Did Daniil Medvedev’s accumulated wear and tear have a lot to do with the outcome of the 2024 Australian Open men’s singles final? Of course it did. Jannik Sinner was fresher and had not played nearly as many games, sets, or points as Club Med. In a fifth set, that mattered. Sinner was clearly able to outlast Medvedev in longer rallies. He sensed this. He became more patient and committed fewer errors. He relaxed. He won.
We could end the discussion there, but that’s way too simple an explanation for what happened. It tells part of the story, but not all of it.
Let’s tackle Sunday’s match in Melbourne from this vantage point: Was Jannik Sinner amazing or extraordinary in those last three sets? Be honest. He played solid, winning tennis, but he did not astound or dazzle. That’s not even a criticism of Sinner, merely an observation of the match which unfolded inside Rod Laver Arena. This was not an epic battle between two members of the Big 3, or between Rafael Nadal and Fernando Verdasco in a memorable and historic 2009 semifinal. It was nothing like that. At 3 hours, 44 minutes, this five-set match was not even especially long. The first two sets went by in a blink. Medvedev not having enough in the tank in a fifth set makes sense in reflecting on how this match ultimately ended, but again, it’s way too simple to leave it there and not follow up in any way.
The fact that Medvedev knows how to compete — knows how to rally from two sets down, as he did twice at this Australian Open tournament — should influence our evaluation of the 2024 final. Medvedev has been through the wars. He has faced Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal in multiple major finals. He also knew what it was like to be up two sets in an Australian Open final. He had a distinct memory of how he failed to manage that match properly against Rafael Nadal in 2022.
Experience — which helped Medvedev gain a two-set lead (Sinner’s lack of experience in a major final showed up at the start of the match) — was supposed to help Club Med finally bag that elusive second major title. It was supposed to help him manage the match better. It was supposed to help him shorten points and make sure he had enough fuel for the full match.
We didn’t see that experience come to the forefront. Medvedev got tight late in the third set, when he was on the verge of being able to put the match away. In the fourth set, he missed a second-serve return at 15-30, failing to make Sinner play the ball in a crucial situation. A few games later, he missed a regulation backhand well wide at 0-30, again failing to force Sinner to deliver the goods in a moment of truth.
It wasn’t just the legs which betrayed Club Med. He had openings, and he didn’t take them. Given that this was Sinner’s first rodeo in a major final, and given that Medvedev was finally playing someone other than Djokovic or Nadal in a major final, Medvedev should have been expected to offer more than what he did.
Let’s keep in mind here that when Medvedev made his first great ascent at the 2019 U.S. Open, he showed creativity and flair in difficult situations. He can play at the net — he won a lot more net points than Sinner in this match — and he can manipulate the ball in a lot of different ways with spin and angle. Medvedev often becomes too passive, limited, and monochromatic in how he plays. Club Med often keeps a few clubs in his bag, to use a golf metaphor. Linear baseline hitting is Sinner’s comfort zone. Club Med didn’t do anything to try to take Sinner out of that comfort zone in the final sets.
Fatigue played a role, but that doesn’t tell nearly enough of the story.
It is to Sinner’s great credit that he moved through his first six matches in Melbourne so efficiently that he had plenty in reserve for the final sets. It’s also to Sinner’s great credit that after two terrible sets, he picked himself off the canvas and regrouped. Not everyone would have done that. Yet, as stated above, Sinner did not attain an exalted and untouchable level in the last three sets. He was good, but he wasn’t spectacular. Daniil Medvedev is not 36 years old the way Novak Djokovic is, either. He’s 27. 27!
He should have found a way to the finish line. He didn’t. In contrast, Sinner — completely new to the unique pressure of a major final — proved to be a comparatively quick study. Sinner learned from his wrenching five-set losses to Novak Djokovic at Wimbledon and Carlos Alcaraz at the U.S. Open. Sinner, not just Medvedev, had some scar tissue coming into this match. Sinner was able to apply past lessons more than Medvedev, despite being new to the occasion of a major final.
Sinner and Alcaraz, though still young and still learning how to compete more fully, have demonstrated more competitive quality than Medvedev, Stefanos Tsitsipas, and the man Club Med overcame in Friday’s semifinal, Alexander Zverev. Those three men have all lost major finals after leading by two sets. Club Med has now done so twice.
This isn’t by accident, especially not when history repeats itself from 2022. Jannik Sinner achieved something special, but it wasn’t merely fatigue that decided this match. One man knew how to compete and handle a moment better than another man whose track record in major finals took another hit.
It might seem cruel to say that, but the truth can often be that way.
Tennis with an Accent 