Australian Open 2024 Review

DISCLAIMER: Please note we use a transcription service, so there may be some errors in the following transcription of this episode. If you can, please refer to the audio for exact quotations.

Daniel Kiernan  00:09

Welcome to Episode 215, of Control the Controllables. And I hope you're well where ever you are in the world. And you've got over another fantastic Australian Open that has whetted all of our appetites as we're moving into 2024. And all of the excitement that we have coming our way on the tennis tour. Now before I jump in today's episode, I just want to take the opportunity to mention that over the last six months, we've been working alongside a fantastic placement student Fergus, who he's our first podcast placement student here at Control the Controllables. And it's something that we have done over the last few years working with Bath University, and then we in England, and we've opened that up to many of the UK universities, whether that's in operations, marketing, strength and conditioning, and it's just been a program that has worked so well for ourselves, but more importantly for the individual that has come to work at the SotoTennis Academy. And, as I'm sure Fergus will absolutely testify, it's been a brilliant first six months for him. And we are already opening up the space for next year. So starting September 2024. And if you know anybody that's interested, then reach out to us we, in our show notes, we will have all of our details. It is perfect for someone that has a gap year as part of their course or for someone that's finished their university course and they're looking to get into the field of podcasting, or media. And we would love to have you come along so anybody that is listening to this right now, please think of someone and share it far and wide. But back to today's episode. And as I said at the start the Australian Open What a brilliant two weeks or three weeks when you take the qualifying event as well. I was very fortunate to be out in Melbourne throughout the course of the event, Gaby Dabrowski and Aaron route left, the players that I coach, they fell short in the semifinals of the women's doubles, we didn't quite have the same story that we had at the US Open but still, it was a brilliant experience a brilliant effort by them. And so many incredible matches that were played. We then have Jannik Sinner sitting at the top and Aryna Sabalenka, winning her second Australian Open. And then so many more winners in the doubles and the mixed doubles the wheelchair events, the juniors and a big well done to everybody that was a part of such a fantastic event. Now, given the time differences in the way the tennis world works, some of our usual panelists were unable to jump on Gaby Dabrowski. As I mentioned, she's still out in Australia before she moves into the Middle East for the next part of the year. And the timings just meant it was the middle of the night for her. And then Emily Webley Smith, she just returned back from the USA. So it is a little bit male dominant. In terms of our panelists. I do apologize for that. But they are brilliant as always Freddie Nielsen, he's out in Mexico and he was he's preparing the Danish team for the next Davis Cup tie out there in Mexico and then Calvin Betten, who joined us before for the for the preview of the Australian Open the coach of Henry Patten. Calvin brings incredible insight and also honesty and I love the conversation with them. We delve into lots of topics, Australian Open, yes related, but also some bigger tennis topics. You'll be holding your breath at some points when you hear if you haven't heard already, about some of the plans that are currently being concocted behind the scenes in the world of tennis. I bet you want to find out so here it is our Australian Open 2024 panelists. So Australian Open Review panelists a big welcome. How you doing?

Freddie Nielsen  04:32

Thank you. Great.

Daniel Kiernan  04:33

And we've got we've got the boys our boys boys, boys. Tonight we couldn't get Gaby Dabrowski she might join us you might jump on later to give us a little 10 minutes. But we got Calvin Betten and Freddie Nielsen, and I'm trying to get my most enthusiastic voice. It's after just arriving back from Australia a few hours ago. It's like 6am for me. Right now the eyes are closing a little bit. So suppose you might, you might have to jump in and, and Freddie I'm gonna, I'm gonna jump in and start straight away on. I guess it's a hot topic in the world of tennis, it's scheduling. You know, we talk about it all the time. It feels like it's maybe over done, but I think it'd be wrong of us not to pick up on it. And despite the fact that Australian Open did extend to 15 days, out of those 15 days, there was actually only two days that they finished tennis before midnight, we had the famous 3.39 am finish. I know there was many others that were around 1am. It doesn't, it doesn't quite seem right, we've got something that we've got to get right. In our sport, surely.

Freddie Nielsen  05:48

Yeah, I've been thinking a lot about this, because I was always of the opinion that my experience with all the players is that they, they want more money. And that's basically all they want. But the sport and if this is what it takes them, that's what they have to deal with. But yeah, I don't know how it makes more money to play these matches at night. And and I don't know what the rating says, but But I agree with you, you have to set saw some sort of of limit. And there's also, I don't know, a bit of FOMO to it, you have to squeeze everything in on the on the bigger courts and stuff. And you have so many good courts, you can spread it out, you can see more matches on the smaller courts and all this, but I agree with you, I think it's pretty pointless when you're playing sports at four in the morning, what we know about the body to the recovery, and then the next few days are completely done. I mean, if you have a tournament like Acapulco, where all the matches start at midnight, or whatever it is, then you can have some sort of consistency. Okay. But when you have such big swings, and when you can play as an Australian? Oh, I definitely think okay, we got to do something about it and do people win other players, you know, getting the benefit from it with the with the players take a little bit of a hit in prize money, if it means having more saw the scheduling, would they even be a hit and prize money? I don't know. But I agree. I've changed my stance a little bit on I think you should just take responsibility on behalf of the players to make make it easy on their bodies and more and increase longevity because all of a sport, it seems like it's just putting more and more strain on players bodies, and their their physical health and maybe even mental health. So this is one place where I think it's an easy place to start.

Daniel Kiernan  07:34

But I think if we even on that, though, if we're talking about we're talking about the top coming from the player's perspective. Yep, absolutely. You know, potentially it cost Medvedev, the title potentially, you know, he was the one that certainly had had some late finishes. He definitely didn't quite look full of beans towards the end of that final yesterday. But we're talking about having eyeballs on our sport. Eyeballs are fast asleep in bed at that time,

Freddie Nielsen  08:05

but not everywhere around the world, though.

Daniel Kiernan  08:06

No, not everywhere around the world. But let's take I had the I had the fortune they weren't they didn't know what they want. They wanted maybe a bit of a Geordie voice on the BBC that there's not many of them flying around. But to do a little bit of BBC Five Live commentary. And I did the Krejcikova Hunter match. And storm Hunter was the first time a qualify from Australian made the third round of the Australian Open in 39 years. On Rod Laver, it finished at like 1:10am. And honestly, the first set was watched by no more than half of a stadium. The second set was watched by no more than a quarter. And the third set was watched by, who knows, a 10th or a 12th of the of the stadium, you know, like that, that that that was a big match for for Australia. That was a big match for Storm Hunter that was a potentially quite a big storyline. She came within one or two points of winning that match. And and I tend to think if she had a little bit more of a crowd behind her, she might have got through that match. But yeah, that for me that night, I thought, well, this is wrong. This has to be wrong. If this match doesn't have a full stadium, you know, and I kept on saying on commentary. Are you telling me there's a hotter ticket in town right now, but it wasn't about the hot ticket it was about it was about the time. I don't know what your take on this is Calvin.

