2025 Australian Open Men's Round One
Sinner vs Jarry :
A near perfect year for Sinner in 2024 has been marred by the offseason containing nothing but speculation about his doping case. Are they all using supplements? Are some of them? There is a constant race to package supplements in a manner that evades the tests and as a result the tests always a step behind (Icarus is a great documentary to watch to learn about this). It is expensive and difficult to get a boost in professional sports, but the nature of the system means it is entirely possible. If it’s possible, it usually means that people are doing it. There are a lot of lovely people everywhere in the world, but there are always people who are firmly dug into the “me vs the world” mindset. “Anything to get ahead”, and whether it’s a conscious choice or not, their clinging to a desired result or goal or a rivalry creates a situation where doping feels justified or necessary. If the “villain” is cheating, then is it wrong for the hero, and who is who? For me, I spend a lot of time writing these articles and avoiding these topics. You’re only ever speculating, and when you do so about anyone’s favorite player or countryman or countrywoman, it’s natural for them to be upset or want to defend them. So let’s get in trouble.
We can point fingers randomly at players, and unfortunately the compartmentalized bracket structure of the tour lends itself to doping being almost profitable. As a top 100 player, if testing is random and I just got tested, I can easily go on a cycle for a week or two and risk skating through. If I can nab a title or go on a big run, that’s most of my seasonal success locked up (for most players). Add in the paychecks from the 4 majors, and I’m at least financially secure for another year. Maybe I risk it once a year, and maybe that’s enough because these players are also incredible at tennis. Nobody is on tour because of supplements. These players play tennis their entire lives from the time they’re like 4 years old, and they’re all excellent, so even naturally they’re still going to be expected to win enough matches on tour. Tennis being a game of endurance and output though, it’s really always going to be a game of inches, and supplements do give you significant edges. It just turns off your limits in a sense. Even something mundane like taking 3g of Creatine a day can allow an average person to significantly increase their output and stamina in the gym, so imagine what actual top tier peptides and supplements can do for a player already in peak physical condition from a lifetime of tennis.
The tour is full of weekly heros. Someone in the top 100 goes off, plays their best with seemingly boundless energy and focus, and many times it’s a player who’d been struggling to find form or someone who then drops off the face of the earth. It’s really common for players to find form for 2-3 weeks and then sort of slump. This will always make suspicions feel tempting even though there are a lot of potential factors. Draws certainly matter, luck plays a part, and tennis is a game of timing and focus, so sometimes you’re just playing enough that you get sharp or conditions suit your exact skillset. Sometimes your early round losses get you extra time to practice and the guys/girls who are playing 2-3 rounds for a few weeks are satisfied or can’t keep grinding.
Still, since the players health isn’t something that’s totally public, it’s easy to be unsure if Karatsev was the greatest and succumbed to injuries and burnout, or if he was a little bit juicy. Polina Kudermetova is a tremendous baseliner, and she just had some of the best months of her life and made a finals. Is it fair to point fingers at her? What is the clear difference between an overwhelming defensive baseliner playing hard and losing in 3 at an ITF event last year, and playing hard and making the finals of a 250. When you accuse players or even ask questions, it really feels disgusting. Kudermetova is 21 years old, and she’s probably just hitting her stride. Also, it’s very common on tour for players to have great success early in their arrival, and then to fall off a bit. Opposing coaches become familiar with their games, and this makes it harder to win or catch anyone off guard. She’s an incredible player, and I’m just mentioning her because people were shocked that she took a set off Sabalenka. It’s really easy to craft a story but at the end of the day it’s not productive.
Karatsev gave us some of the greatest tennis I have ever seen, and the fact that it was such high-tier and seldom seen tennis should lend itself to explaining why he hasn’t produced it since. It just isn’t possible, or we’d see it all the time from other players. The problem with any viewpoint on a speculative topic is that we overlook our own ignorance. I look at single week heroics as a sketchy thing, but not when players are at that level the entire season? I never thought Thiem was doing anything, even though he swung harder at the ball for longer than anyone. I honestly never thought of Sinner as doping, because he maintained such a high level all the time. If he went above that for a week I just thought, “he’s locked in.” I cheer for Basavareddy’s massive run in the last few months, but him doubled over after every point in Mexico yet still able to win the title never occurs to me as funny? “He’s just like Monfils haha” It isn’t that any of these players are necessarily doing anything, it’s just that the hypothesis “pro sports is full of doping” makes outlier results and superhuman performances seem just that. Our own biases and lazy perspectives unfortunately creep in when we analyze stuff, and I can talk about this endlessly but can never tell you with any surety what is going on. Plus now I owe apologies to Kudermetova, Karatsev, and Sinner.
The fact is that the skill gaps in tennis are extremely small, and the results are often balanced but random during a season. Everyone manages to stay in the top 100 and find some wins somewhere even if they are in terrible form. Pablo Andujar would lose first round all year but end the season with 2 Challenger titles. Gilles Simon was totally donating wins at the end of his career but would randomly make the finals of an indoor event. The long season also means players burn out at different times, so suddenly in September you can beat Tiafoe in the quarterfinals and play Navone in a semi, where earlier in the season you would have gotten first rounded. Does that mean you were on the sauce? Do heroic performances have to be cheating? There is a lot of tension and pressure in the early rounds of tennis tournaments, and it boxes people into playing pretty generic and safe shot patterns. As they get free of that pressure and into later rounds, it makes total sense that they start to grow in confidence and their games open up. The outlier performances make sense even in a world completely devoid of any supplements.
We almost have to trust the testing agencies and just enjoy the sport, but when the testing agencies do something it manages to muddy the waters even more. We don’t want to lose our favorite players, and yet when our other suspicions are confirmed it lends itself to “hmm, I knew it”. It’s messy, and shows me a bad part of myself, which is why I generally avoid it. While we’re here though, let’s offend some more fanbases <3.
When Holger Rune added Patrick Mouratoglou and played like a superhuman in Paris, it was one of the most exciting tournaments of the year. Since then, he hasn’t really showed that form too often. His ballstriking isn’t the same, his energy level isn’t either. It felt suspicious, but by the same token hasn’t Ruud been terrible in large chunks of the year and a machine in others? Since Rune’s behavior has not been 100% perfect, it feels safer to accuse him of things? It shouldn’t. Since Mouratoglou seems so smarmy and smug, it’s easier to believe he’s helping his players dope? My own judgements and preferences are neat, but they aren’t evidence of anything and that’s what we really need to speak comfortably.
When Kerber slumped then popped up in 2018 and almost won the Australian Open and took Wimbledon, it was heroic defending and she turned seemingly into a wall. Did she just find her best tennis again? When Halep was visibly gassing out on the court, and brought Mouratoglou in, and failed a test, was she a railroaded victim? Even if the players who get caught are doping, we might not even be correct to wag our fingers at them. If the rest of the tour is also pushing the envelope in terms of supplements and boosts, it’s really unfair for people to blame a choice few who get caught. It’s a hot mess, and now I’m involved. Heavily. Who else can I offend? Hopefully Fritz.
