2024 Wimbledon Quarter Final matchup - [1] Jannik Sinner v/s [5] Daniil S. Medvedev

Who wins?

  • Meddy in 3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Medvedev in 4

    Votes: 4 11.1%
  • Medvedev in 5

    Votes: 4 11.1%
  • Sinner in 3

    Votes: 10 27.8%
  • Sinner in 4

    Votes: 17 47.2%
  • Sinner in 5

    Votes: 1 2.8%

  • Total voters
    36
  • Poll closed .

DariaGT

Professional
Always love Russian Carrot salad
Meds grated him down well
iu
 

Humble Crumble

Semi-Pro
Same man. The guy lost to such a boring pusher it’s unforgivable. The dude legit finds a way to lose in five it’s disappointing

I am disappointed, I must admit. He works hard to get to the 5th, then fades away. If this is physical, mental or whatever, he needs to regroup and work on it. The upcoming hardcourt swing may tell us something.
 

sortof

Professional
Sonic couldn´t find his A game when needed. Clearly, he is not going to dominate the tour anytime soon. The 3rd set breaker was kind of decisive - Sonic had the momentum back on his side after the MTO and really needed to win this set. Apart from his shaky 2nd serve (11 DFs!) mostly a great game by MadMed though. Anyhow, Sonic in the semi against the rat would have been more interesting - now I´m pretty sure that the crown is going to end up in the wrong hands.
 
Last edited:
I think double digits is just not possible for him. He’ll be 23 at the next slam,

This post reminds me of how deleterious the effect of the big three's monopolization has been. 10+ majors is a really, really high bar. The majority of top players in the past did not achieve it. McEnroe did not. Connors did not. Lendl did not. Wilander did not. Agassi did not. Edberg did not. Becker did not. Courier did not. Between Wimbledon 1980 (when Borg won his 10th slam) and Australian Open 2007 (when Federer won his 10th slam), only one man won ten slams: Sampras got his 10th at Wimbledon 1997. So, in 26.5 years, only one man got to 10 slams.

Sinner will probably not win ten slams. But if he doesn't do so, that doesn't make him a failure. It doesn't even mean he isn't a top player.

And he does still have a decent shot at it. It's easier to wrack up multiple slams than it used to be. Still not easy, but easier.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
This post reminds me of how deleterious the effect of the big three's monopolization has been. 10+ majors is a really, really high bar. The majority of top players in the past did not achieve it. McEnroe did not. Connors did not. Lendl did not. Wilander did not. Agassi did not. Edberg did not. Becker did not. Courier did not. Between Wimbledon 1980 (when Borg won his 10th slam) and Australian Open 2007 (when Federer won his 10th slam), only one man won ten slams: Sampras got his 10th at Wimbledon 1997. So, in 26.5 years, only one man got to 10 slams.

Sinner will probably not win ten slams. But if he doesn't do so, that doesn't make him a failure. It doesn't even mean he isn't a top player.

And he does still have a decent shot at it. It's easier to wrack up multiple slams than it used to be. Still not easy, but easier.
Yeah, sometimes it seems to be that fans who grew up with the Big 3 era sort of expect that every generation will have a Big 3 caliber player - like 20+ Slams is an expected standard. But, it really doesn't have to be like that, and it's much more likely that even the best of a generation will have a more humanly-scaled Slam total - 7, 9, 12? - which are, less we forget, incredible totals, just not close to the Big 3. Also fans of the young stars seem to get WAY ahead of themselves. Sinner and Alcaraz are great players, obviously, and maybe Sinner and/or Alcaraz do go on to have a gaudy, dominant 15+ Slam career. But we're not there yet. There's all these proclamations of "just you wait and see." Well, let's truly "just wait and see" and stop bombarding with claims of future expected dominance. Let it play out.
 
Last edited:

roysid

Legend
This post reminds me of how deleterious the effect of the big three's monopolization has been. 10+ majors is a really, really high bar. The majority of top players in the past did not achieve it. McEnroe did not. Connors did not. Lendl did not. Wilander did not. Agassi did not. Edberg did not. Becker did not. Courier did not. Between Wimbledon 1980 (when Borg won his 10th slam) and Australian Open 2007 (when Federer won his 10th slam), only one man won ten slams: Sampras got his 10th at Wimbledon 1997. So, in 26.5 years, only one man got to 10 slams.