Calvin Betten  09:37

I mean, I think set various things. I mean, witnessed it firsthand when I was there. My first position on it is that if you're going to start the night session at 7pm, and you're going to have one best of three set match and one best of five set match in whichever order you're going to do it. Unless both of those matches get through pretty quick. You're probably going to finish at a time that is beyond logical for a tennis match to finish. Because let's say you go the best of both, say the best of three match goes first and it goes, let's say 7664, which I would say is average, you're probably looking at 930 45, before you get the second match starting. So before you get in them on court, so you're looking at 10 o'clock there. And that's if it's straight sets, pretty average. So even then you're probably looking at a one o'clock finish, one o'clock 1.30 finish if the next match is straight sets ish. So it's not conducive. So that's the problem with that. Or you can do it the other way, which is where the French do it, where it's just one match, the night session is just one match. But then you run the risk of what happens if one match is 6-2, 6-1 six. And people have paid their night session and they get one match of tennis that lasts about 52 minutes. So there's no real way of doing it other than you start the night session early, but then it's not really a night session. So I think it's one of these, I don't think it'll ever really get solved. Because we want the slams want to do night sessions, there's two ways of doing it, you can either do one match, or you can the two matches. And there's massive drawbacks in either of them. So I don't really see how you can get around it. And I don't think that the adding in the extra day made any difference, which I never thought it would anyway, because it only really changed the schedule for the first two days, we had to the first two days now took place over three days. But once you got to the Wednesday, then everything was on the exact same schedule as it was on the year before and every other year. So If you schedule the same amount of matches on the third quarter, it doesn't make a difference if it's one or two.  And also while we're on schedule, I'll say this, although it's not particularly about the night sessions finishing, we've had a lot of talk. I mean, I came on your podcast early in the year Kierno, or last year sorry, we talked about doubles and the importance of doubles in the schedule and the importance of doubles in general. Now I went in Henry and Francisco lost. They lost on what the Friday. So I went in on the Saturday just to watch a bit of tennis. So that was the seventh day. And at 12.30. At half past midday on the seventh day of the tournament, there were only three senior matches going on. And one of them was a doubles. This is why you need doubles in a tournament because there's no tennis to watch. In the slams. Once you get past the first two rounds of the singles, and you're spreading them over that many days. There's simply no tennis to watch then. So every court for the first three courts was Junior matches. So I think that raises that issue about how important doubles is because without doubles, you'd have even less tennis going on by that stage. What I did think the Aussies paid quite a one of the benefits of that situation, which I just mentioned, is that and what the Australian Open does very well, is that it means that all the matches are basically getting watched by big crowds. By that stage. So you're getting to that there's four court, there's four stadium courts really isn't there. And a couple more that are not far off that and you're basically getting by, by the by the time you get to the third round of singles second round of doubles, it means that the stadiums are full on every one, which I did think was quite good. But the scheduling, I don't think we're going to get round while we're going to have I don't think we're going to find a way to get round it while we're having night matches. I mean, one of the days, I forget which day it was, but it was on Margaret Court I think, where there was two hours, there were just two hours dead time with nothing on it on Margaret Court before the night session started. And then I think the night session ended up going until about one or two,

Daniel Kiernan  13:53

that was the one that they they offered Sabalenka and her opponent to move courts, which obviously caused caused a problem then for a quality of who was going on which court and you know, obviously, probably rightly so I think Sabalenka turned around and said, Well, why don't you put I think it was the Rublev- De Minaur match maybe wanting to put that match on Margaret Court, you know, so that I think there's always going to be those things. The other thing that we had this time Freddie, I was thinking I felt like it French Open last year it felt like there's a lot of five set matches, but it kind of really seemed to go down. Going into going into the into the second week. Wheras the Australian Open this time it actually equal the 1983 US Open and had 35 five set matches, including a record breaking 20 1st round five set matches and of those 35, five of those matches actually play a won the first two sets that ended up losing in five sets. You know, and obviously it brings up you know, one of the one of the things that we've talked about a lot is get rid of the five setters. It's not it's not conducive to the way that tennis is going. Obviously, it then fits into what we're talking about with the scheduling about fitting in those, those two night matches. But I quite liked what Mark Petchey said on, on on Twitter, he talked. And I'm a one of this as well, I like to see the five sets, I think it brings the drama. And I also like that we can then compare through the ages, you know, people playing the same scoring system, but he suggests that maybe they change when the ball is out of play. So he's saying if the if it's zero to four shots, you have 15 seconds, five to 8 25, nine plus, you have 35 seconds, but then rather than sitting down at change of ends, you have 60 seconds to make your way down to the other end. So I guess in summary, for me, what you're saying is, let's get the ball in play more. Let's take away the the players that are strategically using the shot clock and and all of that dead time. What do you think of that?

Freddie Nielsen  16:17

I think it was a decent enough argument where you used to remember looking back at the the old days with with the great matches with Sampras and Agassi and whatnot, and they barely used the towel, there was almost not enough time to watch the replays between the points. And now you can have it from 18 different angles. However, the counter argument to that would be that they're then able to compete at a higher level now. And and the quality of the matches that you do watch will get better. And that leads to the question, are we trying to get the matches done? Or are we trying to get the matches done as in as high quality as possible? I think there's something to be to be done in the with the with the shot clock situation, I think there could be something to be played with. But yeah, I don't know if it would make that much of a difference. But maybe it would be. I think that five set matches should be here to stay and, well, if we can find a solution to make that happen. And what you said there is a pretty decent solution. I'm pretty boring with these kinds of things because I'm always pro-no change. But but if it makes it better, then okay. But I do think it's vital that the Grand Slams are best of five sets, because it will ensure that in more cases than not the better player will win. And I think it would, it would change history a lot. If you all of a sudden had slam winners best of three sets. I think if you compare slam winners to mastered 1000 winners, it's vastly different. And I think it's vital for the slams, that they're the most difficult to win and the best players are winning. So I don't think that that should ever be touched with.

Daniel Kiernan  18:01

Well, we know that statistically marches are getting longer. You know, that's that's, that's been proven. And I think that was Medvedev, it will be played over 24 hours of tennis on this occasion, which is he joked in his press conference, at least I'm breaking some records, you know, and that was that his brain broken, I think it was 24 hours and 17 minutes or whatever it was. Now the time before that. The record was Carlos Alcaraz at the 2022 US Open, and that he played for a total of 23 hours and 39 minutes. So it's been, you know, very much proven that the matches are getting longer. Is it because the rallies are getting longer? I'm not sure statistically they are.

Freddie Nielsen  18:46

I was gonna say that. I think there's, I think there's something today with the surface and the balls and it's more tough on the body. Whereas back in the days, it was a little bit faster, especially at the US Open Wimbledon and, and Australian Open. So it's also tougher. So in that sense, instead of changing the scoring system, maybe they should make some of the slams faster. So it's not as tough for the body. Some something like that. Because every the tennis is the same everywhere. Now all the slams. You can play the same tennis, you can hit the same way you the balls are heavier, there's not really the serve and volley, you know, I'm almost expecting a big rally every big point. And maybe that's the place to start by playing around with the conditions more than than the actual time in between assembling.

Daniel Kiernan  19:33

And Cal I'm not sure I'm not sure some of the Brits would want a different condition or longer matches because and when I turned up and I walked in to Melbourne Park, literally I'd been in two minutes, and I looked up on the screen and there was Ryan Peniston, the British lad playing in the first round of qualifying and he was serving I belief serving at nine four up in the third set, tie break super tight break at six all, and he was having full body cramps. Now he kind of heroically found a kind of slash forehand at nine, seven to get over the line against Emar. But then we also had Fran Jones, who at four up in the third set at full body cramps at for all I mean, it was quite difficult seeing her the way it coming off the court, she was in a lot of pain. And then we had Jack Draper, who famously almost went massively viral, more so than anything else at the Aussie Open because he almost puked in the face of his opponent as he was shaking hands at the end of his five set match. He just managed to get the handshake and then make his way to the, to the bin. The conditions were pretty tough, certainly on those first few days, and it seemed like the Brits, it seemed to be happening to the Brits more than anybody else.

