Roland Garros / French Open 2025 [Men] - Grand Slam

[El Dude]

Fonz needed a lesson! He was getting so much praise for such a young kid! His head had to blown up twice the size; esp. after his TCC Desk interview the other day! Draper looked so small sitting at the desk after his win! What did they do, put him on a stool? He's a lot bigger & stronger I'm sure! With other winners of Masters outside of the Big 3, he's a solid #4 in the world after winning Indian Wells! Who would have thought? Djokovic to start soon! It's a nite match! Hopefully it won't be too tough, but he needs the workout!

Not surprised by the result - didn't really think Fonzie had much of a chance against Draper, who's a cut above the Hurkaczs and Rublevs of the world (2025 versions, at least). I think Fonzie can legitimately beat anyone on a good day other than non-rusty Novak, Carlos, Jannik, Draper, and Zverev. There's a gap between those five and the rest of the field, imo. I'm not saying he's favored against everyone else, just that I don't think he has the chops to beat those five yet, but wouldn't write him off against anyone else.

I would would love to see him go up against Rune. Focused Holger would beat him, but he might get flustered by Fonzie's cannon shots. A Fonzie-Shelton or Fonzie-Musetti match up would also be fun.

 

[Jelenafan]

Not surprised by the result - didn't really think Fonzie had much of a chance against Draper, who's a cut above the Hurkaczs and Rublevs of the world (2025 versions, at least). I think Fonzie can legitimately beat anyone on a good day other than non-rusty Novak, Carlos, Jannik, Draper, and Zverev. There's a gap between those five and the rest of the field, imo. I'm not saying he's favored against everyone else, just that I don't think he has the chops to beat those five yet, but wouldn't write him off against anyone else.

I would would love to see him go up against Rune. Focused Holger would beat him, but he might get flustered by Fonzie's cannon shots. A Fonzie-Shelton or Fonzie-Musetti match up would also be fun.

Don’t forget the Fonzie-Fils match , a future 3 set 7-6 in the third outcome that will last for all of 55 minutes. ; )

 

[kskate2]

Order of Play for French Open, Day 8 Round 4, June 1, 2025

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

El Dude,
I also didnt think at this stage of his career Fonseca would defeat a top 5 player
I read after the match Fonseca said his goal is to get his ranking high enough to play all the 500 events and to be seeded in Australia next year.
Given the exlposiveness of Fonseca, discourse always useful to put his age in historical context.
In this century, its been quite rare for 18 year olds to make the 3rd round , 4 of previous, 6 won slams
Only 1 player has made an earnest run that player's footprint is on the court.
Youngest men to reach RG 3rd round since 2000
Alcaraz 2021 18 years 1 month 3rd round ( lost to Struff)
Coric 2015 18 years 6 months 3rd round (lost to Sock)
Roddick 2001 17 years 9 months 3rd round ( lost to Hewitt)
Fonseca 2025 18 years 9 months 3rd round ( lost to Draper)
Federer 2000 18 years 9 months 4th round ( lost to Corretja)
Gasquet 2005 18 years 11 months 3rd round ( lost to Nadal)
Nadal 2005 18 years 11 months Champion ( defeated Puerta)

BTW,
At the time Jack Draper turned 18, he was ranked as the No 7 ITF junior in the world, also junior R/U finalist 2018 at the Wimbledon championships
Fonseca is up to 11 spots to a career high of No 54 at age 18 years and 9 months

 

[Jelenafan]

Good for Tommy Paul that he came through with a s straight set victory over Popyrin 6-3, 6-3, 6–3 to reach his first FO qtrs. It’s been a long drought for American men at Roland Garros, Agassi was the last one to reach Quarterfinals way back in 2003.

Shows yet again that you don’t know until the match is actually played whether a long previous match(es) exhausts you too much or conversely in some cases can mentally strengthen you for the battle ahead. Of course so much depends on your opponent.

Tommy has spent a lot of time on the court, his last 2 matches went the full 5 sets (1st round was 4 sets) so he’s got to be thrilled with this non physically exhaustive win.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Good for Tommy Paul that he came through with a s straight set victory over Popyrin 6-3, 6-3, 6–3 to reach his first FO qtrs. It’s been a long drought for American men at Roland Garros, Agassi was the last one to reach Quarterfinals way back in 2003.

