By Tom Jones
Iga Świątek’s 6-3, 4-6, 6-3 loss to Elena Rybakina in the semifinals of Stuttgart two weeks ago was a fascinating contest, but not the most seismic of tennis matches to be played this season. Rybakina’s win puts her up 4-2 in their head-to-head, with a 2-0 lead on clay (the other via a third set retirement in their Rome quarterfinal last season), but this match and tournament was never going to define this rivalry or either player’s clay court season. The real prizes lie way ahead of them: Madrid, the final of which pits Świątek against Rybakina-conqueror Aryna Sabalenka, and then Rome, where Rybakina is a defending champion and Świątek will want to add to her two titles there already. Then the Pole looks for a three-peat this year at Roland-Garros.
Rybakina stopped one of those three-years-running title streaks by beating her in Stuttgart, Świątek’s first loss at the tournament, but couldn’t do the same in their match in the final of Doha earlier in the year which Świątek won in straight sets. While these haven’t quite been the best matches of the year to date, they have been both intriguing and pretty brutal contests.
Their Doha match had a 90-minute opening set eventually won by Świątek who recovered from a 4-1 deficit to eventually clinch it, then winning the second relatively more comfortably 6-2. The most recent clay court encounter went almost three hours with the final set, just nine games long, lasting 64 minutes. These have been long fought, attritional battles going on between two of the best players in the world.
Even though she lost this most recent contest, this Rybakina match is another example of Świątek beginning to slowly turn the tide on some of the bad matchups that have been causing her the most difficulty in the past year or so. Much has been said about her struggles against the so-called “big hitters” on the WTA tour, by me and many others, and how she needs to find a way to overcome them.
Here, we’re talking about players like Rybakina, but also those such as Danielle Collins, Linda Nosková and Jelena Ostapenko. Since the start of 2023, Świątek has taken four losses to Rybakina (at the Australian Open, Indian Wells and Rome in 2023), one to Nosková (in the third round of the Australian Open this year) and one to Ostapenko (in the fourth round of the U.S. Open). Go back to the start of 2022 and you can add a beatdown from Collins at the Australian Open and another Ostapenko win.
These players play predominantly first-strike tennis; they want the point over and done with as soon as possible, hitting with powerful, flat groundstrokes. They tee off on any ball they can. This is a nightmare for Świątek for a few reasons, chief among them the fact that these fast low balls rush her shots, particularly off her extreme grip forehand, leading to errors or much more comfortable putaways for her opponents. Particularly on a hard court, Świątek’s own game and tight point construction gets unsettled; she can’t move opponents around and dictate from the back of the court like she usually does.
Here’s an example of the way she constructs a point from the recent Rybakina match. This is towards the end of a pretty neutral rally in the first set, but Świątek (top of the picture) has managed to whip a very aggressive forehand from the middle of the court that pulls Rybakina cross court from her initial middle of the baseline position. A ball with that kind of pace, spin and placement has Rybakina on the stretch…
Which gives Świątek the perfect ball to be aggressive and follow in on. Look at how much space she now has to work with in the open court to Rybakina’s right.
Świątek hits this for a winner that is right on the baseline and inside tramline, but she’s winning the point even if it’s less precise; she’s fashioned so much space she can kind of hit it anywhere and win the point. Even if she goes back behind Rybakina, to the left side of the court, Rybakina is only just recovering to the middle of the baseline so is off balance if forced the same way again.
The world number one was able to generate a lot of winners and good points like this in this match. It’s much easier for her to do on clay, where the slower surface means that she isn’t going to be rushed nearly as much and the extra height on that forehand is more lethal.
But if things were that simple, I wouldn’t have spent hours writing thousands of words about whether she has a matchup problem against Rybakina, whether she’s doomed to lose these types of matches for eternity and on and on. Rybakina and co can break out of these patterns of play or just take the racket out of Świątek’s hands altogether, swatting away huge groundstrokes for winners that she has no chance of getting at.
I’m focusing on Rybakina in particular here because of the recent match, but also because she’s the apex of this type of opponent that is giving Świątek the most problems. She’s beaten her the most times (four wins in joint with Ostapenko, but unlike Ostapenko, all four have come with Świątek as world number one) and is world number four; Świątek is going to be meeting her more often and struggling to a greater degree.
