Tennis Is A Mental Game
That Alcaraz / Sinner Roland-Garros final was bonkers and opened a new book between these two. Also an exclusive interview about communication strategy at Roland-Garros.
Welcome back! In today’s edition, we’re coming back to THAT Roland-Garros final between Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner. I’m also sharing an exclusive interview with Anaïs Roussin, communication and marketing director at the French Federation, about the strategy behind the Roland-Garros brand.
Sorry, the schedule’s been a bit messed up: Blame a stuck sciatic nerve, some needed break to take, and a train to catch. I’m all good now, so let’s go! :) The next paid edition will come your way on Thursday with another exclusive interview.
This publication is supported by readers, so if you like what you’re reading, don’t hesitate to spread the word, try a paid subscription, like this post, or leave a comment, as it helps TSS discoverability. You can also prefer to buy me a cuppa!
ROLAND-GARROS (H)
Tennis Is A Mental Game
Honestly, what else is there to say? Tennis Is Mental, in all senses of the word. I’m not going to add my voice to the contest of superlatives that’s been going on since Sunday. I always feel all this kind of cringe, not going to lie. It took 5h29 for the dice to roll on one side during that epic final between World No.1 Jannik Sinner and World No.2 Carlos Alcaraz. And so it took 5h29 to cement this rivalry in a “Now, We’re Talking” moment. Maybe all these questions about how they would or would not end up deserving the Big 4 comparison triggered that performance!
You don’t cement this type of blockbuster-like rivalry in any other places than Grand Slam finals, and this is what happened in Paris. Next time they face each other, these will be the scars left. This will be the bar. Now, the stakes between these two young players have been raised. They’re officially in each other’s way. Think Novak Djokovic against Rafael Nadal in this monster of a final in Melbourne in 2012 or Nadal against Roger Federer at Wimbledon in 2008. Or Andy Murray against Djokovic at the US Open 2012. Alcaraz and Sinner had their first one. Great, now let’s try to keep this going for over a decade! Ah!
This year, Carlos Alcaraz won the Roland-Garros final he should have lost.
Last year, Carlos Alcaraz won the Roland-Garros final he was supposed to win because losing to Alexander Zverev here would have made no sense for the legacy he had started to build. He had overcome Sinner in the semifinals and found a way to push through to win that final he was always supposed to win. This year, Carlos Alcaraz won the Roland-Garros final he should have lost. It’s not only the three consecutive match points that Sinner lost more than Alcaraz saved, it’s also being two sets and a break down. It’s also Sinner serving for it and then being up in the tie-break. Alcaraz spent 80% of this match with his back on the wall.
But this year, like the last, Alcaraz showed what still pushes him a tiny bit above Sinner. His mental game is still a tiny bit above the Italian’s, and because he won his Grand Slam finals the very hard way in Paris last year and at Wimbledon in 2023, he knows how to suffer that extra suffering in the last stretch of the stretch. Sinner, somehow, had it too easy, even in that first title in Melbourne, coming back from two sets down. It’s rough, but Sinner has been zoning so hard on this Tour for over a year now that he wasn’t made to suffer enough to go over that last hurdle in Paris.
It’s impossible not to feel heartbroken for Sinner (and his mom, omg) after that final. He had it, he let it go, and then he couldn’t prevent Alcaraz from taking it away. It’s also impossible not to be amazed at Alcaraz’s rage to win when knife-on-throat. Nothing in his body language for 5h29 said he was doubting he could win. Nothing. The way he served and the depth of shots he found, too, when down these three match points, was impressive. He was very smart tactically throughout that match. That’s the other tiny bit explaining Sinner’s loss: On these massive points and from then on, his choice-making wavered. He went too much on that Alcaraz’s forehand on big points. He also attacked the wrong balls. And it reminded me of the talk I had with his co-coach, Darren Cahill, about Sinner liking these big shots but needing to go for them on the right ball. After 5h29, it’s not the details that make the difference; it’s a detail of the detail. And luck. A luck you provoke either for you or against you.