Calvin Betten  20:56

Yeah. I mean, I don't know whether he, whether it did or whether we just pay more attention to the Brits. I mean, he's such a strange situation with in Melbourne with with the climate, because we really experienced all sorts of different stuff. And I was only there for a week, like we had some of the hottest temperatures that I've ever been in. We had a day where it rained all day when my lads were playing. And then we had a few days where it wasn't particularly warm at all. It was basically like a moderate British spring day, really. So I think it's just difficult to, to plan for that. I mean, body cramps has just a weird wrong side. I know both I know Peno and I know Fran really well. And I know that they they don't have any issues with fitness. Off the bat, I think they're both very fit individuals who work hard. So I don't really see what else you can do on that. I assume that they're both very professional, and they take on their hydration and that kind of thing. So I think it's just one of those. I mean, I seen it I was in Thailand the week before and Lucas Pouille was making the final in that tournament, and cleaned everyone out. The whole week destroyed. Everybody got to three two up in the final and had a full body cramp. But that was that was at three, two. So you know what? No way that he I think I don't think he'd lost more than about four games in a set all week. So it wasn't, it wasn't a physical issue for him. And then at three two in a final, he just had full body cramp had to pull out with the final. So, you know, I think it's just one of those things that comes in, there's no accounting for it, isn't it. But I do think going back to the actual length of matches, I entirely agree that, that a lot of this has to go on balls and surface that we've that we've slowed the game down so much a few years ago. But also, the players don't help themselves on this. Because I do think I'm not entirely sure about this idea of reducing the amount of time between points because I've watched a bit of the Ulimate Tennis Showdown where I think it was, I don't know how many seconds it was, but the whole thing was just too rushed. Like you couldn't settle into the point. And it's alright, in the early stages of tournaments, when, you know, there might be the odd rally that and early on in the match where it's, you know, players are taken a bit long. But like yesterday, for example, in the final as a viewer, you want the match to marinate in the in between the points. You know, when it's getting when the drama hypes up and that kind of thing. You don't want that one point to finish and then straight into the next point. You want to know what's going on. You want that you want the commentators to talk a little bit, find out what happened in the point you that's the viewing experience of it

Daniel Kiernan  23:43

As a tennis purist, yeah.

Calvin Betten  23:45

Yeah. But I think it's like it's like in any sport, you know, look, football, the balls in play, I think on average now 55 minutes out of 90. You know, you watch cricket. There's about a minute and a half between balls, sometimes you have to have some dead time. I don't know how you manage that. Because some dead time is good, I think. And some isn't. I do think I don't want to get rid of best the five, it will happen. I'm sure of it, they'll get rid of it. Because the way that it's moving, everything is pointing to the players wanting to play less tennis all the time. And it sooner or later, they'll decide why are we doing best the five, we can get the same amount of money with Best of three. And then once it's that will be down into third set champions tie breaks. I don't agree with it. I wish this generation of players weren't like that. But they are they'll figure out how we can get the same amount of money for less work.

Freddie Nielsen  24:42

The one thing I will say with regards to change is get rid of toilet breaks or at least you pay a point to take a toilet break and no injury types allowed. There's also I know that studies have shown that as soon as there's an injury time viewership just goes down because they don't want to sit around and wait for that.

Calvin Betten  24:58

I mean there's that again. And it's again, that's on the players because we know that players take players out. I'm going to say now that 80% of injury timeouts are nothing to do with injuries. Players are taking them when they know that they're not injured. They're doing it is purely as a gamesmanship issue. And I've seen it happen. There are some times where and toilet breaks. And toilet breaks. Yeah, 100%. But again, I think that has to go on the players, the players have to take responsibility for this. They know they're doing it happens all the time. You know, it's coming all the time. And to be honest, as coaches, we probably advise it as well. If you're losing, we're gonna go like, why don't you go to the toilet, like call a timeout, or that kind of thing, It's just, it's just one of those things.

Freddie Nielsen  25:47

And I think that's why you got to legislate against it, because players can be trusted, because you would take advantage of those loopholes in the rules. And, like with the injury time thing, I mean, if, like you said, it's gamesmanship, and I would like to see a percentage, how many injury times are taken from players that are behind on the score, that's probably a majority. And if you have a really important injury, I mean, assessment plus three minutes is not going to make a difference. And if you had something that needed quick fixing, then you do it in the change show, or you get a time violation as much time they will take because if you really needed it, and I think the one time a year where somebody would really not be hurt by that rule is, of course, unfortunate. But right now, it's just being taken advantage of and nobody wants to see it. It takes a long time, especially if you leave the court for an injury time. And yeah, I know. Also, they Clara Tauson played Azarenka and she was also making her wait and taking toilet breaks conveniently and saying, Okay, take a short break, but you play a point to start moving. You started 15. Next game, let's see how many total breaks you'll have to actually take. I

Calvin Betten  26:55

think it the same as that as well. I mean, the the time violation rule is just borderline pointless. It only makes sense. Why are we not just going if you get a tie, if you if you don't meet the shot clock, you lose your first serve anyway, why do you get a warning, and then you lose the first serve the next time, it should be straightforward. If you miss the first one, you get you lose your first serve. If you miss another one, you lose the point. That's the way to deal with it. Why do they need a warning first? And also that it's counterproductive, particularly, and Djokovic is remarkable at this, how he gets away with it so often, he doesn't meet the shot clock. So it'll go it'll go over it, he'll get the it'll get the warning. And then he'll spend a minute arguing with the umpire about him getting a warning. And it's pretty straightforward. It's like you've got 25 seconds or 20 seconds. If you don't, if you're not ready to play, you get a warning so you'll not be ready to play after 20 seconds, the umpire will give him a warning. And then he'll argue with the umpire. So it slows the game and he gets them basically gets about a minute and a half in between. And again, that's where players are not helping themselves, they're not helping the product. And

Daniel Kiernan  28:02

And, it's an apt time for me to tell you why it's hurting me bringing this up now because I'm desperate to get into the dark horse pics. Because I've got the graph in front of me here. And it just it makes beautiful reading for myself. You know that when we're competitors in where we're trying to, you know, we're trying to outdo each other. But I will wait because it is the app time to move into what we're talking about the game changing the you know, the content that's out there the way that player's demands are and, and the hot topic or one of the hot topics that came through in Australia. I'm not going to go into in a big names on this. But I I did hear and had quite a few conversations with people that were heavily involved in this talk. And there's there's big talk coming out of Australia that the Grand Slams have all come together. Motivated by what happened at Wimbledon 18 months ago where Wimbledon decided that there wasn't going to be any Russians playing at Wimbledon, the ATP and WTA responded by taking away the ATP and WTA points. And I think at that point, the Grand Slams kind of little bit of ego thought well hold on a minute. We're not being controlled here by the ATP and WTA where the big dogs in this world were the ones that are that are demanding. The big fees from TV were the ones that are bringing in all of these people to I think it was 1.1 million people that were at the Australian Open. We talked previously how many people were US Open, Wimbledon is Wimbledon, and obviously the French Open as well. Well spectated as well. So they've all come together and I believe, quite heavily led by Craig Tiley at the Australian Open and then is Stacy at the US Open. And, and they are looking very strongly to form a new tour, which will be called the Premier Tour, where they're going to have the four grand slams, they're going to have 13, 1000 events. And it will be 96 players bit like in golf, you qualify for the for the tour of the top 96 men or women qualify. And they then play in those events. So they're playing less events than they normally do. The prize money will be raised, they will have big partners. But what it does mean if this goes through is anyone outside of 96? What happens to you, and not so good for myself and Calvin, what also happens to doubles, because they have been very clear that doubles will not be part of this tour, players outside of the top 96 will not be part of this tour. This has been floated with the players, it's been floated with the ATP who were absolutely dead against it. I heard that they were just that if the ATP don't come on board, we'll just slowly but surely push them out. As is the words that I'm hearing the WTA are slightly more open to it is what I'm hearing. But there could be a big big sea change coming very soon. As soon as 2025 in the world of tennis Freddie Nielson. What do you think?