I would venture that a good chunk of the public thinks professional athletes are on some sort of performance enhancing substances. If the chemists are always working to evade the new tests, then it’s a sort of never-ending chase, and players will always be able to dope because the new tests will have to be updated as new manners of packaging the supplements are created. The system and the appeals process and the fact that barely anybody ever says “lol yes i did it” makes everyone skeptical on both sides of every argument, and while we get reports and news, in the end we can’t really be sure what happened because we weren’t there. It has been talked to death, and my own opinions about sports medicine are not informed by any formal education, so I will try to talk about the tennis and circle back to my part-time job of judging Sinner at a later date.
Sinner hasn’t lost in a long time, and he looked great to close the year. The biggest elevation in his game besides rampant steroid use to become a beefcake has been professionalism on the court. He always had all the tools to win but last season he really maintained constant composure in his shot choices. Him and his team have found the perfect Djokovic medium, where he’s applying pressure but isn’t going all out. He’s never scared to reset the point, and because he’s not swinging for the fences at every ball his unforced errors have disappeared. He’s the best returner on tour, and his serve is really effective on hardcourt.
There’s no reason for him to lose to Jarry, and despite dropping a set to him in Beijing 2024, he closed out that match 6-3, 6-1 so I would expect something similar here. Jarry’s issues with vertigo have made his appearances on court very unpredictable, and while he won a match or two in Brisbane, it seems like he’s not really capable of offering a significant challenge here. Jarry will have to serve well and stay aggressive which is his usual 6’7” approach, but Sinner’s ability to create short angles and remain steady from the baseline mean Jarry’s slightly slow lateral movement will get exposed if he doesn’t serve perfectly. Sinner in 3-4.
Schoolkate vs Daniel :
This Australian Open draw is going to be extremely chaotic in the first round. There are so many close matchups, and in many cases there are extremely similar players facing each other. This match is a rematch of the US Open clash that made me hold my breath for 4 hours, as Schoolkate was expected to win and went down 2 sets and a break before starting to play. His five hour comeback would lend itself to Daniel having a healthy shot here. Early on in the match it really did not seem like Schoolkate could find ways to score in rallies, and if you can’t keep points short against Taro you are in trouble.
Early this season the Aussies have really thrived, and despite the baseline imbalance Schoolkate has gotten a little better while Daniel has basically started losing constantly. Three straight losses to Challenger standouts bring him to Melbourne (Blockx, Galarneau, Guinard), and I think this is likely to be very close again because of Daniel’s struggles. Schoolkate is still not a big enough threat to close this out quickly, but Daniel’s collapse last season, the Aussie edge, and Schoolkate’s year of decent progress should let him get off to a faster start. Daniel in 4.
Giron vs Hanfmann :
Giron’s backhand makes it really hard for me to believe he’s going to win, but he turned in a good performance in Adelaide last weekend. A win against Vukic and Shapovalov and a hard fought first set against Felix are good signs, and Hanfmann is never really dominant on hardcourt because he’s such a large fellow. The big swings are excellent with time but Giron is fast and a good retriever. I don’t think Giron is dominant enough in return games to make this a lock but in neutral rallies he should be able to put more balls back and I don’t like Yannick’s chances of chasing down Giron’s forehands for a whole match. Giron in 4-5 if he can maintain his composure.
Etcheverry vs Cobolli :
Cobolli was one of the most improved players in 2024 so it’s odd to see him slumping early. Losses to Machac and Nardi are somewhat unexpected, even though Luca had been working on his game late in the season by attending every Challenger event in sight. Etcheverry is a tough opponent in general, and he leads the h2h 3-0. The problem with annointing Etcheverry as the winner is that Cobolli can elevate to a higher level. Etcheverry just lost to Kokkinakis, and went three with Harris at the United Cup. He’s really solid, but still beatable. Cobolli withdrew from the second set against Nardi, so that adds another wrinkle in Etch’s favor. Etcheverry in 4.
Hurkacz vs Griekspoor :
All of their previous meetings have gone the distance, and it’s become Griekspoor’s thing on tour to play the best players close. Hurkacz hasn’t been at his best lately, but he won about half his sets at the United Cup and he should navigate through here. Griekspoor won their previous meeting in Rotterdam last season, so any result makes sense here. Griekspoor’s delivery isn’t huge, but he has a good enough serve to score on Hurkacz, and since Hubert makes errors he’ll likely struggle with the safe but effective manner in which Griekspoor hits the ball. Griekspoor has so much experience in navigating Zverev/Hurkacz types that he’ll be comfortable here, although he didn’t play any warmup events. The longer format (to me) tends to favor the servers, because a lot of their effectiveness is in their height, so in a deciding set they’re still going to serve well. Hurkacz in 4-5.
Kecmanovic vs Lajovic :
Kecmanovic is on a deep run right now in Adelaide, so it’s not entirely sure that he’ll play this match. You don’t really want to skip a major, but sometimes the title winner just isn’t physically ready to go again. The tournaments will fine you if you aren’t able to put out a good effort, so it’s a minor concern. If he plays, he should win, but Lajovic won in 3 in both their previous meetings on clay. It’s not clay obviously, but Lajovic is not helpless on hardcourt and Kecmanovic’s level can fluctuate wildly. As I’m typing this, Kecmanovic is scheduled to play Korda who has forfeited his way to the semis, and I think Miomir can win that, so he should be coming off a finals appearance and playing a guy who is better on clay. The h2h is a concern and compatriots playing is always tricky, but Kecmanovic in 4-5. It’s just hard to shut out a guy who knows your game and feels comfortable on the court against you.
Berrettini vs Norrie :
Two rusty bois here. Berrettini had a good 2024 after injury concerns kept him off the tour for a bit. Norrie has struggled a bit the last 6 months, and it feels like Berrettini should win this. It will come down to his serve percentages. Norrie is really off right now, but if he’s putting the ball back in play he’ll be able to grind down Berrettini’s backhand. With both players in rough form, it’s tough to predict anyone winning in clean fashion. Norrie could drag it out in 5, but it feels like Berrettini’s job is simpler, and if Norrie doesn’t trust his groundstrokes, it really takes away from his effectiveness. All of his good runs have been when his forehand and serve actually start to work, and right now he’s a little bit hesitant. Berrettini in 4.
Zhang vs Rune :
Rune still alternates between hyper-aggression and pushing, and neither work. Zhang swings for the fences, but when his timing is off he hits himself out of matches. I think Rune’s defending should get him through here, but giving Zhang time and control is not a good plan at all. Tennis is definitely tricky, but I feel like Rune’s team is not maximizing his game at this point. He has a good serve, but playing claycourt tennis on a hardcourt is not the plan, and scurrying around half-volleying the ball and trying to hit instant winners like Paire doesn’t suit Rune’s game. Holger has excellent mechanics on his swings, so rushing shots takes away one of his best attributes and causes errors. Since he has good speed also, him donating points really takes the pressure off his opponent. He should, of course, look to push the pace and be offensive, but it should really be made clear to his opponents that he’s not going to be the one to go for broke. If you can establish that, then your opponent will feel pressured to go bigger. Not rocket science, but it just feels like Rune has established hope in the tour that he will miss routine shots and force things and get upset on court, and that inspires people to hit the ball into the rectangle more often, which you do not want. Since Zhang hasn’t been winning, I don’t really expect him to start here. Rune in 3-4.
