Speaker A
Hey everyone, Gil Gross here, little emergency episode post US Open day one. Because for the first time since 2006, Novak Djokovic has lost in the opening round of a slam.
Novak Djokovic loses in US Open 2026 first round for the first time, with analysis of his physical struggles and match dynamics.
Key Takeaways
- Djokovic's physical condition was the main factor in his first-round US Open loss.
- Navone's fitness and playing style exploited Djokovic's physical weaknesses.
- Djokovic's serve was critical early but deteriorated, leading to his downfall.
- Such losses may signal the beginning of a physical decline that could push Djokovic toward retirement.
- Despite the loss, this is considered an isolated incident rather than a trend.
What the video covers
- Novak Djokovic lost in the opening round of a Grand Slam for the first time since 2006 and his first ever first-round loss at the US Open.
- Djokovic was physically impaired throughout the match, suffering from cramping, back, and shoulder issues, which affected his movement and stamina.
- Mariano Navone, a clay-court specialist, capitalized on Djokovic's physical decline by using his superior fitness and legs to outlast him.
- Djokovic initially led by two sets and a break, leveraging his strong serve and slice serve to gain free points.
- Navone struggled with his return game on hard courts due to his clay-court style but ultimately benefited from Djokovic's serve dropping off.
- The match highlighted a physical mismatch, with Djokovic unable to sustain baseline rallies due to his declining endurance.
- The video discusses the implications of this loss on Djokovic's potential retirement, noting that such physical struggles could become a trend.
- The host also touches on online security and promotes NordVPN as a sponsor, linking it to his experiences as a traveling YouTuber.
- The video contextualizes Djokovic's current physical condition and compares it to other tennis greats like Federer and Nadal.
- The host emphasizes that while this loss was tough, it is currently a one-off and not yet a sign of Djokovic's imminent retirement.
Chapters
- 00:00Introduction and Djokovic's historic first-round loss
- 00:57Djokovic's physical struggles and movement issues
- 02:11Match analysis: Djokovic losing his serve
- 03:27Navone's playing style and return game challenges
- 04:38Comparison to other matches and Navone's strategy
- 07:00Sponsor message: NordVPN and online security
- 08:26Implications for Djokovic's future and retirement
- 09:27Emotional moments and crowd support
- 11:34Djokovic's fitness challenges over the season
- 13:01Closing thoughts on Djokovic's career outlook
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
For the first time ever, he's lost a first-round match at the US Open. Mariano Navone beats him in five sets.
Speaker A
And one more first that I have to share. The last time there were no members of the big three in the second round of a major, it was 2003.
Speaker A
Quite remarkable. Pretty tough to watch last night as Novak Djokovic's body failed him in pretty much every way possible.
Speaker A
There was puking involved. It was a humid night in New York. Of course, he was sweating quite a bit.
Speaker A
That presents a cramping risk. I think that was probably the biggest problem towards the end of the match.
Speaker A
Although really from the very start, from the word go, Djokovic's movement wasn't up to par.
Speaker A
His endurance, stamina, shot tolerance, all that was not up to standards and he was playing a guy in Mariano Navone who is very well equipped to take advantage of exactly that. In fact, it is his primary and chief
Speaker A
strength as a tennis player. His fitness. His legs. That's the only weapon that Mariano Navone really possesses is his legs.
Speaker A
And he uses them. He did not take on a lot of risk. He tried to keep the ball in the court.
Speaker A
He made things physical. That's what he's good at doing. He did not need to change anything. I don't even think he really had to execute his game at the highest level. Meaning, I don't think his performance was even by his standards all that good.
Speaker A
But Djokovic had an expiration in the match ultimately. He had trouble separating early because of the physical gap. You know, this was a legs mismatch, is really what I'm trying to say. That was clear early, and then it hit a point late.
Speaker A
What really happened, if we want to talk about the match itself, Djokovic lost his serve.
Speaker A
And Djokovic's path to winning the match was leaning on the serve. He went up two sets and a break because he was getting a ton of free points.
Speaker A
Because Navone, who is really a pretty pure clay court player, has developed a very particular style of returning and has not really developed his fast court returning. You could see how rushed he was on his forehand return.
Speaker A
Djokovic with his deadly, world-class slice serve was picking Navone apart by serving it hard into his forehand.
Speaker A
And it almost won Novak the match. Again, he was up two sets and a break. It looked like for a moment he was stabilizing physically. And then, as soon as that went away, it was really when the serve, and I think Novak was
Speaker A
having back problems and shoulder problems and cramping problems, obviously energy problems. When the serve went away, now there was no getting away from those neutral baseline rallies, those physical points.
Speaker A
That spelled doom for Novak. For Navone, just because I like to get nerdy, I'm, you know, this is maybe not so relevant. This isn't a major storyline.
Speaker A
We're going to get to the Djokovic retirement piece in a moment. But first, you know, Navone, really all he had to do was make a ton of returns and he was going to win the match.