Freddie Nielsen  29:33

Well I'm not surprised that you say something like this, I'm kind of waiting, in bit frightened about what the changes that are gonna happen for. For my for my sport? I, like I said, like, you also mentioned the food chain. How is this going to be the 96 qualified for a year? How do you get up? How do you go down? What does that mean? You know, tennis is such a global sport that if you only have what 17? Did you say? 13 1000s?

Daniel Kiernan  32:12

Four grand slams that what I'm hearing.

Freddie Nielsen  32:15

Yeah, so what countries are gonna get that right? What tennis is going to play it and the other countries that can't like can't get this stuff? And how are you gonna get tennis out to the other, to the other spectators and fans and the fans everywhere? And what, what's the criteria for getting these 1000s probably going to be money, some places is going to be able to pay more than others? And is it going to be better in the long run, but there's so many thoughts to it, I don't really know what to say. But until I get a full grasp of the whole food chain, if there is a viable food chain for the youngsters up until the tour and there's a like, I think that's the one thing tennis has right now it's got a pretty good way to move up to move up the ranks and go from from pretty low level to high level pretty quickly. But like this, that seems very exclusive. And I'm, I'm not particularly fond of that. I don't mind the changes as such, if it has, like I said, if it's coherent, but I'm also a little bit scared of what it actually means like, is tennis better off with just being top heavy? I'm not so sure. I don't know. And also, is it for the right reasons? Is it for the betterment of the sport or the game? Is it to make it more attractive? Or is it to again? What's the equation here? Is it to make tennis more? Get it out to more people or spread it out and grow the game so that you can get more people to play and be inspired to play and have some role models? Or is it to make money for a few and use that top top heavy to make money for yourself? Or I don't really know what it is you kind of surprised me a little bit with appear to say that it's so far down the line. But I'm a little bit worried. I don't think it's necessary for the best reasons. And I'm always I'm also a little bit different because I'm not particularly pro more money, I would happily take less money if it means that the sport is going to be better. I think at the end of the day, why do we do sports? I think that's the big questions. Why do we have all these things? It's so that people like to watch it. And so that people can spend their time doing sports and get inspired and stay healthy. And they they can have something to do there's something for the youth to do with their spare time and all this and this and I think the most important question is Is this gonna help this or is it gonna make it worse, but I'm not really sure it's for the right reasons.

Daniel Kiernan  34:43

I think the spin the spin on it. Again, just picking up picking up from some conversations is that below that they're going to encourage more localized tours so the European Tour the Asian Tour the North American tour the South American tour, and an almost kind of throwing it to them, that this is an opportunity for you to make local stars for you to inspire within your region. For you to be able to really commercialize and develop your own tour, that's gonna be the spin. I think, however, that sounds okay, but who's who's gonna be in charge of that? Well, exactly. And the thing about it is, however, that doesn't get away from the fact that there's some people at the top that have the power and the Grand Slams have the power within our sport right now. Because that is where that is where the demand is, the demand is at the Grand Slam at the Grand Slam level that is our highest, most sought after piece of content that we put out there and is making the most money. So they they see this as a way I guess, of grabbing a hold of the sport, creating a legacy. Is that a selfish legacy? Is that a legacy for the sport? i We don't know. We, we don't know how this is going to this is going to turn out. But from from what I'm hearing, it's like they feel that the time is now for this to happen. And that was one busy boardroom in Australia with with a lot of people going back and forth. And and I know that was a hot topic was was a was about this tour. Calv what's your thoughts?

Calvin Betten  36:27

I think it's absolutely abhorrent. If I'm honest, my thoughts are the same as when football announced that they were going to have the Super League, because it's exactly the same type of thing. And you come down to the fact that sport is our last remaining meritocracy that we have in society. And if you don't have if you take the meritocracy out of it, you no longer have a viable sport. And the Super League was the same. There was no relegation to play, the teams were selected at the start, they couldn't get relegated, they will just kind of hoover up all the money in football. And this is exactly the same thing. And I spoke with three or four players about, in Australia, I spoke with three or four players who I consider to be friends about both this situation and about the Saudi Arabia situation. And what disappointed me with every single one of them is they just don't care about the future of the game. They've got this weird idea in their head that they're not getting paid enough money. Now, let me just put that out there. I don't know if how many people know this. But if you're in the top 96 Already, even if you just play the four slams, which people don't do and even if you don't win a tennis match, you've already got about 240 grand in your bank before you start. Then you've got all the Masters Series, all the other tournaments that you're going to collect. So try telling me that those people don't earn enough money. That I just think it's abhorrent that they're going to come out and go, we need to be paid more money. Jannik Sinner had a great couple of weeks, does he need to be paid more money than what did he get about two and a half, 3 million quid for two weeks. But does he need more than that, because apparently, that's what they're saying they need more money than that. What will happen here is the food chain will break down. I'll say you'll get about six or seven years out of this. And then it will completely break down because you've cut it off at the bottom. And all that's going to happen is you're going to have those 96, IMG who already have too much influence in tennis, they'll stick a few of their wildcards in that kind of thing. They'll get some of their juniors, they'll select it. It won't be done on a meritocracy it will be done on who is signed to IMG. There'll be no one else. That's the way that most of the wildcards already work, who's with IMG, they'll get the wildcards. And then the guys who are good players who are coming through guys who are ranked 150, 130, they're just not going to get a sniff. They're just going to be cut out of it because some guy who's ranked 89, who's barely winning any tennis matches, is just hoovering up all the money. I think it's absolutely abhorrent. And if it tennis needs to stop that the guys who are a bit ranked ranked a bit below that. And the doubles guys in particular, they need to start waking up and stop sleepwalking into this situation and the doubles guys, I was speaking to a few of them over the last couple of weeks. And I like all these guys. But they're a bit they're a bit asleep on it, how quickly this is moving away from them. And they've just had the council selections for who's going to be on the councils and that disappointed me in itself. I don't want to name names or that kind of thing. But all I kept hearing was oh yeah, we went for him. He's a nice guy. Not because he thought this is a terrible idea who's going to fight our corner. But yeah, we'll just vote for the nice guys who are gonna go in and they're just gonna get bullied in there. Doubles will lose out and it'll be down to the players sleepwalking into it. The guys who are ranked a little bit lower, it'll lose out because they've been a little bit slow out with the blocks on it. Make no mistake, so I don't know if I said it on your podcast the other week Kierno, the PTPA this has been their aim, their sole aim has being more money at the top of the game, all the stuff about cheaper flights and hotel accommodation and all that kind of stuff, it was all a cover up at the start, it was always to get more money for the top 20 players in the world. That's what it was always. And now we're seeing the fruition of it.

Daniel Kiernan  40:18

Yeah, people are uneasy about this, you know, people are uneasy about this, people are uneasy about what the what the true reasons are behind it. But as we know, when when when anything comes to the forefront like this, it is ultimately money and someone is looking to someone is looking to line their pockets. And I think that's, like

Freddie Nielsen  40:42

If I can just interrupt. If I can interrupt. Sorry. Like Calvin said, it's money right now. People can really see what's going to happen in 20, 30 years, they don't give a shit. It's just what can benefit me right here right now.

