0:00

Hi, this is Billie Jean King. This

0:02

is Marion Bartoli. I'm Mats Villander.

0:04

This is Mary Carrillo. This is Pam Schreiber. This

0:06

is Yannick Noah. Hi, this is Rachel

0:09

in Pam Schreiber's hometown and Francis

0:11

Tiafoe's home state, Baltimore, Maryland,

0:14

and you're listening to The Tennis Podcast.

0:27

Well hello and welcome to

0:30

The Tennis Podcast, introduced

0:32

brilliantly there by Rachel in Baltimore,

0:35

Maryland, Maryland, Maryland,

0:39

home of course, as she points out, to Pam

0:41

Schreiber. Hello Pam and

0:44

Francis Tiafoe and lots

0:46

of other

0:47

celebrities. Can anybody name one? I

0:50

feel like Baltimore is a

0:53

celeb hub. All I remember from

0:55

Baltimore is that it featured

0:57

as the hometown of

1:00

the person in Sleepless in Seattle,

1:02

the Tom Hanks character, because he lived

1:05

in Baltimore and she lived in Seattle

1:08

and apparently they were very far away from one another.

1:11

Setting of the wire as

1:13

well. I once spent some time on

1:16

the tarmac at Baltimore Airport,

1:19

very much unexpectedly and unwelcomely,

1:23

but that wasn't Baltimore's

1:25

fault. It just wasn't my destination

1:28

or my starting point at that

1:31

moment in time. Hello David, hello Matt, how

1:33

are you?

1:34

All right, yes, very well, thank you. Likewise,

1:38

yes, very well. Tennis is happening.

1:41

It is on the screen behind me

1:43

here. Carlos Alcaraz is just jogging

1:46

his way to the net for a coin toss with

1:48

Dan Evans. So it's a replay

1:50

of their very, very fun match at

1:52

the US Open. Don't know whether to expect similar

1:55

fun today. We'll be able to update you on

1:57

it over the course of the podcast.

1:59

We have had some

2:03

results at normal times. We had a final

2:05

played on a Sunday. What a novelty.

2:08

But of course, Shanghai is,

2:11

it's all over the place. I do not

2:12

know what round we're in,

2:14

but whatever tennis has happened, we'll

2:16

be covering it for you on this tennis podcast.

2:19

And just before we do all of that, a

2:21

reminder to you that if you're a friend of

2:23

the pod, you can enter a prize

2:25

draw to be in with a chance of winning. And this

2:27

is an incredible prize package.

2:30

Semi-final tickets to the Billie Jean King Cup

2:32

by Gamebridge Finals in Seville

2:35

on Saturday, the 11th of November. The

2:37

winner gets a pair of tickets for both

2:40

sessions on that Saturday. You

2:42

get two nights accommodation and return flights

2:44

from any EU or UK

2:46

airport. Devastating to have to say EU

2:48

or UK. You

2:51

have until Thursday, the 12th of October

2:54

at 11.59 p.m. UK time to enter. The

2:58

link to do so for friends

3:00

will be in our newsletter this week. And

3:03

if you're a friend who doesn't get the newsletter, what

3:05

are you playing at for starters? But

3:07

don't worry, you can rectify that terrible

3:10

situation by writing to us, friends

3:12

at tennispodcast.net and we'll

3:14

send you the link if you want to buy

3:16

tickets to the Billie Jean King Cup Finals.

3:19

The link to do so is also in

3:22

our show notes and Matt is going to be

3:25

at the Billie

3:26

Jean King Cup by Gamebridge

3:28

Finals. So you'll also be winning the

3:31

possible chance of seeing Matt. I'm

3:33

very excited to find out what Seville's

3:36

like, Matt. Have you ever been there before? Because

3:38

I'm really interested in to know what that's like as

3:40

a city.

3:42

I have never been to Seville. No, it's probably

3:44

the one major Spanish city I haven't

3:46

been to actually. So I'm very excited

3:49

to go there. It's beautiful, I believe.

3:52

And hopefully there'll be a bit of time

3:54

to explore the city. It's a great

3:57

venue, I think, kind of like with Malaga for the

3:59

Davis Cup. finals as well. The weather should be great

4:02

in November still, you

4:04

know, sort of mid-20s I

4:06

think, so good for any travelling

4:08

fans. It's a nice place to be,

4:11

I just think, at that time of year.

4:13

It's a tough job, Matt's got, but

4:15

someone's simply got to complete Spain.

4:20

What

4:20

a hero! And it could be Matt Roberts.

4:22

What a hero he is. Let's

4:24

head to Beijing, shall we, which had its

4:26

final yesterday won

4:29

by Igo Šiontek, she beat Ludmilla

4:31

Samsonova, the inexplicable Ludmilla

4:33

Samsonova 6-2

4:36

to win that title, ending Coco

4:38

Goss' winning streak en route in

4:40

the semi-final 6-2, 6-3. She

4:43

survived a big battle with Karoline Garcia

4:46

in the quarter-finals. We'll get onto the Samsonima

4:49

side of the draw and her route through to the final in a minute,

4:51

but let's start with Šiontek, for

4:53

whom I thought it was a real

4:57

return to form this week. And I don't mean

4:59

her recent World Number One form, I

5:02

almost mean her form quite

5:04

a bit before that, the form that got her

5:07

to World Number One. I felt a lot

5:09

less anxious watching

5:11

her this week. I felt like there was a freedom

5:13

in her demeanor and in her

5:16

play, which I haven't

5:18

seen for quite a long time, actually.

5:20

Am I just imagining that, David? Because

5:22

am I overlaying the fact

5:24

that

5:25

I know she's not World Number One anymore and

5:28

she's relieved of that pressure

5:30

of being the

5:31

hunted rather than the hunter? Am I

5:33

sort of overlaying my own narrative on it or

5:36

is there something there?

5:38

I think

5:39

it is possible to overlay

5:41

a little of how one feels watching

5:44

somebody who's no longer World Number One, who

5:46

then becomes part of the Chasing

5:49

Pack again and assuming that

5:52

that is

5:53

creating freedom in the player's mind

5:56

and demeanor. I think that I did

5:58

that a little bit. But I also

6:01

think there is something absolutely there in

6:03

in her demeanor. There's an energy. There

6:05

is a Freshness, she seemed

6:08

revitalized a little and without

6:11

the weight of the world on her I

6:13

did note on match point. She was

6:15

emotional and then she was ecstatic.

