As it is written … Wednesday is mailbag day.
• This week’s Served podcast is here. We are doing daily “Quick Served” podcast episodes breaking down all the action from the Australian Open. Also—good soldiering—subscribe to the podcast and the YouTube channel.
• More good soldiering: Lindsay Davenport, Martina Navratilova, Steve Weissman, Prakash Amritraj and I are doing the Tennis Channel pregame shows each day at 5 p.m. ET until first ball. Modesty aside, they are a lot of fun.
• ICYMI, Emma Navarro comes by her competitive resolve honestly.
• This is a holdover from a few weeks back, but all hail Gaby Dabrowski.
• Good on Madison Keys, Jessica Pegula, and Donna Vekić for their role in acknowledging the Los Angeles Fires and providing ways to donate.
Let’s dive into some Q&A …
Good morning Jon,
Since I'm a loyal Served listener and a big Ben fan, I'm sitting here with my first cup of coffee this morning having a wee gloat that Shelton beat [Brandon] Nakashima in straights.
It wasn't pretty; but Ben was helped by Nakashima not bearing down at critical moments. A good first match for Ben nevertheless. I agree with you that Nakashima has a huge upside. Not just yet though.
Sorry about the hole in your draw (the draw pod was tons of fun this time BTW).
Best, Jenny
• Thanks. Yes, I thought Nakashima had a real chance at an upset over Shelton. Some of these picks come through (Alex Michelsen d. Stefanos Tsitsipas!) Some don’t. It’s all part of the fun.
That match wasn’t particularly close. It wasn’t simply that Shelton brought to bear his lefty serve and his athleticism. He was the better player when it mattered most. But it’s a reminder of how (cliché alert) thin these margins are. How unpredictable this sport can be. How the smallest factors can loom large. That’s an early takeaway from this event.
Peyton Stearns can serve for the win against Navarro … and lose 16 of the last 19 points. João Fonseca can look totally unbothered as a teenager playing a solid seed in a best-of-five match, and announce himself by taking down Andrey Rublev. Other bright prospects (see Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard below) can reveal that there are still rough edges in need of sanding down. Some players thrive on off-court chaos, as matches become sanctuaries. Others need order in their personal lives before they can impose order on their tennis.
All of which is to say … have sympathy and empathy for the players. Marvel at them, as they overcome so much more than big serves and the ground strokes of their opponents. Don’t gloat (too much) over good picks or stew (too much) over bad ones. Because the smallest variable can change everything.
Love these Quick Served episodes. Real questions: 1) Do players wear sunscreen? I feel like I never see them putting it on and no one is ever burnt! They are definitely more sun-acclamated than us NARPs. (Nonathlete regular person)
@lomyrick
• The short answer is yes. A) Because we should all respect the sun. B) Because avoiding sunburn is one more control-what-you-can-control variable. Whether it’s applied in the locker room or before players reach the venue, yes, most will wear sunblock. It’s funny you mention this: On Monday, the (many … too many?) Aussie Open cameras caught Stearns applying her sunblock. Also, we noticed that Michelsen had a sunburned nose after beating Tsitsipas. That it was only his nose suggests he missed a spot … but otherwise applied sunblock accordingly.
Jon, I saw Nick Kyrgios say that he may have played his last singles match in Australia. I’m not sure what that means (or whether I believe him) but where does Kyrgios go from here? Is there a chance he retires?
Peter S., San Clemente
• A number of you wrote in about Kyrgios. I appreciate some of your supportive messages, but I have zero interest in getting into a food fight with a player.
The short answer to this question: only he knows. Armitraj made a really salient point on our Tennis Channel show this week, asking, “What is his why?” Why is he doing this? What’s his motivation? What is his willingness to work? What’s his health?
You can’t just rock up and win best-of-five matches, much less tournaments. The flip side: Given his talent level is so extraordinary—with full health and full commitment; and the two are inextricably linked—only a fool would consider him past his sell-by date at 29 years old.
One point I would impress upon him, were I a member of his team: He is misplaced in this thinking that he is the tennis outcast and that the school administrators and the goody-goody honor students want to see him expelled. No one wants to see him leave the sport. Many wish he would be more judicious on social media. Fine. But virtually nobody thinks the sport is better without him. And everyone wishes for his full health.
So, how good is Nishesh Basavareddy?
