Tradition-rich Wimbledon is making what could be considered a seismic shift this year. No, they didn't go to a Sunday start. Wimbledon is now the only Grand Slam that doesn't start on Sunday, and that won't be changing anytime soon. (After all, they only just started playing on the middle Sunday a few years ago.) This change that was made is nearly as unthinkable as that, though.
The finals will start two hours later. Instead of the 2 PM local time start that has been used at Wimbledon forever, this year, they'll begin at 4 PM. "Breakfast at Wimbledon" won't start at 9. It'll start at 11. And the reason for the change is because they think the later start will result in a bigger American audience, which I think is very interesting. (And, if I had to guess, the 9:00 thing probably wasn't as much of an issue as the 6:00 in the morning on the West Coast thing was.) So, "Breakfast at Wimbledon" has become "Brunch at Wimbledon."
It's not crazy to think that the American audience could very well see one of their own playing for the ladies' championship on Finals Weekend. The first two Grand Slam tournaments this year have been won by American women--Madison Keys in Australia, Coco Gauff last month at Roland Garros. And it was at Wimbledon where Gauff first burst onto the scene, upsetting Venus Williams in the first round and going all the way to the round of 16 in her 2019 debut. Interestingly, though, that's the furthest she's ever advanced at Wimbledon.
Gauff hasn't been blessed with the easiest draw, either. Vika Azarenka in the second round, Sofia Kenin in the third round, Iga Swiatek or Elena Rybakina in the quarters. All four are Grand Slam champions. Rybakina has won Wimbledon and is arguably the best grass court player of the bunch. So, Gauff's got her work cut out for her.
World No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka, meanwhile, has lost both of those American-won Grand Slam finals in 2025. She's only played Wimbledon twice in the last five years, but made the semifinals each time. There was no tournament in 2020 because of COVID, Belarusians weren't allowed to participate in 2022, and she was injured last year. But, her game translates so well to grass that you have to think it's only a matter of time before she lifts the Wimbledon trophy.
I'd even venture to say that Sabalenka comes into Wimbledon as the favorite. She has a much friendlier draw than Gauff. Sabalenka gets British favorite Emma Raducanu in a potential third-round match that seems destined for Centre Court, but none of the seeds in her section should scare her. Elina Svitolina, Paula Badosa, Madison Keys, Jasmine Paolini, Zheng Qinwen. Sabalenka should be favored against any of them.
After the French Open final, Sabalenka created some controversy by saying that she lost because of her own mistakes more than anything else. Am I the only one who doesn't have any problem with that? People suggested she was being disrespectful to Gauff by not giving her any credit, but that's not the way I interpret her comments at all. Sabalenka was criticizing herself and basically saying she didn't play well enough to win. I don't think it was meant as a knock on Gauff in any way. More was made of the whole thing than it needed to be.
Although, it does make for a great setup if we get another Sabalenka-Gauff final at Wimbledon. It seems more likely that Sabalenka will get there than Gauff, however. I just think Gauff's draw is too tough, and grass is her weakest surface. So, who'll make the final from the bottom half of the draw, then? I actually really like Rybakina's chances, and her winning a second career Wimbledon title isn't out of the question.
There's another change taking place at Wimbledon this year that will be noticeable. It's the first Wimbledon since Andy Murray's retirement. Plans are in the works for an Andy Murray statue on the grounds, and he's more than earned it. Fear not, though. The next great British player to follow in Murray's footsteps has already arrived on the scene. Jack Draper. He'll inherit that third match on Centre Court spot.
To think that Draper can make a Murray-type run may be a bit of a stretch, though. He's never been past the second round in three previous appearances, but that's not the reason why I don't like his chances. It's because he's in the same section of the draw as Novak Djokovic, then the winner has a potential semifinal against Jannik Sinner. Draper's not beating both of them.
If Djokovic is going to get Grand Slam title No. 25, Wimbledon might be his best bet. The seven-time champ is the best grass-court player out there, and he's made the final at six consecutive Wimbledons (four straight titles, then back-to-back losses to Alcaraz). And, keep in mind, this has been a "down" year for Djokovic and he's still reached the semifinals at both Grand Slams. Who beat him in both of those semifinals? Jannik Sinner. Do we have a third Sinner-Djokovic Grand Slam semifinal this year coming up at the end of next week?
For the last year and a half, Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz have been trading Grand Slam titles. Sinner's won the three hardcourt events. Alcaraz has taken the three in Europe. They played that epic, five-and-a-half-hour French Open final, where Alcaraz won his second straight title. Now he goes for his third straight Wimbledon. It was Alcaraz who ended Djokovic's reign in that five-set epic in 2023. He's already proven to be the next great Wimbledon champion, following in the line of Sampras, Federer and Djokovic.
So, there are three pretty clear favorites on the men's side. And it really would be surprising if somebody other than Alcaraz, Sinner or Djokovic wins the title. Of the three, I'd have to give Alcaraz the slight edge not just because he's the two-time defending champion. Assuming that Djokovic-Sinner semifinal happens, the winner will then have to turn around and face Alcaraz. Alcaraz, meanwhile, only needs to face the winner of that match. That could make a big difference.
We've also seen a resurgence of the American men. There were two American quarterfinalists at Roland Garros for the first time in 30 years, which has to give them plenty of confidence heading into Wimbledon, where you always feel their chances are stronger. Tommy Paul and Ben Shelton suffered the unfortunate draw of being in Sinner's quarter, but don't be surprised if Taylor Fritz and/or Frances Tiafoe makes a run.
Don't count out Daniil Medvedev, either. He's been a semifinalist in each of the last two years, and he has a favorable draw in the quarter that doesn't feature any of the three favorites. His seed is No. 3 Alexander Zverev, who's still waiting for that first Grand Slam title. It won't come here. Grass is Zverev's weakest surface, and, even if he does get to the semis, he's not beating Alcaraz and Sinner/Djokovic back-to-back.
In the end, though, I think that despite all the changes, I think this Wimbledon will follow a very similar script to years past. Alcaraz beats Djokovic in the final for the third year in a row. Although, Sinner's had Djokovic's number in Grand Slam semifinals this year, so a repeat of the French Open final wouldn't surprise me at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment