Taking Stock at Midway - what are the questions of the second half?

[El Dude]

I sort of see the gap between Roland Garros and Wimbledon as the halfway mark of the tennis season. We've got two Slams in the bag and half of all other big titles - so it is technically halfway through the big tournaments. Or to put it more exactly:

So far: 2 Slams, 5 Masters, 7 ATP 500s, 22 ATP 250s
Still to come: 2 Slams, 1 Tour Final, Olympics, 4 Masters, 6 ATP 500s, 16 ATP 250s

So yeah, about halfway.

The point of this thread is to speculate about the second half - what are the big questions? What do you hope or expect to see? What surprises might unfold? I'll reply in the comments, but will only add some facts and figures from the first half:

SLAMS: Sinner (1), Alcaraz (3)
MASTERS: Alcaraz, Sinner, Tsitsipas, Rublev, Zverev
ATP 500s: Sinner x2, Baez, Humbert, De Minaur, Ruud, Paul
New title winners: Tabilo, Lehecka, Darderi, Diaz Acosta, Thompson, Struff, Perricard, Draper

 

[El Dude]

I suppose the big question is: Who will win the race to #1, of Alcaraz and Sinner? Key to this is probably winning a second Slam, which would make either the first non-Big Three player to win multiple Slams in a year since Agassi in 1999. And of course if we're really lucky, they'll battle for #1 at the World Tour Finals. Either way, they're clearly separating themselves from the pack.

Holger Rune remains an enigma. Of all the younger players who've somewhat established themselves (so ignoring Mensik, Fonseca, etc), he's the one guy with the talent to make "AS" into "ASR." Gill Gross seems to think part of his problem is relying on attacking too much - that he needs to settle back and trust his ability to defend and rally. I think he needs that one break-out tournament.

And then there's Novak and Rafa. Can Novak manufacture a career Indian Summer and rise to the top once more? Can Rafa channel his old self and win Olympics Gold? I'm going to guess no for both, but you just can't count these two out...not until they hang up the racquets themselves.

I suppose the last question is whether Zverev or Tsitsipas will ever take home a Slam trophy. I think Wimbledon will be all Alcaraz-Sinner, but maybe the USO opens up a bit again. Rublev and Ruud aren't far behind them, but don't seem to have the same weight of disappointed expectations.

One final note. We don't yet have a first-time big title winner. A first time Slam winner, but Sinner had already cut his teeth with a Masters last year. Will we see a new Masters winner in the second half? I suppose the main candidate would be Ruud, with darkhorses of Paul, Shelton, De Minaur, maybe even Auger-Aliassime. I think if Baez wins one he'll have to wait until clay season, though I suppose he would be a darkhorse at the Olympics on clay.

OK, really one final note. While the above is front and center in my mind, I've got an eye on Mensik and especially Fonseca, the latter of whom I'm trying to temper my rising hopes for. I suppose my hopes for both would be: top 50 finish for Mensik (he's at #85 now) and top 100 finish for Fonseca (he's at #215).

 

[kskate2]

Interesting thread. I can see both Charlie and Bean winning the remaining 2 slams. Whoever wins Wimby, the other will bounce back and take the USO, really making that race for #1 a thrill ride.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Interesting thread. I can see both Charlie and Bean winning the remaining 2 slams. Whoever wins Wimby, the other will bounce back and take the USO, really making that race for #1 a thrill ride.

Well, its different than the Big 3 plus Andy who had a complete strangle hold on the entire ATP. I cant understand what happen to Meddy or there hasnt been a breakout player because we all saw Sinner and Carlitos coming. E.g. this is like failing a college exam and discovering the professor got fired and there gonna be an opportunity for a retake of exam ( yes, i know its wild and weird but i had it happened to me several times in college). Novak's injured and Rafa isnt nowhere back to full strength. If I was someone like Rune or FAA, its time to say.." I got to have my version of a WTA First time grand slam winner." Sinner and Carlitos are playing great but they can be vulnerable at times. The latter two players need to buy in that they cant take points off. e.g. there was a match that Roger was playing against The Glass Samurai where Roger had won match point but was so focused on winning the point he didnt realize that he had won the match.

 

[El Dude]

Well, its different than the Big 3 plus Andy who had a complete strangle hold on the entire ATP. I cant understand what happen to Meddy or there hasnt been a breakout player because we all saw Sinner and Carlitos coming. E.g. this is like failing a college exam and discovering the professor got fired and there gonna be an opportunity for a retake of exam ( yes, i know its wild and weird but i had it happened to me several times in college). Novak's injured and Rafa isnt nowhere back to full strength. If I was someone like Rune or FAA, its time to say.." I got to have my version of a WTA First time grand slam winner." Sinner and Carlitos are playing great but they can be vulnerable at times. The latter two players need to buy in that they cant take points off. e.g. there was a match that Roger was playing against The Glass Samurai where Roger had won match point but was so focused on winning the point he didnt realize that he had won the match.

This made me scratch my head a bit, the notion of "there hasn't been a breakout player." Maybe a mistake your meaning, though. I mean, Alcaraz and Sinner are the most promising players to emerge since Andy and Novak showed up (unless we want to count Del Potro - who had great promise, but it didn't actualize).