6:17

It was kind of oh goodness me

6:19

and then Overwhelmed a little and

6:21

then suddenly the the joy came

6:24

out and she bounced around and but generally

6:26

her play did have a freedom

6:28

to it and Because

6:31

she's such an interesting player because of how

6:33

she's evolved from being this player

6:36

full of variety That

6:38

people reference when she first came on the tour

6:41

to suddenly becoming this killer In

6:44

rallies who just wants to take over

6:46

and she she was playing big hitters in this

6:48

tournament and and the highly ranked players

6:51

and she was standing up to the test time

6:53

after time and And

6:56

I did I did enjoy watching her I do think there was less

6:58

stress watching her because I

7:01

Think you you know for her

7:03

that she's not defending

7:05

Now

7:06

and it is it is a different mentality

7:08

and I think it has just given us something a

7:11

new look a new Vantage point

7:13

to have a go at and blimey. She came

7:15

through flying colors

7:18

It's very refreshing Matt, isn't it to see? Players

7:21

looking fresh during this

7:24

portion of

7:25

the season because it's let's

7:27

face it's a time of the year that is

7:29

so defined by players

7:32

looking various degrees of jaded

7:34

and having various degrees of Motivation

7:38

quite frankly and it's always interesting quite often You'll

7:40

see players that have had an injury layoff

7:42

at some point in the season looking really motivated

7:45

and refreshed and hungry because You

7:48

know their canister is less depleted than

7:50

others and obviously fish on tech She's got the

7:53

season has a complete different complexion

7:55

on it for her to what everything that came

7:57

before it has and I just I I

8:00

really enjoyed that this week, seeing her

8:02

look so hungry and fresh because, you

8:05

know, full disclosure, I find this

8:07

time of the season hard. I'm

8:10

looking for reasons to really care

8:12

and I'm looking for reasons to watch

8:15

other than the fact that I make

8:19

a tennis podcast. And

8:21

that sounds awful, doesn't it? I mean, I really

8:23

do love the sport, but sometimes the

8:26

lack of vibes it

8:29

gets to me. So I thank

8:32

E.G.S.V. on Tech this week for injecting

8:34

some

8:36

zing to it all. Yeah,

8:40

that's a great word for it. Zing

8:42

is very much what E.G.S.V. on Tech

8:45

had on the court this year,

8:47

well, this week in Beijing. And

8:49

I remember the night she lost to

8:52

Osterpanko at the US Open and we knew

8:54

she would be losing her world number one ranking. We

8:58

had a debate on the podcast. What

9:00

way is this going to go for E.G.S.V. on Tech

9:02

now? Is losing number one,

9:04

which has meant a lot to her and she's

9:07

carried that role so well for I think

9:09

over 70 weeks she held that ranking. Is

9:12

that going to be a big downer for

9:14

her? Is she going to really struggle to find

9:17

motivation again or is it going to completely

9:19

free her up and make her go

9:21

again? And I think in

9:24

her words, she's kind of been through

9:26

the process of both of those things already.

9:28

She said she was really down about losing the number

9:30

one ranking and perhaps that contributed

9:33

to her bad performance the other week

9:35

when she lost to Kuda Matova. She still

9:38

said she was not in a great place. She was still sort

9:40

of coming to terms with being number two again.

9:43

But it seems like through Beijing she really

9:47

found the motivation of, okay,

9:49

I'm number two, that means there's things that I can

9:51

work on, things that I can get better at. And

9:54

there was a freshness that had sort

9:56

of been missing, I would say, for quite

9:59

a while her game and just

10:02

as David said, the fact that it

10:05

wasn't just that she was winning these matches, it was the way

10:07

she was winning I think was so impressive.

10:09

There was lots of great tennis in matches you

10:12

would absolutely expect her to win against

10:14

Magdalen Net and Vavaro Kucheva.

10:17

We know that Igor Svyantek can go out there

10:20

and blitz those opponents and

10:22

be brilliant but it was the matches,

10:24

the final three that she played against Karolina

10:27

Garcia, Coco Gough and

10:29

Ludmilla Samsonova I just thought were just

10:33

signs that Svyantek was kind

10:35

of back to her best this week because Garcia,

10:38

it was such a high quality match, probably

10:40

the best match, well definitely the best match I've

10:42

watched since the US Open for sure. They were both

10:44

playing really really well, great to see Garcia playing

10:47

well again. And I've

10:50

often watched Vyantek in these matches against

10:52

big hitters recently and just been

10:55

struck by how many unforced errors Igor Svyantek

10:58

will make. Like she's trying to take the big hitters on

11:00

at their own game and suddenly

11:02

it consists of all run away from her and I've always

11:05

been a bit curious, I'm like you've

11:07

got more in your game than that, you don't need to be

11:09

necessarily trying to out hit these players all

11:11

the time. And against Garcia

11:14

she had that totally under control even though

11:16

she really had to battle to win and then the final

11:18

against Samsonova. Full disclosure,

11:21

I was cursing the Buffalo Bills

11:23

at the time, I didn't watch this match live, had

11:26

to go back and watch it this morning but David

11:28

sent through the stats and it had a big

11:30

fat zero next to Igor Svyantek's

11:33

unforced error count. And honestly

11:35

I thought that just has to

11:38

be some kind of horrible

11:40

mistake, you can't go through

11:43

two sets playing the way Igor Svyantek

11:45

so often does and not hit a single unforced

11:47

error. So I watched it this morning

11:49

with sort of whizzing through it and

11:52

I made a sort of count myself

11:55

and if I was being really

11:57

harsh I would say there was maybe

11:59

a couple. that I personally would have put down as

12:01

unforced errors. That obviously is quite a subjective

12:06

spot really isn't it? Where's

12:08

an unforced error and where's an error? But

12:11

generally absolutely it was so

12:13

noticeable how Sriyantek had changed

12:15

tactics against the big hitters this week

12:17

and decided that no, she doesn't

12:19

need to try and out hit them. She can rally

12:22

with them, she can force them to make the errors

12:24

and that was just really refreshing to see. Almost

12:27

like a clear mindedness has come over

12:29

her and her game and maybe

12:31

that's tied in with what

12:34

we're talking about in terms of her now being number two

12:36

rather than number one and just having something

12:39

to prove again and to find

12:41

new ways to win. I think it's all

12:43

related and then the other

12:45

win obviously against Coco Gough in

12:47

the semi-finals just felt

12:50

like a reversion to the first

12:52

seven Gough Sriyantek matches

12:55

that we became so used to seeing

12:57

and of course it all changed before the US Open

12:59

when Gough got that win but Sriyantek

13:01

reminded everyone I think why she's dominated

13:04

that rivalry in the past and she was

13:06

brilliant in that match as well. So

13:08

just a really good week

13:11

for Sriyantek and great to see

13:13

because yeah it's sometimes been a,

13:15

it's not been a bad year at all

13:17

for Sriyantek, it's been an amazing year. I

13:20

think she's won five titles in

13:23

a season back to back now to

13:25

two years in a row, first bad to do that since Serena

13:28

about nine or ten years ago. Since

13:31

it's been consistently very good, it's

13:33

just the experience of watching her sometimes

13:35

hasn't always been quite so

13:38

easy as it always used to be and I think this

13:41

week I just felt calm watching

13:43

her, she had it all under control and it

13:45

was great to see.

13:46

I feel like a bit of a theme of this

13:48

week's pod is going to be

13:50

match-ups

13:52

and head-to-heads and

13:55

just before we get into the samsanava

13:57

side of things, just on what you said

13:59

there on Tech and Gough,

14:02

that match up being a reversion to their

14:05

previous head-to-heads. Do we expect

14:07

that to continue? Is Cincinnati going to end

14:09

up being the anomaly and

14:11

maybe they'll be the odd other

14:14

anomaly throughout their careers

14:16

or do you think next time

14:18

it could... do you expect the

14:21

relay, the baton to be passed

14:24

back and forth? What

14:26

do we think, David? All Matt?

14:28

Anyone?

14:29

Well, I don't

14:31

expect it to be passed back

14:33

and forth unless Coco Gough

14:35

can make some quite big

14:38

improvements or Spiontek's

14:40

level generally to drop because I think

14:43

match up wise, I don't think it was an accident.

14:45

I don't think seven matches, 14 sets

14:48

in a row was any sort of accident

14:52

and I don't think Coco Gough winning

14:54

the US Open and having that excellent run

14:57

changes that in a really

14:59

material way. I don't know what you think, Matt,

15:01

but I just feel like there

15:04

is a reason for it. They don't match it

15:06

well from a Coco Gough perspective. I think she did

15:08

a very good job to win that one. She

15:10

did win, but

15:13

there's not really anywhere to hide with that forehand

15:15

unless you're able to loft it

15:17

and so forth. And it

15:20

is bizarre to think that

15:22

Spiontek got hammered by Osterpanko

15:24

the way she did and then Gough just completely

15:27

diffused and messed up the game of

15:29

Osterpanko the next round and who knows what would have

15:31

happened had they met, but match

15:34

up wise it just feels like one of those to

15:36

me.

