tennis coach Dmitry Tursunov about the main characters of the women’s Roland Garros

In Paris, the French Open Tennis Championship is coming to an end, the winner of which in the women’s singles was the first racket of the world, Iga Sventek. Russian Dmitry Tursunovone of the most successful coaches in women’s tennis in recent years, who worked, in particular, with the current second racket of the world Arina Sobolenko, in an interview with a Kommersant correspondent Evgeny Fedyakov summed up some of the results of the tournament, commented on the triumph of the Polish tennis player and analyzed the performance of some of its other participants, including quarter-finalist Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova and 16-year-old Mirra Andreeva.

— Iga Sventek won Roland Garros for the third time in four years. Does she become invincible in Paris?

– Schwentek is a big champion with her own shortcomings. She is insanely energetic and quite disciplined, she has a very tight game, and her attention does not sag longer than many other tennis players. When Iga is in good physical shape, he often picks up his opponents with impudence. At the same time, she has a rather mediocre second serve, and from the first ball she serves not as powerfully as the same Arina Sobolenko. In addition, I would still not forget that Schventek’s rise came at the moment when Ashleigh Barty ended her career, Naomi Osaka was at war with the press and was generally not going through the best period, and Sobolenko and Elena Rybakina, in turn, had not yet become who they are now. I generally doubted that Iga would be able to win in Paris this time. But she did.

— That is, although Schwentek has been continuously leading the world rankings since April 4 last year, in your opinion, there is still no clear leader in women’s tennis?

– I would talk about the troika – Shventek, Sobolenko, Rybakina. I still don’t see how other tennis players can systematically beat them. Especially if they stabilize their results.

Is the entry into the final of Roland Garros by the Czech Karolina Muchova a big surprise?

– Similar things have been happening lately at almost every Grand Slam tournament. Probably Czech. jumped slightly above the head. But she has good potential and a large technical arsenal. Mukhova is a very unpleasant opponent who can cause difficulties to anyone on all types of surfaces. And if she can avoid injury and develop, then she can move forward.

– Arina Sobolenko in Paris lost to Mukhova in the semifinals. But earlier in Australia, she took her first Grand Slam title. You know Sobolenko well, because you worked with her for a long time. Due to what she managed to add?

– I think that she has become more calm, learned to restrain her temper when necessary. It is no coincidence that in Australia, Arina significantly improved the ratio of shots right through and unforced errors. Perhaps she just matured and the stage of implementing new ideas began in her life. It seemed to me that Arina had good chances to win here too, but Mukhova for her is an even more uncomfortable opponent than Shventek. But even despite this, Sobolenko’s victory was very close. She had a match point with a score of 5:2, then one important rally did not work out, and the psychological component came into play.

– What impression did 16-year-old Mirra Andreeva make on you, who attracted increased attention with her entry into the third round?

— I like her clean technique when doing jump shots. In addition, Andreeva plays very disciplined. I didn’t see anything fantastic in her tennis, but I happened to watch Mirra with her older sister Erica (147th racket of the world.— “b”) are engaged in training camps in Turkey. For that age, it was a very professional approach. It can be seen that Mirra is the same tennis fanatic in the good sense of the word, like, for example, Carlos Alcaraz. She is a daring young girl hungry for victories, whom many are afraid to lose due to her age. All this together and allowed her to shoot. Similar stories have been in tennis before.

– The best result among the Russians in Paris was shown by Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova, who returned from injury earlier this year and reached the quarterfinals. Is she capable of reaching the top ten, where she has never been before?

– Anastasia is talented and was always able to show a good game. The issue is mental and physical. If she stays healthy and stays motivated, then anything is possible. If not, then she will only have certain bursts, like the Czech Petra Kvitova (two-time Wimbledon champion.— “b”), which won the Miami Masters in early April, and then went into the shadows. In addition to Pavlyuchenkova, I would also note the result of Elina Svitolina, who returned after giving birth even later, only in March, and also reached the quarterfinals. These are mature tennis players with vast experience, which only helps them.

– Over the past few years, in addition to Sobolenko, you have worked with the Estonian Anette Kontaveit, who under your leadership became the second racket of the world, the sensational champion of the US Open in 2021 British Emma Radukanu and the Swiss Olympic champion Belinda Bencic. Who was the most interesting to work with?

– Probably, after all, with Radukan. In New York, she, one might say, hit the jackpot, but this does not mean that this will happen all the time. Emma, ​​in my understanding, still has a rather raw game, but she is a very capable, smart and hardworking girl who is constantly on the lookout and ready to absorb new ideas. There are very few such players in the first hundred – ten percent. The question is that she does not have outstanding physical data and some powerful blows. Therefore, in theory, she should play Ashleigh Barty-style tennis, which is based on the ability to breed opponents on the court, playing on counterattacks. But Radukan’s problem is that she changes coaches too often. And there was also a period when she suffered from an overabundance of attention from the outside, although now, when Emma rolled back beyond the top hundred, in this sense, it will probably be easier for her.

– As a person who won seven titles of the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) and climbed to 20th place in its ranking, do you agree that, from the point of view of psychology, men’s and women’s tennis are practically different sports?

— There are differences, but they are not so critical. There are also different tennis players in the men’s tour – both stable and not very good. I myself was a player with a very mobile psyche. If we talk about the relationship between the coach and the athlete, I can only emphasize that in any case it is categorically wrong to justify your whims. To cover the coach with a three-story mat and then refer to the unstable female psyche – such behavior cannot be justified. I do not want to say that violations of subordination are absolutely unacceptable in the relationship between a coach and a tennis player. But there are certain limits that cannot be crossed.