Daniel Kiernan  40:55

That just is the summary for me, because I think we can talk about these for hours. And I'm I'm conscious that Freddie doesn't have a long we haven't actually talked about, about the about the Aussie Open winners yet. And, and what's happened with the players. But ultimately, this is this is not thinking of the longevity of the sport, and, and the ecosystem of the sport, which is the players, but isn't. And we talked about the scheduling at the Australian Open. The thing that hit me at the Australian Open, yes, it's the players finishing at that time. But the journalists that are finishing at that time, the whole time that the racket stringers the physios the, the workers that obviously the coaches, the psychologists, the fitness coaches, there's a big ecosystem that that makes our sport go round. And it's a fantastic industry in many many ways. And and we need to also fight for that from from all levels. You know, we don't want this to become this

Calvin Betten  42:00

It's also sorry, Kierno, I'm sorry for interrupting but like, it's like in the slams like I just raised the point there if you're not going to have doubles in all this, right, how are you filling those grounds? After the after the Thursday of the tournament? Who's going to watch what what are people going to watch? In that time, and you're hoping to still sell tickets for two weeks? There's nothing to watch and also, all this stuff about they're gonna they're gonna push this I know what you know what they're gonna say, if there's gonna be less tournaments if they're gonna push it away. We're trying to preserve our bodies player well being and that kind of thing, which is the biggest load of tripe, right? Because they say that there's no clubs. There's no close season in tennis, right? There is a close season in tennis about three or four weeks. It's not much but it's three or four weeks, right? What happens as soon as the closed season starts with the top 20, 30 players in the world. They go they go off and they do. They go off and they do Ultimate Tennis Showdown. They go off and they do exhibitions in Mexico and Colombia and Saudi Arabia, they go off and play that World Tennis League thing. That's what they do. I think I think I saw something that Holger Rune didn't have any close season he didn't have a preseason, this season. He went he played right through he played World Tour Finals don't know whether he played Davis Cup, but then he went straight and played something else and then he played Ultimate Tennis Showdown and then he headed to Australia where I think there was a week and then he started first tournament the first time of the year. Don't start talking about player wellbeing and players looking after their bodies they'll do whatever they want to do for some money and that's that's the disappointing thing.

Daniel Kiernan  43:42

Australian Open it we need to let's watch this space. Boys. We'll we'll jump back on when we get any more information. I think it's an important topic obviously, in in the world of tennis and I guess it's a little bit watch this space. So we'll jump back on that but Australian Open and I just want to I want to start with the the underdog stories. We had Yastremska, who was the first qualifier since Emma Raducanu to reach the semi finals of a Grand Slam. Emily Webley Smith a big shout out to her I know she hasn't been on this Australian Open edition but she's been telling us about Noskova for a good while and Noskova defeated Iga Swiatek on the way to the quarterfinals. We had Nuno Borges, I want to mention him the first Portuguese player to reach the fourth round of a slam and also then Sunit Nagal from India then reaching the third round of a slam but Freddie the time has come to talk about the dark horses Chris O'Connell. Not a bad shout by you he managed to get a set off Ben Shelton in the second round of the men's event and and Calvin your your pick Jack Draper managed to win a match just puked in a bin and then lost in the second round, and Gaby picked Grigor Dimitrov not sure that was a dark horse, but he's still lost in the third round. And my true Dark Horse, Kecmanovic went all the way to the fourth round as only a true Dark Horse, can do. Freddie, you want to you want to comment at this point. I do want me to move on to the women's singles.

Freddie Nielsen  45:24

Like I told you off air. You're better than that. Dan stop claiming little wins like dark horse is quarterfinal, not fourth round. Having said that, you obviously did better than me. I had a horrible event this year. I have to look myself in the mirror. I have to really go into training make myself better before the French Open. Because yeah, like my pick with Chris O'Connor. But let's be honest, I didn't have I didn't have a great great pre pre tournament pot this time so Yeah, gotta look inwards and do better next time.

Daniel Kiernan  45:57

Well on the on the women's side you didn't do so well again. You tend to see your fellow country people in your in your picture. Clara Tauson went out the second round Gaby, also stuck with her fellow country woman in Leylah Fernandez went out in the second round Cal jumped on the dark horse that we all know is not really is not really a dark horse, you know, in Mirra Andreeva, who we all we all knew was gonna go a long way went to the fourth round and then

Freddie Nielsen  46:33

Dan are you claiming that he didn't pick a dark horse but you pick the real one was that the narrative you're trying to build up for to protect yourself? Oh, my goodness. Is this what it's falling into this podcast?

Daniel Kiernan  46:45

Well, my two my two women actually one was was Marta Kostyuk, who who went to the quarterfinals. So I will take that as good on your criteria Freddie.

Freddie Nielsen  46:57

That was your criteria?

Daniel Kiernan  47:01

I thought I thought her name was Zhen, I was calling her Zhen, but Yun, who went all the way my dark horse went all the way to the final and lost to Sabalenka. So now's the time if you want to give any credit, lads, you can. If not, we can move on to the winners.

Freddie Nielsen  47:22

I will say to give you credit. It shows that the tactics of picking 45 players does pay off from time to time. So well done. Now you obviously did better. And I fully admit that there's a little bit of heart to my predictions, but when it comes to Clara, like I alluded to in the preview also, there's so many floaters and women's tennis and have won a slam have been higher ranked like the other top court Leylah Fernandez a Grand Slam finalist, is this a dark horse. Come on. So I'm just waiting for Clara to make that breakthrough. I think she has the game so so so it's half brains and half the heart when I pick her to be honest, because I know that it's going to come and I do think it's very difficult to pick dark horses on the women's tour. I mean, you you are sitting there you I've never seen so happy basking in the glory of taking Zhen as you said pronounced and she was number 13 in the world.

Daniel Kiernan  48:18

To make the final as number 13 seed as someone who's never been past I believe the fourth round

Calvin Betten  48:25

Who was the highest ranked player she beat to make the final?

Daniel Kiernan  48:29

You can only play what's in front of you.

Calvin Betten  48:30

Did I see that she didn't beat a player inside the top 60? Is that right?

Daniel Kiernan  48:38

All I know is she made the final in that we know that these drawers we know these drawers open. But now we all need to hang our heads in shame because

Calvin Betten  48:51

sorry, kiddo. Sorry. Can I just come in that? I think in general, just Just a quick comment on the women's drawer. I thought it was a pretty cool women's tournament. To be fair. I think that, you know, I was trying to think of like, and women's tennis needs a bit of a leg up. You know, I think that a couple years ago, it looked like they had like seven or eight absolute stars that were going to take this forward. And it just hasn't panned out. And in anything in sport. If you want to get viewership, you need rivalries, and it's proven research has proven that you need repeat winners, somebody who's a dominant force has actually helped viewership in sports. And it's just not happening at the WIPP minute with the women's drawers like this was probably the least compelling major that I can remember in terms of no offense to Sabalenka, but I think you know, I think it's pretty sort of faceless winner on it, to be honest, and didn't really have any really good matches. They had one memorable match that I think was Rybakina against Blinkova.

Daniel Kiernan  49:58

Yeah, that was fun.

Calvin Betten  50:01

That to be fair, the drama was high. I don't know if the tennis was that great in it before the tie break. And I thought Yeah, I thought, you know, women's tennis really needs start having a good slam, where the big players, the superstars of the game, play each other all the way to towards the end, they can just be keep having these type of tournaments, which it is doing too much at the minute.

