Mike, do you think if there's a point where they make the call early on wanting to be ready for US Open? But, then also knowing that the Olympics are this year, and that's the one thing he's never got is the gold of the Olympics.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's tough. I think what happens is one. He's going to value that gold more than anyone else does. There's not a person who makes a rational argument and I've seen it out there and I kind of just roll my eyes where, well, if he doesn't win that gold medal, it changes everything with the conversation. No, it doesn't. It's one tournament every four years, on a random surface, in a random place, that gets wedged into the season. Um, I was King Olympics when I first went and it was like I convinced myself that it was as valuable as a grand slam. Uh, so much so that I skipped it the next time and then I went in 2012.
Speaker 1:It's just not the same for tennis players. It's just not the same, right? You put four years of work in and you have to do six flips on a balance beam that's three inches wide and this is your chance with a global audience. I left in Athens after I lost to Fernando Gonzalez in the round of 16. And I was like, oh man, shit, the world's ending. But oh well, fuck it, I'll go to New York and try to win the U S open in 10 days. Like it's just a different. It's just a different thing for, I think for tennis players to pretend like it's the same as every other person, who, uh, olympic athlete who also might have a job at home Depot is is is crazy. It's crazy town. Same for the NBA, same for, you know, kind of the global sports.
Speaker 1:Um, it might be precious to Novak, but that decision also is surface dependent, right? Do you have more confidence in your footing and your ability, the predictable nature of a hard court, even if there's some wear and tear, elements, or the sliding on on a clay court? I tend to think on a knee that's just been operated on court. I tend to think on a knee that's just been operated on. If you or like shit, maybe his camp, it's like it's Olympics or bust, this is it. Let's just blow it out, let's do it. That would surprise me, but I don't know. I've never been in the position where I've been the all-time slams leader and have one thing that I haven't won. So I don't know. I would tend to think. So I don't know. I would tend to think, I would tend to guess.
Speaker 1:You kind of punt on everything. That's an uncertainty for this year. Maybe the US Open is like I can recover and get in shape in time for that. Maybe Cincinnati before, maybe a 250 before the Olympics, still feels like a short timeline on an unpredictable movement surface. Otherwise, I think you punt. I think you try to get a couple of events in at the end of this year, uh, just so you remember what tennis is, um, and then maybe you're at the age where it's like you know what, let's go down to the blaze of glory, let's try to win Australia again, uh, you know, for the 27th time, and let's you know, let's get healthy for next year.
Speaker 1:But these are all questions that we're guessing at. My best guess is like he is going to be 100% and not take chances, because if he takes chances, takes risks and they go sideways, then you're looking at the end of your career and it not being your choice. We saw that with Roger. We've seen like little glimpses of that with Rafa over the last two years, where we got this nice run of of health, but at what cost, um, you know. So these are all uh, big questions. We hope we see Novak sooner rather than later. I would like to see the passing of the torch, uh, to have a little bit of an extended runway to uh, to center, uh in Alcaraz, but the Olympics in Wimby, it's uh listen you, you under again, underestimate the greats at your own peril. There is something that makes them different, there is something that makes them tick differently. That is an extreme timeline for recovery, fitness and form, um, all three of which are necessary to uh deliver the results that Novak of himself, of his team, so on and so forth.
Speaker 2:You guys want the good news or the bad news?
Speaker 1:right now. I vote good. I vote good news. Cool Absolutely nailed it on half of my women's predictions Top half. Wint Chalk had shviatek and uh coco. Um, shviatek has just dominated. I mean, she's just not losing games, it is. It's like I remember roth I think it was 08 was like barely losing games to get to the, to win the tournament it was. It was like we were betting on not actually betting, but having conversations. So don't arrest me on whether or not guys were going to get three games in a set. And that's what it kind of feels like.