Shows yet again that you don’t know until the match is actually played whether a long previous match(es) exhausts you too much or conversely in some cases can mentally strengthen you for the battle ahead. Of course so much depends on your opponent.

Tommy has spent a lot of time on the court, his last 2 matches went the full 5 sets (1st round was 4 sets) so he’s got to be thrilled with this non physically exhaustive win.

Yeah, this might be the most impressive match that Tommy Paul has ever played. I didn't know he had that in him, lol. I thought he was done when he went down 2 sets to Marozsan.

If Paul plays like this going forward, he will be a contender to win the French Open title.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Yeah, this might be the most impressive match that Tommy Paul has ever played. I didn't know he had that in him, lol. I thought he was done when he went down 2 sets to Marozsan.

If Paul plays like this going forward, he will be a contender to win the French Open title.

Please Phil that is not happening

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Shame for Popyrin, who bows out of RG, Paul advances to the QFs
7th game of the 1st set was probably the cruncher when Pop wanst able to convert BPs
I like the fact that Pop has made coaching changes, Wayne Ferreira is now his coach and Pop has been playing better.
Credit to Paul

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Please Phil that is not happening

I know, I know, that match was an absolute fluke. Tommy Paul could play another 8 years and not come close to that level of play ever again.

 

[don_fabio]

Did anyone see Alcaraz make a volley while throwing his racket to reach a ball? The racket just left his hand when the contact with ball was made and umpire didn't see it. The slow motion camera revealed what happened. Umpire called a score, but Alcaraz corrected him. This is the example of the good sportmanship. Player always knows.

 

[El Dude]

I feel like we're back in something akin to the Big Four era, where there was a feeling of inevitability about every Slam going to a small and very clear number of players, with no one outside that sublime coterie having more than a snow ball's chance. Then you had Federer-Nadal-Djokovic and maybe Murray, with anyone else as a big surprise. That was the case for two decades, pretty much every year from 2004 to 2023. Murray was always there, and Stan had his moment, but there was a feeling of boring monotony about the inevitable nature of Slams.

Now it is Sinner or Alcaraz, and maybe Novak if he has a good day at the office. There's still the possibility of a surprise, and two greats is a lot less hegemonic than "three and a half," so there's a bit more opportunity to sneak in and win one. But I just hope it doesn't stay back-and-forth between just the two of them for two long.

The top surprise candidates, in order, are probably: Draper, Zverev, maybe Musetti on clay, possibly Rune, though he's looking more and more like the new FAA in terms of disappointment. I suppose Paul or De Minaur could win a Slam opportunistically, but no one else is there yet (and I kind of chuckle at the notion of a Cerundolo or Borges winning Roland Garros...I just don't see that happening). Hopefully Fonzie and Mensik will climb up above the rabble and, at least, make things difficult for Sincaraz, but we're probably another year or two away from them being good enough to consistently challenge the Big Two.

 

[kskate2]

Did anyone see Alcaraz make a volley while throwing his racket to reach a ball? The racket just left his hand when the contact with ball was made and umpire didn't see it. The slow motion camera revealed what happened. Umpire called a score, but Alcaraz corrected him. This is the example of the good sportmanship. Player always knows.

They do. And I have mad respect for anyone who doesn't take a point or an advantage they didn't earn. Now if we can just get more players onboard to diffuse stalling tactics (MTO's, potty breaks, change kits just to breakup momentum) what a wonderful world it would be.

 

[Jelenafan]

I feel like we're back in something akin to the Big Four era, where there was a feeling of inevitability about every Slam going to a small and very clear number of players, with no one outside that sublime coterie having more than a snow ball's chance. Then you had Federer-Nadal-Djokovic and maybe Murray, with anyone else as a big surprise. That was the case for two decades, pretty much every year from 2004 to 2023. Murray was always there, and Stan had his moment, but there was a feeling of boring monotony about the inevitable nature of Slams.

Now it is Sinner or Alcaraz, and maybe Novak if he has a good day at the office. There's still the possibility of a surprise, and two greats is a lot less hegemonic than "three and a half," so there's a bit more opportunity to sneak in and win one. But I just hope it doesn't stay back-and-forth between just the two of them for two long.

The top surprise candidates, in order, are probably: Draper, Zverev, maybe Musetti on clay, possibly Rune, though he's looking more and more like the new FAA in terms of disappointment. I suppose Paul or De Minaur could win a Slam opportunistically, but no one else is there yet (and I kind of chuckle at the notion of a Cerundolo or Borges winning Roland Garros...I just don't see that happening). Hopefully Fonzie and Mensik will climb up above the rabble and, at least, make things difficult for Sincaraz, but we're probably another year or two away from them being good enough to consistently challenge the Big Two.