Speaker A
There was a point in time where it looked like he wasn't going to manage to do that, and I think that's because he spent his whole life standing really far behind the baseline, letting these clay courts slow down the
Speaker A
bounce, and then taking full swings at the ball. He's never really developed a pure return of serve, an abbreviated return of serve, or a chip return.
Speaker A
Because technically, tactically, the right play there would have been for Navone to chip returns. Just get it back, right? That is the only objective. You do not need to really worry too much about the quality of return. Get it back, and then try to dig
Speaker A
out the second plus one shot, and get into the rally. You know, really use the legs and the physicality.
Speaker A
But Navone has never been forced to develop a chip return because he's played so much on clay. He does not have it, he does not use it. You can't really back up to the fence against Novak on hard court, either.
Speaker A
That gives him so many pathways to use the slice serve dragging off the court.
Speaker A
And obviously, that would give him so many past pathways to point shortening. So, Navone couldn't really stand back, couldn't really chip the return, so he was forced to stand up, not on the baseline, but not as far back
Speaker A
as he would like to be. And then he was rushed on the return constantly.
Speaker A
He had no solution until Djokovic's serve speed dropped off. That was the solution. From there, Navone took off.
Speaker A
So, tough gritty performance by him to just kind of stick with the task at hand, and never really truly fade, continue to make things hard on Novak, and do what he does best. It was similar
Speaker A
to the Juan Manuel Cerundolo match at Roland Garros against Sinner, in the sense from the Navone standpoint. He just had to do what he does. He did not have to do anything more. Just like Sinner in that match
Speaker A
just had to do what he does. Okay, I want to get to the retirement stuff and address the discourse that is swirling on that topic.
Speaker A
It is a scary topic. I know what's also scary these days, the internet. That is why this episode is brought to you by NordVPN. Nobody is safe from phishing scams, malware, or ransomware, but as a YouTuber, I'm constantly
Speaker A
getting these suspicious emails from purported advertisers trying to hack me. Last year, I fell for one of them and almost lost my account. So, ever since I started taking my online security more seriously and I started using NordVPN.
Speaker A
It has a built-in next-gen antivirus to protect against malware, dangerous websites, and ads, and it combines all of these useful cybersecurity features into one subscription. It's an all-in-one digital security app. Of course, there's also that core VPN functionality, which is huge for me.
Speaker A
This year, tennis has taken me all around the world, thankfully, and VPNs allow you to access all your favorite streaming subscriptions from abroad.
Speaker A
This definitely came in handy when I was back in my hotel in Toronto and needed to stay across the National Bank Open matches through my tennis channel app subscription. So, to get the best discount off your NordVPN plan, go to
Speaker A
nordvpn.com/mondaymatch. Our link will also give you four extra months on the two-year plan. There's no risk with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee. The link is in the podcast episode description box, and the discount code is mondaymatch.
Speaker A
So, it did not look fun for Djokovic last night. Probably the most aggregated comment from Djokovic in the press conference was, I think he said every moment on the court was excruciating or something along those lines.
Speaker A
That's not fun what he just did. And ultimately Novak is out there for the love of the game because he wants to be out there because it is worthwhile for him to be out there because it's fulfilling for him to be out there. And
Speaker A
you know what probably was fun? Not probably, definitely was fun for Novak Djokovic, beating Yannick Sinner at the Australian Open this year, beating Felix Auger-Aliassime in a five-setter at Wimbledon this year.
Speaker A
I can assure you that was fun. This was not fun. If nights like this started to become a trend, they would absolutely push Djokovic into retirement.
Speaker A
And moreover, if Djokovic sticks around long enough, nights like this will become a trend.
Speaker A
There's no way around it. If you stick around long enough, you are either going to be retired because you can't win anymore or because you get injured. And for Federer and Nadal, it was more so more so the
Speaker A
injured part. Rafa was maybe a blend of both. Federer was clearly the injured part.
Speaker A
Djokovic at the moment though has not created a trend out of this. Last night was a one-off.
Speaker A
Look at the results last night and the closest parallel you can draw to what happened last night was maybe the Alexei Popyrin loss at the US Open a couple of years ago, which kind of got waved away because it
Speaker A
was on the heels of the Olympics tri...
Speaker A
None. But there will be eventually. Does Novak want to leave before that occurs. Maybe.
Speaker A
Here's my take, though. I am not worried about Djokovic. And I could be wrong. This is all conjecture.
Speaker A
I'm not worried about Djokovic suddenly announcing his retirement. When I say worried, I mean I don't suspect it.
Speaker A
I don't suspect it will go down that way. I do think that Novak is going to want to give advanced notice.
Speaker A
And I think he might want to go through a full year knowing that it's his last.
