I have my second Claydal meditation pretty much ready to write; look for it later today or tonight.
Here’s why you need me; the lame brain tennis media can not reconcile the following:
Tsitsipas’ form over the last few months, highlighted by QF appearances in Qatar and Dubai, should give some indication that he’s been coming.
At the same time, the clay’s volatility and inferiority make these kinds of “upsets” pretty commonplace.
Therefore, this is not an upset.
Look at his score lines over the last several tournaments. He doesn’t just go away. He’s a fighter. For me, most illustrative of this talent was watching his R64 loss to Thiem at Indian Wells, a three-setter that showed the Greek’s tennis spirit and poise. As in most of Thiem’s matches, the Austrian flirts with the plank over shark-infested waters, anyways. This is not a recipe for consistent, deep runs. The Greek has all kinds of danger beneath that handsome cloak of youth.
Thiem, as well as he’s made for clay, is not the dirt juggernaut folks want to make him out to be. Such is the tennis analysis of a soft tennis intelligentsia. Thiem, like a Dimitrov, is too deep, too vulnerable to a hungrier dirty grinder on this circus of a surface.
Keep in mind, at Mcshow, we still Beliem in Thiem.
But this sort of soft tennis coverage and “analysis” is weak. Announcing (for internet clicks, as well) the Thiem upset is right up there with the rabid coverage of Nadal’s clay streak, his surface dominance, his “untouchableness” on clay.
As my theory goes (and stay-tuned for this disquisition later today): you are what you are.
The ramifications of this life and sport truth can be disquieting.