Tsitsipas vs Michelsen :
Big chance here for Michelsen on a big stage. Tsitsipas is just not the same anymore, but he wins enough each year that he’s still a big name. He’s traded in skill and variety for angry stomping around and glances at his opponents, and the aiming at people at net thing was old 2 seasons ago. He’s a tremendous player, with a bad defensive backhand. Similar to Rune, he alternates between playing super safe with it, and trying to hit a clean winner. Neither work. Hitting a safe backhand that lacks depth is really bad when your backhand is where they already want to hit the ball. You basically allow your opponent to take the footwork they’ve practiced more than anything else, and to hit a backhand over the lowest part of the net to a completely safe target and since that target is the thing they want to wear down, you never escape unless you do something different. The one-handed backhand is almost always a commitment to a ton of focus and footwork, and since Tsitsipas’ slice sits up a bit too much, he doesn’t have a clear exit in sight from this backhand struggle. When he tries to rip it, he tends to shank the ball. If you’re missing playing safe and missing at full commitment, there might be another option, where you swing anywhere in between those two. No? Nvm.
Michelsen is a really promising prospect but there are a few things that make me hesitant to think he can win these tougher matches. His lateral movement is not great, because he’s tall. Also, he can completely lose his timing on shots for entire games. His overall serving and ballstriking is tremendous, but stringing 2-3 errors in a row is disastrous on tour. Tsitsipas is giving you 1 shank per game, and that’s enough that he’s become a snaggable player on tour. Michelsen is winning matches because his game is larger than his opponents, but I think at the next tier it’s going to be really tough for him if he donates random games. Michelsen will feel good in this matchup because he was able to beat Tsitsipas in Tokyo at the end of last season in a lopsided 3-setter, but it’s going to be really rough playing in Melbourne for the next two weeks. The heat is serious, and Stefanos’ best strength on tour has been his stamina and physical strength (another example of how I laud some players output but question others; anytime I talk about anything I don’t know about it just shows me how deep my ignorance goes).
I’m expecting a reversal here, but what is it based off? Michelsen has a more stable backhand, their serves are similar in effectiveness, and Stef just leads in his ability to redirect forehands and his athleticism. In general, picking the higher ranked player feels very lazy. Picking Tsitsipas after he lost in straights to Shevchenko at the United Cup doesn’t really feel intelligent, but I have a hard time seeing Michelsen going the distance here. Tsitsipas in 5.
McCabe vs Landaluce :
Landaluce is on his way to the tour. He is another Spanish player who just seems able to eliminate errors from his game. He not only plays a consistent probing style of tennis, it is also clear he’s looking to hit deep in the court. Similar to Djokovic, he looks to hit returns deep down the center which is giving his opponents a lot of trouble, and despite a breakfest against Svrcina in the final round of qualifying, he is in good shape here. McCabe is a good server with a clean forehand, but Landaluce has shown a level slightly beyond what McCabe has mustered. Playing at home and being used to the heat is a bonus, and McCabe’s time grinding on the Challenger tour has gotten him excellent at winning sets, but I think Landaluce’s overall level will be a bit too solid. Landaluce is the 2nd most buzzed about player from that qualifying (after Fonseca), and I think it’s legit. He has a good attitude, solid shot selection, and he seems able to generate depth from all angles which is a really big key when you’re fresh on tour. Martin is good, but I don’t think he’s dominant yet so this should be close. When McCabe’s serve falters though, I think he’ll lose sets because he’ll be having to do more than Landaluce to win baseline points. Landaluce in 4-5.
Diallo vs Nardi :
Grumble. Two excellent talents here, both rounding into good form, and both with some terrible runs of losses in their history. Enough losses honestly, that I am hesitant to trust either. Diallo has huge power, and a great serve. This event is perfect for him. Nardi just made a nice run in Auckland, qualifying and beating Diaz Acosta and Cobolli, but his inconsistency and his stature make me hesitant. He has a really solid game, but I think he can be outhit. In a 2/3 structure, maybe Nardi wins this, but I think Diallo’s serving will be a big edge and he is the type of player who thrives once his opponent gives him time to get full swings. Slight slight edge to Diallo here. Diallo in 5.
Mannarino vs Khachanov :
This is supposed to be an easy one, but Khachanov’s form had been rough in several periods last season and he lost his last two matches. Mannarino had a nice little run in Auckland, and he’s good at finding sets. The commitment to moving your opponent and giving them no pace to work with is something that works at the 4.0 level (where Nadal dares not tread) and the pro level, and Mannarino should never win this match but will often make it close. Khachanov’s serve and backhand are the big keys here, as no amount of peppering his two-hander will make it break down, and his shot selection with it is never risky enough to yield enough errors. Khachanov has won the last 4-5 meetings, and he’s not sharp here but muscle memory is often enough when you have that type of dominance. Khachanov in 4.
Cerundolo vs Bublik :
Cerundolo started off last season poorly, and he quickly lost to Carballes Baena to start this one. Bublik isn’t much better. If they both play well, I like Cerundolo to win. I don’t think he’ll play that well though. Bublik is not really great lately and there’s no way to convince him to take tennis more seriously. It’s the absolute right time to come out aggressively since Cerundolo is a little bit off with his confidence and shotmaking, but will Bublik do that? Great entertainer, but at times he’s donating wins to guys he could beat. Cerundolo in 5.
Bergs vs Diaz Acosta :
Bergs is in the semifinals of Auckland as I’m writing this, so it’s unclear what his physical form will be. If he’s flat, this could be tricky. Diaz Acosta is not the best on hardcourt, but he works hard, and he’s a lefty. Bergs does almost all his work with his forehand, and he’s committed himself to being as annoying as possible on the court (in a good way). He doesn’t really have a ton of variety, but he constantly rushes the net and works hard and makes a good show of wanting to win. Their previous match was a 7-5, 6-4 win for Bergs, so this is likely to have some twists and turns. Bergs really doesn’t put anyone away quickly, because so much of his game is predicated on outlasting opponents in rallies. If he gets forehands, he’s dangerous, but the rest of the time he’s just average. I’m not trying to hate on Bergs either here, he’s doing more with less imo and has established himself as a tour regular when he was stuck on the Challenger circuit for a few seasons in a row. To me, he’s never a lock against anyone willing to put in similar work. Bergs in 4-5.
