ATP Montecarlo: Tsitsipas conquista il tris come Borg e Muster, superando Ruud; tuttavia, Sinner si dimostra un avversario difficile da battere

It’s hard not to think back to what happened in the Tsitsipas-Sinner semi-final, especially when you saw Tsitsipas win six games in a row in the first set.

In the press box, we all looked at each other and there was no need to speak. The real final was on Saturday, the one ruined by a referee’s mistake and Sinner’s bad luck. Sinner had not made a mistake in his response and did not have the experience of Tsitsipas, who clearly stated on clay that he trusts himself more than referees and line judges.

Following the much more competitive second set, it was only fair to adjust the focus a bit, also to avoid appearing overly biased. Ruud managed to put up a fight, earning 5 break points in three different games, and trying to keep the match alive. However, it never felt like Ruud could turn the outcome around.

Tsitsipas is more complete than Ruud. He doesn’t just score points with his forehand, but also with his backhand – unlike on faster surfaces where he struggles due to lack of time leading to unforced errors. He can also serve and volley, play beautiful volleys both placed and in drop shots, and has a shot that Ruud never attempts: the drop shot.

Ruud explained why he doesn’t hit drop shots by saying, “If I have the opportunity to close out a point, I do it with my forehand 8 times out of 10, with a drop shot 4 or 5 times.” However, he acknowledged that maybe he should learn to use that solution as well, citing Sinner as an example of someone who has mastered the drop shot.

Sometimes against Tsitsipas (and even more so against Medvedev, who plays so far back from the baseline), the drop shot can be very useful. Sinner understood this, while Ruud perhaps did not.

Playing slightly shorter against Tsitsipas can be dangerous, as the Greek player is proficient at moving around the ball and unleashing a deadly forehand. Indeed, if you play a bit shorter, Tsitsipas’ forehand…sounds the death knell. Whether he anticipates and attacks down the line or plays tight cross-court shots during long and grueling rallies, those shots are almost always unreachable.

Tsitsipas has won this tournament three times, not just once. Three times like Borg (1977, 1979, and 1980) and Muster (1992, 1995, and 1996). Then, there’s a phenomenon, Rafa Nadal, who won it 11 times: 2005-2012, 2016-2018. But the Mallorcan is unique and unrivaled on clay, as Roland Garros enthusiasts know where he has triumphed 14 times, a record that is perhaps the most unbeatable of all, despite Djokovic striving to set more records destined to last an eternity.

But what was Tsitsipas’ most important victory of the three? He was asked. Go read his interview. I liked that, while giving due importance to the first win (the first is never forgotten… it’s a bit like that in all things, right?), he said that beating a “hot” player this year in the semi-final, who was on an almost unbeatable streak – referring to Sinner for those who didn’t catch it – gave him even more satisfaction and awareness of his progress. It also boosted his confidence for the next “after seven, eight months of unsatisfactory results,” which led to his temporary exit from the top ten.

Do note that in the final in 2021, Tsitsipas beat Rublev, and in 2022, Davidovich Fokina, not two players at the level of the current Sinner.

However, in fact, both on Saturday and this Sunday, Tsitsipas played backhands – usually his Achilles’ heel (which Greek player doesn’t have one?) – that were truly extraordinary. Worthy of a top-ten, not just the best single-handed backhand on the world circuit (along with Dimitrov). And indeed, he is back in the top ten. Now the nostalgics of the single-handed backhand will be happy. After disappearing from the scene for the first time since the birth of tennis a century and a half ago, today they have at least two representatives wielding their skills on the left side: Tsitsipas at No. 7, Dimitrov at No. 10.

Given Tsitsipas the credit he deserves, even with the shadow of a semifinal snatched with the unwitting help of a couple of myopic referees, we have to admit that we did not see a truly memorable final.

6-1, 6-4 is not exactly an epic scoreline. It was a bit of a bland match, to be honest. Too much of the same. Unfortunately, Ruud’s rarely exciting tennis did not contrast much with Tsitsipas’ style. We all know that contrasting styles like Federer and Nadal’s may not be seen again, but this year’s finalists – despite the aforementioned observations on Tsitsipas’ more complete repertoire – played a bit too similarly to excite. Big forehand shots, some net approaches leading to points almost halfway won, apart from Tsitsipas’ serve and volley, and it was all a bit too predictable.

There was also a lack of that electrifying atmosphere that is present when an Italian or French player competes on the Ranieri III court.

There were 5 or 6 Norwegians occasionally shouting “Lets’ go Casper, let’s go Casper,” some variations being “let’s go Ruud,” trying to garner applause from neutral fans who, after the 6-1 first set in just 36 minutes, cheered for a more competitive and longer show worth the ticket price.