Alcaraz, in a perfect Nadal’s heir way, made that dice roll one last time for him
Alcaraz, in a perfect Nadal’s heir way, made that dice roll one last time for him because he found a way to get that right arm to loosen up at the moments it had all the reason to get tight. The opposite happened to Sinner. But by coming back one last time in that fifth set, when honestly he seemed done after missing such a huge chance, he proved to himself and the rest of the world that he really has it in him to suffer, go through it, and still ends the winner. I’m tempted to think that coming back to 5-5 in that fifth set could be the key to healing from that. He didn’t crumble; he kept fighting: it’s something you can build on.
What I have no doubt he and his team will use to bounce back from that is a simple fact: Jannik Sinner’s improving pace is bonkers. He has closed the gap on clay against Alcaraz. He tore through that draw. And, scariest for the rest of the field, the margin for improvement remains. Like, can he become more creative? Get a net game? Fix what remains of a forehand that can betray him at the worst time way more than his backhand? Can he steady that first serve? Move even better for his eight? Also, physically, the Italian, who used not to be trusted over the three-hour mark, played 5h29 against the ultimate physical test. And all of this, having returned to the Tour only a few weeks ago. If that loss doesn’t sink his brain for too long, Sinner will keep turning into a ruthless ruler.
That’s also what, for sure, Alcaraz and his team are going to plan for once they’re done celebrating this title and being relieved they didn’t abdicate on clay against Sinner. Alcaraz has lost all his margin in the game against Sinner, but he still has that mental edge in a rivalry he leads 8-4. Now he needs to find ways to get some tiny margin back in the game because if he ever loses that mental edge, his fort will fall. He’s the artist, and it should stay that way: the more tough to predict he is, the better against Sinner. Alcaraz can also improve his serve and use his great net game even more. He’s already in the “are you kidding me” good spot, so the margin for improvement might not be as big as Sinner’s, but if he can sustain the level he’s at now and add a couple of percents here and there, that could also be way enough. I also feel that winning on Sunday might help Alcaraz’s mental strength become even stronger, as it helped heal the scars of the Olympic final.
What we don’t know is how their bodies - and their minds - will cope with the demands of their rivalry, because none of what happened on that Sunday in Paris was within the normal realm of tennis. Yes, the Big 4 did it for over a decade, but that remains a cosmic tennis blink in the sport’s history. I’d hate for injuries to decide that rivalry, so I hope the right decisions will continue to be made.
It’s impossible, after watching Alcaraz win that fifth Grand Slam title and the second in a row in Paris, not to have flashbacks of Nadal against Djokovic and how Nadal fought tooth and nail as long as he could to keep the upper hand in that rivalry. How it pushed them both to heights we never thought existed. One of my first thoughts after that match was about how Sinner should page Djokovic to ask how he healed from going through that numerous times (hum, I have written a book about that, by the way).
One of my other thoughts was about how Sinner might have pushed the control button too hard on his emotional level. When Alcaraz already knows when to let it go. Sinner didn’t show any frustration - or anything at all - before 4h30 when he threw a racquet on the ground. He didn’t let go either when he lost. He showed very little overall to the crowd. I totally understand that getting his emotions under control has been a key part of his rise, also because he could get very nervous in big moments when he was younger. I just think that at some point, all the biggest champions got through their last hurdle by letting it all go. Sometimes, to go past your last limit, you need to open up and be carried by whatever there is inside that can carry you. Alcaraz puts the last of his guts out there, even trying to see if he had bonus ones hiding.
FIRE AND ICE
It’d also have been a smart move for Sinner on these match points to add a layer of pressure on Alcaraz by getting the crowd going by showing he was about to jump on the prey. I can’t remember which coach told me that one day, wondering if it wasn’t Cahill again, that when you played the Big 4, you had to wake them up, you had to show them you were there, or else they would stay on autopilot, running on you. I feel Sinner, by putting so much energy in showing nothing, helped Alcaraz not open his eyes when he was 0-40 down in that now infamous 5-3 game. The Spaniard, though, let it go multiple times at key moments during that match, showing the crowd how much he cared and so getting them going for him, adding pressure on the Italian, and releasing some of his own tension. He knew what he was doing, and that was really smart. Let’s not forget he has, even if younger, more experience than Sinner in these matches.