Speaker 1:With ego so far, uh as dominant as a favorite as she was coming in, uh, dare I say she's only added to that notion pedigree. Um, she has to be feeling good. Obviously, coco coco, one of the best players uh on earth. No doubt she is going to win many, many majors. She is going to be no more in the world at some point. She is going to uh, going to be has been a force. This is no disrespect for her. The matchup has been terrible for her uh up to this point. Um, I think this is their 11th time. I think she's won once coming in. Coco's done a great job.
Speaker 1:I thought she really rounded the corner in Rome. I thought she was finding form. Indian Wells, miami, not playing great tennis, rome. I thought she started hitting the ball fantastically, like like ripping forehands. Obviously the second serve was an issue still in. Rome has righted its course a little bit at roland garros, which is great to see.
Speaker 1:Um, listen, given the choice of progress or regression, I think we take progress most of the time. Um, you know, obviously, perfect is is a tough place to work back from. Uh, I know it's easy for us talking heads, dumbasses in the media, to talk about perfect and work backwards from that, but that's not the reality of an athlete. If you wake up every day, you do your best. It's imperfect. And how do we handle those imperfections and can we win through uh, those imperfections? I promise you it's certainly easier.
Speaker 1:Uh, sitting here analyzing the matches, knowing what someone has to do, I oftentimes knew what I had to do. Going into a match executing against the best players on earth is a different thing and that's why, even though I was one of the best players in the world, uh, for a moment in time, and pretty consistently, for a moment in time I still had a three and 21 record against someone who was just one at a base level, better at a base level, better. And that part, uh, probably phased me less than the matchup of things, right. So I'm going to draw the parallel between what Coco's going through with EGA and it seems like you know I talk about her record being bad, and only only will I ever do that when I throw myself under the bus first, right, like so. Three and 21 against someone. I was the second best player on grass for probably half a decade. It just sucked because the best player was also his best surface, Like a lot of these things. And that's what we're seeing at the French open now right, losing the finals a couple of years ago, quarters, and now it's the ego test again. On the toughest ask, clay might very well be Coco's best surface. It's the EGA test again on the toughest ask, clay might very well be Coco's best surface. It just so happens that EGA is on her way to being in the conversation for one of the best ever on this surface. Her record has been dominant.
Speaker 1:I think Coco has to play a near perfect match. I think she has to play outside of her comfort zone, everything that EGA does well switching directions, getting the ball up and out of the zone on the forehand side, controlling the middle of the court, not letting Coco get away with the fadeaway. Forehand attacking second serve, standing on the baseline, being an intimidating presence and then being able to hit off-pace serves, which, against the big hitters like Sabalenka, rabakina, they have time, all they want to do is crack it. Coco is a little bit different. Right On the forehand side, she'll roll it. She's not one of those that takes the first ball on the return and just tries to hit winners. So all of those little things melt into a matchup that is tough. That Iga has won a lot of the time in a lopsided fashion.
Speaker 1:Coco won in tight three setter in Cincinnati. I have lived that life. Of my three wins against Roger, they were like I barely fucking won, like barely. It wasn't. As if I went out and was like, oh, I was way better than him tonight. No, I survived and choked my way to the finish line, like Coco needs one of those performances where, listen, I lost the oh nine Wimbledon final but I executed. Well, I did exactly what I wanted to. I knew the game plan, it just didn't work out. She has to have that type of game plan, which I have full faith in Brad and team putting together. She's just going to have to do things that she's not comfortable doing at a very high level of execution.
Speaker 1:So, if you haven't gathered it by now, I don't think this matchup is truly indicative of how coco is playing or what, how we should value her as a player overall. It's just she's playing the best player on earth, of which there might be two or three at any given moment, and she might be the second best player at any given moment, but there is someone that is better igish fiatek. Anyone who says she hasn't been better than anyone over the last three years is taking crazy pills. Like not every month has she been better. Sabalenka has had three months runs, but as at scale, she's been better than anyone over the last three years and her results have spoken to that. It's just a tough matchup, right. It's frustrating.