Rybakina’s game is almost perfectly built to nullify and counter Świątek. Her groundstrokes are extremely flat and pack a huge punch, meaning if they come back, it’s never going to be easy to generate the kind of huge forehands Świątek executed in the point demonstrated above. Her serve is one of the best on the tour, which means Świątek will always have a harder time breaking and returning than Rybakina will.
Świątek’s much weaker serve puts more pressure on her own service games to keep at even, but also means she must work much harder to win points. Their Doha final was a perfect example of this: with many points becoming longer rallies, Świątek was running probably twice as much for every shot she hit compared to Rybakina. While Świątek must fashion opportunities in a rally, Rybakina can just lay down an ace. Add to that Rybakina’s height – she’s six feet tall – and those huge topspin forehands aren’t coming up at shoulder height now but right into Rybakina’s strike zone.
While this matchup will always be difficult for the Pole, it’s not exactly some sort of lost cause. At the elite level of tennis, bad matchups can be overcome by an intangible, unquantifiable factor known as being really good. Świątek is still the world number one and has a lot of powerful tools and assets that help her out in this matchup, particularly her rally tolerance, fitness, and defense.
These recent Rybakina matches have become attritional grinds, ones that Świątek will always be able to cope with because she’s never going to break down physically. She’s won key points and moments in both of the last two meetings with bursts of movement towards the net or strong defense and generally coming in clutch. Being the best player in the world counts for something, even if you’re at a disadvantage.
I suppose, though, that this last point is really the crux of the issue in these matchups at the moment for her. The issue for Świątek is no longer that she can’t win or find a way to beat these players, it’s about finding a consistent, workable way to do so. There have been a lot of big, key milestones wins this year that point to a lot of positive movement. Her comeback from the brink of defeat against a redlining Collins at the Australian Open is one (she was 1-4, 0-40 down in the decider and won the next five games), overturning the Nosková defeat with two wins at Indian Wells and Miami is another.
Beating Rybakina in Doha was as important if not the be-all-end-all; if she wasn’t going to beat her at one of her best tournaments in Doha, where was she going to do it (remember she’d been beaten on clay by this point already too)? Compared to how she handled this last year, going out in straight sets to Rybakina twice in Australia and in the California desert, and there’s a lot of positive progress. Świątek isn’t being overwhelmed anymore, she’s digging her heels in and able to go toe-to-toe, even if she is still taking losses.
Beating the big hitters was a crucial step, but that’s only step one to solving the issue. She and her coaching team need to find a way for her to be able to consistently do this. By this I don’t mean that she should be beating Rybakina or Nosková in every match they play, but there needs to be a repeatable pattern and tactics that she can implement. While she will always be able to cope in a marathon match, a brutal hitting contest isn’t a sustainable way to take players down, particularly if she’s facing Rybakina before the final of a tournament.
Let’s project to Roland-Garros and say that Świątek has to play Rybakina in the semis and then another elite player like Sabalenka in the final. She won’t be setting herself up for success by brute forcing her way past Rybakina in a draining three-hour contest. She needs to work smarter, not harder.
Her recent win over Nosková in Miami is another good example of this issue in practice too, where she won but not by playing a particularly sustainable or efficient way. That evening saw a concerted effort to hit down the middle of the court and rally with Nosková, breaking her down rather than carving a way past her.
I can understand the logic in the tactic, especially when she’s up against the more aggressive big hitters like Nosková who want to redirect the ball more often. They’re not going to be able to nail perfect down the line winners for three sets or three hours, so if Świątek can just stay in the rally she can draw the error out of her opponent more often than not.
The issue is that it’s not flawless stuff; Nosková was still able to redirect and hit winners when the opportunities arose. Grinding players down in this manner just isn’t Świątek’s game, it relies far too much on her opponents missing and losing through an eventual plateau in their game rather than being properly controlled on the Pole’s racket. It can beat a 19-year-old top 30 player, but it comes up against much greater trouble when facing Rybakina who won’t play as aggressively or miss as much.