15:37

Yeah, I agree. I think

15:40

I'd be a bit surprised

15:42

if the next seven were all straight

15:44

sets win for Gough and Spiontek like we

15:46

saw at the start of their rivalry. I do think, as

15:49

David said, they'll have some closer

15:51

matches, but I do see Spiontek

15:53

dominating overall. I mean, Coco

15:57

Gough winning the US Open was not a big deal.

16:00

not about her suddenly finding

16:02

a level that was the same level as peak

16:04

Eager's Fiontech. You know,

16:06

it was, it was about her

16:10

tuffing through a lot of three

16:12

set matches. And she did that this week as

16:14

well until she got to Sri on tech. And it was

16:17

about hiding weaknesses when

16:19

she could and accentuating her

16:21

strengths. And the match up with Fiontech

16:23

just doesn't allow her to do that

16:25

in, in quite the same way. And, um, you

16:29

know, so I think absolutely I think

16:31

Eager's Fiontech still feels very

16:34

comfortable in that match up with, with Coco

16:36

goth, despite the one win that golf had. Um,

16:39

and it's, it's, I don't think

16:41

I'm ever going to look at it in quite the same way that

16:43

I used to now that at least golf has

16:45

got a win. Like we know it's possible. I

16:48

won't be dreading that match up. Like I was

16:50

excited for it this week and I will be again,

16:53

but I think it was a reminder this week that

16:55

no, no, it's, what is it now? 8-1 to, to

16:58

Eager's Fiontech just, just because Coco

17:00

goth had won the most recent one before this, the

17:03

dominance really is with

17:05

which we on take it that match up.

17:07

Some sort of a beat, Rabakkina

17:10

in the semis, Rabakkina having beaten Savalenko

17:13

in the quarters. That is at

17:15

four straight wins for some son

17:17

of a over Rabakkina. Why

17:20

does Rabakkina have a some son of a problem?

17:23

I mean, why is Sam son of a, why

17:26

anything Sam son of a,

17:28

but specifically here, why

17:31

does Rabakkina have a some son of a problem?

17:33

I was really surprised by that head

17:35

to head. I was watching that match and,

17:38

and it kind of

17:39

was referenced mid match. I didn't actually

17:42

know about the lopsidedness of that head

17:44

to head until the commentator mentioned

17:46

it. And I thought I actually went and

17:48

looked it up because I couldn't quite believe

17:50

it. Cause I don't think of Rabakkina having

17:52

a problem with anybody. I kind of feel

17:54

like her game can adapt

17:57

to anyone, whether she can beat Shranta,

17:59

she can. we know she can beat Savalenko

18:02

who she overcame in the round before that

18:04

and I just feel as though what's

18:07

to go wrong with with Rebecca and this game

18:09

really against anybody and

18:12

so it was quite jarring to see the

18:15

there were some competitive matches in there but they all

18:18

four have gone the way of Sam Sonneva

18:20

who I watch

18:22

and never feel anything particularly

18:24

strongly about I never I'm never quite

18:27

sure what is it she's doing that is getting

18:29

her to these positions truth is she's absolutely

18:31

hammering the living daylight sound of the ball but that's

18:34

no great shakes in

18:36

professional tennis a lot of players can do that

18:39

I think the relentlessness of the way

18:41

she does it and the way

18:43

she sort of goes through

18:45

the court with pretty flat strikes

18:48

and she's she's not quite as hit and miss as

18:50

as um Austepenko for

18:53

instance there's more consistency

18:55

to her in that and she was really hurt

18:57

in Rebecca with the drop shots she must have hit

19:00

five drop shots and completely

19:02

bamboozled Rebecca who again I don't think

19:04

of as a poor mover she just didn't seem

19:07

to read them didn't set off in time

19:10

the same shot wasn't working at all in the final

19:12

for Sam Sonneva but honestly

19:15

I really am struggling to find out why

19:17

Rebecca hasn't solved that conundrum yet

19:19

because I think she's that good she should be

19:22

the only thing I can say is that I

19:24

watched Rebecca against Andreeva

19:27

a couple of rounds earlier and she was 6-2-4-2

19:29

down and actually went I

19:31

saw that live score and made a note to go

19:33

back and watch it I watched it yesterday

19:36

and expecting Andreeva just to

19:38

be playing this light sound tennis she

19:41

wasn't really she was playing within herself and

19:43

Rebecca was just hitting all

19:45

over the place just hitting long so many

19:48

times and then she managed to

19:50

get her margins in and and win

19:53

the match I don't actually feel that

19:55

Rebecca played very well last week

19:57

but I can't give you the reasons for the lopsidedness

20:00

of that rivalry because like you

20:02

I don't really understand Sam Sonover I don't really

20:04

understand how she's doing what she's doing she should

20:06

have lost to Marta Kostrup two rounds earlier

20:09

she was a double breakdown in the final set

20:11

and I was working while that match was

20:13

on and that seems so unlikely

20:16

that she would come back and I feel like I'm

20:18

probably not giving her credit by

20:20

the way I'm describing her but

20:22

I don't really get her either.

20:24

There's this

20:26

weird sort of rock-paper-scissors

20:29

thing going on with the fact that

20:32

Sam Sonover beats Rebecca now Rebecca

20:34

beats Svyantek and Svyantek

20:36

beat Sam Sonover and as you

20:39

said it's just the beauty of tennis

20:41

matchups really. I was struck watching

20:43

Rebecca and Sam Sonover by the number of times

20:47

that Sam Sonover was rushing Rebecca

20:51

off the serve like Rebecca would hit quite a good serve

20:53

and Sam Sonover would just be on it immediately

20:56

and just sort of be immediately

20:59

putting Rebecca on the back foot you

21:01

rarely see Rebecca on

21:03

the back foot but you know the sort of breakdown

21:05

of winners unforced errors in that match

21:08

was Sam Sonover had way more

21:10

winners and way more unforced errors which you know you

21:12

can probably read too much into those stats

21:14

sometimes but I think it did just say that Sam

21:16

Sonover was the one dictating and

21:18

normally in a Rebecca match she's the

21:21

one dictating and for some reason

21:23

she just doesn't seem to be able to do it against

21:25

Sam Sonover it really is fascinating

21:29

and yeah just it's

21:31

almost like they all need to sort of talk to each other

21:33

and say how do you I'll

21:36

tell you how to beat her if you can just

21:38

give me the code how to beat her but of course

21:40

like they're not gonna do that.

21:43

The

21:46

results this week in Beijing

21:48

mean that the Cancun WCA

21:51

finals lineup is set, Von

21:53

Dreshiva and Mukhava have qualified,

21:54

Maria Sakary

21:57

is first alternate. I do

21:59

wonder if Sakari,

22:02

whether from the start or whether coming in midway

22:04

through, will end up playing because I am

22:07

not sure if Andrei Shvit is

22:10

fit with that knee. Maybe she'll give it a

22:12

go because it's such a big

22:14

deal for it to qualify for Cancun

22:17

and all the rest of it. But I'd

22:20

be surprised, put it that way, if

22:23

we don't end up seeing some of Maria Sakari.

22:27

Drieschova, Mukova. It's a great line up, isn't it? We've got all the...

22:29

It is a great line up. Like, everyone there apart from

22:31

Pagula, I think,

22:33

has reached the Grand Sam final this year.

22:44

It's a great line up.

22:47

I am pumped.

22:48

I am pumped for the WTA finals.

22:52

On to the ATP

22:54

event in Beijing, which of course finished

22:56

days ago. I mean,

23:01

yeah. Anyway, see everything

23:03

we said last week about the discombobulated

23:06

nature of tennis at the moment, but it was won

23:08

by Yannick Sinner, 7661

23:13

over Carlos Alcarazin in the semi-finals and

23:15

then 7676 over Daniil Medvedev

23:19

in the final, thus proving everything

23:22

we said up to this point of the podcast about

23:24

match-ups being everything in tennis to

23:26

be utter trash. Because up until

23:30

whenever it was, Wednesday, I thought

23:33

Yannick Sinner had an incurable Daniil

23:35

Medvedev problem and it turns

23:37

out he doesn't

23:40

or he never did or he did and

23:43

he has cured it. Which

23:45

of those is it, David?