Speaker 1:If you're, you know where Coco is and it's like listen, I do all of these things well, but the things that I do specifically well that bother other people might not bother Iga as much and, conversely, what Iga does well plays into my weaknesses like a glove. It's a good fit. So I, I like iga. I've liked iga from the beginning. I like her even more now that there aren't these you know, there aren't any six foot two uh giants hitting the ball through her anymore, uh, which leads to the if I didn't give away the ending already, um, sabalenka and rabakina, uh, both go down. Um, which I was surprised at Shocked. Yeah, mira Andreeva, listen, I love the way she plays. I like her toughness. I like her court IQ or tennis IQ at 17 years old is phenomenal.
Speaker 1:The special potion that doesn't jump off the TV screen of being able to switch directions at will and find, when you can switch directions, the next ball, you can find the pattern that you want. It's what Novak Djokovic has done so well for so long. He's the only person that can find the rally they want against Rafa Nadal, against the leftiness, because he can knock down that high back end and find Rafa's back end and then all of a sudden he can get inside the court and kind of maneuver way easier said than done. And Drava. I'm not saying she's Novak Djokovic, so put your Twitter fingers away. I'm saying her ability to switch directions. It doesn't jump off the screen, right.
Speaker 1:It's not the physicality of Sabalenka, where you know aunt Sue can look and say you know, I get what she does because she just overpowers people and I can see on the TV that her ball moves faster than someone else's. It's very obvious. Rafa's physicality is obvious. Roger's artistry is obvious. Novak, switching directions and getting the pattern that he wants is like Brett the Hitman Hart, where he gets you in holds. He's not dropping elbows from the top rope in a dramatic fashion.
Speaker 1:What she does is so nuanced at such a young age and I'm so impressed. Listen, at 17, your body isn't the fastest it's ever going to be. It's not the most powerful your body is ever going to be. Not everyone is Rafa and Serena where, at 17, they look like they can bench press, dump trucks. Mostly at 17, you're not hitting your physical prime until three or four years later.
Speaker 1:What she's been able to do, I didn't think that she had the physicality nothing to do with her mentality, nothing to do with stylist, nothing to do, but just the physicality to take out someone like a Sabalenka, who is, you know, a powerhouse, took her out in Madrid and, like a straightforward fashion, one in four. If they had to play again tomorrow, I would choose Sabalenka again. If they had to play tomorrow, I would choose Rabakina again. So save your criticism because you would too. You're lying if you say otherwise, but I'm just so impressed with her tennis IQ.
Speaker 1:At such a young age that is a natural gift, it is a sign of intelligence. She recognizes patterns. She's able to decipher, fix in real time, make up for the fact that she's not hitting it as hard as everyone else or with as much spin as everyone else. Her superpower is switching directions, finding the pattern she wants. That is his skill. Even Novak didn't have that skill when we first saw him out on tour. This is a special type of tennis, mind, I think, the closest comp that I've seen.
Speaker 1:This lady I'm about to mention has a little bit more flair. You know she was a little bit smaller, uh, but Martina Hingis had that when, at a young age she was 16 years old 15 years old and she was dominating tennis. She could come in, she could switch directions. Her tennis IQ was, you know, off the charts and she eventually got swallowed, uh, by the people who were six foot three and just could go through her right, where you can't protect against a 65 mile an hour second serve. So andreva is going to be bigger, stronger, faster.
Speaker 1:The only thing that could possibly be a speed bump is a reaction to fame, a reaction to expectations, which I personally think is the hardest thing in in all of sports is like she's not supposed to win the match against sabalenka. That is a freer feeling than shviatek is feeling going in saying if I don't win it's a disappointment. Those are two totally different sides of the coin. But, andreva, I didn't think I knew. I think we all knew. It's not like I'm, you know, going out on much of a limb. I think we all knew that she would be in this position at some point. It's a year earlier than I thought. Uh, if I'm being honest, so credit to her.