Whether it is a concerted tactical plan from herself and the coaching team or just Świątek’s response in the heat of battle is somewhat up for debate, but the impact is clear. When someone can match Świątek for power, her response is to fight fire with fire and it’s not working.
Yes, she can probably beat Rybakina into submission with the firepower off her forehand, but is that a smart strategy? The way she loads power into trying to overwhelm opponents can be quite comfortably absorbed a lot of the time. Let’s look at a few more examples of this through the match:
In the last point of the first set, Świątek rifles her forehand return straight into Rybakina, trying to catch her out with the depth (she did the exact same on her own set point in set two and drew an error to win it).
Unfortunately for her, Rybakina copes with the shot and is able to direct back at Świątek with a very nice deep backhand plus-one shot (the server’s first shot after the return), forcing Świątek behind the baseline to hit a backhand as we see here.
This isn’t a position that allows Świątek to do much with the backhand with the pace it’s coming at her, she’s running backwards to hit this shot, so hits it with all her might cross court again to Rybakina.
This, however, allows Rybakina to create an immense backhand angle as Świątek’s shot lacks power or depth to challenge her. With the ball in her strike zone, Rybakina smacks it cross court once again for a winner, one Świątek has no chance of getting to. This is a classic Rybakina point in many ways; overwhelming opponents not by redirecting the ball like, say, Ostapenko or Sabalenka, but by hitting a cross court ball too good to get back.
With that fact in mind, it does make the Świątek strategy a bit more baffling; this is exactly what Rybakina wants her to do. She can live with the pace and the spin; it’s not knocking her off balance or forcing her back like it might a more underpowered opponent. When Świątek did decide to go more direct, not playing into the cross-court exchange, she was able to generate more success.
Here in the third set, Świątek’s plus-one shot goes down the line rather than putting it back at Rybakina. It’s a pinpoint shot that gets her opponent on the stretch, able to be put away with a second down the line backhand winner. She did the exact same thing break point down in the second set, too.
Of course, these examples are somewhat different to the earlier one I showed because this is on Świątek’s serve rather than Rybakina’s. Rybakina is giving her a ball that allows her to do more off. This is worth keeping in mind, but I do think it’s striking that Świątek was seemingly quite freely willing to redirect these balls here to great success.
Many of her returns, meanwhile, were directed into Rybakina, trying to rush her next shot and cause issues by overpowering her. I’m not suggesting Świątek needed to start trying to angle every forehand return down the line for a winner, but she had a lot of second serves to look at – like in set two when Rybakina’s first serve percentage was down at 50% – and didn’t do anything differently.
Ultimately, the most recent loss to Rybakina came, I believe, through a mixture of poor execution and tactical failures. There were plenty of times Świątek was creating the types of scenarios we outlined at the start, opening a forehand down the line and missing it long, into the net or hitting a drive volley that went a meter beyond the baseline. Sometimes, you have a bit of an off-day, and sometimes that comes against the world number four in a tough matchup when you can’t really afford those kinds of cheap errors.
I think it’s important to keep this part in mind, both in that there shouldn’t be any catastrophizing that Świątek lost here or that she’s doomed in the matchup. If she had cut out some of those execution problems – missed less backhands in set one, had a higher first serve percentage and taken chances on some early break points – there’s a decent chance Świątek could have won this match.
On a clay court, she has a much better chance of dictating the rallies and getting this type of point construction where she is in control and moving opponents about. Put some of the second serves Świątek was dishing out break point down on a hard court, and I think we see a lot more return winners or difficult shots under pressure. The thing is though if we frame it as a question of execution (“Świątek lost because of errors”) we miss that glaring tactical failure. Świątek could easily have got another positive result but the process by which she got there was once again flawed.
The more frustrating side of the loss were the tweaks she could have made to make her life much easier despite some of those misses or mistakes. This is about both the general tactical style of the points — grinding it out in exhausting cross-court rallies — but also crucially her returning position.
Świątek is a very aggressive returner. She stands no more than a meter behind the baseline and that does not change under any circumstances. She will stand in the same spot to return a first serve or a second, on hard, clay or grass, regardless of who’s at the other end of the court. Such a return position often, then, relies on intense focus and perfect timing to consistently get the ball strike right, especially with that forehand, and to be able to put it back in a dangerous place, rushing the opponent. When it works, there’s no one better. She can hit some stellar return winners from almost any position or serve coming at her or failing that put it into a dangerous position that has her target on the backfoot immediately.