• This was sent from a high school classmate and fellow tennis team member who asked not to be named. And, ironically, we competed—with little success—against Carmel High, alma mater of Basavareddy (and Rajeev Ram. And Sage Steele.)
Anyway, how good is Basavareddy? It’s hard to say. The kid is 19. But there’s so much to like here. He has a solid game. A real feel for tactics. A uniform chorus of good kid, when asked about his personality. He possesses comfort on the big stage and an absence of awe when playing Novak Djokovic.
I think we still need some more data points before hanging a future ranking on him. But there is a resemblance to Navarro. Transitioning from college to the pros without much friction, Basavareddy has already won a lot of matches. And he’s just starting. (And we will always link the Indy Star when asked.)
How about Jasmine Paolini? I think she stays in the Top 10. I’m curious to see if Grigor Dimitrov can keep the resurgence going. Naomi Osaka will make the second week of a Slam, probably Australia.
Megan F.
• This will be a story to watch in 2025. Will winsome Paolini win some more? (Groan.) Will Paolini—a journeywoman for much of her career—regress to the mean? Or was 2024 a bona fide breakthrough and she will remain a force?
Honestly, I’m a little surprised how much skepticism seems to exist around the 29-year-old. At one point, she was lower with the Australian Open oddsmakers than Karolína Muchová, whom we all love, but is ranked more than 10 spots lower. Without being naïve to the math or sports trends, I tend to go guardedly optimistic here. She is a sleek athlete. She is a versatile player, who can play on any surface—note her back-to-back finals on clay and grass. Is she still in the top five eight months from now? Maybe not. That’s a lot of points to defend—even for a defender par excellence. Does she make the WTA Finals in Riyadh? Maybe. Does she revert to a player lucky to win a round or two at the majors? No way.
How much damage can Gaël Monfils do this year!!! I’m loving what I am seeing!
Andy A.
• Granted we’re barely halfway through the first month of 2025, but Monfils has been one of the more joyous stories to start the year. At 38, he wins a title in Auckland, New Zealand (older than Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer and Serena William on the occasion of their last title). He did so with his typical flourish but also wisdom and patience, two commodities he sometimes lacked earlier in his career. And then he started his Australian Open campaign by taking out Perricard, outserving him! Allez!
It is a good reminder of the depth of story lines, too. We should be top-heavy. Carlos Alcaraz, Jannik Sinner, Aryna Sabalenka, Coco Gauff and Djokovic should take up a lot of oxygen. But in most sports, there are still rabid fan bases and sources of great joy, even if the team doesn’t win the championship. The same goes here.
Enough with the playing time police. If they shorten the season, all we would see is [exhibitions]. Let the players decide when/if they play. As a fan, I love watching tennis, and I enjoy the variety, players up and down the rankings and from all over the world. Put your police cap away
• This was in response to the usual gripe that tennis’s offseason is insufficient. I don’t disagree with the idea that we should defer to the players. (I’ve softened my stance largely on best-of-five matches because there is little political will to change among players. My attitude: It’s their bodies. They’re the ones out there slugging sway for hours, for the same wage as best-of-three matches. If that’s what they want, we ought to respect that.)
But in this case, the players are (rightly) complaining. It’s absurd that the season foot faults its way into December. And then, the next season necessitates that players leave home before Christmas. Sorry, that’s nuts on so many levels. Players need time to recover physically and spiritually. Fans need time to anticipate. (There’s value in scarcity!) The optics are terrible. That tennis forces virtually all players to board planes and cross borders and time zones makes the relentless schedule all the more brutal.
New York, Monday, 9:30 p.m. No tennis on TV because ESPN can't be bothered. What do they prefer to broadcast instead? On ESPN and ESPN2, both channels are showing the same football game (Rams-Vikings). What is wrong with them?!!!
Rich, New York City
• I get that the NFL is king. I get that tennis’s tonnage is as much a curse as a blessing. I get that there is a push to streaming. (If you really love tennis, every court from Perth to Auckland is streaming on ESPN+. ) I get that the Australian Open is particularly problematic given the time zones. But I don’t get broadcasting the same event simultaneously on multiple networks.
ENJOY THE TENNIS, EVERYONE!
This article was originally published on www.si.com as Tennis Mailbag: 2025 Australian Open Brings Upsets and Impressive Veteran Showings.