Speaker 1:Her team uh conchita martinez, by the way, like we, we don't talk enough about her as a coach took muguruta to two grand slam titles has been in the picture, and not publicly in the picture, like she's not one of the. Look at me, you know, look at me, look at me coaches, like we see so often now. Um, we'd be be remiss if we didn't mention Sabalenka. Looked like something was really bothering her. You want to point out the good and give people credit before you point out that someone may have been compromised.
Speaker 1:Sabalenka does not whine about stuff on court. She gets temperamental, she'll break shit, she'll yell at someone, but she is not a whinger. She is not someone who lets you know every time something is wrong with them. Something was bothering her, stomach issues, don't know what it was. She was not 100%. That also doesn't matter, because you play who is across the net on that given day. Unfortunate for her regroup. But take nothing away from Andreeva the intelligence is really impressive, really really impressive, and especially playing this style of game and kind of creating some ownership over it at that age is just phenomenal.
Speaker 1:So Paolini played great, won in Dubai, biggest title of her career, I think, being Kalins Skaia, I think in the final of that one, looking for big things in the clay, and it just didn't really present itself. You think the product market fit, is there, created a lot of speed, is quick, natural mover. All the things were set up for a big clay court season off of a great beginning to the year for her. It didn't work out that way. Won doubles in Rome with her. Ronnie got matches even though she wasn't playing great in singles, was still putting in yards getting match prep, still had to make returns at break point. He still had to do all of these things.
Speaker 1:It's basically just Rabakina, obviously, obviously is a better, more powerful player, has the height, is able to drive through uh, one of the best second server turners on tour. Uh pale in defending that at. Uh. Uh, her second server to higher clip as far as percentage of points one uh, even more so than her first serve, is a Herculean effort. That would not happen at scale over probably over a three to five set match, and or if they played this match every day for two weeks, that would not be the recipe for success. But again, you only have to be better than someone for two sets a day. Andre told me something amazing one time we were in Australia. It was hot as life out. It was one of those where 140 degrees on court, australia type days coming in. I'm like man, that's hot, he goes. Will you shut the fuck up?
Speaker 2:I'm like all right, well hi.
Speaker 1:Hi hero and he goes. You know, easy we have it. I'm like what are you talking about, dude? I just almost vomited during practice. What do you know? He goes. How many people only have to be better than one person a day at their job? He's like most people play the field every day. Most people have to win against the field every day. We only have to win against one person and I think that's kind of what Paolini did today. I think Rabakina, not Sabalega, is the better player. I think at scale she wins this match 7 out of 10 times. But credit to Paolini, didn't have a lot of singles progress coming in and was able just to turn it.
Speaker 1:I think I like Andreeva in this semi. I think she's going to be able to spread the court. Paolini is not big, probably 5'5 or less. When someone is 5'5 or less and you can kind of extend the court so she can hit line and we talked about that superpower that makes the court a lot bigger, especially for someone that reach isn't quite there. I think Perlini is a little bit older, is going to feel it a little bit more.
Speaker 1:I don't think Andreeva knows the consequences of what's going on. I think she's at the moment in her career where it's like, oh, I'm going to be here 77,000 more times. I know, I certainly thought that and it certainly didn't work out that way, but ignorance is bliss a lot of the times. I like Iga Andreeva in the final. I think Iga rolls. I think this is her title, and I like it more now that Sabalenka and Rabakina are out of the tournament. So that's where we're at. I think this is her title and I like it more now that Sabalenka and Rabakina are out of the tournament. So that's that. That's where we're at. I think did we convince T2 to let us do a full recap show instead of you know kind of something that is more relevant all of the weeks.
Speaker 2:We'll be on Monday evening. Yes, sick.