However, this type of aggression can be very boom or bust, and against the best servers in the game, which Rybakina is most certainly one of, it hurts her more than it helps. Świątek ended the match with a poor 2/13 record on break points, oftentimes doing a lot of great work to make inroads on the Rybakina serve only to let herself down with a missed forehand return when it really mattered.
I think one small change Świątek could, and frankly should, make that would make a big difference is stepping further back on return, especially first serve return. Against most players she can execute that sort of precise, perfect forehand return often enough to not be an issue, but it’s holding her back against an elite server like Rybakina.
When she will always be under greater pressure serving herself, Świątek needs to be able to change the dynamics with her returning. So much of her success in these matches does somewhat ride on that ability to break the Rybakina serve, and if Rybakina can respond every time by getting a cheap point out of a missed forehand it’s one step forward two steps back. Working so hard to generate break point opportunities only to lose them so tamely each time is probably even more frustrating to experience on the court than it is to watch. She doesn’t need to suddenly start returning from the back fence like Nadal, but taking a step back gives her extra time with very little downside.
The other thing I think Świątek needs to alter to get an advantage in this matchup is more about her general style and point construction, though it’s something that I think will take a lot more time to implement than that return position. Świątek’s game is about dictating and dominating from the baseline, so what do you do when you can’t dominate from the baseline?
Her response has been to double down and try bullying her opponent off the court in a pretty unsophisticated, non-systematic way. That’s why those break points she saved with shots down the line stood out so much to me, it felt like seeing pockets of clarity where she was willing to utilise space and angles.
She’s played over 10 matches against these types of big hitters in the past year but doesn’t seem any closer to cracking a winning tactic beyond “hit the ball hard and win the rallies”. There is a pretty clear trait that runs across these players too that she seems unwilling to exploit more: movement. At six feet tall, Rybakina isn’t going to be able to move with the same speed or agility as Świątek or Coco Gauff. Nosková isn’t a great mover either.
What feels particularly grating about the grinding, down the middle rally balls approach is that it keeps the ball where Świątek’s opponents want it, in their strike zone, and means they can stay static to fire out on her. While I think she could be more willing to redirect the ball at times in these matches, I do think there are limitations to how much she can make her opponents run with this current baseline game matching up with them.
What Świątek is badly missing right now is some variety. She used to play a lot of drop shots but that’s been totally removed from her arsenal since Tomasz Wiktorowski became her coach in 2022. The Wiktorowski tactics have been about streamlining her approach and pushing more aggression, and it’s got her to world number one and three more grand slam titles.
The thing is, though, it’s become a one-dimensional game now; if she had those drop shots to call upon she could create even more issues for opponents. Rybakina could be pulled out of her comfort zone on the baseline, forced to run after shots and dragged to the net on Świątek’s terms. Świątek can take the net herself and cut out that baseline grind, both shortening points and changing the dynamics on which points are played.
We saw a bit of change in the second set of the Doha final where Świątek began experimenting with adding more height and spin on her balls, which I think she could try more of. She just needs to do something to draw these players out of their comfort zone, make things awkward and exploit their weaknesses.
I have no doubt that Świątek will eventually round out her game and make the changes she needs to; she’s far too good not to find a way around these opponents and her ferocious desire for success will lead her down this path in time. She is, by her own admission, quite stubborn, and I think you see that when she’s made to feel uncomfortable on the court when Rybakina can stand up to her game in the way she does.
She’s approached these matches in the same way every time but is managing to get somewhat different results. That’s a positive to some extent, but I do wonder if it’s feeding the stubbornness in some part. Her game can overpower or outlast Rybakina’s to some extent, but it won’t do that every time. The results have been more good than bad, but the performances don’t show much of a step forward in the tactical aspects. This is the next step and obstacle for her to overcome in her dominance at the top of the sport. Right now she can take apart almost every opponent, but she’ll find herself running into a brick wall time and again if she doesn’t find the performance answers to overcome those who still cause her issues.
Popcorn Tennis 