23:48

Well, I would think that

23:52

Eges van Tijt might say, well, it's

23:54

just the one. You've got the one that

23:56

you're going to win for a bit and then I'm going to

23:58

go and win the rest of them.

23:59

Daniel Mevadev, probably thinking that as well. But

24:04

I don't know, I find it quite interesting that Sinner,

24:06

after he beat Al Khraas, who he

24:08

has an interesting head-to-head against as well, because

24:11

he has the better of that rivalry at the moment. I mean,

24:13

he had it put to him, you know, you've lost six

24:15

out of six against Mevadev, and he said,

24:18

well, I am, there are a couple of things I'm going to

24:20

try. Now I

24:22

asked Matt, could you identify what

24:24

those things were, because I didn't get to watch that

24:27

match as it went out. And I

24:29

mean, Matt couldn't really put a finger

24:31

on exactly what it was. I mean, he just seemed to be playing

24:34

really well, and he was going like that. I mean, and

24:36

if you consider that Sinner, what

24:39

he was being sick in a bin in one

24:41

match, and then in another

24:43

match against Dan Evans, he was hobbling around

24:45

with cramp, and he was and Evans

24:48

was mimicking him because he didn't like

24:50

the way he was doing it, and then hitting absolutely

24:52

blistering winners seconds later. He

24:58

went for it, and he's playing bloody

25:00

well. And I think he shouldn't have a

25:02

problem playing against Dan and Mevadev. I

25:04

don't think he should be winning them

25:06

all, but I don't think he should be losing them all either.

25:09

He should be able to win some of them. And

25:12

so to me, this is a correction that

25:14

should happen. I

25:16

am interested to see future matches for

25:18

them. But I do think it's quite

25:20

a big deal for Sinner, this quite a breakthrough.

25:23

Interesting David, that you

25:25

think it's such a breakthrough because this is not the biggest title

25:28

of his career. It's not the

25:30

biggest title of his season. He's

25:32

won a 1000 this season. Other

25:34

than Mevadev, you know, he's beaten Al Kharaz before,

25:37

you know, for most players beating Al Kharaz is an

25:40

enormous deal. It would be a big coming

25:42

of age. But for Sinner, it's kind of like, yeah,

25:45

mate, you've really, you've really

25:47

got a rivalry going with the

25:51

famous Carlos Al Kharaz. So why,

25:53

and add into that the fact that we

25:56

quite often put an asterisk next

25:58

to... results at this

26:01

point of the season just in terms

26:03

of what they mean for the future.

26:06

Why do you see this as such a

26:08

big deal? Because it's not new stuff for

26:11

Sinner.

26:12

Well

26:13

because I think his main problem has been

26:15

in his own head and winning

26:18

the biggest matches on a big

26:21

showcase stage where all

26:23

eyes are on him and his opponent and nobody else.

26:26

And that we've

26:28

been talking about the struggles with some

26:30

of the crowds and there have been some poor crowds

26:32

in some matches and we got an email

26:34

from tournament director Lars Graf for a listener

26:36

of ours who heard that and sent us a picture of

26:39

the absolutely packed house for our crowds

26:41

against Sinner and the one in the final. I

26:44

think that him winning

26:47

that match in an occasion like that

26:49

where it's absolutely packed and

26:52

our crowds is going to want to be winning, Medvedev

26:54

we know is going to be wanting to win and Sinner

26:57

has taken it from them is

26:59

quite a big moment. I take

27:02

the point end of year

27:04

stuff and I

27:07

can't guarantee that this will be a difference

27:09

maker. It just feels like something different to me

27:11

because he's beaten them back to back. Djokovic

27:14

aside they're the two best players in the world

27:17

and he's done it in

27:19

front of a full house where I think I would

27:21

have probably expected him to lose both matches

27:24

and he's just gone and wrestled away from them both.

27:27

They're both straight sets

27:29

I think it's quite a big deal.

27:32

I

27:34

absolutely take all of

27:36

the caveats about this time of year

27:39

and really trying to find

27:41

meaning in this time of year is

27:44

a fool's game probably really but

27:46

I was watching those Yannick Cinemaxes

27:49

this week with my jaw

27:51

wide open I thought he was phenomenally

27:54

good against both Al Khraze and

27:56

Medvedev and it was it was very difficult

27:58

for me to then say Oh well, it's October

28:01

tennis. He

28:03

just seemed so good and there did

28:05

seem a, as

28:08

David's saying, almost a calmness

28:10

to him because I do

28:13

think that Medvedev locksided

28:16

head to head has been a lot about Sinner

28:18

being in his own head in that match up.

28:21

That match up to me is not a Chion-Tec-Goth

28:25

situation. That is a match

28:28

that Yannick Sinner probably should be winning

28:30

a lot of the time and he stepped

28:33

up in the big moments against Medvedev, played two

28:35

phenomenal tie breaks. Absolutely stunning.

28:38

And having

28:41

the record against Carlos

28:43

Alcaraz that he's got is such

28:46

a feather in his cap compared to everyone

28:48

else. Like I would back, I

28:51

think it's easier for Yannick Sinner to

28:54

improve his head to head against all the other

28:56

players. He's got losing head to head against Sitsopas,

28:59

Ruunas, Zverev, Medvedev.

29:01

I think it's easier for him to correct

29:03

that than it is for a lot

29:05

of players to be able to figure out what on earth

29:08

they have to do against Carlos Alcaraz. He's

29:10

done the hard thing, I think, already in

29:13

that he matches up well with Alcaraz and

29:16

he can make Alcaraz malfunction

29:18

a bit by the way he rushes him and he can

29:21

just turn it into a total, almost

29:23

just feels like a hitting contest from the baseline

29:26

and Alcaraz isn't able to use all of his... It turns into a

29:28

slugfest, doesn't he? Yeah, and Alcaraz isn't

29:30

able to use his incredible speed and his

29:32

incredible variety. It's just sort of back

29:34

and forth hitting and Sinner is phenomenally

29:37

good at that. And I think the

29:39

more he grows, the better he gets, the more he goes

29:42

deep in tournament, I think he will figure out

29:44

his head to head against the other

29:46

players that I've just mentioned there. But I

29:48

don't think a lot of those players will be able to figure

29:50

out Carlos Alcaraz. So

29:53

I think long term it's great for Sinner

29:55

that he's able to cope with Alcaraz

29:57

and the emphasis now is... And it's not like he dominates.

30:00

and it's close. But the emphasis

30:02

now is on Al Kharraz to try and figure out

30:05

Sinner. And I just think that's really,

30:07

really interesting. And there

30:09

was little stuff he did, like coming forward

30:11

a little bit more against Medvedev. Like I don't,

30:14

it wasn't all the time and I still don't think

30:16

it's a natural part of his game, but there were little

30:18

signs of it, which I thought he did really well. Yeah,

30:22

he was just brilliant this week. And

30:24

I think what David said, doing it back to back, successive

30:26

matches, you know, that Medvedev and Al

30:28

Kharraz was as tough as it got in that tournament and he

30:30

beat them in consecutive days. It was just,

30:33

just really impressive. And yeah,

30:36

tough to make big sweeping

30:39

assessments, as we always say at this time of year, but

30:41

it does feel like something's

30:44

improved and changed with Yannick Sinner this

30:47

week. I was really impressed.

30:49

Yeah, those were really good points.

30:51

And I guess the fact

30:53

that he has done

30:55

it before, won titles, won bigger titles than

30:58

this, makes it

30:59

easier to not put the asterisk next

31:03

to this result because of the timing

31:04

in the season. You know, when Felix Ojjaye earlier

31:06

seen went on his tear at this time

31:09

in the season last year. Well,

31:11

that's the anomaly at the moment in his

31:13

career, isn't it? Him doing that then,

31:15

yes, he broke his title dark and

31:18

he was unreal, but it was all indoor.

31:21

It was all at a certain level of tournament at a certain

31:23

time of the year when everybody else is running

31:25

on fumes. That is the ultimate kind of asterisk-y

31:29

set of results. He may

31:31

very well yet go on to carry

31:34

that form into elsewhere, produce

31:36

it elsewhere. But at the moment that kind of stands

31:39

alone. But for Sinner,

31:42

this adds to the feathers already

31:44

in his cap. And I agree, I

31:46

was so, so impressed. And I guess I have

31:49

been a little bit high, less high on

31:51

Yannick Sinner than some other people just because

31:53

I feel a bit scarred by certain

31:56

performances. I was scarred by, I was there

31:58

for his performance against Medverev in the month of the year. I was

32:01

a bit scarred by that. I was scarred by his performance

32:04

against Djokovic at Wimbledon.

32:07

Those performances really stick in my mind

32:09

and make me think, God, how can

32:11

a player as good as you sort

32:13

of play look at

32:16

impotent,

32:17

I suppose. But he certainly didn't look that

32:19

this week. I was so, so impressed.

32:21

And I agree. I feel it could

32:24

be a big result. Although apparently maybe

32:26

anyone could beat Carlos Algaraz. Dan Evans

32:28

currently 3-1. First set. Four

32:31

down. Maybe Algaraz is

32:33

there for the taking. Well,

32:37

let's just... Look, I haven't been watching the

32:39

match, David, because I've been recording a podcast, but I'm

32:41

willing to bet that Evans hasn't made this a slugfest.

32:43

No, you're right. He hasn't. No,

32:46

it's all been... Gail and

32:47

Ged in.

32:50

Lovely. What

32:54

a great new slogan for Dan Evans' style of

32:56

play. Incidentally, Yannick

32:58

Sinner's win in Beijing means he

33:01

has achieved his goal for the year. He's

33:03

qualified for Turin. And

33:06

that is... That's great news

33:08

for that event, which when

33:11

it launched in that part of the world, I think

33:13

everybody just assumed that it

33:15

would have Berritini and Sinner

33:18

kind of every year, pretty much. That

33:20

Italian representation would be a given,

33:24

and it didn't have it last year, and it was a great event, but

33:26

it missed it, I

33:28

think. And specifically, Turin

33:31

Yannick Sinner. We've seen that guy, and

33:33

that was my favourite Yannick Sinner when he came

33:35

in his alternate a couple of years

33:37

ago. He turned into a hype man. It

33:40

was like Kyle Edmund at Labour Cup.

33:43

So I am excited

33:46

to see ATP finals

33:49

Yannick Sinner in Italy again.

33:51

I think that's great news for everybody. Congratulations,

33:54

Yannick, on achieving your 2023 goal. Just

33:58

before we get into... a status

34:01

update on Shanghai,

34:02

another result to wrap up that we

34:04

should have done last week, I think. But

34:06

I'm actually, as much

34:08

as it wasn't planned... No, hadn't finished? No,

34:10

it hadn't finished? Oh great. Of

34:13

course not, sorry. Astana

34:17

was won by Adrian Manorino.

34:20

He beat Sebastian Korda in the final.

34:23

And in lieu of finding anything

34:25

to say about Adrian Manorino, I just want to

34:27

point everybody in the direction of Gary Nathan's

34:30

piece this week in Racket

34:32

Magazine about Adrian Manorino.

34:35

And I just love the

34:37

fact that there's somebody out there writing

34:40

whole articles about Adrian Manorino,

34:41

and it's

34:44

definitive, and it's called, What is Adrian

34:46

Manorino doing?

34:49

What is he doing? It's

34:51

fantastic. Which is

34:53

basically what Francis Tiafos said about

34:56

him at the US Open, when they played that,

34:58

I think it was four-set match, and he was like, what

35:01

is this guy doing on the court? And

35:04

I should say, I do remember a

35:06

few weeks ago when Manorino,

35:09

who is having an incredible year, he's

35:11

won a few titles,

35:14

and to be doing what he's doing, he seems

35:16

to be getting better, which is pretty interesting,

35:18

really. He's having the best season of his career

35:20

at 35. Yeah, which

35:23

is incredibly impressive, and he ties

35:25

players up in knots. I actually

35:28

watched him this morning get absolutely blown away

35:30

by Andre Ruble in Shanghai. Ruble

35:32

apologized to him at the net for saying, I'm sorry,

35:34

I played so well, which was a very Andre

35:36

Ruble thing to do. But

35:40

we got a lot of emails. I mean, we do often

35:42

get a lot of emails, but we got a lot of emails from

35:45

Adrian Manorino fans and defenders. They are

35:47

out there. There's a lot

35:49

of people out there who appreciate

35:52

what's the home of Gav. Look, my dad's got a lot of burner accounts, Matt.

35:57

Cameraman Matthew is a big

35:59

Manorino. fan like yeah

36:02

he's quirky and I'm pleased

36:04

I'm pleased that there are players

36:07

who can who can sort of thrive

36:10

playing in that weird game style that he

36:12

does and Gary Nathan's piece points out

36:14

that he adapted his game because

36:16

of an injury and you know when

36:18

he was much younger that's why he plays

36:20

with a sort of really condensed strokes that he

36:22

does I didn't know that until I'm reading that piece

36:25

and yeah he's

36:27

he's probably not for everyone but he is for

36:29

some people

36:32

hmm yeah he must be the

36:35

inspo for Coronet and Mute who's trying

36:37

to totally adapt his whole

36:39

game as a result of injury Coronet and Mute is trying

36:41

to transition to only underarm serving

36:44

I don't know if you're aware of that David something

36:47

that's happening yeah

36:48

I'm

36:50

intrigued I've had my Maxine Cressi

36:53

year of following somebody who only wants

36:55

to serve as Ollie so now this

36:57

is the next the next installment

36:59

and that let's be honest haven't gone especially

37:02

well so let's see how Coronet

37:04

and guests on do

37:05

you remember when Maxine Cressi hits

37:08

it hit a double foot fault

37:10

yes against

37:13

well that gets runa but the Australian

37:15

Open this year that

37:17

wasn't the same tournament in which he told us she was going

37:19

to be world number one was it yeah he celebrated

37:22

that anniversary

37:23

with

37:27

a double foot fault

37:31

so Sebastian Corder reaches

37:33

the final in Astana

37:35

only to be mannerinoed it happens

37:38

to the best of us and then

37:40

beat Daniel Medvedev in Shanghai 7 6

37:43

6 2 so back to

37:45

the theme of the week does

37:48

Medvedev have a Sebastian

37:51

Corder problem and David I'll

37:54

defer to you on this because you

37:55

are the guy that saw that

37:58

Corder was gonna beat Medvedev

37:59

at the Australian Open this year about

38:02

a point and a half into the match. So you obviously

38:04

saw something, I mean you

38:06

obviously saw that Corder was playing really

38:09

well and he does have very seductive

38:11

stroke production when he's on doesn't

38:13

he? It looks lovely

38:15

but you obviously saw

38:17

something in that matchup

38:19

and I'm guessing that you're continuing

38:21

to see that. Well that is what it is Catherine.

38:23

I think it's when Corder is

38:26

on

38:26

and

38:27

he can look two very different

38:30

players when he's on and when he's not. Some

38:32

players don't look that different when

38:34

they're on their absolute best form.

38:37

Like I can't really tell the difference

38:39

between Andrei Rublev playing the best match of

38:41

his life and playing a normal match. I

38:43

think that they both look more or less the same. He's

38:49

not a Rublev guy.

38:51

I like the man. I don't want

38:54

to go watch him really

38:56

and that's just me. I'm

38:59

not trying to be mean or unkind or anything.