Speaker 1:Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, tennis, this channel. Thank you for letting us deliver a better show for people watching on T2, which we certainly always appreciate. So we'll do a full recap rundown. I think we're going to get Kim Kleisters on. I know that you've texted her. I will certainly text her. One of our partners in crime. We will get John Wertheim on to see what was the deal. He will be dialing in from Paris Sunday evening so that we can get you a Monday evening show. Hopefully they run it a bunch and we will see who's right and who's wrong.
Speaker 1:And on the men's side, exciting stuff. Obviously a little bit of weirdness with what we had talked about before, with Novak pulling out, rude not having to play a quarterfinal match. I worry about it less with someone like Kasper Rude because he's gone deep in majors before. It's not as if the moment's going to get to him. He has played semifinals in majors before. He's won three semifinals in majors before, which is a huge, huge deal. Two finals here at Roland Garros, back in the semis. So this is not someone who is undeserving to be in a semis, not someone who, uh, you know, you think of of curious a couple of years ago where I don't think he would have been uh the favorite or he hadn't been to a semifinal of a slam before, when he got the walkover and got to play Novak in the final. I don't think this is that situation. Uh, casper is proven. Has uh played well in a three out of five set format over two weeks? Knows how to navigate that scenario.
Speaker 1:They played last year in the semis and rude rolled Alex Zverev in the semis there last year, straight sets. Uh was a pretty jarring scoreline was a pretty jarring matchup. This is different. Zverev was four months into a comeback from a grotesque ankle injury which we saw in the semis of the 2022 french open. Uh rolled it, stopped it broke a bunch of shit. Uh had some ups and downs, some stops and starts with that recovery in australia 2023.
Speaker 1:Zverev looked like a ghost of himself. It just you could tell he was. It was going to take some time to work back. When you felt like he was back was at least the fitness was there to make the second week, to make the semifinals of a Grand Slam again. I don't know that the tennis was there. He is playing significantly better going into this semi than he was last year going into the semis against Kasper Ruud Now. Does that year going into the semis against Kasper Ruud Now does that account for straight sets win? Turning it the other way, I think it will.
Speaker 1:One of the things that Kasper Ruud actually has more RPM rotations per minute than Rafa Nadal on his forehand he creates a higher spin profile at least and this isn't prime Rafa right, they started keeping these stats later on. So you know the 32 year old version of Rafa is not the 25 year old version of Rafa, so on and so forth. But point is to say this guy gets some serious spin jump on the ball which you also can't see from that annoying above angle on television. I wish we could watch every match from the slightly elevated behind the players perspective, because then you would get from that annoying above angle on television. I wish we could watch every match from the slightly elevated behind the players perspective, because then you would get a feel for how brutal the movement is. You would get a real feel for the spin profile of a Casper Rude where on the above view on TV it looks like the ball is bouncing short and is hittable, whereas it's actually bouncing short and getting above your shoulder, or at least my shoulder, both of your shoulders maybe not someone who's six foot seven, like an Alex Zverev, and that's kind of the point. Right, he rips that forehand to the inside, out to the Zverev backhand. Zverev can handle it. Probably, you know, one of the best five on earth of being able to handle that ball, because it won't jump up just as high because he simply is taller than the rest of us. So he will be able to handle it more. He will be in a bunch of Casper service games. He will make many more returns than he did last year. Right, he was missing returns. He wasn't quick off the, but his movement is way better than this year.
Speaker 1:His forehand is is he's hitting it as well. And people say, like his forehand is hitting it as well. And people say his forehand's bad, his forehand's not bad, shut up. If you keep saying that it is a weakness only compared to the rest of his game. If he was someone who was 30 in the world you'd say wow, he gets a pretty decent spin profile. He doesn't miss it that often. The narrative would be completely different. It's just because his serve. He serves 74%. First serves in really struggled against Dmanour. The first serve percentage came way down. He was at 71%. You know, the first serve percentage came way down. He was at like 71%. Real struggle, which is also higher than everyone else on tour every day. World-class backhand. Six foot six, six foot, seven moves Is a natural clay court mover. So then what do we say? Net game is above tour average. Great Forehand is just above tour average. So then we talk about his forehand in a more negative manner, because it comes up in every scouting report and it will again here.