I concede that Rune may never achieve the heights that some first thought for him when he burst on the scene, but to beat arguably the best indoor hardcourt player in a Masters final (Novak) and this year the best clay court & reigning FO champion in his home court in Barcelona in another final (Alcaraz) is IMO more impressive than anything FAA has done in a longer and visibly (as of now) declining career.

Let’s wait a bit more before lumping little 22 year old Holger with the overrated and overhyped FAA.

 

[Moxie]

I concede that Rune may never achieve the heights that some first thought for him when he burst on the scene, but to beat arguably the best indoor hardcourt player in a Masters final (Novak) and this year the best clay court & reigning FO champion in his home court in Barcelona in another final (Alcaraz) is IMO more impressive than anything FAA has done in a longer and visibly (as of now) declining career.

Let’s wait a bit more before lumping little 22 year old Holger with the overrated and overhyped FAA.

I think that's fair. El Dude does have a chance to jump ahead. Still, I wouldn't say that FAA was "overrated and overhyped." He just fell short of expectations.

Holger was finding the net a LOT today. Way too many UFEs. His overheads were dreadful, though it is said that the lights in Chartrier can be a problem, if you're not used to them. But still...he needs more discipline. He has to find patience, and a game plan, but there's still time.

 

[El Dude]

I concede that Rune may never achieve the heights that some first thought for him when he burst on the scene, but to beat arguably the best indoor hardcourt player in a Masters final (Novak) and this year the best clay court & reigning FO champion in his home court in Barcelona in another final (Alcaraz) is IMO more impressive than anything FAA has done in a longer and visibly (as of now) declining career.

Let’s wait a bit more before lumping little 22 year old Holger with the overrated and overhyped FAA.

Well, I didn't say they were the same, just similar in terms of being overhyped early on and disappointing later. As you said, Rune just turned 22 so has time to make good on at least some of his promise. But he's also old enough that we have a good sense of who he is; most players are as good, or close to as good, as they'll ever be by the time they are 22. IMO, he's never going to be the player we thought he might be way back at the end of 2022, when some of us (myself included) thought he'd be the guy to partner with Alcaraz to usher in the new era (this was before Sinner had his breakout).

Rune's having a better year than last - he's #10 in the race rankings, which I think is an accurate depiction of where he's at with regard to the field as a whole (FAA's #16). I do think that Rune will make some more gains and hang out in the top ten for most of the next 5+ years, while FAA is looking more like a 10-20 guy. I just don't think Rune is going to be a true elite player. He might dip into the top 5, but he's not going to challenge the Big Two at the top.

 

[El Dude]

I think that's fair. El Dude does have a chance to jump ahead. Still, I wouldn't say that FAA was "overrated and overhyped." He just fell short of expectations.

I think you mean Rune? Haha.

Anyhow, isn't "overrated and overhyped and "fell short of expectations" on the same spectrum of degrees of disappointment? FAA showed up on the radar (or my radar) when we were all looking/hoping for some new young guy to show his mettle and be the next great player. Next Gen was starting to peak, but it was also becoming clear that there probably wasn't a true great among them. FAA looked like he might be a good one, when he finished 2018 at #108, and 2019 at #21...at just 19 years old. He then showed the first sign of disappointing when he stalled out at #21 for a second year in a row, but then jumped forward again in 2021 reaching #11, then #6 in 2022 at age 22. But that was his best year and he hasn't been in the top 10 for two full years now (May of 2023). Given that there's no clear injury, that's worrisome for a player who at his age during that span (22-24) should be in his best years.

If I were to speculate, I'd say that FAA's best-case scenario is to have a late-blooming peak year like Dimitrov did in 2017 at age 25-26, maybe win a Masters or two in the second half of his 20s. But that's best-case and at this point, I see hiim more as being kind of like a Gasquet or Monfils, a top 20 guy who wins some 250s/500s and occasionally reaches the second week of a Slam, but is never an elite. Of course we live in an era when lesser players are winning Masters (Popyrin, Coric, Carreno Busta), so he's got a chance of winning a Masters.