Boyer vs Coria :
This is a spot where we all completely rule out Coria’s ability to play tennis and declare Boyer the winner. Coria is way better on clay, and this is the second half of the second half of his career. Still, the guy is fast, and when he’s playing well he doesn’t miss much. Boyer had a good run through qualifying, beating Sakamoto, Barrios Vera, and Eubanks, but none of those guys really would be a lock against Coria, so this is a test for Boyer. I watched Boyer play a bit of clay in the South American challenger circuit this winter, and he has a lot of power and determination. He also has a temper which cost him at least one match I watched. He screamed a curse in frustration, got popped for a code violation, and argued about it with the umpire because he cursed in a foreign language (English) so maybe it was okay. He gave up the argument pretty quick, but he was visibly annoyed and had his attention half on the chair for the rest of the game. Just something to watch out for as he progresses. Great player, but if people know you can get frustrated they’re going to play better against you. Look how well everyone competes against Rublev now. Boyer in 3-4, but I think Coria is still allowed to try to win this match and this is Boyer’s first ever match in a major and his first match this tournament against someone who’s solid from the baseline. (He did beat Tien last season so I might be too alarmist).
Van De Zandschulp vs De Minaur :
De Minaur was really rough when he first returned last season, but he still managed to be a tough out. The dominant speed demon seemed absent, but even while spraying errors he managed to be the more consistent player on the court in a bunch of matches. Van De Zandschulp made headlines for considering retiring, and for randomly straight setting Alcaraz at the US Open a few months later. Since then he’s been a little better, but he still struggles to win consistently. The first round is the most vulnerable anyone is in an event, just because of nerves and everyone else being at their optimal physical pace, so this feels tough for Botic. He was willing to show us he’s the greatest of all time at the USO, but Botic is a secretive beast and may revert to “normal” tennis here just to allow us to calm down. De Minaur in 4. It takes so much for Botic to win games against De Minaur and I just don’t think he can avoid errors for the entire match.
Fritz vs Brooksby :
Welcome back, Brooksby. Two handed dropshots and looking exhausted but running forever are back on the menu at Applebrooksbee’s. Fritz is finally a top player, and I won’t be disparaging him anymore, even if he does look like a lazy pencil crossed with a cat. No one can really expect Brooksby to be sharp in his first outting, so Fritz in 3. If Brooksby were back to his peak it could be close, but Fritz has turne the corner a bit and I expect him to lose more to unique offenses and faster opponents, rather than similar approaches.
Coric vs Garin :
More similar matchups. Both are incredibly strong physically, and more can lose their timing on groundstrokes for months at a time. Garin’s run through qualifying makes me think he can win this. Coric has a better backhand, and a better serve, but his forehand is the wing that breaks down and Garin hits his very flat and with power. Coric hints at returning to the tour but he’s involved in a lot of 3 set matches and he can still lose to lower tier players. It’s cool that he beat FAA at the United Cup, but he lost to Collignon in Lyon. It’s nice that he beat Maroszan in Almaty, but he also lost to Dino Prizmic. I think Garin is a little sharper right now, but these two haven’t played in 5 years any anything can happen (they split their two claycourt meetings and Coric own on grass in 2019). Garin beating Djere in qualifying is exactly the kind of match he’s in for here. Garin in 5.
Comesana vs Altmaier :
Tricky spot here between players with more similarities. Two guys known as clay-courters whose bets wins are on hardcourt. Comesana beating Rublev hasn’t really carried over to his recent play, but he remains a really tricky player. His smaller stature means his serve isn’t as dominant, but against Altmaier he should be okay. Altmaier tends to return from fairly deep, and his one-hander is excellent but means you can buy time by going to that wing. Comesana’s recent losses are a concern because he doesn’t really have the type of serve or power that can keep him in a match when he’s making errors. Altmaier serves a little bit better, and in a long match I think he’ll be slightly more able to find his best level. Altmaier in 5.
Monfils vs Perricard :
Finally two players who aren’t similar. Monfils is currently in the finals of Auckland, and he’s a great returner. Perricard is the hottest player on tour right now, and he has the best serve. His service motion is so smooth, simple, and repeatable, and what makes me think he’s going to be at the top for a long time is that he scores so many of his points serving wide. Being able to go wide on big points is huge because it’s just really tough to smother those serves when there’s pressure. Against someone like Bublik or Kyrgios you can sit on the T in big moments, but with Perricard you really have to guess or stand very deep. The latter won’t work because he’s so adept at net, and guessing doesn’t guarantee you land the return anyway as well as GMP serves.
I see a lot of people questioning Perricard’s backhand and his unforced errors, but I think too much is made of the one-handed errors. People are waiting for his backhand to break down and for errors to fly because that’s how he used to lose matches, but things have changed. Perricard has maintained a steady level, and his backhand is good. In his recent match against Tiafoe, it was Tiafoe’s backhand that broke down first in the exchanges, and Perricard is the only guy I’ve seen mirror Thiem’s backhand down the line (when it lands).
The guy is excellent, and he’s funny. If you get a chance, watch his press. In the last one I saw, the interviewer asked him when he first hit 200kmph on serve. Perricard said “when I was about 10” and then paused and waited for the interviewer to realize he was kidding, then grinned like a kid who’d told his first joke. He then added that it was when he was around 16, and that he was so proud of that moment, and the moments since. He was polite and personable, and as soon as it was done there was no interest in the mic, he just grabbed his bag and went to the next task. He’s humble but motivated, and goes about his business. He’s intense and focused, and I suspect he’s working very hard off the court.
Tennis-wise, Monfils can drag anyone into deep water. If you aren’t able to dominate him from the baseline, it takes a lot to beat him and his reach allows him to chip returns more often than most opponents. Perricard’s serve alone makes him 50/50 in most matchups, and I think his skill at net will allow him to expose Monfils passivity and deep court position. Add in the mental fatigue from a finals run, it feels like Perricard will be the fresher player and able to score points a bit easier. Perricard in 4.
Shelton vs Nakashima :
Shelton is in stage 2 of the Shapo evolution, and hopefully he avoids stage 3. I noticed the parallels between their games about a year and a half ago, and while I’m a big fan of Shelton, the willingness to go for huge shots at inopportune times, and dropping sets to guys and always coming back in 3 are somewhat rough for optimism. Shelton has one of the biggest serve/forehand combos on tour, and he fights hard in big moments, but it’s the matches he’s expected to win that bother me. Developing that workhorse ability to just grind out the weaker players in straight sets is really big for being able to make deep runs, because even if Shelton can turn it up when he needs to, the cumulative fatigue that arrises if you’re going extra sets early in events isn’t ideal. His backhand is very stable, but he doesn’t really score with it and that’s something he needs to work on a little. Again, Shelton is great, but he plays for the crowd and goes for huge winners. The ability is there, but the slump in results means everyone is hopeful against him, and hope means people aren’t making errors. Shelton started off the year with a decent loss to Mensik, and he’ll be comfortable in this matchup since he beat Nakashima in Washington DC last year.