Speaker 1:Casper root is going to have to extend the court to that side. Zverev doesn't flatten that ball out very often. He can hit it really big, but it has some spin profile. When he's extended he loops it right. He plays a little bit higher. He's been hitting that one up the line, basically to reset. If Zverev hits that forehand up the line and it's high and heavy, gets above someone's backhand, they have to take that ball cross court, which then goes into Zverev's comfort zone. He is sunken five or six feet behind and he can create space for that backhand. He will not be beat for pace. Doesn't get beat for height that often. That is not an accident that he's getting that matchup over and over. It is by virtue of him having control of that forehand, getting the spin profile actually having control over that ball, which I don't think he had as much last year. He is serving better, he is serving harder, he is serving at a higher percentage. The second serve doesn't look as yippy.
Speaker 1:I like Zverev in this match, but I consistently always and I'm an asshole for it I consistently underestimate Casper Roode, as we all do. We all act like he's a visitor to the semis and finals of grand slams and we are fucking wrong. How many times does he have to do it before an asshole like me doesn't pick Zverev in the semis? It's at least one more time. But at one of these points I'm going to learn. But listen, kasper, I would worry if some people were getting the day off. I don't worry about him, I think he will show up. I don't think the day off the weird cadence of Novak pulling out, he's going to be fresh mentally, fresh physically. I think his variable will be the same Him going through the demon in straight sets full day. I think both are going to be fresh set and I think we can say the same thing for the other two semifinalists. The show of the semifinals. Here's a look at the next 10 years of our lives.
Speaker 1:Friends as tennis fans, is the Chuckster? My friends as tennis fans, is the Chuckster, my favorite player to watch, currently back in full flight. I think he's played at the highest level so far in this tournament. I think he's been the best player and with as many question marks coming in and the fact that he had played three matches on the dirty stuff, uh, coming in hell of an effort finding form. I think Indian Wells and getting through that tournament, playing well in Miami, finding form, will change the arc of his entire year.
Speaker 1:Um, I took center at the beginning. I think that was a risky pick. I don't know that many people chose him to win the tournament. Um, on-by-match basis, he just smothers. You Made a mid-year adjustment on his serve last year, brought the foot up, holding over 90% of the time.
Speaker 1:When I saw him in Monte Carlo last year, he looked like you could expose his movement a little bit on clay. You could hit behind him a little bit on clay. His results weren't as consistent. On clay he's still the upside. He can still. You know he's, he's Italian, he grew up on clay right. But I don't know that it's ever going to be his best surface. I think so highly of him. I think he can win this tournament, even with it not being his best service. I took him at the beginning in our pre-draw show. A lot of that was probably just because of the question marks around the Chuckster. They're both healthy. They're both in full flight. I have to stick with my pick and I think it's just purely out of ego, because it would be cool if I called him at the beginning and if he wants so.
Speaker 1:I don't know that it's based in balls and strikes, if anything. If anything. The Moutette situation against center in the first set, where he's playing a bunch of drop shots and he's playing just this weird ass brand of tennis where Yannick can't throw punches because he's constantly moving. Guess who else can do that. I'll give you one guess Producer Mike uh, carlos Alcaraz the.
Speaker 1:Chuckster, except he can punch you in the mouth too. He can do the body blows, but then all of a sudden your chin's exposed and he can knock you out. Ramoutette will just keep throwing jabs at your face until you just want to bury him. I'm going to take Sinner. Zero faith in it. I don't have any confidence in it. I'll tell you when I feel confident. I feel confident in Iga Sviantek. I love Coco, I have a friendship with Coco. I hope Coco wins, not because I dislike Iga, just because I really really appreciate Coco and I've spent time with her. I love Iga, I respect her. It knows no bounds. But I think I'm going to stick with Sinner for no other reason than it's what I said 11 days ago and I'm not going to flip. I'm not going to stick with center Um. If for no other reason, then it's what I said 11 days ago and I'm I'm I'm not going to flip. I'm not going to turn my back if I think colors is a 52% favorite, um, but this is like.
Speaker 1:This is the future. This is the next generation and post big three I think a lot of us worried about. You know, is the tennis going to drop off a little bit. Are we going to have these consistent champions? Are we going to have these bankable personalities? Are they going to get along? Are we going to go back to Stylistically? I mean, alcaraz is as much fun to watch as Roger was in prime. He has that variety. He can hit every shot.
Speaker 1:Sinner has worked man. He was this Gumby body thing where you could shove him around he would get nervy. Sometimes he would all of a sudden bury two forehands when he hadn't missed one in 40 minutes Work. Work has been why he is now number one on earth, 28th person to do so. Uh, he's got to be like a heavy favorite, by the way, if we're not getting too far ahead of ourselves to be the seven. There've been 17 year in number ones. Is that? Is that right? Is that what we said? He would be the 18th year end number one is like a massive, massive, massive deal. That deal that goes down in every record book. It's not a career high, it's literally. When you're looking at the roll call in tennis history.
Speaker 1:He doesn't have the points to defend coming up right. He didn't win Wimbledon like Carlos did. Carlos wins Wimbledon and he gains zero points this year. Those are already accounted for right, carlos made a run was further than who did the center lose to Zverev, I think, in the round of 16 at the US Open last year. Not a lot of points coming off there. Right, he is set up very nicely, made a huge run at the end of the year, wanted a bunch of stuff, but as far as the remaining slams go, he lost second round last year.
Speaker 1:Roland Garros Guess who's getting points if they win this match. Alcaraz has made exactly zero points to this point in the French Open. So far Zero. Sinner has made second round to semis, adds finals. He made semis at Wimbledon last year. It makes a run there. It's round of 16 at US Open. There is wide open space. He did win uh in the summer in canada last year. He's got to be the odds on favorite, at least even money to finish the year number one. So congratulations to yannick center.
Speaker 1:That is a. That is, you don't get to number one by accident. That is a lifetime of work. Anyone who discredits that accomplishment in any way, shape or form. If it's Novak's hurt, shut up. You better be. If you're going to like, qualify anything ever about like.
Speaker 1:I remember when Alcaraz made his well, novak couldn't play. I don't care. I don't care In order to criticize someone who's number one on earth in a global sport. No, it's not like American football, where we're world champions, where no one else actually plays the game anywhere else on sport. No, it's not like American football, where we're world champions, where no one else actually plays the game anywhere else on earth. And we just say world because it's great, because we are the best football team in the world. Just no one else plays Global sport. Number one in the world. If you may say this at all or qualify it in a negative way, you better be really good at your job. You better be great at your job.
Speaker 1:Congrats to Yannick Sinner. I get goosebumps even thinking about it, because what an accomplishment. That is a lifelong goal and I promise you he will not think about it this weekend. He will be able to compartmentalize. It is something that nobody can ever take away from him. He will never be less than a career high ranking of number one in the world. Big, big deal, all the props. And oh, by the way, he's playing someone younger than him, who has also been number one in the world and finished year end number one in the world.
Speaker 1:We are starting to see the early rivalry of. I can say and I'm not one to sit here and say so-and-so, they're going to win 12 slant. No, these guys are going to win Like again. I'm going to run you through history Okay, agassi has eight, connors has eight, mcenroe has seven, edberg has six, becker, you go on like. The absolute icons of our game. Forget about the big three, cause I don't want to hear. Well, they have 24. These guys are like. They may not even match that Shut up. They will be absolute icons and legends of this game. I don't know which one's going to end up with 10. I don't know which one's going to end up with six. All I know is that when they do end up with five, six, seven, eight, nine, they're on Mount Rushmore of our sport, right Like, they're in that league. They will be in that league.
