This year has already been historic for the Association of Tennis Professionals tour, with Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner showing levels of dominance that haven’t been seen since the Big Three: Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Between the two of them they won all four of the Grand Slam tournaments and three of the Masters 1000 tournaments. This raises some questions: How will the rankings shape out beneath the top two, and who would’ve won these tournaments if Sinner and Alcaraz weren’t there? The Shanghai Open gave some interesting insight into these questions.

One of the ATP Masters 1000 tournaments, the Rolex Shanghai Open, is one of the most important singles titles of the year. Unfortunately, Carlos Alcaraz suffered an ankle injury during the Japan Open, and while he still played through that injury to go on to win the tournament, he later announced that he would not play in Shanghai. Similarly, Jannik Sinner only made it to the second round before he pulled a muscle in his thigh, forcing him to retire before the end of the match. This left a wide open path for any other player to claim an important title, especially with almost all of the other top seeds competing in this tournament. However, the end result was definitely unexpected.

Valentin Vacherot won the final against his cousin, Arthur Rinderkench, in three sets. It’s possible that these names are not familiar to most people, and that’s because these players were ranked 204th and 54th respectively — basically nobodies as far as the tennis world is concerned. While both of these runs to the finals have been incredibly impressive, Vacherot’s journey to his first singles title was truly exceptional. He beat 14th seed Alexander Bublik, 10th seed Holger Rune and fourth seed — and one of the greatest players to ever do it — Novak Djokovic. After besting Rinderkench in the final, Vacherot became the lowest ranked player ever to win not only the Shanghai Open, but any Masters 1000 title. 

Vacherot’s run is simply too impressive to be chalked up to luck. Beating this many top seeds in a row is one thing, but his performance on court shined throughout the tournament. While he doesn’t have a powerful serve or any other explosive talent, Vacherot’s strength is shown with his great precision and shot selection. His playstyle revolves around hitting deep corner shots as close to the baseline as possible, which is a playstyle greatly rewarded by the increasingly fast courts.

The “speed” of a court refers to the pace of a match played on any particular surface. If the surface creates a lot of friction on the ball after the bounce, such as a clay court, the ball will slow down more and give players a lot more time to react. This is why clay and grass courts will usually see a lot more play around the net than hard courts, because it opens opportunities for players to move up the court with drop shots or slices. Recently, the ATP tour has been accused of making courts faster, and this is partially true. A lot of new materials being used on hard courts have reduced friction dramatically, and although the Shanghai Open is usually a fast court, this year’s courts were significantly faster. 

Some players, such as Alexander Zverev, think the increasing court speed is made to help Sinner and Alcaraz win more tournaments. While it’s true that the top two seeded players do excel on fast courts since they are both incredibly athletic, they also excelled on clay and grass this year, so that can’t be the only contributing factor to their success. The number one thing to take away from Vacherot's victory is that tennis evolves, just like any other sport, and right now it seems to be going through a renaissance. As the courts evolve, so do the playstyles, and it seems that Sinner and Alcaraz are at the forefront of this movement. Any player can adapt to these conditions, and Vacherot definitely did. Hopefully we see more success from him and he can set a precedent for other players.