Key events
“Going into this final,” begins Gavriella Epstein-Lightman, “Alcaraz and Sinner’s roles are reversed. It is Alcaraz who has been ruthlessly efficient, not dropping a set, whereas Sinner has dropped two sets.
Alcaraz has also been serving better than Sinner this tournament, getting 7% more first serves in than Sinner, with 5% more unreturned serves.
This is in contrast to the situation before the Roland Garros final this year: Alcaraz had dropped four sets whilst Sinner had largely eased through, unflappable as per usual. We know how that final went.
So how far is recent form in the tournament a predictor of performance in the final?”
I’d say both have played so well it’s hard to look at their route to this point and find anything telling other than Sinner’s stomach knack – if it’s still bothering him. It’s also worth noting that he was bothered by Bublik recently, but when they met round three, he binned him 1, 1 and 1. As Calv said below, this match will probably be decided by which of the two play better, not any tactical tweak, and both are in such good nick we can’t possibly predict which it’ll be.
The queues outside are colossal; our players are scheduled to walk out at 37 minutes past the hour, but I’d not be surprised if that’s pushed back again. Still, in return we get to see the continuing theft of democracy in real time, so.
With men’s tennis settled into a pattern, there’s an interesting contrast to be found in the women’s game. For the last decade and a bit, it’s been the least predictable sport in the world, all manner of random winning majors, but it now feels like we’re on the verge of a new era: Aryna Sabalenka, Iga Swiatek, Amanda Anisimova and Naomi Osaka – maybe Karolina Muchová too, if she stays fit – appear to be settling at the top. You never know, but I’d suggest it’ll be a while before anyone but them wins a slam, and if the latter three names can get in amongst it, we might soon be talking about one of the great eras.
One of the many things I love about the Sincaraz rivalry is what sound lads they clearly are and, from which flows, how well they get on with each other. I can’t lie, I tend to like a bit of needle in my sport – I found, for example, Klopp-Guardiola a bit bloodless for my taste.
But when these two get together it feels like a celebration of what’s best about humanity, so the two of them being both mates and menschen fits beautifully. And, let’s be real, we need that example and inspiration more than ever.
More from Bryan.
Bryan Armen Graham
An hour before Sunday’s US Open men’s final between Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz, the boardwalk from the Mets-Willets Point subway to the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center was quiet, punctuated only by bursts of fans spilling out of the No 7 train every few minutes.
Among them stood Emma Kaplan, a 33-year-old executive assistant from Brooklyn, distributing flyers that read “The Fall of the Trump Fascist Regime.” She was joined by three members of RefuseFascism.org, one hoisting a poster that declared “GAME, SET, MATCH! NOV 5, FLOOD DC. TRUMP MUST GO!”; another’s sign demanded the shutdown of ICE and “the whole Trump fascist regime.”
As waves of spectators streamed past, a heavy security presence shadowed the scene – NYPD, Parks Department officers, Homeland Security agents and the Secret Service. Some fans nodded quietly in approval. Others made their opposition clear.
“Oh my bad, I voted for him,” one man muttered.
“Maga! Make America great again!” shouted another, a 22-year-old from Long Island who said he would happily back Trump again.
Kaplan brushed off the jeers.
“Trump has historically been booed here,” she told me. “He should be booed everywhere he goes. And on November 5 we’re calling for millions of people to come to Washington DC. They might try to silence our boos, but they can’t silence our rage.”
Asked what she’d say directly to Trump, Kaplan didn’t hesitate: “Get the hell out of Chicago. Stay out of New York, get out of LA and get out of the fucking White House.”
So far, she said, reactions had been mixed. “We just got out here … our audience really is everybody who hates Trump, [for them] to not be silent right now.” She added that she felt safe and had not been approached by security.
There they are, the lads
The collab we didn’t know we needed:
“Every breath you take, every move you make.”
“It wasn’t me.”
On account of Trump’s attendance, our start is delayed until 7.30pm BST
In an entirely normal turn of events, broadcasters have been told not to censor any protests or negative reactions.
There’s are major queues outside Arthur Ashe, as Donald Trump is taking a break from golf to take in a bit of tennis and there’s more security than usual. Demagogues do sure love themselves some sport.
The only thing individual sport loves more than a dominant champion is a dominant rivalry. If Sinner wins here, though, we’ll be forced to wonder if, though Alcaraz is going away from the pack, he’s going away from Alcaraz.
On the same topic, here’s Calvin Betton, our resident coach. “Nothing at all to add really since Wimbledon. Same stuff. They’ll both blast away, whoever plays better will win. One of them will try a drop shot or a serve and volley and people will get excited that it’s a tactical move. It’s not.”
Where is the match? On a hard court, if Sinner can get on top of the bounce, he’s hard to stop because his groundstrokes are so reliable and so true. He has, though, had trouble against players who unleash on the forehand – Dimitrov, Bublik – but are canny on the back, their slicing forcing him to dig out responses.
Sinner, meanwhile, will look to put Alcaraz under constant pressure, standing on the baseline while cramping him for room and time. If his second serve is firing, it’ll take something serious to deny him.
Also going on:
Preamble
Yes yes y’all, and welcome to the US Open 2025 – day 15!
It feels like we’ve been here before, doesn’t it? For the third grand slam in a row and for the first time ever in an open-era calendar year, the same players meet to decide which of them takes home the big pot, just as we knew they would. We invite sport into our lives because we don’t know what’s going to happen, except in men’s tennis we now know exactly what’s going to happen: Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz will beat whoever is put in front of them, handily. There is no sign whatsoever that this will stop being the case anytime in the next decade.
But though it might feel like we’ve been here before, verily we have not. Each time these two play, they grow, and each time they play each other they’re telling us a new story, a fresh mesh of styles and characters demanding we conceive of them and ourselves differently.
The pair are easy to characterise. Sinner is even, flowing, and predictable, doing things you can’t believe but can predict: he picks the right shot even if it’s the hardest shot, then executes with style and poise that is perfect. Alcaraz, on the other hand, is capricious, extravagant and visionary, doing things you can neither predict nor believe: technically he is impure but mentally he is unique, conjuring angles and trajectories geometry has yet to discover, perfect because of his imperfections.
In individual sport, players come and go, so to sustain us, we need them to stand for something, and we will, all of us, have a favourite in the fight: the one who is closer to expressing who we are or, if we’re honest with ourselves, who we’d like to be. The reality, though, is a little more nuanced. Unlike, say, Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe, these two aren’t sticking to their given identity partly to spite the other, nor are they, like, say, Stefan Edberg and Boris Becker, continuing to do what they do in the belief that if they do it well, it will be enough. Rather they are studying each other and, more particularly, studying themselves in the light of each other, rethinking and remodelling as they go. So Sinner is now fitter and more daring, while Alcaraz is less impetuous and error-prone; their rivalry is not a series but a serial, with character driving plot not the other way around.
There’ s a notion that Sinner’s Wimbledon win evidenced him moving clear – a hard court suits his organised power-game, just as the variable, lower bounce on grass and clay works better for Alcaraz, so if he’s winning on one of his less natural surfaces, he is likely to be impregnable on the one that seems made for him. On the other hand, Alcaraz has developed a new consistency which, when added to his artistic gifts and preternatural timing, means that if he plays close to his best, he’s close to unbeatable.
Which is to say though previously we knew what was going to happen, presently we’ve not a clue what’s going to happen. It’s time to settle in and find out.
Play: 2pm local, 7pm BST