39:01

I'm just not into watching Andrei Rublev

39:03

matches particularly despite

39:06

the fact that I think he's a great fella.

39:07

He spent a year watching Maxime Cressy

39:10

double foot faults but he

39:12

won't watch Andrei Rublev for

39:14

love nor money. I did give up my experiment

39:17

quite quickly I have to be honest with you of watching

39:19

every Maxime Cressy match. With Corder I think

39:22

you see

39:26

somebody so balanced

39:28

and capable of hitting both

39:30

forehand and backhand with such intense

39:33

and destructive poise.

39:37

He's got aggression and

39:39

ferocity and poise all at the

39:41

same time when he's really playing well. I

39:44

sometimes think well how would you get the ball past

39:46

him? He was kind of doing

39:48

to Medvedev what Medvedev does to everybody else but

39:50

he was doing it with aggression and

39:53

just turning his power back on himself.

39:56

Instantly I thought well how does Medvedev

39:58

beat this guy if this guy carries

40:00

on playing like this. The truth is quite

40:03

a lot of the time, Korda doesn't play like that

40:06

and he'll have injuries and setbacks,

40:09

but he'll also sometimes really lose his form

40:11

and start to look really quite unstable.

40:16

So I can't

40:18

get my head around why that happens

40:20

as such. It doesn't feel like so

40:22

much should be going wrong as it does. But

40:26

yeah, I think when Korda plays well, I don't

40:28

give Medvedev much chance.

40:31

Medvedev was unhappy

40:34

with the speed of the court in Shanghai.

40:36

We were back to that narrative again

40:41

about how slow it was.

40:44

He did point out, look, I reached in India well's

40:46

final and

40:48

that was awful,

40:50

court speedwise. He was sort of

40:52

like, I can play on inferior

40:54

courts. And

40:58

then Taylor Fritz came up

41:01

with a correction to him on Twitter

41:04

and he said, no, it's not the court that's different this year,

41:06

it's the balls. And that's why it's playing

41:08

slower. A tennis

41:10

player.

41:12

That's so Nadal, isn't it?

41:16

The balls. Are

41:19

there interesting things that have

41:21

happened in Shanghai so far other

41:23

than Dan Evans still being

41:25

a breakup on Carlos Alcaraz?

41:27

In a 13 minute game.

41:28

And I can give you an update that Nicholas Jerry

41:31

has just beaten Lorenzo Sonago. I can change

41:34

channel now and put Alcaraz on.

41:39

We've

41:41

also, Matt, quite high up in

41:43

the Shanghai section of our agenda,

41:46

put a Fabian Marajan update

41:48

in.

41:49

You've put him back. As

41:52

if everybody's

41:53

been wondering where he's been.

41:55

I'm quite curious where he's been now. He's

41:58

been Arthur Rindiknesh.

41:59

Alex de Minot and Dusan Lajevic

42:02

and now plays Caspar

42:03

Roode.

42:06

Fabian Marijan of course the guy who

42:09

pops up and stunningly beat

42:11

Carlos Alcraz in Rome earlier

42:13

this year, drop shotting him off

42:15

the court and just generally being great

42:18

and then has absolutely

42:20

not backed that up since. Yeah,

42:23

I just found it amusing that he's

42:25

winning again and

42:27

yeah, honestly, the way he played

42:29

against Alcraz was incredible. If he

42:32

brings that level, Roode will have

42:35

his hands full. If, if, if.

42:38

Yes.

42:38

It does not exist. Ben

42:41

Shelton will play Yannick Sinner in

42:44

round four, yes please. Shelton having beat

42:46

Roman Sifuilin who for a period

42:49

of a few days there looked like the best player

42:51

in the world. I mean, what a, what

42:53

a ball striker he is. It's

42:55

such a gorgeous, clean

42:58

hit. He's, he's another curiosity,

43:00

isn't he? He was a top junior and has

43:03

just really taken his time to transition

43:06

to seniors and

43:09

he still doesn't seem to have been able

43:11

to do it consistently

43:14

and sorry to make sort of Russian generalisations,

43:16

but he's a bit carat-serve-like, isn't he? And

43:18

he occasionally pops up, looks just

43:21

sumptuous and then

43:24

disappears for a bit. Fabian Marijane's

43:26

style. Yeah, I mean he

43:29

was fantastic against Verrif the

43:31

other day. I mean, I think Verrif probably hit

43:33

the wall. He played, he's played so much tennis

43:35

recently, but he was made to look ordinary

43:38

against Sifuilin who, as you say, has got

43:40

a lovely ball strike plus angles,

43:43

drop shots, volleys. He was getting into

43:45

the net a lot and winning, maybe,

43:47

I was 6-3-6-1, I think, that

43:49

match. And then he went a set up on

43:51

Shelton and I went, I saw the results

43:54

at the end and went back to try to find the breaks

43:56

of serve that Shelton got against him

43:58

in sets two and curious well how's

44:00

he beating this guy because Safuelin looks

44:03

so good and part of it was Shelton

44:06

suddenly igniting and just hitting him off the

44:08

court and getting energized

44:10

the way he does when he's really on it and

44:12

also Safuelin just missing terribly

44:15

suddenly went through little spells of

44:17

missing loads and Shelton

44:19

in classic sort of Pete Sampras style just getting

44:22

the break and then holding I

44:25

was really impressed with Shelton.

44:27

First time he's won

44:29

back-to-back matches not at a grand

44:31

slam I believe. Amazing results

44:34

really

44:36

Shelton it slams.

44:46

Zhong Zhi Zhen has become the first

44:48

Chinese player to reach the fourth round of Shanghai

44:51

in the events history

44:53

this coming off the back of him winning gold at

44:55

the Asian Games he's

44:57

been Richard Gaskay Thomas Marty Nechavari

45:00

and Brandon Nakashima.

45:03

Nakashima having just absolutely

45:06

taken hold of the Runa to the cleaners

45:09

earlier in the week loving two or

45:11

two in love for Nakashima over

45:14

Runa who just needs to

45:16

stop and take a break.

45:19

I just

45:22

think that the decisions

45:24

he's making are

45:25

boneheaded at the moment and it's

45:28

worrying me about

45:29

Holger Runa. Speaking

45:33

vaguely of which, Stefano

45:35

Tsitsopas gave an interview to tennis

45:37

TV this week quote

45:40

my dad is here to stay I have

45:42

no intention of ever pushing him away

45:44

Mark Phillipusis is not

45:47

part of the team anymore I wanted

45:49

to try with a coach and see how

45:51

that might work it was a little

45:53

bit off-tune in many ways and

45:56

not having the presence of my dad there felt

45:58

like I was sort of losing power

45:59

of my identity as a tennis player.

46:02

I wasn't able to adjust to the new form

46:05

or ways of teaching or methods

46:07

that were applied by Mark, who I admired

46:10

and liked watching a lot on TV when I

46:12

was younger.

46:18

Could I have a reaction to that,

46:21

please, from someone?

46:25

I almost feel that there'll be casual listeners

46:28

of the tennis podcast, so we've maybe missed a few episodes.

46:30

In the last episode they listened to it was, since

46:33

the passes all in on Mark Philipusis.

46:36

It's happened so quickly,

46:38

this, which is

46:41

probably the thing that stands out to me the most.

46:44

I just

46:46

think you've got to give coaching

46:49

setups and partnerships

46:52

more time than that. But

46:55

what he's saying there is, it's

46:57

interesting insight, actually. I thought he was pretty

47:00

open in that

47:03

interview. That's

47:05

just me, because his

47:07

identity

47:08

as a tennis player is tied to his

47:10

debt. That

47:12

is something that I don't think is ever going

47:14

to change. He's laid

47:16

that out there. And it's

47:19

just the question of whether

47:21

he can revert.