Sinner will probably not win ten slams. But if he doesn't do so, that doesn't make him a failure. It doesn't even mean he isn't a top player.

And he does still have a decent shot at it. It's easier to wrack up multiple slams than it used to be. Still not easy, but easier.
Only alcaraz looks he can win 10+ slams. Remaining no chance
 

neytron

Semi-Pro
Medvedev's serve has gotten better, but there are still a lot of DFs. It should be even better at USO. Medvedev should have won in straight sets in this match, but lost the 1st set with UEs in the end. Then he also almost missed the 3rd set, serving for the set, and then Sinner had set points. In the 5th set there was good aggressive tennis from Medvedev and a confident serving for the match. Medvedev didn't show his best tennis today either, but mentally won in the end. He doesn't have to be 100% ready against Alcaraz and Sinner, he just needs to serve better than he has over the past year. And then he can fight them on equal terms.

Poll results here are funny as always. Bookies' odds were also funny.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I can't even say Sinner has dominated ATP this year. If anyone compared the two in front of you, I can understand how frustrated you might had been. Obviously that person didn't watch tennis in 2004. Also, I don't think we'll see a complete domination by him under the presence of Carlitos. Raz may have a dominant year coming up in his way pretty soon.
Sinner should worry about the rest of the players before he worries about Raz.
 

socallefty

G.O.A.T.
I think double digits is just not possible for him. He’ll be 23 at the next slam,
You get critical of Sinner during his losses on match threads, but then forecast great things for his future otherwise. Others see the same flaws that you write about only during his losses and say he has a low ceiling in terms of ATG potential.

You are always cocky about Sinner before tournaments. Then in the match thread of a Sinner loss, I’ve seen you deflate slowly as you see the same lack of physicality costing him again. Sinner is one of the least physically impressive players when you see him in person due to his thin physique including in his lower body.
As these two responses to you in the past indicate, you see Sinner’s flaws only during his losses and then after a few days go back to hyping him too much to win everything. Others like me who see his many strengths and yet are concerned if he has the body/physicality to be a dominating champion get insulted by you all year long. Yet another loss with physical issues in the middle.
 

robyrolfo

Hall of Fame
Med playing the way he has, as much as he has, for the past 3-4 years, and not having any serious injury or fatigue issues is pretty much a joke.
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
I am disappointed, I must admit. He works hard to get to the 5th, then fades away. If this is physical, mental or whatever, he needs to regroup and work on it. The upcoming hardcourt swing may tell us something.
Well, Sinner was sick. Even a small illness is a major factor against top players.

This post reminds me of how deleterious the effect of the big three's monopolization has been. 10+ majors is a really, really high bar. The majority of top players in the past did not achieve it. McEnroe did not. Connors did not. Lendl did not. Wilander did not. Agassi did not. Edberg did not. Becker did not. Courier did not. Between Wimbledon 1980 (when Borg won his 10th slam) and Australian Open 2007 (when Federer won his 10th slam), only one man won ten slams: Sampras got his 10th at Wimbledon 1997. So, in 26.5 years, only one man got to 10 slams.

Sinner will probably not win ten slams. But if he doesn't do so, that doesn't make him a failure. It doesn't even mean he isn't a top player.

And he does still have a decent shot at it. It's easier to wrack up multiple slams than it used to be. Still not easy, but easier.
I totally agree with your sentiment here. That said, McEnroe and Connors did not regularly play many slams, particularly the Australian Open. Connors also missed 5 French Opens in his prime and McEnroe 3. Connors would easily be above 8 major wins had he not skipped about 13 majors in his prime. He only ever played 2 AOs, won 1 of them and was runner-up in the other.
 

KantenKlaar

Hall of Fame
As these two responses to you in the past indicate, you see Sinner’s flaws only during his losses and then after a few days go back to hyping him too much to win everything. Others like me who see his many strengths and yet are concerned if he has the body/physicality to be a dominating champion get insulted by you all year long. Yet another loss with physical issues in the middle.
You spoke on my behalf...thank you
 

Humble Crumble

Semi-Pro
As these two responses to you in the past indicate, you see Sinner’s flaws only during his losses and then after a few days go back to hyping him too much to win everything. Others like me who see his many strengths and yet are concerned if he has the body/physicality to be a dominating champion get insulted by you all year long. Yet another loss with physical issues in the middle.

You’re quite right. I just heard his comments about the match. His physical issues seemed to have started this morning:

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/sinner-wimbledon-2024-qf-reaction

Already this morning I didn't feel great. I had some problems,” Sinner said in his post-match press conference. “Then with the fatigue, it was tough. But take nothing away from Daniil. I think he played very smart. He played good tennis. That’s it. I went off the court. I didn't want to go off. The physio told me it was better to take some time because he watched me and I didn't seem in shape to play. I was struggling physically. It was not an easy moment. I tried to fight with what I had today.
 
Yeah, sometimes it seems to be that fans who grew up with the Big 3 era sort of expect that every generation will have a Big 3 caliber player - like 20+ Slams is an expected standard. But, it really doesn't have to be like that, and it's much more likely that even the best of generation will have a more humanly-scaled Slam total - 7, 9, 12? - which are, less we forget, incredible totals, just not close to the Big 3. Also fans of the young stars seem to get WAY ahead of themselves. Sinner and Alcaraz are great players, obviously, and maybe Sinner and/or Alcaraz do go on to have a dominant 15+ Slam career. But we're not there yet. There's all these proclamations of "just you wait and see." Well, let's truly "just wait and see" and stop bombarding with claims of future expected dominance. Let it play out.

Agreed. And at least in Alcaraz's case, you can see that winning three different slams within a month or so of his 21st birthday is a fast start and suggests the possibility of something unusual. But for Sinner this has started on the basis of one slam title and a hot start to 2024. That's nowhere near enough evidence to suggest he'd win 10 slams, especially as was 22.5 by the time of his first. It doesn't make it impossible at all, of course.

Well, Sinner was sick. Even a small illness is a major factor against top players.


I totally agree with your sentiment here. That said, McEnroe and Connors did not regularly play many slams, particularly the Australian Open. Connors also missed 5 French Opens in his prime and McEnroe 3. Connors would easily be above 8 major wins had he not skipped about 13 majors in his prime. He only ever played 2 AOs, won 1 of them and was runner-up in the other.

This is true and is one reason why I said that it's easier to win 10+ slams now than it used to be. I personally don't think the missed Roland Garroses made much difference to their career totals - perhaps Connors would have won one of the early ones - 74 is an especially good chance - but I don't think he'd have many of them. (I certainly wouldn't have bet on him getting past Vilas in 77 or Borg in 78). I think that the only one for which McEnroe would have been even vaguely a contender is 82, and that looks much easier in retrospect than it would have done in prospect. Anyway, according to Wiki, the reason McEnroe didn't play RG in 82 was injury, which is a different sort of reason than most of the other absences. Unlucky but part of the game, now, then, and always.

The missed Australian Opens are much more significant, in my view, at least when thinking about career totals.
 

Dragy

Legend
@Dragy Actually I really notice the fade on Medvedev's forehand too, similar to Rublev. Is that maybe a bit of a Russian player thing?
No, I don’t think so. Medvedev hits a lot of variations, and not all of them are recommended, imho :-D

He hits a lot of draws actually, off both sides. And some fades as well. I didn’t pay attention what he uses more when going hard, but fade is quite natural option.
 

Marius_Hancu

Talk Tennis Guru
Did you see Simon today in Medvedev's corner?
Clever move.

"Gilles Simon announced in February 2024 that he would be joining Daniil Medvedev's team for the season. He will be working alongside coach Gilles Cervara and accompanying the Russian on the road when required"
 

ppma

Professional
Did you see Simon today in Medvedev's corner?
Clever move.

"Gilles Simon announced in February 2024 that he would be joining Daniil Medvedev's team for the season. He will be working alongside coach Gilles Cervara and accompanying the Russian on the road when required"
Nice. The king of the pushers is going to be in the team of the tzar of the pushers. It's a day of joy for tennis.
 
Top