The price of the tickets, by the way, for seats farther from the court but still offering excellent visibility, was 160 euros, quite affordable for a Masters 1000 final. I think they cost more in Rome.

I believe there were about as many Greeks as Norwegians. However, Tsitsipas, with his previous victories in the Principality, had a few more fans. And they were louder, making their presence felt more. I do note that there were no journalists in attendance, neither for the finalists nor us. Not one Greek, not one Norwegian.

The Italian presence, both in the press room and in general, has always been strong even when Sinner wasn’t in contention for a win. And sooner or later, I predict, that win will come.

Answering my question regarding Sinner and his prowess on clay, Tsitsipas had no doubts: “Jannik is an excellent player on all surfaces. I think he has a game that will allow him to play well everywhere. This time, I found his game to be very different compared to the two times I faced him in Rome. I’m not counting the times we played on hard courts… that’s different. But I’m referring to our matches on clay. He has progressed tremendously. I saw it, he put a lot of pressure on me, and I had to use all my physical resources to withstand his game, which wasn’t the case in our previous encounters. The margins were very close… I think he is a great favorite for all the clay-court tournaments of the season.”

As for Ruud, what can I say? He is a player who has won 10 ATP titles, not just one. He has reached three Slam finals and now a Masters 1000 final. Since the Estoril 2023 tournament, he hasn’t won any of the 5 finals he played (Roland Garros 2023, Bastad 2023, and in 2024 Los Cabos, Acapulco, and Monte Carlo), while in 2022, everyone remembers he was one step away from becoming world No. 1 by reaching finals at Roland Garros, Flushing Meadows, and the ATP Finals… all of which he lost.

In short, a particularly malicious journalist could label him “a big loser.” Which wouldn’t be fair. Auger Aliassime lost a ton of finals before winning one. But until some time ago, us Italians would have rejoiced at having a tennis player like Auger Aliassime, and even more so like Ruud, a three-time Slam finalist. Players like him are what we need.

All that being said, let me reiterate what I hinted at yesterday: the Tsitsipas-Sinner semifinal was, in fact, an anticipated final. Without taking anything away from the talented and gentlemanly Ruud, who once again responded with extreme courtesy and availability to all my questions and those of the only Frank Ramella, a colleague from L’Equipe. We conducted a sort of interview together, which is not exclusive because his responses are shared with everyone. You’d be surprised how often we work for many: a few of us ask questions, and various TV channels, media, take everything and write about it even before us. Of course, without ever mentioning who asked the questions. It can be a bit silly in the long run… you know.

But now our perspectives and ambitions have changed since Sinner emerged onto the world stage: we have Jannik, and we’re holding onto him tight. Every day, newspapers, fans, want to read only about him. I’m sure that even this Monday, newspapers will be full of… Sinner! I don’t know, though, if his statements regarding the Madrid tournament, a Masters 1000 event that he only said he wanted to play as preparation for Rome and Paris, will be well-received by the Spaniards who cannot be sure of having the best Alcaraz – who withdrew from Barcelona, how he will fare in Madrid – and certainly not the best Nadal. And as for Djokovic… who knows?

In my opinion, someone will go tell him that he should have said what he said. For my part, I don’t see Sinner going to Madrid and not striving to win. So, even more, there was no need to say – on two separate occasions – what he said.

I am often asked to inquire about him from other players. And some accuse us of overdoing it. The Sinnermania continues, indeed grows. Of course, we must not complain about it. But sometimes, writing something new about him, his tennis, his personality, is not that easy. There is a risk of it becoming tiresome.

If he’s holding an umbrella and talking to a line judge, talking to a child, not arguing with the referee who made an important mistake, cooking pasta in his apartment while the rest of the team goes to a restaurant, if there are mom and dad, if the girlfriend stays hidden so as not to attract attention… all of it fuels the Sinner phenomenon. There are people who had never watched a tennis match and now don’t miss a Sinner match. And they want to know about Sinner.

Well, much better this way than when he wasn’t there. Hopefully, though, he will return to the limelight and be joined in the headlines, in the photos, by Matteo Berrettini as well. His defeat to Kecmanovic here doesn’t count. But what he does in the upcoming tournaments does. We can’t just wait for the grass season to evaluate his new potential.

And let’s hope that the various Musetti, Sonego, Arnaldi, Cobolli, Darderi, Fognini also do us proud, as well as our best doubles players, Bolelli and Vavassori. Everyone can contribute to making our tennis, and Ubitennis (!!), more popular. Ad maiora.