Freddie Nielsen  50:26

I agree with that. And I think it is also what you were alluding to, to our picks that just, I was so disappointed with Rybakina. I thought she was gonna she had a big game, she seems to have a good mentality is going to be out there for a while. But I picked her a few times now. And it's always been a little bit. So I agree with you. I don't. I put I hear people talk about how Oh, it's interesting that people beat each other from 10. And then but in my view, it's like Yeah, it's nice that they're so upset from time to time. But the way I see it, it shows lack of quality at the top, and I don't like that I like quality at the top. I don't need necessarily two people to win everything and and all this but the top needs to be be solid and have consistent good quality and it proves that the level is high. And and it's Yeah, I agree with you. I don't think it was there this time around and I think it's there needs to be a little more consistency to make it captivating.

Daniel Kiernan  51:26

Is is that not the best of three sets though we talk about, you know, on the men's side, the masters 1000s have very different beef. Before

Freddie Nielsen  51:34

you get into that. Let me just say there's always been there's always been best three sets and the people have the players have dominated in best for three sets. You obviously can't win every time but you have a consistent set of winners or girls that went deep throughout time whether it's Steffi Graf, or was it hankies, Capriati, Serena Venus, whatever, there's, there's been a solid set of of good players, but we've talked about it a few times before, there's a lot of for one time when us and the people are beating each other from all over the place and like it's always been best to three sets. So what's what's the difference now then?

Calvin Betten  52:11

Yeah, and I think you know, if we go back to the 90s and some I raised this point the other day that I said, I thought it was the least compelling freemail slam that we've ever seen and Simon Briggs journalist, the Telegraph said to me, Well, you know, Steffi won a lot of pretty dull ones. But the difference was, it was Steffi. She was a megastar. Absolute megastar. So and a dominant force, so you could go, well, at least at the end of it, you have this no offense to Sabalenka, but she's not that level of megastar and she's basically and it's no real criticism of her she's cruised through the tournament cuz everyone else dropped out. But it happens too many times, like Swiatek has won a couple of those. Where just everybody else has dropped out.

Daniel Kiernan  52:49

Did she cruise past Gauff? I noticed that I was already on our WhatsApp group. I know Freddie said that she was gonna smoke Gauff.

Calvin Betten  52:58

She basically did apart from that she had like a 15 minute period where she lost their head a bit and started spraying the ball everywhere. But she was five two up in the first set, five two up double break in the first set. And then she just stopped spraying the ball for 15 minutes, then Gauff had a set point out and then lost that and then it was and then she just basically smoked her again. But I think that for about 75% of that match. Sabalenka was by far the better player.

Freddie Nielsen  53:26

The point about Steffi, yeah, obviously back then, the women's tennis was less competitive and it's much more competitive now. But it was also very competitive and Serena's era and it seems to be a lot of the same people that went, players that went deep so I think you can have both for sure.

Daniel Kiernan  53:45

Did we see did we see enough of Naomi Osaka to think that she can get back to the top of the game over the next over the next 12 months?

Calvin Betten  53:56

Probably not, I mean, I think she will be at the top of the game but I don't know if we saw anything there. I mean, it was a pretty pretty rough draw although I think we all thought that she'd be Garcia it didn't we but it was a pretty you know pretty rough draw but then she's not seeded so she's gonna get it she's gonna have to get through a couple of decent players to get back to get on a run again, which I think you know, the main thing with that with Osaka is how often she's gonna play I think that's the thing and whether we're gonna see enough of her she's she's obviously got a child now I don't know whether she's gonna do a full schedule but that's another problem that we're that we get in the women's game that the best players just don't play very often and you know there's good see some people are there's good Anisimova back, potentially a star but she just  just took a break before that but we didn't see a whole lot of anybody in the draw other than Sabalenka and Gauff kind of played alright.

Daniel Kiernan  54:51

I know he didn't play the Australian Open but Mr. Nadal did did come to Australia, played three matches Freddie in Brisbane. The same question to you do we see enough of Rafa to suggest that he's going to give us a go out on a on a high note and 2024? Pretty encouraged by

Freddie Nielsen  55:13

his level? I think he showed that. On the other hand, well, he last physically, maybe he's his body, which has always been pretty remarkable coming back from injury and winning big tournaments right off the bat. Maybe it's finally just broken down and it can't last anymore. I think that's the big question mark. level wise. Yes. He will be competitive. Will he endure? I'm not so sure. But maybe it will be better for him to get on the clay with maybe that's a little more easily on his body. level wise, I was very encouraged. I think he will be competitive whenever he plays and stays fit.

Daniel Kiernan  55:49

And Jannik Sinner. Lots of people outside of us called Jannik Sinner as as someone who was going to win the 2024 Australian Open. I don't think we quite saw it. We thought maybe over five sets, he would struggle but Novak Djokovic didn't even have a break point against him in in four sets. That's three times that he's now lost to him out of the last four. In the last couple of months. It's it's the most that we've seen over the last few years. Or the biggest indication that there is some form of changing of the guard.

Freddie Nielsen  56:25

I would say very impressive by him. Very impressed. Mentally. He goes about it the right way. He makes very good changes to his game technically. I wasn't the biggest fan of his I thought it was too much one way. But I've come around to it now. I think he's very good and impressive. And yeah, I liked everything I saw from him. I like his attitude. I liked his quote about his parents after the match. It makes me I like that we have a guy like that and world tennis to to take over the mantle. I think he's easy to root for. He has a good team behind him. Love his game. It's very aggressive obviously just smacks the ball. It's fun to watch.

Daniel Kiernan  57:02

Its aggressive but he's solid, as well. It's not flush. It didn't feel Yeah, it

Freddie Nielsen  57:06

used to be a little bit too much but it seems a little more solid. So yeah, very impressed by him. I didn't think he was going to be this good this early but obviously Yes. Guys, that was my last point. I have to step in and Davis Cup doubles practice now.

Daniel Kiernan  57:19

Good luck out there and Mexico.

Freddie Nielsen  57:21

Feel free to talk shit about me. My pics. That's okay. It's warranted.

Daniel Kiernan  57:25

We will as soon as you leave.

Freddie Nielsen  57:29

Take care.

Daniel Kiernan  57:32

But yeah, Cal Freddie mentioned that there the Jannik Sinner, the Jannick Sinner comment. And I thought it was good for him to have his head screwed on after winning his first Grand Slam, and obviously he spoke and did. You know, as a lot of these players, they don't give you a lot to they, they they say the thanks to the right people. But I think to use that platform, what he said was, I wish everyone could have had my parents, they never put pressure on myself. And I wish this freedom was possible for as many young kids as possible. And he's made a pretty, I think he's actually just been very kind to his parents there. But that's, that's a quote that's been used at academies and tennis clubs and tennis coaches around the world this morning.