Speaker 1:Now, hope injury doesn't have anything to say about it. This is a absolute titan of a matchup. This is a Tyson fight in the late 80s. This is electricity. This is what we have to look forward to.
Speaker 1:I cannot wait to watch these two go at it as. Uh, as a fan, uh, predictions be damned. There are no losers when these two, when these two match up, we can all guess we're going to get some right, we're going to get some wrong. What I do know with confidence is we're staring directly in the face of the future, uh, of our sport. Hopefully a couple others enter the arena. These two have separated right.
Speaker 1:I, I love, I love all the other players. I, like you, won't find a bigger mevidev fan than I, than me. He will tell you these two are on a different planet. Talent wise, he's going to get his wins. He is the number one player. He is a grand slam winner. He is a hall of famer. These two are on a different level, not every day, not every surface, not every scenario. Again, if we out look at scale, over time these two will be absolute legends of our game Already, two number ones going off, scoring off semifinals. Roland Garros, I promise you I will not miss a point. We know that you will not miss a point. Also, and please check in for our full recap show uh, monday evening, is that right, mike?
Speaker 2:monday evening yeah, monday, monday evening, they haven't set a time yet okay but we'll tape as soon as the finals are over, on perfect sunday and uh, so real quick though before we go. So who are you picking to win it all?
Speaker 1:uh, women I mean I'm gonna pick whoever wins center alcaraz, um, you know. So I, I think I I'll go and obviously I'm going to go Iga. I don't think anyone's not going to go Iga, it's just like listen, upsets happen, but similar to Rabokin and Sabalenka. If they play those matches again tomorrow, I would still make the same pick. Nothing I saw would convince me enough to not think they would win that matchup. More often than not, I don more often than not. I don't deal in feelings, I deal in pragmatism, matchups and statistics. Uh, whoever wins center alcaraz, I think, is able to separate. I think uh zverev's in the final, uh center over zverev. Uh in the final. I had novak in the final. That's obviously not going to happen, not not sure I can account for meniscus and predictions. But here we are. Uh center ego. Check us out uh monday evening on t2 we will come on and film our show as soon as uh we are off air. John worth time will join. Hopefully we we can pull kim kleister's in uh friend of the show. Next week's episode I want to talk about real quick um. So hopefully you've enjoyed this kind of like uh add-on episode that is, keeping uh techie sean from his dinner, um, and his whatever else he's doing tonight, um, next week's episode, I think, is going to be really interesting.
Speaker 1:I love, obviously, live tennis. I love results. I like seeing legacies made, I like chopping it up, I like matchups. What I also really really like and I think was kind of the spark for this podcast becoming real is giving a look behind the curtain. When Roland Garris is going on, I think we do less of that because we're covering current events. Next week obviously calms down a little bit before the grass ramps up.
Speaker 1:What do you say? We talk about money in tennis guys Like appearance fees, how all that works. Do you negotiate against your agent? What does a shoe and clothing deal look like? How many endorsements is too many? What can you put in your sleeve? What are the size of the logos? How do you pay taxes and declare them in 27 states and 17 countries? How do we feel about that? Maybe just we're not reacting to a semifinal somewhere, but we can actually take a look behind the curtain of tennis a little bit more.
Speaker 1:I will be drinking an Olipop and we will be talking about it next week. Check us out. We will do Monday recap show, which will be kind of a hybrid version of racket rundown presented by Wilson, and just kind of a full analysis of goings on, takeaways, upstarts that we didn't get to in this show that, you know, may have had great runs a little bit. Who's looking for more? Who's looking for form again? What do we think about the grass court season, all wrapped up with a bow? John wertheim will be joining us from paris, will tell us what it was like on site. We'll get his insights. We'll get the insights of, uh, the legend, kim kleisters. Um, and that'll be it. Uh, I'll be there too. Uh, thanks for listening to this check-in version of serve. We certainly appreciate you and we'll talk to you soon.