Nakashima turned in his best season ever, but there were a handful of losses at the end of the year that make me think he’s not at his best right now. Losing to Hijikata last week is fine, but it doesn’t make me think he’s going to turn around a matchup that he’s lost in straight sets in both previous meetings. This should be a pretty close matchup since both have excellent service stats, but Nakashima is a little bit slower around the court and I think Shelton will be able to outlast him. Shelton in 4-5.
Carreño-Busta vs Majchrzak :
Great to see Majchrzak back in a tour event. He’s a really solid baseliner and his run in qualifying was against good competition (Trungelliti, Svajda, Harris B.). Since this is some sort of Noah’s Ark draw, the guy who was off tour for a while with injury issues but is showing form again is playing the guy who was off tour for a while with injury issues. Pablo Carreño-Busta is back and has been improving steadily in each match. He just managed to take a set off Tsitsipas, Mensik, and Bergs and honestly that’s good enough to beat Majchrzak. Kamil can definitely compete at this level, and he beat PCB in their two previous meeting (on clay), but I am not sure he can score on Pablo on a faster court. The surface gives Pablo a little edge, but it’s hard to declare him the winner because of the way he has consistently lost deciding sets. Majchrzak might be able to hang on and win. Majchrzak in 5.
Bautista-Agut vs Shapovalov :
Shapovalov played a perfect tournament in his Belgrade title run, and we all said “he’s back!” (well, I did) We were all wrong (well, I was). One great Shapo or FAA week makes us (me) all think they’ve finally put it together, but they’re high octane tennis comes with wild variance. Shapovalov’s issues with impatience and errors are the exact thing which will cost you the match against RBA, yet Denis has beaten him in all three meetings without dropping a set. Since RBA is in the second half of his career, it’s possible this dominance continues. Good Shapovalov can play anyone close, so I hope he gets it together this week. Shapovalov in 3-4.
Arnaldi vs Musetti :
It feels odd that these two have never met on hardcourt before, but Musetti’s prowess on the blue stuff has been a recent development. Arnaldi was looking solid on hardcourt for quite some time, but some of that has fizzled. Losses to Goffin and Rune to end the year don’t sound bad on paper, but he’d been outworking most of his opponents from the baseline and in those matches he wasn’t his normal automatic self. Musetti’s defending and speed make him a really tough out, but I think Arnaldi is more efficient on hardcourt so this will be extremely close. Musetti has won all three meetings on clay, but those matches were fairly close. He’s just lost in 3 to Munar, who was playing great, but is a level below Arnaldi even during a period of middling play. For Arnaldi here, he needs to remain solid throughout this match. Musetti hits bigger and he’s a little faster, but his game is less compact and repeatable. Arnaldi can profit from errors here and win, but there’s no quick way to do it. Musetti can likely wear down Arnaldi’s forehand and rely on some powerful serving, but he hasn’t demonstrated consistent performances on hardcourt so this is a close one. Musetti is likely to have better stamina but he needs his best, and Arnaldi at his best can win. Tough draw, honestly amazing for fans but tough for turtles. Arnaldi in 5.
Rublev vs Fonseca :
A tale of two emotional states. Fonseca has just finished qualifying for his first Australian Open. He has been on an absolute tear. He won the Next Gen Championships in dominant fashion, and he’s won about 13 matches in a row at this point. Fonseca’s game is predicated on consistent power and aggression. Despite being a very aggressive player, he brings a consistent level throughout sets. He’s a good returner, and makes quick adjustments with the racquet to reflect power. His background is on clay, so he’s fairly good with dropshots and netplay. Fonseca serves well, and his use of the kick serve from the ad side is really effective. Having a big kick serve is a huge boost at the top level, and I believe he’s headed there. Plenty of time for that, but right to me he seems ready to win right now.
While Fonseca is enjoying a wonderful time, Rublev is doing something else. Something a bit more, Rublevy. A quick loss to Maroszan in Hong Kong that saw him throw the usual tantrums is all we have so far this season, and while he played well in the World Tennis League, exhibitions don’t count much. Since most of Fonseca’s losses last season came because of stamina issues in long matches, his ability recently to power through and maintain a level is really exciting. It’s possible that Rublev can outlast him and win this match because he has more reserves at his age, but I really don’t love his level lately. For me, Fonseca is winning at a lower level, but his game translates up very well. He serves better than Rublev, and is more comfortable with his own game on the court.
I anticipate this being a very close match, and I think Rublev is the actual ceiling of Fonseca’s game at this point. I know which player will hit the wall physically first, and it’s Joao. Will he get there before Rublev hits the wall mentally? This is going to be one of the best matches in the first round, and I’m going to have my popcorn ready, or whatever snack is popular in Australia. It feels like in the 2/3 structure Fonseca would really be a small favorite here, so here I think he may just win anyway. Fonseca in 4. It feels like overestimating the hype to call for this win but I just think the two players are heading in uniquely opposing directions and it makes this first meeting very important and very even. Fonseca lands in the top 40 by year end, and by the middle of 2026 I’d expect him to be in the top 20.
Sonego vs Wawrinka :
Stan is usually good for a first round upset, but it’ll get tougher and tougher to make that happen every year. He’s definitely a more complete player than Sonego, but Sonego’s serve/dropshot/forehand heavy approach can expose Wawrinka’s stamina issues, which can appear in a single match. I’m writing the story of how Sonego beats him, but if you don’t show me any lines or recent history, I’d have a hard time believing in either of these guys. Wawrinka is only at his best for 1 set per match, and Sonego’s inconsistency and impatience on the court cause a lot of unforced errors. Sonego in 4-5.
Seyboth Wild vs Maroszan :
Seyboth Wild hasn’t played since October, but he was decent in the indoor swing. He managed a win against Kovacevic, PCB, and Mpetshi Perricard. He showcased a very high level at times against top competition, but doesn’t seems to channel his frustration well. He takes bad losses when he’s off his game, and he’s going in the right direction as far as effort and training but he still started out as a very talented player who was underperforming in terms of results. It just feels overall like he should compete at a higher level than he does, but he has a lot of frustrations to work out before he can free himself to do the work to get there. Professional sports and competition are tough because you don’t get to set the bar unless you’re #1, but if you want to be at the top, you need to work at least as hard as the guys ahead of you. I don’t see it on the court, so I don’t imagine it’s going on off the court either.
Maroszan is a guy who’s frustrating to watch also. He really hits pure winners when he catches the ball clean, but he reminds me of early Popyrin when he loses. Errors that he didn’t really need to make, and forehands long and into the bottom of the net that incentivize his opponents to not take any huge risks. It wouldn’t be the worst thing if Maroszan took some time to develop the Dimitrov/Thiem backhand slice game, where you really hit it frequently and force your opponent to come up with something. For Thiem, it worked great because when they finally left one short he could come with the big one-hander, and for Maroszan it might be ideal also so he can develop more resilience defensively and also just to give people a different pace to deal with. Shapovalov also has great power, but if you hit the ball at the same speed all the time you often play people into form. Anyway, Maroszan beat Thiago in 2 in Indian Wells, and the faster court helps him a little bit. I think this will be another win for Maroszan, but these are two guys who can lose any match.