Calvin Betten  58:18

Yeah, I think I think one of the things that I found most interesting about Sinner particularly I guess, in the last the back end of last year, and now is how he's developing quite a funny personality, as well. Like, you know, we're seeing a little bit more of him. He's a little bit dry. And he's done a I think he's done a few modeling shoots as well as a couple of the guys taking the mick out of him a little bit of the World Tour finals, I think he's done a Gucci shoe or something. And he's, I've seen him making these like little comments where he's quite a funny guy. And it was always levelled at him that he had no personality before that, but I think we're seeing that that's definitely not the case. He actually has got a personality he's not he's not Nick Kyrgios he's not Thanasi Kokkinakis or, or anyone like that, but he is quite funny, I think. And I think he's quite, it just seems like a normal guy, like the comment about his parents was quite funny. And I don't know if he was actually trying to be funny with that, or he was but it was you know, he was basically pretty straightforward about it. But I think what's interesting one of the and I found this quite interesting for a while that you might know something different Kierno you're I guess you're closer to that that world than I am. But we've always sort of said that, you know, parents like to say how you don't have to be a top junior to be you know, all the best juniors don't become the best seniors. But then there's that. That's not true Isn't that all the best seniors are also very good juniors. Sinner might just be the player with the biggest differential now between his senior career and his junior career. Because he was he was not a great Junior. Like he was you know, I'm He wasn't terrible. I think he was right about 150 Something like that. But all the other players who wouldn't slams there's never been a world number one I don't think who wasn't a very very good Junior. Like I know it was always leveled at Sampras, people, as you say are Sampras wasn't a great Junior I think it was like eighth in the world as juniors or something like that. But, but this one is, this is the first time I can think where somebody has. And there's been the guys that haven't played a lot of juniors like the Nadals, Alcaraz didn't really play much juniors, that kind of thing. But this is Sinner who played a lot of junior tournaments and wasn't great as a junior. And now he's a Grand Slam winner. There's a good likelihood he makes Well, number one this year as well. Yeah, and

Daniel Kiernan  1:00:41

I think I think it's a really interesting point on on center, because what you're seeing there, I think what we're seeing is we're seeing someone that's really growing into his own skin and his own body, you know, it's, it's coming out more and more in what he's doing. And I think that's a lot about the team that around him, I think, I think he's is a great role model for that. Like, just keep getting better, keep working, keep working at your game, and you can feel it, you know, and I've mentioned it a few times on this podcast before. I remember seeing him in Tunisia. I'm not sure if you were there. But he played Luke Johnson first first round, or there wasn't there was five to up in the third against while I was and I scouted it because he then Evan was playing the winner. And then Evan then beat him in the next round. And I've talked about it before, but that was literally two weeks later that he went on his run, where he started winning challengers and qualifying for ATP events. You know, it wasn't 234 years later. But the one thing that stuck out to me, those practice courts in Tunisia, that kind of people are hustling to get on and you see some of these kind of 30 minute naff warm ups. He was putting it in, you could feel it, you could feel he was he was proper, he was real. You know, he was even he was there. And I even get that sense after he won yesterday, it wasn't like this. My career is done. I've won a Grand Slam, you know, like, so it was almost just like, okay, that's what's going to happen in my career. And yep, now that now there's more. And, and I have a little inkling that we've talked about Alcatraz for a couple of years now, as the as the as the one and Alcaraz and fair play. Obviously, Alcaraz has won his couple of grand slams, but I have a little feeling over the next two or three years that we might be seeing more of Jannik Sinner then we will have Carlos Alcaraz.

Calvin Betten  1:02:40

I think they'll both be in it, I think we're gonna see a rivalry there. I really do. And I think what you're getting with both of them, I think what's going to be interesting now, and this is not me, closing the book on his career by any stretch. But what's gonna be interesting now is what happens with Djokovic. Because you've now got like a couple of guys who don't have the scar tissue, having been beaten relentlessly by him. Like you're sort of Tsitsipas of this world, Thiem, those guys who, you know, it's like, they'd beaten him, but he's just beaten them too many times in big matches. Whereas now, I think even though with Sinner even though he's beat him three out of the last four, even before that, he was all he was on top of him a few times he was two sets up on him at Wimbledon a couple years ago. And basically experience just let him down on that front. But now he's like, he doesn't look like the other day didn't look at all bothered about Djokovic. And bear in mind that he had match point in the third set, lost it. And a lot of those guys, see Tsitsipas in a similar situation would just have lost the next two sets six two six two. Whereas Sinner was like, he has the sort of way about him that he carries himself like, okay, that's how that set finished. We'll just bring my game again. And it's either going to be good enough or it's not going to be good enough. And I'm not going to over stress about it either way. And that's what happened. And it was good enough.

Daniel Kiernan  1:04:09

And Calv, I just want to finish with doubles. You know, it's a, it's a world that we that we live in, and Rohan Bopanna 12 days older than myself, and I'm pretty old, you know, like, make this body feels pretty old, you know, and to be swinging that racket as he's swinging that racket. Not only did he become world number one after he went through to the semifinals, the oldest ever world number one, but he then went on to win his first ever Grand Slam age 43, 44 in March with his partner Matt Ebden. Thought it was very interesting. When we got down to the in this doesn't happen. This doesn't happen very often on the side of, of men's doubles. There was actually some six singles players in the semi finals as well, going up against the doubles pair that was left and what an incredible achievement I believe it was his 61st ever Grand Slam. And the first time that he came out as a winner and a bit of an inspirational stories for us already.

Calvin Betten  1:05:19

It's a great story, isn't it? It's fantastic to see it. And he's been closed a few times as well. I think he lost final of Wimbledon and US Open last year. So be be hungry. And Julian, US Open? Seven, six in the third. And yeah, I mean, it's just it's just a hell of a story. I one thing I'm interested in Kierno, and your listeners might be interested in as well, because you've known Bops for years. He's kind of like now he has this very unique style how he plays now. He's like, kind of accepted, right? I'm going to serve flat and hard, is I'm going to stand at the back and I'm going to hit the ball flat and hard. And then you know, I'm gonna roll the dice on it. Is that kind of all the way he's always played? Or as he as he adapted that? Over the years?

Daniel Kiernan  1:06:03

No, he's always been that type of player. You know, without question, you know, he was it was actually I cuz he had I told this story a little bit this last week. It was actually my last effort. I then looked it up my last ever two singles matches. I played two singles matches in two challengers. One in Uzbekhistan, and one in Manchester. You know, I was playing doubles. So it was my last ever two singles matches. Were against Rohan Bopanna I lost in three sets in both. And but in Manchester, myself and David Sherwood we beat Rohan and his partner Qureshi at the time who went on to be in 2010 Maybe French Open, or US Open finalists. And I remember thinking about Bops. He's not that great at doubles, is he? He doesn't he doesn't come forward, you know, like we were because we were of that of that era of like you have if you don't serve volley you're a bit of a bit of a weird or do you know what I mean? Like you can't, you just can't be any good at doubles. If you don't serve and volley that was kind of what we what we knew. And you knew he was dangerous because he served big and he hit big. But you also knew that he wasn't necessarily someone who had the best first volley or necessarily was the best volleyer, but that was like that was 19 years ago. Do you know what I mean? And how and that's the thing for me that's just so impressive that is that he's still playing the game of tennis. Yeah, that he's that he's still playing the game of tennis but then the fact that he's obviously overcome various demons along the way of wanting to give up and as a partnership they look like they're gonna keep rolling you know, I see I see no reason why that can't continue for another couple of years as well. Yeah,

Calvin Betten  1:08:01

I mean it's funny because when I tell this story couple of times my even told you it last week in Australia but when Henry and Jules played them in the US Open we spoke to a few of the doubles guys who played them you know what, what what they're like what what happens and everyone had said the same and people are respect hugely interested from a scouting point of view. Everyone had gone like you know, bond Matt's a great returner and quite active at the net. But Bop, he hits big but as the match gets tight, he starts getting more passive. And he starts making a few more first serves safer takes a bit of pace off goes body a little bit more groundstrokes, he gets a bit safer so that the lads are playing them in the in the US Open and it gets the six all in the third tie break. And I say two Baz, right. I reckon we've got these, Bop's gonna get a bit tight. And in the 10 point tie break it four aces and four clean winners. So that's that was that scouting out the window.

Daniel Kiernan  1:08:14

Well, my, my scouting report from Bops over the last 12 months is Get ready get ready for the winners in the in the big moments, I think, I think he's massively produced and again, I had a little joke with him actually, in the in the gym after one of his matches. I said hey, I'm pleased that we got to see you clean your clean winning backhand return down the line that that you do in every single tie break that I ever watch, you know, and he had like a little smile, but that's the shot that I kind of that resonates with me when I think of Bops over the last 12, 18 months playing tir breaks, you know, and people seem to keep giving him that backhand and he takes it early and he hits it pretty clean and it's it's gonna take a good volleyer to stop d pass down the line.

Calvin Betten  1:09:51

I think as well, you know, a lot of the talk quite rightfully has been on has been on Bop but Matt Ebden is a hell of a doubles player. Second Grand Slam. And I think it's a great sort of complement to how Bopanna plays how Matt plays he's very, he doesn't serve volley either, he tends to serve and stay back a lot, which is weird because when he played singles used to serve and volley quite a lot, but in doubles, he definitely serve and stays back a lot more. But he's very, very active at the net, he's a bit of a pest that the net when when bops at the back, he's he's taking he's pressuring with territory, and also taking quite a lot of risks. And I think that allows Bob, who's obviously, at his age, I mean, he moves better than I do it at that age, but you don't move as well as you do any more. So it's basically gonna, he's going to serve, and he's going to stand in the same position pretty much, whereas Matt is going to move, he's going to do all the moving and that kind of thing on it. And I think, you know, it's, he deserves a hell of a lot of credit as well, because, you know, they are a partnership.

Daniel Kiernan  1:10:51

And that doesn't it also does shortcode or the complementary nature of a doubles team, you know, you can, I always think of that Lampard and Gerrard, when we talk about this, you know, playing the, you know, these two great midfielders but actually, as a partnership in the midfield, they maybe didn't work. And it's the same on the doubles court, you know, and having the right complementary personality and game style next to you makes makes a hell of a difference. And when you do get that spark in that connection, and that moves me by the last one that I just want to mention is Su-Wei who came away as the mixed doubles champion, but also, I believe it was her first ever mixed title, actually. But it was a seventh women's title and second with Elise Mertens. And again, one for the oldies. She's 38 going on 39 this year. And anyone that's ever seen her play, it's kind of ridiculous how she plays. You know, what, what she does with with the ball. These players are showing showing us that age is just a number. Yeah,

Calvin Betten  1:12:04

Yeah, I mean, especially, I mean, I don't know whether she's watching the women's levels. I don't work in it. But men's doubles is, you know, although it's an odd you know, Bobby's is the oldest of the lot. But there's other guys like John Julian Roger, still playing at the top of the game. He's what is he the same age Kierno?

Daniel Kiernan  1:12:20

He's 42 a year younger

Calvin Betten  1:12:21

Yeah. You know, and I think I don't think there's anybody in the top 10 at the minute. I think Neil might be the youngest in the top 10. Neil or Joe's the youngest, and I think they're 34. There's a long career in doubles. And yeah, it's

Daniel Kiernan  1:12:35

Hopefully hopefully.

Calvin Betten  1:12:39

Well, yeah, I mean, there's certain people who are trying to prevent that been the case. But as we discussed, but yeah, I mean, I don't know as well, I think, I don't know if it's the same on the women's doubles Kierno. But the men's like, as you as you pointed out that a lot of singles players in the semifinals and the last two winners of the Aussie open actually have been all singles players last year was his Carter and Kubler. And the year before that Kyrgios Kokkinakis. And then this year, you had a lot of singles guys coming through. And even the finalists like Vavassori is a very good singles player. He's still very much singles and doubles. I wonder why that is in Australia. And I think the only thing I can think is it has to be to do with the balls and the conditions that there's a lot more baseline doubles going on. There. And I know that now in the men's game is 55% the game serve and stay back, but it's definitely more of a singles game doubles out there.

Daniel Kiernan  1:13:34

Yeah, I spoke to Gaby about this so unfortunately Gaby couldn't join us. But obviously Gaby and Erin had another great run to the to the semifinals. And they lost a Khichenov and Ostapenko in the semis obviously Ostapenko one of the best singles players in the world right now. I think in the women's doubles, you, Erin and Gabby won the US Open. That was the first time a doubles only team had won a Grand Slam out of 92 attempts. So the last 23 years, there's always been at least one top 100 singles player on the women's. Somebody told me now you can't do it with a doubles pair. You know, so that was quite satisfying in New York when we when we heard that. But I do think even more so in Australia and the feedback that Gaby gave was very much it was much harder to cross and take the ball on because the balls are traveling through the air so fast, especially when they're new. And I think that probably favored the big hitters from from the baseline. I watched the Joe Salisbury and Rajeev Ram. I think that was what a third round matchup maybe Yeah, watch that one check in Zhang and they just groundstroked them off the court. Which which you which you don't see happen happen so much. So there's definitely something there with the environment. But yeah, but well done to all the winners. It's been a it's been another fantastic Grand Slam. So Carl, thank you for joining us. And I know Freddy had to leave us early, but it's always good to catch up. And we've got lots to look forward to our we got the next events already starting. And then before you know it, it'll be clay court season.

Calvin Betten  1:14:19

I'm not sure how many people are going to be over the moon about that maybe to get a bit more hard court tennis in before that.

Daniel Kiernan  1:15:29

Not from our part of the world there be in the UK. That thanks for joining me, Calvin, and all and all the best to you guys over the next few weeks. And a big shout out as well to your player Luke Johnson, who's broken into the top 100. ATP doubles for the first time, Luke, if you're listening a big well done made from everyone we made Hey, now your top 100 We might have to get you on to Control the Controllables as well. Cheers Cal, take care mate. So there you have it. We talk tennis, we could have talked for hours. As always, I'm sure some of you are surprised to hear the news that we did share. And some of you might have already felt that this was where tennis is going next. Let's see I for one hope that we don't push through with this exclusivity. I don't believe that that is the way forward maybe that's a selfish reason. I'm working in the double space right now. But I certainly believe that there's a space in tennis for us to have doubles players to have singles players to have many, many, many different aspects of the sport that we have showcased across control the controllables whether that's neurodiversity, whether that's wheelchair tennis, there's so many ways that we can enjoy this sport. And we need to continue pushing all aspects of the sport forward and opening up more and more opportunities for everybody. So let's see let's watch this space over the next few months. And as for the Australian Open, it was a pleasure. It really was to be involved as a coach, as a as a commentator as a tennis fan. As someone who is incredibly enthusiastic about the sport. I just loved every minute of it. The drama that it brought us it brought us 35 Five set matches, it brought us the blink Korver rabac in a tie break the 22-20. And it brought us so much more hand. We have lots of to look forward to throughout 2024. The same with Control the Controllables we have lots more coming your way. Next week. We have Olivia Nicholls, who is a British tennis player. She's been top 100 in the world for a few years on the doubles tour Olivia was put forward by Alfie Hewett, who went to school with Olivia and what a what a proud school in Norfolk, that that must be to be celebrating the successes of Alfie and Olivia and maybe we'll try and get Olivia to share some Alfie Hewett stories with us as well as tell us about her amazing tennis journey that is only just started. You know Olivia, anyone that seen her play, she is one hell of a tennis player, and she has a bright bright future ahead. But until next time, I'm Dan Kiernan and we are Control the Controllables