47:25

The thing about Sitzipati, for a second, he needs to go back

47:27

to what he had. And

47:28

I think that's

47:30

such a hard thing to do. And I felt

47:32

like Philipusis... I

47:32

don't think he can now, because what

47:35

he had was so linked to his youth and

47:37

newness. I don't think

47:39

that's... You can't

47:41

go home again.

47:43

So

47:44

bringing Philipusis on board was a

47:46

way of maybe trying to push him out

47:48

from that and take

47:50

him into the future and move on as a tennis

47:53

player. What

47:55

he's saying there is it's just going to be hard

47:57

for him. him

48:00

to do that. It's pretty worrying,

48:04

I think, that there doesn't

48:06

seem to be room within that setup for

48:08

another voice.

48:10

I feel sorry for Sitzapaz.

48:13

For

48:14

him

48:17

as a human being, go and

48:19

figure out who you are. Take the tennis out

48:21

of it. You need to figure out who you are without

48:24

your dad there and your mum

48:26

all the time. Who

48:27

are you as a tennis player? Who are you as

48:29

a person? I feel really

48:35

sorry for him. I'm

48:38

sure it is unbelievably hard.

48:40

He shouldn't be the one having... His parents

48:44

should be the ones taking the lead,

48:46

I think. It

48:48

sounds like he doesn't want

48:51

the change,

48:52

really. It sounds like he wants to

48:54

be what he was and be just

48:56

with his dad. I

48:59

wouldn't

49:00

advise that, personally. I

49:04

thought Philip Poussas was a good idea,

49:07

and I still do, and I would have given

49:09

that time. But in terms of trying

49:11

to go back to what you were and getting

49:13

the results you had in the past, well, that's what

49:16

the setup was when he had those results. Personally,

49:19

I don't think you can go

49:21

back in time and just recreate because

49:23

of your age and because your experiences

49:26

and the Scottish you

49:28

will, we often talk about, the

49:30

newness as you reference. But

49:33

then I think Caroline Wozniacki

49:35

kept trying little stints with coaches

49:37

and always going back to her dad. That,

49:41

overall, I think worked for

49:43

her.

49:44

I don't personally think... I

49:47

think we probably have seen the best of Stephanus

49:49

Sittipath, overall.

49:54

Up to him to prove that wrong, and it'll

49:57

be interesting to see if he can.

49:59

seem like he has the makeup to go

50:02

in a different direction to this. I think that's

50:04

what this experiment has probably proved. Maybe

50:07

he'll change his mind again in two

50:09

months time but

50:11

it's not going very well

50:13

at the moment.

50:16

Some other news from

50:18

the tennis world this week. Tennis

50:20

Australia announced John McEnroe

50:23

voice out of nowhere that the Australian

50:25

Open is becoming a 15-day event

50:29

starting on Sunday.

50:32

Just like the Fun Show open they've said with data

50:35

showing matches are now longer the

50:37

move to a Sunday start is designed

50:39

to help alleviate the pressure on late

50:41

night finishes for both the players

50:44

and the fans. We've listened to feedback from

50:46

the players and the fans and are excited to deliver

50:48

a solution to minimise late finishes

50:51

while continuing to provide a fair and equitable

50:53

schedule on the stadium courts.

50:57

The additional day will achieve this benefiting scheduling

50:59

for fans and players alike. The first round

51:01

will now be played over three days instead of two also

51:03

giving fans an extra day of unbelievable tennis entertainment

51:06

food and family fun. Every

51:08

year our team works hard to bring fans an event

51:10

that feels new and exciting. The

51:13

Sunday start increases the number of AO sessions

51:16

in the three arenas from 47 to 52.

51:19

The day session at Rod Leaver

51:21

Arena and Margaret Court Arena

51:24

will feature a minimum

51:26

of two matches down from three to limit

51:28

the potential of late night finishes.

51:31

Night sessions will continue to feature a minimum of

51:33

two matches and the John Cain

51:35

Arena schedule also remains

51:38

the same. My take

51:41

on this

51:41

is

51:43

sort of fine. I

51:46

see why it makes total

51:49

sense to want to introduce an

51:51

extra well

51:53

an extra day full stop but in particular an extra

51:56

weekend's day to your event to

51:59

boost revenues especially at a post-Covid

52:01

time

52:01

when there have

52:04

been

52:05

hard hits and there are losses to

52:07

recoup. I kind of think

52:10

fair enough. I

52:12

don't

52:13

like the pretense

52:15

that this is for late

52:17

night scheduling reasons because I don't

52:19

think it solves that problem really

52:22

at all. I'd be very surprised if it does and

52:25

I don't think that's the real reason

52:27

behind it and I think

52:29

the real reason behind it is fine but

52:31

I don't think it's scheduling. I

52:34

think it's revenue. Yeah

52:36

I think that's the main reason too. I

52:39

think it

52:40

helps the first three days I

52:43

think when they

52:45

can put it over more time

52:47

and I think maybe it will take away

52:50

the absolute extremes of

52:53

the late night finishes. I don't think we would

52:55

be as likely to get an Andy Murray 4 in

52:57

the morning situation just because I think that

52:59

they will have a bit more space to

53:01

play with but

53:04

generally speaking with two

53:06

matches in the evening session if that evening

53:08

session isn't starting earlier I

53:11

don't see that it'll bring things forward that

53:13

much.

53:14

That's it. That's the point. If the

53:17

evening session is still starting at seven

53:20

o'clock and you've still got two matches from seven

53:23

all you're doing with this new schedule is making

53:26

it pretty much guaranteed that the night session

53:28

will at least start on time because

53:30

you've only got two matches to get through before the start of

53:32

the night session rather than three. So that

53:34

you know you should start your night session at seven

53:37

o'clock every time no problem

53:41

but if you've then got two

53:43

matches and one of them is a five setter

53:45

that goes you know five

53:47

hours and you've then got a best

53:49

of three set match you're still

53:52

absolutely looking at finishing in the early morning.

53:56

I'm fascinated to know whether they bring the start

53:58

of the night session forward. because that

54:00

to me would be a way of yes

54:05

trying to alleviate

54:08

and take away some late-night finishes but otherwise

54:10

I don't

54:13

see what changes really in terms of that

54:16

late-night session but I agree you know an

54:18

extra day of Grand Sam Tennis Roland Garros has showed

54:20

that it works I'm all in on that I think

54:22

that's great but I

54:25

need more information to be convinced about

54:27

the night session stuff

54:30

I also think an unintended consequence

54:32

of this looks like it's going

54:34

to be less women's

54:37

tennis on the Rodlave Arena because I've gone back through

54:39

the schedules and generally speaking with this three-day

54:42

session matches it would be two women's

54:44

and one men's because

54:46

two men's and one

54:49

women's is sort of a guaranteed

54:51

recipe for starting the night

54:54

session late so it by

54:56

and large it's

54:59

going to be the extra

55:01

women's match in the day session

55:04

that it gets the shot now I expect it still

55:06

to be equal in terms of match

55:08

numbers on Rodlave Arena it will be a men's

55:10

and women's in each session that doesn't

55:12

mean equal in terms of time because

55:15

women's matches are shorter

55:17

than men's so yeah I

55:20

just

55:20

I

55:21

don't

55:23

you know

55:26

just wanted to point that out tennis

55:28

Australia also released their plans

55:30

for the United Cup in January

55:34

which of course starts in December it

55:36

starts

55:38

on December 29th and runs to January

55:41

7th ties will be reduced to two

55:43

singles matches one for women one for men and

55:45

one mixed rather than the two singles each

55:48

for men and women and the ties

55:50

will take place over just one

55:53

session rather than over

55:54

two sessions or two days in

55:56

some cases host cities

55:59

have been reduced in three

55:59

to two, just Sydney and Perth. The idea

56:02

is a shorter format, shorter event, better for players,

56:04

better for fans, better for broadcast and

56:07

I think those all sound

56:09

like good reforms. Moving

56:12

far more towards the Hotman

56:14

Cup

56:15

format

56:16

and that's good I think.

