It’s Day 12 of the Australian Open and its women’s semifinal day — an absolute favourite time of each Grand Slam as these are the four players that are flagged for various reasons for the current season and the one to follow when these kind of results are achieved. In previous pieces exclusively shared for the 2024 Australian Open, I’ve taken a step back and focused on core metrics. These include the 7 Keys to the newest release “How to Develop a Top 10 Tennis Ranking: the Power of the 8th Key”. But what I am yet to share is a more refined take and one that is more explicit as to why a player will move the marker and potentially claim that maiden Grand Slam or replicated success.
Both Sabalenka and Gauff hold one Grand Slam Championship a piece which means they’re both primed to achieve replicated success if their metrics continue along their current trajectory. For those who are not familiar, replicated success is more than one Grand Slam and as more scientifically extrapolated in “What is Your Game Missing, to Win?”. I can still recall when I stumbled across this and figured it out. I was beside myself — in a very good way! Fancy unraveling how to Win more than one Grand Slam and to know more explicitly what a tennis player (and coach) needs to do to get to this level of play.
This is where science rocks. Like, literally rocks my socks off to be able to share these kind of data intense outcomes.
But this is a rematch of the US Open final in the Australian Open semifinal which should very well be another final — but that’s the nature of the draw. Either way, it’s 2-2 and even though this will become available after the result, I thought it would be fun to share a few key snippets from both Sabalenka and Gauff that are void from any commentary you may have heard. Because this is where it gets interesting.
Believe it or not, Gauff is primed to Win her next Grand Slam but her greatest asset is in her ability to gauge those patterns of play and to execute. The irony here is that the same applies to Sabalenka. So how does one defeat the other? Contrary to popular belief it comes down to their frequency in their metrics. I hope by this point you’re familiar with them and that you’ve heard me rattle them off almost on repeat. Why? Because again, this is how substantial these metrics are.
Nope, strategy can be pushed aside. At this level of play you’re on an even playing field. But what’s not ‘even’ is the level of consistency in the respective patterns. And by patterns this is where the opponents game falls apart courtesy of the forerunner keeping their patterns in check.
For example, Sabalenka is up 4-2 at this point courtesy of Gauff’s metrics slightly fluctuating — momentum isn’t as consistent due to her positioning and Sabalenka is in direct contrast. Both of these players have very similar levels of play — No. 2 and No. 4 in the world respectively. And this is how the best players in the world beat the best to Win Grand Slams.
Now before feathers get ruffled, remember this is backed by science. And when I say science, sure that’s data science to extreme technical analyses of players on the WTA and ATP tours over an 11 year period — that’s excluding years prior to explicit data capture which is another decade. Needless to say, I’ve become rather familiar with these metrics and why that places me in this unique position to share this key differential and why if you want to become a Top 10 player and gain that edge — you come to me. The same goes if you’re at the beginning of better ascertaining what it takes — you’ll head directly to the Books I’ve authored around this very topic.
At 5-2 in the first set, what is Gauff to do? Well, Sabalenka is primed to close this set shortly with one more hold of serve and despite the commentary Gauff isn’t playing bad — it’s really just one break. Sabalenka came out firing and Gauff needed a little extra before she started buzzing — that’s all it takes to snag a break. But at 5-3 it is clear Gauff has amped her level to hold her own now with Sabalenka. So again, how do you differentiate the two?
Look how Sabalenka is fluidly ‘flying’ through her balls. Look at that rhythm. In contrast, look how Gauff — ever so slightly, is lagging in this respect. You’ve heard me write about how the kinetic chain is involved and how “The Science of Elite Performance” runs this home in immense detail. And if there’s a blip, the other player will capitalise. And guess what? Sabalenka has started to stand taller at 5-4 — that’s not a good thing. Guess who’s maintained their depth? That’s right, it’s in the micro discrepancies first shared in “What is Your Game Missing?” and Gauff has secured the break back. This isn’t surprising. But then again, maybe for someone beginning or not familiar with these metrics it may take you a few clicks to follow. And that’s okay.
There’s a reason why it has taken 11 Books to explicitly share what it takes to Win a Grand Slam to achieve a Top 10 ranking plus so much more. From 10 Years of Play plus your second decade of play, there’s a lot of work involved to get ready for the pinnacle of play. And at 5-5 now in the first set, this is where I’m going to leave it. I’ll continue watching now as I’m sure you are (or were) and let this piece find its way as “what was” and “why” between this popcorn worthy encounter and let’s see who brings home the Win.
If there’s one thing for sure, I know who’ll walk away with that Win and so much more, but where’s the fun if I lay it all on the line before the bell drops?
To learn more about AM8 International check out our selections of Books to options to join Dr B’s Pack to gain exclusive access to the best in the world. Not quite ready? Head on over to Beyond Top 10 Tennis for free to access 60+ episodes directly from Dr Berge of what it really takes to win multiple Grand Slams to securing that Top 10 tennis ranking. More? Catch up on our Tips over on TikTok, Twitter, Threads or Instagram for quick snippets to apply in your game, today.