No one gets sidetracked like Coach Evan, but it’s always entertaining to read. Here is Kyrgios vs Medvedev – some kind of analysis.

Kyrgios d Medvedev analysis

What to take out of the first game? Kyrgios served ‘T” on the Duece side, and “T” first serves on the AD (His second serve went out wide).

What’s Medvedev doing? Targeting Krygios backhand corner (Box 4).
Why? Hmm!

In his first service game, Medvedev is still targeting the backhand corner of Kyrgios. After winning the first point, Nick gets aggressive with his backhand out of Box 4, hits a “puncher” down the line, and wins the point.

He gets to 15-40, plays conservatively, and hits three backhands crosscourt. On the third one, Medvedev redirects down the line, and Nick “recycles” the ball to Box 2 (Forehand corner Deuce side middle). Medvedev rips and angled forehand crosscourt for the winner.

This is a good pattern to develop.
Alcaraz uses it.
Sinner uses it.
Etc.

All you’re doing is starting the first ball to the backhand corner and establishing a few shots crosscourt before you redirect down the line. You’re baiting the opponent to hit back to your Box 2 (Which gives you the most options for strategy. You can rip the angle as Medvedev did, you can attack down the line, you can straight-line right at their Box 3, which gives you the same options, just reversed (which is cool. That option is like teasing your opponent to make a positional mistake and you holding the string and toying with them).

The bottom line is manipulation.
Diversionary tactics.
If you always attack, your opponent will figure those easy patterns out, which is why you are losing the second set after winning the first.
Simple power patterns.

The big question

Here’s my big question.
Would it be better to let Nick dictate his forehand on your return games and attack his backhand on service games? Occasionally “melding the pattern” to divert him, especially on game points that hold more value.
What I mean is flipping the pattern to throw him off.
You dig!

Check out the first point of Nick’s serve on game 3. A lot is going on there. A little cat and mouse on both sides. This point is what separates the great players from the good players—being able to use multiple patterns in a point. Aggressive shots with recycles with positioning. It’s like a Boxer.

It’s like a few jabs, a few bobs and weaves, a strike, more bobs and weaves, and then BANG! Or you get an error.

There’s a lot that tennis players can learn from boxing. The reason they don’t watch boxing (as much) is because, generally, tennis players come from money, are self-absorbed, and boxing is a poor man’s sport. Plus, tennis players have difficulty putting themselves in other people’s shoes.
Hey! I was just speaking the truth.

Manipulation

It’s funny that Nick Served and volleyed in Montreal and stays back at the baseline this match. What a mind %^&^. Whether you like Nick or not, you have to love the manipulation. I’m starting to think he’s going to win a major.

It’s funny how I dove into patterns for six months, and it changed the way I coach and look at the game. How dumb could I be to not look at the baseline in terms of four boxes or six and look at the service box the same way and coordinate locations on your serve with first balls to specific boxes. It makes me feel like a turd at times.

Many coaches and players never adapt or change…partially, that has to do with their minds and who they are off the court.
Rigid.
One size fits all.
The movie that pops into my head is “Dead Poets Society.” The part when Robin Williams makes the students stand on the desk and look at things differently, from a different perspective.
I’m not sure why people don’t watch that movie.
Even if they did, would they understand?

I think too many people “listened” too much to the teachers and became good at regurgitating bullshit that doesn’t matter. I struggled in school, not because I was stupid, but because I didn’t see the point. And didn’t understand regurgitating nonsense.
I thought the point of school was to learn about life.
Not regurgitate someone else’s crap.
Anyway.
I’m barely three games in, and I’ve already written 800 words.

The power of quick serving

Oh! Oh! Oh!
Quick serving.
I like this concept.
Sometimes I felt bad when I did it. But pay attention to the time between the first and second serves. Both players quick serve.
Why?
To keep the returning on their toes.
To not let the returner get “set” mentally.
Djokovic is the opposite.
He bounces the ball a hundred times, hypnotizing his opponent.
This is well within the rules.
And I’m starting to see more underhand serves in the juniors.
Don’t fear change.
What the pros (top pros) are doing with their serves is using them as locations.
Where do I want my opponent to start from at the baseline?

The old philosophy is to serve “T,” serve wide, and serve body (occasionally).
The new age is using the serve for a position (and occasionally getting aces and unreturnables).
It’s about using speed and mixing timing.
It’s adding first ball manipulation (the game is much faster now).
It’s hitting the same location with three different types of spin and speed.
Greg Maddux!
Pedro Martinez!

The announcers are talking about return position and focusing on every Kyrgios service game.
Don’t be distracted by that!
More importantly, the Aces are distracting Medvedev from planning his baseline rallies.
So frustrating playing big servers, so I would instead focus on playing diversion patterns and not worrying as much about the game score.
This is easily done by watching this on the computer and not playing the match.
Backseat driving.

Medvedev gets broken

Medvedev gets broken in Game 6.

What’s interesting is how you can have a plan, and it gets derailed by good shot-making and (planning). This is hard to explain on paper, but at 30-15, Medvedev was going to try to “settle” into a pattern, but Nick went big on a forehand and wasn’t going to let Med play that game.
Homey, don’t play that.

Game 7.
The first point was a crosscourt/line drill. Medvedev hit down the line, while Kyrgios hit crosscourt.
I’m reading into it too much, but let’s say Kyrgios is messing with Medvedev. Like hitting Box 4 (which Med likes to play out of with his backhand) and saying, “Go ahead, Let’s go, Beat me.”

At times, I go after a shot that beats me the previous point. A lot of the time, it throws them off. “60% of the time, it works every time.”
Anchorman quote.

That’s one thing I teach the juniors to mess around with in practice. Try to outplay someone’s strength and break them mentally.
And watch the player go wild.
Usually, this is done with “outside” hitters.
“In House,” I don’t like dealing with too much BS and EGOS.
We’re going right to the tie-breaker but before that…

A tangent

Do you get annoyed when other kids come to your house and trash the place while you’re at work?
And there’s nothing you can do about it because if you say something you’re the ass. If you don’t say anything, you bottle it up.
This young generation is awful.
ZERO accountability.
The helicopter parents caused this.

Because some Mom said at their house, “Don’t worry about it. We’ll pick it up.”
What she’s really saying is, “When my kids come over to your house…same rules, right?”
NOPE!
SO?
What would you do in the breaker?

Control the variables

Aces, Winners, errors. IMO it looked like tennis. Just play the points instinctually and let the chips fall where they may.

Tie-breakers are weird to me, anyway. How do you stay focused on strategy when you’re switching servers every two serves? Should you play one strategy? For both the serve and return games and possibly flip it mid-breaker?

One thing I never thought of until this moment is whether should you think about where your opponent is positioned. For instance, should you serve some Deuce “T” s and return to the same spot to start the point? And then serve wide and hit the same location on the first ball. For the first few points anyway.

There’s consistency in that, and you can control the variables.
Kind of.
I will mess around with that theory next time I play breakers.
Put the opponent in one location to start the point, whether serving or returning.
I’ll get back to you on that.
I’m curious about that.

Four hours. Four pages. One set.
Geez.
I need to get a life.
(Rain day).
And I need to go to the grocery store.
Adios.