Rinderknech vs Tiafoe :
This should be a fun match. Tiafoe hasn’t really been that bad, but in my head he has? He played Perricard close twice in the past few months, beat Walton and Norrie, and lost a close one to Berrettini. Those results are fine. I feel like he’s fallen off a bit, but he’s #17 in the world, so I’m wrong. Still, Rinderknech lost his opening two matches of the season; he should be a simple win for Tiafoe. I don’t feel that way though. Tiafoe still makes errors on rally balls and it just really holds you back from constantly competing in the later rounds of tournaments. He can elevate his game to a great level, but his base level is not anywhere close to his peak. Tiafoe in 4ish, and hopefully he gets going because he’s in a very good section of the draw.
Popyrin vs Moutet :
Moutet has beaten Popyrin in their previous meetings on hardcourt, but they were a few years ago. Since then Popyrin has made solid physical progress, and brings a higher level. Unforced errors remain an issue though, so how can Moutet’s defending really be ruled out? It’s a stylistic nightmare for Popyrin, because he wants to play quick points and take big swings, and Moutet plays a ton of slices and uses height and all sorts of devilish nonsense to frustrate his opponents. Moutet’s blowups are classic and he doesn’t enter this as a favorite in any sense, but this is a tricky first round for Popyrin. Popyrin in 4-5. I’m scared to call for an upset with Moutet still trying to sort out his backhand (an injury caused him to initially go to a one-hander), but I think Popyrin has shown himself to be vulnerable in this matchup so he’ll be lucky to escape quickly.
Hijikata vs Krueger :
Mitchell Krueger was one of the best players in qualifying and got one of the few guys in the draw I think he can beat. In my mind, Krueger hits a bit harder and Hijikata is more of a retriever at times. If Krueger is so good though, the question is why is Hijikata on tour and not him? Why did Hijikata beat him 3,3 in Phoenix in their only meeting? Why is Hijikata beating Nakashima and Goffin while Krueger is stuck in qualfying and ranked just off tour. In the end, there are levels to this, and Hijikata should be able to win this. I just feel because he isn’t the hardest hitter, there are a lot of matches where he’s ranked much higher but still will need a lot of tennis to get through. Playing at home, coming off a decent run in Adelaide, Hijikata should get over the finish line here, but I don’t think Krueger will be an easy out. Hijikata in 4.
Ugo Carabelli vs Tien :
Learner Tien would be the biggest story in tennis right now if Fonseca and Perricard hadn’t shown up. He won about 14 million matches in 2024, and he played great at the Next Gen Championships. I think he’ll win here, and I think he’ll win a bunch of matches on tour this year, but I don’t expect them to be easy. Tien is a great player, but of small stature. He serves great, and his return game is improving, but the tour is a big step up in ballstriking and I think he earns too many of his wins in long matches. Outlasting guys at the Challenger level for him is simple, on tour the level tends not to dip as much in a 3rd set. I’m not saying anything his team doesn’t know, I just see a guy like Carabelli as a great draw for him, but a match where if I saw it heading into a 5th I wouldn’t be wildly surprised. Tien in 4ish. He’s definitely better on hardcourt, but I expect close scorelines from him this season.
Samrej vs Medvedev :
What can be said about Kasidit Samrej that hasn’t already been said. The Thai phenom has become a household name and all the local kids are clamoring for Samrej merchandise. The tennis champion, who earned his wildcard by winning the Asian Pacific games, has been offered a spot on next season’s Dancing With The Stars, and rumors are that many cool trendy kids are now calling sandwiches Samrejes instead. I, for one, am down the trend. Jokes aside, Samrej is really solid and he’ll put up a good fight here. Medvedev is somewhat inactive and grumpy, but still one of the best players in the game. Samrej will have a hard time scoring on him, and his serve is good but not quite good enough to create danger for Daniil. Medvedev in 3.
Djokovic vs Basavareddy :
Some are comparing Basavareddy’s ballstriking to Novak’s, so this is a fun matchup. It isn’t the one we want though. Nishesh has really played excellent for a few months now, and his spot on tour feels solidified. He has great fundamentals, a good attitude, and his grit and dedication in Mexico to secure a title that guaranteed him a spot in the Next Gen Finals was excellent. It was a tournament where, as I mentioned, he was doubled over exhausted after every point, and his tennis was still good enough to get him through. Apparently, his spot was in jeopardy and he was exhausted, and he still chose to go back to back. Two titles in a row in really impressive for anyone at the Challenger level. I’m excited for Basavareddy to remain on tour, and playing Djokovic has to be a dream come true for him here. It’s a bad draw though. Djokovic is the most dangerous floater in these draws now, and he lost to Opelka but who really expected him to be fully committed at a 250? Djokovic in 3-4. He usually starts slow at the majors, so I think Basavareddy can conjure a break in at least one set. Even as I’m typing that, I’m really not sure if his service delivery is good enough to avoid pressure. Djokovic probably gets into a lot of his service games.
Faria vs Kotov :
Pavel Kotov definitely eats a lot of Samrejes. I think I like Faria here. Kotov has lost a bunch of matches recently, and Faria was one of the more consistent players in qualifying. Kotov’s best wins this, but Kotov’s best is absent. A loss to Duckworth last week shows he can be outworked, and Faria having three matches under his belt will let him start off well. Faria in 4-5.
Onclin vs Opelka :
Onclin qualifying is great, because he won a lot of good matches last year on the Challenger circuit but never really got much buzz from it. I don’t know if he can beat Opelka, simply because Opelka’s serve is unplayable, but working in Onclin’s favor is Opelka’s back issue which he withdrew with last week in the finals. If Opelka isn’t 100% he’ll withdraw, and even if he is, Onclin will know that an extended match might get him a less than fit opponent. Opelka in 3-4, or the withdraw which would be lifechanging for Onclin.
Nagal vs Machac :
Nagal’s defending is excellent, but Machac isn’t really the guy you want to give rally control to. His forehand is hard to read, and a bullet. Nothing crazy in his start to the year, but Machac should win in 3-4.
Lehecka vs Tu :
Lehecka can be really good, or can play at exactly Li Tu’s level. Tu really has a strong baseline game, a good onehander, and he’s fast. If Lehecka is making errors, or struggling with his range, this could be close. If Lehecka is serving well though, he should be a bit more efficient on offense than Tu. Lehecka in 4.
Gaston vs Jasika :
More twins, as the two smol lefties play each other. Jasika is a cool player, but with less offense than Gaston. I think he can win this type of match with his speed and consistent play, but he just withdrew last week against Hijikata, so his fitness is not guaranteed. This is a big 100k paycheck, so no one who is eligible for the wildcard and able to stand is going to say no. Gaston has been subpar lately, but I don’t think Omar is at this level right now. Gaston in 4.
Goffin vs Bonzi :
Bonzi’s resurgence is honestly a surprise to me, but he’s kept it going since his wild run in Metz where he won the title. He qualified in Brisbane, he qualified in Adelaide, and he’s well on his way to answering a big question here. The question isn’t relevant to him, but it’s one I have. Hijikata beat Goffin. Hijikata plays Krueger and should win if he beat Goffin by playing well. If Hijikata is playing extremely well, then Goffin’s loss can be excused, and his h2h against Bonzi (3-0) becomes reliable. Goffin lost to Vukic the week before Hijikata, so the odds are that he’s not at his best. That gives a surging Bonzi his best chance ever. Maybe. Sort of. Possibly. The truth at this point with Goffin is he’s still a great player but week to week he can struggle. Bonzi’s best chance ever to equalize it, but with all the slumps that Goffin has had in the past, it’s like a stylistic issue. Goffin somehow in 4.
Fognini vs Dimitrov :
Fognini can still ball, and Dimitrov just had another injury issue, so this is a tough match to get into. If Dimitrov is fine, he wins easily because his defense is frustrating enough to capitalize in Fognini errors, which are plentiful even when he’s playing well. Fognini has a lot of power and speed still, but he only wins this if Grigor is playing hurt. Dimitrov in 3-4.
Draper vs Navone :
Draper hasn’t played since Paris due to a hip injury, so this is another questionable one. If he’s healthy, he can hit through Navone all day on a fast hardcourt. If he’s less than 100% of struggling physically, Navone is a wall. Navone basically plays behind his backhand, but he has that tenacious claycourt style where pressure is being applied sans errors. Draper in 3-4, or a Navone injury win.
Safiullin vs Kokkinakis :
Let’s put everyone injured in the same section! Kokkinakis pulled out of his last event before a clash with Korda. The prize money and it being his home slam certainly is an incentive to play when less than 100%, but there’s no real way to know how Thanasi is feeling here. Safiullin has been in a powerful slump lately, so it’s not really a guarantee that he can beat 75% Kokkinakis. I like Safiullin here, at least he’s healthy. Safiullin in 4-5.
Dzumhur vs Vukic :
Dzumhur is an exciting player with poor control of himself. He is easily moved by frustration, and this affects his game. Vukic should beat him just by staying more stable throughout the match. Since Damir is a smaller player, it takes him a lot of work to score and Vukic’s serve should end up being a big factor in who has more reserves (mentally and physically) at the business end of sets. Vukic in 4.
Klein vs Korda :
Korda just made the finals of an event and he’s a great player but he sort of forfeited his way there. Two matches to make a finals is a lucky break, but at least he’ll be fresh for this. Korda playing well makes him favored to win this match but Klein has a really well put together offensive game and I don’t think Korda can easily shut that down. Korda just continues to have be a tremendously skillful player who seems .5 seconds behind the pace of professional tennis. With control, he’s a top ten player. When he’s rushed, he doesn’t seem willing or able to push harder. Korda in 5 here. If he can beat Klein in straights I’d say it vaults him into a new tier and he’ll likely come through this section.
Thompson vs Koepfer :
This has 4 hour grueling battle written all over it. Koepfer is forever off tour, but he causes problems whenever he’s on it. Thompson has somehow gotten himself the 27th seed and it’s hard work and dedication that have gotten him there. The dude has grit, and a silly moustache which makes me a partial fan. Thompson is supposed to win this match but it’s one of those spots on tour where the rankings don’t really offer a quick way to score. Koepfer is fast and defends well, and that’s sort of Thompson’s thing. Koepfer being lefty also presents some problems because Jordan’s backhand is not great at creating offense. I guess there’s no way to point to Koepfer winning here, so Thompson in 4. Jordan does have a better serve and playing at home is a boost.
Muller vs Borges :
Two very similar players here. Both are baseliners with almost good serves. Both tend to start slow and lock into a good level in the second set. Both make more errors on their forehands even though that’s the more useful side. They’re both quick. It’ll be a great match. For me, Borges hits harder and is a little more creative, but he has really only been involved in close matches and been on the losing end of them. Being clutch and trends are important for decision-making in tennis, and Muller has been the winner of a lot of close matches recently. Muller in 4-5. There is very little to separate these two in terms of tennis, so I’m just leaning towards the guy who’s more likely to believe the ball is going to go in the hoop.
Nishioka vs Dougaz :
Are there two leftys who win by extending rallies? Yes? Let’s have them play each other. Dougaz had a very impressive run through qualifying, and in the final round against Gojo he managed to wear the big server down until the result felt inevitable. The heat in Melbourne is serious, and stamina can become important. Dougaz is fast and playing well lately, but I think Nishioka hits a little harder than him on the backhand side. That plus him playing decent lately make him a decent favorite. You can wear down Nishioka mentally but physically I think he’ll be okay in the first round. Nishioka in 3-4.
Alcaraz vs Shevchenko :
Shevchenko has been playing well lately, so this should be fun. No one is really expecting Alcaraz to lose early in this event, and right now he’s actually my pick to win the tournament. He has a pretty good draw for him to get reps in on the surface and he should be healthy. Sinner has distractions, Zverev is a dark horse, and Djokovic is great but seems less than automatic physically. Alcaraz doesn’t really make an issue of sets dropped and is usually greenlit to go for anything, so this could be him in 3 or 4.
Ruud vs Munar :
Munar started off the season playing great, so this will be close. Ruud can always be vulnerable on hardcourt and the best thing Munar was doing in his last outting was hitting his forehand inside out. Isolating Ruud’s backhand is always the move, and Jaume has had success against Ruud on hardcourt before, winning their one previous meeting in Tokyo 2022 in straight sets. Casper won a bunch of exhibitions recently at the World Tennis League and the United Cup, so this is going to be a close match. I think Munar can hang early and maybe even get the lead but Ruud’s forehand tends to make inroads as the match progresses and Munar’s serve can fade. Ruud in 5.
Basilashvili vs Mensik :
I wouldn’t really be happy with this draw if I were Mensik’s team. Basilashvili is a guy who hits the ball as hard as he can almost all the time. It’s possible to beat him by staying steady, which is why Mensik should win, but he gives you no rhythm and it’s not great prep for the next round playing Ruud/Munar where you’ll have to play 1,000 balls. Nikoloz played well in qualifying and Mensik has not been automatic lately, despite establishing himself as one of the tour’s better prospects. It’s easy to forget that Mensik is only 19, and we’re relying on him to reliably dispatch a huge offense in the first round where players are at their most beatable due to nerves and the frantic pace of the tennis. Mensik should win, but I could see Basilashvili getting off to a fast start. If he does, it’s really asking Mensik to be automatic. Big ask. Mensik in 4. Jakub does reflect power well, I just think this is a scary spot.
Shang vs Davidovich Fokina :
This should be fun. “ADF is great” “ADF has all the tools” “ADF etc etc”. At some point, I have to accept that Fokina doesn’t really win a lot of tennis matches. He’s a fun player, but his serve is not effective on hardcourt, and he plays impatiently. Shang is not 100% physically here, but he is a likely candidate to hit the court more than Alejandro here. ADF will make you scramble, but that’s where Shang usually is in a match, so he should be okay with that. It’ll be fun, but I think Shang’s commitment to results will give him a tiny edge here. Shang in 4-5.