Top players, we know, are gifted with not letting highs go too high and lows go too low. Okay, but at some point, you still need to feel… something. So yes, overall, it feels that, crazily, history is trying to repeat itself, and so Alcaraz is, like Nadal, facing the same kind of generational nemesis. That’s actually the best news for tennis, as I don’t think the Tour would thrive with either one of them ruling uncontested. Here, you need them both. Fire and Ice.
DOUBLES:
Jasmine Paolini and Sara Errani, Olympic champions here last year, won the Roland-Garros title against Anna Danilina and Aleksandra Krunic (6-4, 2-6, 6-1).
Marcel Granollers and Horacio Zeballos, who lost in the semifinals of Roland-Garros in 2022, 2023, and 2024, finally put their hands on the trophy, beating (6-0, 6-7 [5], 7-5) Joe Salisbury et Neal Skupski.
HE SAID, HE SAID:
Side note here: Carlos Alcaraz left Paris without coming to present the trophy as scheduled on Monday at La Concorde “for personal reasons.”
Carlos Alcaraz: “Today was all about believing in myself.”
Jannik Sinner: “If you watch only the sad part, you're never going to come back, no?”
Juan Carlos Ferrero: “One more time with Carlos, everything is possible, and he did it again.”
If you haven’t read the TSS edition on the women’s final yet, with an exclusive with Coco Gauff’s coach, Jean-Christophe Faurel, you can catch up here:
INTERVIEW
“It's a foundation on which we can build a lot of things,” Anaïs Roussin, head of communication and marketing at the FFT:
Roland-Garros, like Wimbledon, is a centenary brand, and it gives the second Grand Slam of the season a true storytelling advantage. Yet how do you find the line between keeping that tradition that is the DNA of the event and keeping up with the new generation’s expectations and the other three Majors? I had an exclusive talk about it with Anaïs Roussin, who is the head of communication and marketing at the FFT.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: Roland-Garros is a centenary brand, so I suppose it's not managed like other brands. How do you modernize it without compromising tradition? You and Wimbledon are the only tournaments with that type of context.
Anaïs Roussin: I'll start with the centenary side. For us, we had internal discussions, but we're really going to take the date of 1928 to mark the centenary, which really corresponds to the arrival of the tournament in the current stadium. But it's a good point, of course: We are a very old tournament, a very old brand, too. The positioning you describe is interesting. Clearly, I think that among the four Grand Slam events, we are already the only non-Anglo-Saxon too. Clearly, in terms of positioning, we are obviously much closer to Wimbledon, with this ambition that we have to always show we are still faithful to our roots. There’s a legacy, and you can find it all over the stadium as we use it a lot, same with our archives. We invest a lot of money in tools to enhance our archives. It's really something that we pay a lot of attention to. And then the modernity can be seen in the evening sessions.
“We have to always show we are still faithful to our roots.”
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: It was a big change.
Anaïs Roussin: It's a big change, yes, and the English didn't do it, for example. It's a big change also in the way we welcome our audience and build the experience on the court. We try to push ourselves and to modernize. The LEDs, for example, it's an interesting phase because I went to Australia and saw they use LEDs in all directions, which is funny and goes with the image of their tournament. We put a lot of thought into these LEDs, and there are, of course, stakes with our partners about it. We want it to animate the show, to showcase what Roland-Garros is, what Paris is, without going overboard. We’re still looking for this balance, which is probably closer to Wimbledon than others.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: In terms of storytelling, it’s an advantage to have so much history.
Anaïs Roussin: Clearly. If you walk around the stadium, there are a lot of references to Suzanne Lenglen, for example. She is our star of the 20s and 30s. It's in the decoration, in the style, the hostesses, etc. It's a foundation on which we can build a lot of things. It's clearly an advantage. We have a lot of markers like that, and we try to put them in front of the public. There is something a bit of Art Nouveau, maybe. French elegance. The Belle Epoque. I don't find that too much in other French events, but all these references to our heritage are very alive here, and it's a great base to build.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: How has the strategy evolved? It's more international, there’s also pickleball or urban tennis in the stadium… Is this like a multi-year communication plan?