Actually, as an aside, that's one way that the Sincaraz era -- at least unless and until it becomes a Big Three or Four with Fonzie and maybe Mensik - will never be like the Big Four Era. Two players can dominate four Slams for awhile, but can't dominate nine Masters like the Big Four did for awhile.

As for Rune, I think his best-case is something in the Zverev/Medvedev/Thiem range - which is plenty good, and even a "lesser elite." But I could also see Rune being a slightly better version of Tomas Berdych: a talented top 10 player who is never quite good or consistent enough to beat the best of the best or win a Slam. Berdych also had an early Masters title way back in 2005 when he was 20 years old, floundered for a few years in the 10-20 range, before reaching his peak in 2010-15 when he was in his late 20s. So my floor for Rune would be a slightly better version of Berdych.

 

[kskate2]

Order of Play for French Open, Day 9 Round 4, June 2, 2025

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

Carlos Alcaraz seems to be in great form. I hope he takes out Novak.

 

[Moxie]

I think you mean Rune? Haha.

Yes, LOL. I think I meant a "tendency" to jump ahead. You like to predict and put them into categories, either of rankings or compared to other players, this era, or others. I don't mind it, and it's useful. It's the way you think. But sometimes I do mind when you predict for young players. I think Fils was one of the ones I was complaining to you about recently, for deciding where he'd land.

Anyhow, isn't "overrated and overhyped and "fell short of expectations" on the same spectrum of degrees of disappointment?

No. I don't think so. To me, "overrrated" means given credit beyond their talent. It is common enough, and happens more often than not, I think we've come to realize. We can see the talent, and it's fair to hope and even expect, or predict, but it's the x-factor that so many are missing. Over-hyped is different. That's the media, and sometimes it is to their detriment.

FAA showed up on the radar (or my radar) when we were all looking/hoping for some new young guy to show his mettle and be the next great player. Next Gen was starting to peak, but it was also becoming clear that there probably wasn't a true great among them. FAA looked like he might be a good one, when he finished 2018 at #108, and 2019 at #21...at just 19 years old. He then showed the first sign of disappointing when he stalled out at #21 for a second year in a row, but then jumped forward again in 2021 reaching #11, then #6 in 2022 at age 22. But that was his best year and he hasn't been in the top 10 for two full years now (May of 2023). Given that there's no clear injury, that's worrisome for a player who at his age during that span (22-24) should be in his best years.

If I were to speculate, I'd say that FAA's best-case scenario is to have a late-blooming peak year like Dimitrov did in 2017 at age 25-26, maybe win a Masters or two in the second half of his 20s. But that's best-case and at this point, I see hiim more as being kind of like a Gasquet or Monfils, a top 20 guy who wins some 250s/500s and occasionally reaches the second week of a Slam, but is never an elite. Of course we live in an era when lesser players are winning Masters (Popyrin, Coric, Carreno Busta), so he's got a chance of winning a Masters.

Actually, as an aside, that's one way that the Sincaraz era -- at least unless and until it becomes a Big Three or Four with Fonzie and maybe Mensik - will never be like the Big Four Era. Two players can dominate four Slams for awhile, but can't dominate nine Masters like the Big Four did for awhile.

As for Rune, I think his best-case is something in the Zverev/Medvedev/Thiem range - which is plenty good, and even a "lesser elite." But I could also see Rune being a slightly better version of Tomas Berdych: a talented top 10 player who is never quite good or consistent enough to beat the best of the best or win a Slam. Berdych also had an early Masters title way back in 2005 when he was 20 years old, floundered for a few years in the 10-20 range, before reaching his peak in 2010-15 when he was in his late 20s. So my floor for Rune would be a slightly better version of Berdych.

This is what I was talking about, above. I get that you think like this, and it's useful, in some ways, but as a predictor of the future, I don't always agree with it. Especially of young players. I think Rune could yet surprise us. He does have a lot of raw talent and power. And an inclination to be agressive and with a will to win. He's just lacking discipline, and structure. But I've said that (well, with far less conviction) about, say, Shapovalov, who never convinced me. I think Rune could still be pretty great. But he's running out of time for dithering about and needs to knuckle down. Or he'll end up being a Dimitrov. (There, I made a comparisons. LOL.)

 

[kskate2]

Carlos Alcaraz seems to be in great form. I hope he takes out Novak.

For that to happen both need to make it to the final. They're on opposite sides. Djoke has bigger problems to worry about first like Zed, Draper or Jannik