Struff vs Auger-Alliassime :
Felix is on a great run in Adelaide and has beaten Struff a few times already on hardcourt. Good Felix is good for a draw, so I’m please. Struff is always dangerous on serve but he plays hyper-aggressive tennis and Felix is a bit too fast to really fall for that. Barring a hangover, FAA in 3-4.
Tabilo vs Carballes Baena :
Tabilo data is tough because he just lost to Basavareddy. I know RCB is playing great right now, but he also managed to beat a guy who isn’t fully committed at the opening 250 of the year (Cerundolo). This should be close. Tabilo is playing decent ball, and should have an edge serving, but I don’t see a quick way to beat RCB. His backhand is too solid and he doesn’t give away any free points. Tabilo in 5.
Duckworth vs Stricker :
I know whose ceiling is higher here (Stricker), but he just lost to Mannarino and he didn’t look sharp. You have lots of time against Duckworth because he leads the league in duece games played, but he’s a guy looking to outwork his opponent and frustrate them into errors. Stricker making those errors will be a problem. I don’t expect him to just roll over but he’s ranked 298 and he lost his last 5. Duckworth needs to win this. Duckworth in 3-4. I honestly think if Stricker can win set 2 or 3 he’ll just find his range and run away with this, but he hasn’t shown signs of doing so lately.
Nishikori vs Monteiro :
Kei Nishikori coming back and making a finals is glorious. He plays such intelligent tennis and his shotmaking is still a joy to watch. He’ll enter here as a pretty healthy favoite and it makes sense. There isn’t really a great way for Monteiro to score on Kei, since his backhand is so solid and Monteiro plays in the tradiitonal lefty patterns. Conversely though, I don’t think Monteiro is an easy out because of how steady he performed in qualfying. He pretty much maintained a steady level throughout and blips in his opponents play cost them immediately. I think Kei having offense off both wings and Monteiro being mostly a forehand heavy operation means less running for Kei and a victory, but it should be close in the scoreline. Nishikori in 4.
O’Connell vs Paul :
O’Connell is always a problem in random matches, but at least Tommy Paul showed signs of life this past week before falling to Felix in the semifinals. I don’t think Tommy can lose to O’Connell if he’s playing decently. Chris doesn’t hit big enough and there aren’t as many ways for him to score. Barring the strange Tommy Paul forehand timing issues, this should be Paul in 3-4.
Humbert vs Gigante :
Humbert had his best season ever in 2024 and he opens here against a talented qualifier who is unlikely to be able to defend against what Humbert brings. Gigante has great shotmaking and a creative game so he’ll be able to score, but I think Humbert offense is a little too sharp for him over the course of a long match. Humbert in 4ish.
Habib vs Bu :
This is a good draw for both. Bu exploded onto the scene late in 2024 and has gotten a ton of respect for his mature attitude (definitely worth watching his interviews) and his work ethic on the court. While that’s all true, lately I think it’s become clear that he doesn’t hit the ball big enough to consistently win on tour. He does everything well but nothing exceptional, so playing a qualifier is a must-win for him. He’s the more durable athlete at this point, but Habib will have his chances. Habib basically has been an underdog in every match he’s played for the last 3-4 months but he finds ways to win. That is a big intangible in tennis, game management. There are guys who manage to win a set even in matches where they seem screwed, and Habib is one of them. For this I think Habib is a bit more capable offensively but I don’t know if he can grind through in the long format against Bu, who is pretty steady and disciplined. Bu in 4.
Walton vs Halys :
Walton and Halys is likely to have some tiebreakers. Both have excellent service games. Walton is a bit faster around the court than Halys, but Quentin has been at higher levels of tennis for a while now so he will be slightly favored. This match will be about momentum. Halys locks into a good level at times and he’s capable of winning a few games in a row. At the same time, I think the heat and Halys’ mobility will play a factor and allow Walton to run games. For me, Walton is slightly worse so it’ll depend on how much the weather affects Halys, and how much Adam can get the big man running early in the match. It’s almost worth it sometimes against big servers to hit serves they can return early on, just to begin wearing down their legs. It won’t take their ability to serve away, but it’ll make them less committed to long rallies. Walton in 5?
Virtanen vs Fils :
This might go 5 sets and take 2 hours. Virtanen plays extremely fast and with his power and aggression the points are rarely long. Fils is an ultra-fast player and the one hole in his game still is impatience with his shot selection. Fils should win in 3-4, but Virtanen can take the racquet out of anyone’s hands so it’s a spot where Arthur needs to get off to a good start.
Baez vs Cazaux :
Cazaux is often injured but is better on hardcourt when he’s not. I like him here, and Baez just lost to Diaz Acosta so it’s likely he’s not at his best or most comfortable on these fast surfaces. Cazaux in 4 just because Baez is likely to dig in more and more as the scoreline goes against him.
Fearnley vs Kyrgios :
Fearnley is a great player and he made his way on tour almost entirely with Challenger results. He has a good serve, his forehand is dangerous, and his backhand is solid. It’s exactly the type of player who can beat Kyrgios, because there’s nowhere for him to really break down. This brings me to Kyrgios. He’s injured, and I don’t really know if he’ll play. Nick played a great match against Perricard and he only shed sadboy tears in one small section. It was really entertaining stuff and he did well enough to win. For that one good performance, I hope he’s healthy here. Even if he is though, I’m not sure he’ll win. Kyrgios took care of his serve admirably against Perricard, and was really efficient in the rallies, but I don’t know if his ego will allow him to put in the same effort against a “lower tier” player. Fearnley by forfeit or in 5. Kyrgios can win this, but he’s wholly unreliable.
Martinez vs Darderi :
Darderi always exceeds expectations on hardcourt, so he has a decent chance here. For me, Martinez is the favorite because of how well he played against Monfils. Losing is never great, but losing a close match a week before an important tournament is great prep. Martinez has slightly more offensive ability in the rally, but Darderi’s speed and defense will make things tough. I don’t think Martinez is capable of supplying all the offense for an entire match without some dips. Martinez in 4-5.
Pouille vs Zverev :
When I first got involved in tennis, it was an interesting year. That summer I watched Pouille play, and said “he can beat Nadal.” I predicted the win, everyone told me I was an idiot, and then it happened. That errant prediction influenced so many more foolish ones. I had no clue what a monumental result that was, nor the level/volume of tennis it takes to upend a top player at a major. I just saw Pouille smoking forehands and moving quickly, and thought “that’s enough to compete”. Here, Zverev will begin what might be a very deep run. He has never served better than he did at last year’s AO, and he’s completely under the radar here and in a very safe section of the draw. Injured Kyrgios, Baez the other nearby seed, and Fils/Tabilo/Paul/Humbert waiting beyong that. Zverev usually drags his way through the early rounds, and I have a hard time seeing Pouille hitting through him here. Zverev in 3-4.