56:18

Yeah I'd agree with that. I think I

56:21

can't entirely remember what we said at

56:23

the time but I think that that's what

56:25

was

56:26

kind of bothering us about

56:28

what is actually a really cool

56:31

event, a cool format. Men

56:33

and women together,

56:35

those were the elements that were making it a bit long

56:37

winded and kind of unwieldy

56:40

in a way that I think this should

56:42

solve. Yep,

56:46

absolutely. So

56:48

this week in tennis there's more

56:50

Shanghai, of course. Dan Evans held

56:52

for 4-1. What's the score

56:55

now David?

56:56

I believe it's now being broken.

57:01

All that effort in the sort of 20 minute

57:03

game.

57:06

More of that match, more of Shanghai. The WTA

57:09

are in Zhongzhou for a 500

57:11

event. Caroline Garcia,

57:13

Maria Sakari, Ludmila Samsonova, Barbara

57:16

Kocicva, Dona Bekic, Darik

57:18

Hasikina, Veronica Kudimitova

57:21

all playing there. There's also

57:23

WTA events in Seoul and

57:26

Hong Kong. Seoul headlined by Piggula

57:28

and Osterpanko Hong Kong has Azarenka

57:32

and Hadad Maya and we'll be back

57:34

next Monday to wrap up

57:36

all of that for you at which point I think

57:40

tennis will be back on track

57:43

in terms of schedule. All finals

57:45

will have been played at the weekend, will

57:49

be vaguely in sync, cannot

57:52

wait. We have a mascot

57:56

for this episode. You're trying to kill me with this

57:58

Matt, aren't you? We have Coco,

58:00

the one-eyed wonder owned

58:03

by Heather and Jodie. Coco

58:06

was adopted with her brother

58:08

Byron a little over a year

58:10

ago. She was born with one eye,

58:12

but that doesn't limit her joy of watching

58:14

her namesake Coco golf slay

58:17

on the tennis court. She's super

58:19

cuddly and a little mischievous. She

58:21

likes to sleep into her, wait

58:24

for it, her dog sister, Billy Jean's

58:26

bed when no one is looking.

58:31

I'd like a picture of that please,

58:33

Heather and Jodie. I would like Coco and

58:36

Billy Jean, the other Billy Jean, no,

58:38

the other other Billy Jean in

58:41

bed together. But I'm looking at a picture of

58:43

Coco, the cat with

58:45

Coco golf. Excellent photography

58:47

work, Heather and Jodie by the way. And

58:51

she's gorgeous. She's

58:53

absolutely lovely. It does look like she's winking

58:55

at me, which I

58:57

imagine is how Heather and Jodie feel

58:59

all the time. But

59:04

yes, thank you very much, Heather

59:07

and Jodie. And thank you to Coco. We

59:09

have our mascots. David's got Maisie.

59:12

I've got Zenya and Zenya.

59:15

We totally shot ourselves in the foot this

59:17

week because we did win points with Iga Šjřík,

59:20

but in the process of predicting

59:22

Iga Šjřík, we also disclosed the fact that we

59:25

didn't

59:26

actually think Iga

59:28

Šjřík was going to win the tournament and called

59:30

into question the entire system of nominating

59:33

predictions. So

59:37

we've got the points, but not the the dignity, Zenya.

59:39

Matt

59:44

has got Darwin, neither

59:46

dignity nor points. Billy

59:49

Jean is sponsored by Billy Jean King and

59:51

Elana Kloss. We have, of

59:53

course, Jamie, Hannah and Drew. There are top

59:55

folks and executive producers.

59:58

And Matt, we

59:58

have shout outs.

1:00:00

We have Spencer Grider

1:00:04

in Salt Lake City, Utah.

1:00:08

Hello, Spencer.

1:00:10

Salt

1:00:13

Lake City, home of the Olympics

1:00:16

a while ago.

1:00:17

Yeah, and Utah, home of the Jazz

1:00:20

Basketball team that I used to watch

1:00:22

in the 90s.

1:00:23

Utah Jazz, yes.

1:00:28

All I have for Spencer is Spencer

1:00:31

Matthews, who was on our row

1:00:33

at the British Podcast Awards, who we

1:00:35

had to walk past to go and collect

1:00:37

our award. Who's he? He

1:00:40

had a lot of hair, didn't he?

1:00:43

I think you would call him a TV

1:00:47

personality. I believe he

1:00:49

was originally from Made in Chelsea. Okay.

1:00:53

Yeah. David. I

1:00:55

don't watch that. All right, Spencer. Great

1:00:58

way of mentioning the podcast towards the game, Matt. Yeah,

1:01:00

I'm going to try and do that every week. I just

1:01:03

think of a subtle way to keep bringing it up.

1:01:06

Thank you, Spencer.

1:01:08

We've also got Jacob

1:01:11

Telfer, who is in London.

1:01:13

Right, Jacob.

1:01:14

Hello, Jacob.

1:01:18

Telfer is a bit like Telford, which is

1:01:21

near Shrewsbury, where we're going next week for our

1:01:23

live show. Tickets available. Very

1:01:25

good. Link in the show notes. Splendid.

1:01:29

I don't know any

1:01:31

Jacob tennis players. This isn't going

1:01:33

particularly well. Well, Jacob has

1:01:36

helped us out by saying he'd also like to give a

1:01:38

shout out to his fiancé

1:01:40

and fellow friend of the pod, Ursula,

1:01:44

like Ursula Radwanska. Oh,

1:01:46

very good. Oh, very good.

1:01:49

That's superb. Thank you, Jacob.

1:01:53

You've done us a solid there. Hi, Ursula. And

1:01:55

hi, Ursula.

1:01:55

Yeah, thank you to

1:01:57

both.

1:01:59

And finally, we've got Catherine

1:02:02

Leip Lazar who is

1:02:04

from the Washington DC area

1:02:07

but currently living in Queens,

1:02:09

New York.

1:02:11

Hi Catherine. All the tennis places

1:02:14

and names.

1:02:16

Yes, this is a same

1:02:18

church different pew situation. Catherine

1:02:22

would like to give a shout out to her

1:02:25

mum Carolyn who is also a friend

1:02:27

and who celebrated her 60th birthday

1:02:30

on October 5th.

1:02:32

Aww. Happy birthday

1:02:34

Carolyn. Love that. Happy birthday Carolyn.

1:02:37

Seeing as we're doing birthdays because I also say happy

1:02:40

birthday

1:02:40

to Rosie.

1:02:41

Yes she can. Happy birthday Rosie. She's 11 today.

1:02:43

77 in dog years.

1:02:47

Bless.

1:02:48

Yes, thank you Catherine.

1:02:51

Great name obviously. Thank you Carolyn.

1:02:54

Hello to Carolyn. Happy

1:02:56

birthday Carolyn. And thank

1:02:59

you to all of our shout outs. If you'd

1:03:01

like to get a shout out, the link to do that

1:03:03

is in our show notes by becoming a friend

1:03:06

of the tennis podcast. There's also the competition

1:03:09

to win tickets to the Billie Jean King Cup finals.

1:03:12

That is open to

1:03:14

Friends of the Tennis podcast

1:03:17

by subscribing to

1:03:17

the Friends newsletter which, of course

1:03:20

you've done that haven't you? Why wouldn't you have done

1:03:22

that? If you'd like to subscribe to

1:03:24

the regular newsletter, the link to do that is in

1:03:26

our show notes. Matt

1:03:29

does great work every week and

1:03:31

I highly recommend it. Tell your friends,

1:03:34

leave an Apple podcast review

1:03:36

and listen to us next week when we'll be back

1:03:39

with more tennis.

1:03:40

Thank you.