Anaïs Roussin: That's a good point. We have created a brand platform that has been in place for three or four years, which you can see everywhere, and it is called “Moves the Lines with Style.” So modernize yourself. Show that we are moving forward. But how? In the Roland-Garros way, with this little touch of style. It really sums up the balance that we are trying to find. And it's a cycle that we will likely follow for at least three years. We also looked at what the other big brands were doing.
For example, Wimbledon has “In Pursuit of Greatness,” which has been their signature, let's say, for quite a few years. We wanted to express an intention, a movement that is also very strong. And every year, in addition to this signature, we have a campaign more tied to what’s happening that year. So this year, it was “Only at Roland-Garros.” And, yes, it’s in English because for us in the communication department, the biggest challenge is to find something that's understandable to both French and non-French speakers. “Only at Roland-Garros,” said a lot about the brand.
“For the tourists who come, we want them to get that Roland-Garros, it’s Paris.”
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: It’d seem that Roland-Garros, like Wimbledon, can be sold only on the name. But do you still feel that you need to convince people to come, especially at a time when leisure expenses are declining?
Anaïs Roussin: It's true that the tournament is going very, very well. Sometimes, in a few hours, all the tickets are sold. But we're giving ourselves new challenges. For example, the qualification week, which we refer to as the opening week. Five years ago. When I arrived at the FFT, it was a week in which we welcomed very little audience. And so, in fact, it remains important today, and a margin for improvement still exists. For now, we are maintaining a fairly limited gauge as we also need to set up the tournament. However, we still have areas of progress in ticket sales. And then our brand isn’t just set up for the ticket sales, as there is also a somewhat statutory side in Paris. It’s also about notoriety. We collaborated with the city of Paris on communication efforts on the Champs-Élysées. For the tourists who come, we want them to get that Roland-Garros, it’s Paris. Unlike the Australian Open and the US Open, our stakes aren’t limited to ticket sales. These two, for example, have their communication campaigns totally dedicated to ticket sales. For us, it’s different.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: Is Roland-Garros still the one doing its own thing to fight for a spot at the “money table” or has it closed the gap with the other three? It seems to me that the brand has gained some volume, no?
Anaïs Roussin: What is certain, and that the French public does not necessarily perceive, is that a good part of our communication is done for foreign audiences. And also due to the fact that foreign broadcasters are a big part of our economic balance. So we created this film, “Only at Roland-Garros,” with the voice of Rafa at the end. One of the triggers is also to understand we don’t have media budgets able to match something like the Renault commercial you could see everywhere. We can't afford that. We are a federation, so the money is redistributed to the clubs. We're not going to put budgets on media plans. Yet, we try to be smart in collaborating with our broadcasters so that our clips go through in France but also a lot abroad. Hence a need for an English message, which we can sometimes get criticized for. can sometimes be reproached to us. And also the chance to have Rafa because the choice for broadcasters is, “Am I putting an ad or am I airing the Roland-Garros clip where there’s no money,” so we need to convince them.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: Is it important for Roland-Garros to radiate abroad?
Anaïs Roussin: I think it's fundamental because our sources of income growth are a lot abroad. here a lot abroad. Sponsoring, media. We also face a challenge with the brand Roland-Garros, which is sometimes put in competition with the name French Open in some markets. They don't know how to pronounce our name, and that’s why we went for “Only at Roland-Garros.” We keep repeating it. Now we need to put it on screens and on sites, of course. The logo is not so easy to understand, but it’s our DNA. So we have some challenges, and we have to raise the brand in English-speaking countries. To inscribe it in the heads. And also to show the logo.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: The French touch always works…
Anaïs Roussin: French touch, absolutely. In this signature, there's this French style, but also Paris and its culture. You can see it on the LEDs. It's the Eiffel Tower. The Parisian monuments. It's the Parisian experience. In the stadium, we have 30% of foreigners. It has to become a must to come to Roland-Garros if you’re in Paris in May or June. These are clients that are different from French clients. The closer we get to the finals, the more they increase in proportion. If we're transparent, they often have more purchasing power, so it creates additional revenue for us. It's a very interesting audience to get, for sure.
“In the stadium, we have 30% of foreigners.”