Anyhow, I went on a bit of a deep-dive to see what the typical pattern was for new Slam winners and new big title winners. I won't bore y'all with another chart, but a few facts:

• There has been at least one new Slam winner in 39 of 57 Open Era seasons (68%).
• Since 2006 it is a bit less: 8 of 19 (42%), though in four of the last five seasons (80%).
• Of the 18 seasons without new Slam winners, 10 of them have come since 2006, including five years in a row in 2015-19.
• In all 57 years, there have only been five seasons without at least one new big title winner - and all in the 2007-16 range (or 2007, 2011, 2013, and 2015-16 to be exact)

Conclusion: The recent era of 2017 - present has seen a ton of breakout players, both lesser elite big title winners and Slam winners. As I noted way back then, the "Big Four Hegemony" started breaking up in 2017, first with Masters titles, then a Tour Finals added in 2019, then finally Slams starting in 2020.

2024 is the first year since 2014 that at least two of the Slams have gone to players other than the Big Four.

Here's another crazy fact I hadn't realized until now: Since 2004, there have only been three seasons in which at least one of the Big Three didn't win multiple Slams: 2012 when the Big Four all won a single Slam; 2014 when Cilic and Wawrinka won Slams, and Novak and Rafa split the other two; and 2020 when there were only three Slams, with Rafa and Novak winning one each, and Thiem winning his first and only.

Unless Novak can win both Wimbledon and the US Open, 2024 will be the fourth--just the fourth--in 21 seasons with none of Roger, Rafa, or Novak winning multiple Slams.

 

[the AntiPusher]

This made me scratch my head a bit, the notion of "there hasn't been a breakout player." Maybe a mistake your meaning, though. I mean, Alcaraz and Sinner are the most promising players to emerge since Andy and Novak showed up (unless we want to count Del Potro - who had great promise, but it didn't actualize).

Anyhow, I went on a bit of a deep-dive to see what the typical pattern was for new Slam winners and new big title winners. I won't bore y'all with another chart, but a few facts:

• There has been at least one new Slam winner in 39 of 57 Open Era seasons (68%).
• Since 2006 it is a bit less: 8 of 19 (42%), though in four of the last five seasons (80%).
• Of the 18 seasons without new Slam winners, 10 of them have come since 2006, including five years in a row in 2015-19.
• In all 57 years, there have only been five seasons without at least one new big title winner - and all in the 2007-16 range (or 2007, 2011, 2013, and 2015-16 to be exact)

Conclusion: The recent era of 2017 - present has seen a ton of breakout players, both lesser elite big title winners and Slam winners. As I noted way back then, the "Big Four Hegemony" started breaking up in 2017, first with Masters titles, then a Tour Finals added in 2019, then finally Slams starting in 2020.

2024 is the first year since 2014 that at least two of the Slams have gone to players other than the Big Four.

Here's another crazy fact I hadn't realized until now: Since 2004, there have only been three seasons in which at least one of the Big Three didn't win multiple Slams: 2012 when the Big Four all won a single Slam; 2014 when Cilic and Wawrinka won Slams, and Novak and Rafa split the other two; and 2020 when there were only three Slams, with Rafa and Novak winning one each, and Thiem winning his first and only.

Unless Novak can win both Wimbledon and the US Open, 2024 will be the fourth--just the fourth--in 21 seasons with none of Roger, Rafa, or Novak winning multiple Slams.

Thanks El Dude. Of course Sinner/ Alcaraz both have broken out although we saw them coming with their recent success especially at the Masters series level. Sorry I didn't clarify. Good post and Thiem very similar to Sinner finally broke through. Thanks my friend for the post. I have a good feeling Wimbledon may be the place where it happens.. remember how Becker broke through in 86 or 87. Remember how our boy Pete came from nowhere and won the US Open. This
Is the time for Rune, FAA or one of the other youngins you have mentioned over the past few months. This may be the lost Gen last chance. I expect Novak and Rafa to be at full strength in NY at the Open

 

[Fiero425]

Interesting thread. I can see both Charlie and Bean winning the remaining 2 slams. Whoever wins Wimby, the other will bounce back and take the USO, really making that race for #1 a thrill ride.

Funny, I instantly thought of Novak going on a tear to snatch up the remaining Masters & 500 level events to steal YE #1 like Murray did back in 2016! I don't think he's motivated to do something like that though! It would be hilarious though!

 

[El Dude]

Funny, I instantly thought of Novak going on a tear to snatch up the remaining Masters & 500 level events to steal YE #1 like Murray did back in 2016! I don't think he's motivated to do something like that though! It would be hilarious though!

Yeah, at this point I imagine it is all about the Olympics and Slams. I mean, he's already de-emphasized other tournaments for the last few years - he hasn't played in more than four Masters since 2019.

That said, he's only played 24 matches this year. If he decides to forego Wimbledon and getting into match-shape for the Olympics, I could see him playing one or two of the lesser clay tournaments after Wimbledon. Depending upon how the Olympics goes, I think he'll put greater or lesser emphasis on North America, with an eye for being in top form for the US Open.

