Carlos Alcaraz had a plan to beat Jannik Sinner 🎯
"I spent two weeks before Cincinnati just practicing specific things to beat Jannik. We watched the Wimbledon final, took notes, and worked on it. And I played the game we had decided to implement, and it worked very well."
Jannik Sinner says he needs to become more unpredictable to become a better tennis player:
“I was very predictable on court today. He changed up the game. That’s also his style of how he plays. Now it’s gonna be on me if I want to make changes or not. We’re definitely gonna work on that.”
“I didn’t make one serve and volley. I didn’t use a lot of drop shots. Then you arrive at the point where you have to play Carlos, you have to go out of the comfort zone. I’m gonna aim… maybe even lose some matches from now on, but trying to do some changes. To be a bit more unpredictable as a player. That’s what I have to do, trying to become a better tennis player. At the end of the day that’s my main goal.”
Argument 1: Lets rarely happen, so it won't be a big deal to get rid of them.
Argument 2: Getting rid of lets will speed up play.
If they barely happen, how much time are we going to save? 90 seconds over the course of a match? Congratulations.
An unreturnable or easily put-away-able let WILL happen at an inopportune time in a huge high-stakes match, and everyone will decry having removed them. They exist for a reason.
Leave tennis alone. Quirky is charming. Charming is lovable. Tradition is a good thing.
Also, the technology patent storyline feels contrived to engineer a desired end result to remove lets. Smells fishy.
Keep the lets. Stop untennising tennis.