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: The generations have changed. When I first came to Roland, there was only tennis. Now there is pickleball and padel. It's also a generation that doesn't stand still. How do you get them, and how do you keep them?
Anaïs Roussin: The federation that organizes Roland-Garros is, before everything else, a federation, so the promotion of these different practices is at the heart of our stakes. We think it's the best time to capture the audience and put a racket in their hands. Roland-Garros is a big place of life where there are a lot of activities to do. We can't force people to stay 10 hours in their seats, unfortunately. Even less when they are children, and so many of these activities are for them. But the stadium being small, it's not an attraction park as we can find in Melbourne, for example. I think we find the right balance and always in service of sports practice. It's very coherent, and yes, we’re also trying to push our emerging practices. But unfortunately, we don't have this much space.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: We all know that professional sports are nowadays heavily focused on attracting and retaining Gen X and Gen Alpha audiences on social media. What’s the Roland-Garros impact there?
Anaïs Roussin: Yes, with all the great content we developed and with Rafa's help, we became the first Grand Slam to reach 3 million followers on TikTok. It's a real strategy, and we have two big networks whose evolution is very strong: Instagram and TikTok. On TikTok, we established ourselves a little later than the other Grand Slams, but I think we worked hard to close the gap. It's a population that we want to try to capture without getting lost. Without getting lost in content. We do things that are always linked to tennis. I don't think we'll push the cursors too far. For us, it's a real issue because it's the public of tomorrow. But our bet is still not to decorate tennis with these small contents that are easy to consume. That's where our touch is, I hope, a little different. We try to make sure that it's still consistent with tennis. We have great sports content, and it works.
“Our bet is still not to decorate tennis with these small contents that are easy to consume.”
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: Since you've been there, what is the biggest evolution that you have seen in terms of communication strategies around Roland-Garros?
Anaïs Roussin: The biggest evolutions are not communication, it's sports with the evening sessions. But communication naturally accompanies all that. Evening sessions but with a model that is very French. A segment that is necessarily linked to our culture. Evening sessions were our ambition, and I think we're getting there. It's also about showing a different Roland-Garros. With a more intimate atmosphere.
Also, this year we had a very beautiful event at the Place de la Concorde, with a big screen. It was a real investment. It's a really significant investment. We may have strategies that are different from one Grand Slam to another. I know, for example, that the Australian Open strategy is really to lead the ticket sales because it's their stake. For us, it's maybe a little less.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: It wasn’t a done deal and must have been quite the communication challenge, though…
Anaïs Roussin: Of course, because we deconstructed habits with people who usually had four matches to see on the Chatrier. It changes habits a little bit. There have been a lot of adjustments with the broadcasters. It's a change of habits. They did it so long ago in Australia and the US that it has now been forgotten. Culturally, the biggest change was showing that Roland-Garros exists at night with different colors. We worked on it a lot. Same for the opening week, we did a great promotion. We reworked the offer and the experience.
Carole Bouchard, The Tennis Sweet Spot: Is there anything you did on this Roland 2025 that felt like a “Wow, that was a big risk, but we made it” moment?
Anaïs Roussin: The Tribune Concorde. The risk was the weather, but we wanted to put Roland-Garros back in Paris. It's also important in terms of relations with the city of Paris. We saw what happened during the Olympics, it was beautiful. We want to keep getting out of the stadium. We're already doing things at the Galerie La Fayette, like broadcasting on the rooftop, but it's not the same ambition. That was the big bet this year. There were also a lot of ceremonies this year, like the one for Rafael Nadal. It was one of the big moments of the event.
SOME BREAK POINTS…
For the first time in seven years, Stefanos Tsitsipas has dropped out of the Top 20 (26).
Andy Murray would do it again. What? Coaching. "I would do it again at some stage. I don't think that will happen immediately," Murray told the BBC.
did you ask her about the empty FFT seats/gender issue at evening sessions?
This is an extraordinary piece, thank you Carole, really adds to the conversation, fully agree that Sinner spent perhaps too much energy not showing any emotion and that had costs, not the only aspect to the story but certaintly an important piece. He will be reliving those errors at 5-3 in his mind, but hopefully not for long!