So really, if I'm Novak I'm prioritizing three tournaments: Olympics, the US Open, and to a lesser extent, the Tour Finals. Everything else should be formed around those three. So maybe a schedule like so:

Wimbledon (maybe)
Clay warm-up
Olympics
Cincinnati
US Open
Basel/Vienna (maybe, and/or...)
Paris (maybe)
Tour Finals

 

[El Dude]

A few players I'm wondering about:
Matteo Berrettini: For a bit there he looked like he was carving a spot in the Rublev/Ruud/Hurkacz zone, but has really slipped and just when he seems to be starting to get himself together, he loses. Not sure what his future is, but I'm not super optimistic.

Sebastian Korda: At times over the last couple years it looked like he was on the verge of breaking out, but then he goes walkabout for half a year. Just recently, are a weak first few months, he reached the final of that crazily spelled Dutch ATP 250, losing to De Minaur, then lost in the SF of Queen's Club to Tommy Paul. Could he be finally rising, or just another spike in his up and (mostly down) career? He's now at #20, so look poised to have a strong second half.

Lorenzo Musetti: After Paul dispatched Korda in the SF of London, he beat Musetti in the final. Like Korda, Musetti also lost in the SF of a grass ATP 250 in Stuttgart. He lost a five-setter in the 3R of Roland Garros to Novak, so he's had a nice little run. Again like Korda, he has moments where it looks like he's on the verge of taking it to the next level, but he hasn't won a title since 2022 and has still yet to reach the SF of a big tournament (he's reached the QF of a couple Masters) and his best result at a Slam is R16 (twice, last at Roland Garros last year). While Korda turns 24 in a couple weeks, Musetti just turned 22 - among title holders, only Fils, Perricard, Alcaraz, Rune, and Shelton are younger. But the trajectory is worrisome - he hasn't really progressed in the last couple years, and he's starting to look like a lesser version of the next guy on my list.

Felix Auger-Aliassime: The perennial tease. Well, sort of. I kind of see Auger-Aliassime as in the Gasquet mold.Though unlike Gasquet, he's actually won ATP 500s - three of them. So the promise is there for more, but the consistency (and mentality, imo) is not. Still, he's too good--and still too young--not to win at least a Masters or two. I'm reminded of Grigor Dimitrov, who had a breakout year in 2017 at age 26...Felix is 23 now, turning 24 later this year. He's got time, though the chances are that he becomes a multi-Slam winner are approaching zero.

 

[kskate2]

Funny, I instantly thought of Novak going on a tear to snatch up the remaining Masters & 500 level events to steal YE #1 like Murray did back in 2016! I don't think he's motivated to do something like that though! It would be hilarious though!

His form this year has shown he doesn't have that fire to do what you're referencing. I'm not saying he can't turn it on, but we all know how hard that is as a 37 year old. Besides, he's pumped up the tour w/ belief since he's been mostly MIA this year. It will prove a bit more difficult to get that Gold medal. BO3 is where the most upsets happen anyway.

 

[Moxie]

I suppose the big question is: Who will win the race to #1, of Alcaraz and Sinner? Key to this is probably winning a second Slam, which would make either the first non-Big Three player to win multiple Slams in a year since Agassi in 1999. And of course if we're really lucky, they'll battle for #1 at the World Tour Finals. Either way, they're clearly separating themselves from the pack.

Holger Rune remains an enigma. Of all the younger players who've somewhat established themselves (so ignoring Mensik, Fonseca, etc), he's the one guy with the talent to make "AS" into "ASR." Gill Gross seems to think part of his problem is relying on attacking too much - that he needs to settle back and trust his ability to defend and rally. I think he needs that one break-out tournament.

And then there's Novak and Rafa. Can Novak manufacture a career Indian Summer and rise to the top once more? Can Rafa channel his old self and win Olympics Gold? I'm going to guess no for both, but you just can't count these two out...not until they hang up the racquets themselves.

I suppose the last question is whether Zverev or Tsitsipas will ever take home a Slam trophy. I think Wimbledon will be all Alcaraz-Sinner, but maybe the USO opens up a bit again. Rublev and Ruud aren't far behind them, but don't seem to have the same weight of disappointed expectations.

One final note. We don't yet have a first-time big title winner. A first time Slam winner, but Sinner had already cut his teeth with a Masters last year. Will we see a new Masters winner in the second half? I suppose the main candidate would be Ruud, with darkhorses of Paul, Shelton, De Minaur, maybe even Auger-Aliassime. I think if Baez wins one he'll have to wait until clay season, though I suppose he would be a darkhorse at the Olympics on clay.

OK, really one final note. While the above is front and center in my mind, I've got an eye on Mensik and especially Fonseca, the latter of whom I'm trying to temper my rising hopes for. I suppose my hopes for both would be: top 50 finish for Mensik (he's at #85 now) and top 100 finish for Fonseca (he's at #215).

This close to Wimbledon, I'd hold off opining for a couple of weeks. But interesting questions.