This article originally appeared on The Grandstand.
Expert picks are back for the French Open quarterfinals, which despite a fair number of top players exiting early has produced at least one blockbuster matchup: Stefanos Tsitsipas vs. Daniil Medvedev. A three-team panel makes its predictions.
Ricky Dimon: Like everyone else, I didn’t think Medvedev would make it to the quarterfinals. And if I was told he did, I wouldn’t think it would be in impressive enough fashion for him to be considered a legitimate threat to Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, or even Stefanos Tsitsipas. But fast forward a little more than a week and that is the case now. Previously winless all time at Roland Garros (0-4), Medvedev has dropped only set through four rounds. That being said, Tsitsipas is a massive step up in competition from Alexander Bublik, Tommy Paul, Reilly Opelka, and Cristian Garin. Paul is a decent clay-courter, Garin is a very good clay-courter, Tsitsipas is one of the best clay-courters on tour. Medvedev is…an improved clay-courter. Tsitsipas trailed John Isner by a set in round three, and since then the Greek has reeled off six consecutive sets while looking every bit like a serious title contender. Medvedev is playing well enough to turn the latest chapter in one of tennis’ most fun rivalries into an interesting contest, but on this surface I’m just not prepared to pick him to beat one of the world’s best. Tsitsipas in 4: 6-4, 3-6, 7-6(6), 6-4.
Cheryl Murray: Let’s get the obvious out of the way first: Tsitsipas is a better clay-courter than Medvedev. He performed beautifully in the lead-up to Roland Garros, including capturing his first ever Masters 1000 title in Monte-Carlo. Sure he lost to Nadal in the Barcelona final, but that can hardly be a surprise, since…you know…it’s Nadal. What did Medvedev do to prep for the French Open? He won a match. ONE. And it was in Madrid, which is the least clay-like clay court in all of Europe. The rest of the time he spent losing and complaining about how much he hates the surface. The data says that Tsitsipas wins this quarterfinal. But here’s the thing. Tennis matches aren’t decided ahead of time on a stats sheet. Tsitsipas has difficulty with Medvedev. He’s 1-6 and his single win came at the Nitto ATP Finals in 2019, when Medvdev was exhausted from his superhuman second half of the season. Medvedev’s brand of chess-like tennis, his ability to be everywhere all at once, makes it difficult for Tsitsipas to find an opening. Furthermore, there is an undercurrent of hostility between them stemming partially from a disagreement that erupted in 2018 in Miami in which Tsitsipas allegedly called Medvedev a “bulls**t Russian.” And while many a great tennis rivalry has its roots in personal dislike, this one seems to have left Tsitsipas intimidated, Medvedev disdainful, and the scoreboard lopsided. Medvedev in 4: 6-4, 6-3, 5-7, 6-3.
Pete Ziebron: Two years ago in Monte-Carlo, Medvedev defeated Tsitsipas and Djokovic in back-to-back matches, so–despite his self belittlement–he is able to win important matches on clay. Following a run to the Barcelona final the next week, Medvedev went 1-7 on clay until he arrived at Roland Garros this year. To watch and realize that he is in the quarterfinals in Paris at the moment is almost beyond belief. Meanwhile, Tsitsipas appears to be on a mission. He has two clay-court titles in 2021 and most likely should have had a third in Barcelona against Nadal. All aspects of the Greek’s game are clicking, especially his play at net. In his second-round match against Pedro Martinez, Tsitsipas was 26-for-27 in points won at net. Despite the lopsided 6-1 H2H in this series that favors Medvedev, Tsitsipas has been experiencing a solid wave of momentum all year while Medvedev has only been able to rediscover his again since arriving in Paris. How very ironic it would be if Medvedev would actually live up to his No. 2 seed, and two more victories would do just that! However, Tsitsipas has been playing too well for the last five months not to win this match and advance. Tsitsipas in 4: 7-5, 6-3, 4-6, 7-6(5).
Comments