Speaker A
It's always the question of do I want a farewell tour? Do I not? But I think Novak, think about Monfils this year. I think Novak will want a Monfils style farewell tour, which I think would be pretty edifying for him. If you If you
Speaker A
think about like the crowd started chanting his name last night. And Novak was moved to tears. Just like during the 2021 US Open final against Medvedev when he was down two sets to love, the crowd started getting behind him and Novak was
Speaker A
moved to tears. The relationship between Djokovic, tennis fans, been a little bit more complex over the years. And it clearly means a lot to Novak to feel the love.
Speaker A
He deserves it. And I think he will get it. If he gives the tennis worlds a chance to literally kind of salute him goodbye over the course of a full year.
Speaker A
I think that's the route Novak is going to go, but I could be wrong.
Speaker A
It's just a hunch. The other part of this is the US Open part of this.
Speaker A
Now, this is the best, I would say like counter argument I could make against this being this like massive retirement red flag.
Speaker A
I'm happy to to throw this aside and say this is just US Open stuff. I'm going to kind of go through something that I went through in the preview. The US Open is not for the olds.
Speaker A
It's not for the olds. Roger Federer last won the US Open in 2008. He won seven majors post '08.
Speaker A
Rafa Nadal last won the US Open in 2019. He had successful years to follow.
Speaker A
And in those successful years, he won three total matches at the US Open. Barely made it to play there.
Speaker A
And since 2015 for Novak Djokovic he's won the US Open twice. I'm saying post-2015. He's won the US Open twice.
Speaker A
He's won the other three majors three, four, five times. This becomes the hard one when you start to age because of its calendar spot. It's at the end of the year. Novak has always talked about you know, peaking for the Slams. We have
Speaker A
seen gradually that it is impossible for Djokovic to stay in good condition over the course of the whole year.
Speaker A
So, then we started to see that okay, he could peak four times a year.
Speaker A
Might we have gotten to the point where he can only peak three times a year?
Speaker A
Novak was in okay shape in January for the Australian Open. I still thought his physicality was not awesome despite him beating Jannik Sinner. We know the circumstances and we know how that match ended up looking with Djokovic sort of flipping the energy
Speaker A
energy switch on and off throughout the match against Sinner. And then I thought he He much more fit for Roland Garros and Wimbledon.
Speaker A
He flashed some signs in Cincinnati that it was going to be difficult for him to ramp it back up for the US Open.
Speaker A
And it was also reasonable to expect that he would be better 3 weeks later at the US Open. And then quickly we saw that he was not any better. Now he's talked about this condition that he's been dealing with for many, many years.
Speaker A
And I don't really know what to do with this. I got to be honest. I don't want to come across as insensitive to this.
Speaker A
But obviously I can only go off of what I see and what Novak says. So he says he's been dealing with this physical condition that makes him suffer on the court for many, many years. But I can't help but notice that this condition, you
Speaker A
know, when I've seen Novak on court and he's dizzy, he's shaky, he lacks energy, he he he doesn't have his fitness. When I see this happening, by and large recently it's been at the 1000s, it's been in March, it's been in
Speaker A
the lead up to Roland Garros at the at the early clay masters. It's been in hot conditions. It's been in physical matches.
Speaker A
It feels like whatever this condition is, there is a one-to-one with Novak's physical fitness.
Speaker A
When he's fit, he's okay. When he's not fit, he suffers on the court. That's pretty normal. If your body is not prepared for the rigors of a professional tennis match, then it's not going to feel great.
Speaker A
This is something we can all kind of relate to at every level. When you push your body past the limit, it does not feel great. You may throw up. You may get dizzy. You may start cramping.
Speaker A
You may feel light-headed. You may get nauseous. So, I don't know what the physical condition is, but it feels like it has a very close relation to Djokovic's conditioning.
Speaker A
So, I wanted to make that point. I think maybe I've gone through everything I want to talk about here with with Novak.
Speaker A
Yeah. I think that's about it. All right. I was out on Armstrong during the match.
Speaker A
So, I was I had an eye on a monitor where I was watching Djokovic-Navone, but I was also watching Alexander Bublik and Naim. Impressively disciplined performance against J.J. Wolf, I will say. I didn't know what to expect out of
Speaker A
Bublik. It was his first match in 33 days. Decided to skip Canada and skip Cincinnati as he often does.
Speaker A
He said in the past he doesn't like the heat of the North American hard court summer.
Speaker A
His son's birthday falls during Cincinnati, which is a reason that he has cited in the past, which is kind of awesome in a lot of ways.
Speaker A
Didn't know what to expect. A buttoned-up performance from Bublik. Although J.J. J.J. still building himself up physically, is not really ready to play best of five. He's getting there, you know, won the Vancouver Challenger a couple of weeks ago, but it just feels like the
Speaker A
the durability and the fitness for for J.J. Wolf, it's uh it's not quite there. He had flashes of brilliance. He was inconsistent in his performance.
Speaker A
And uh his second serve is the main thing I would circle that needs to really get better, especially because Wolf wants to be playing more offense.
Speaker A
His second serve is not really facilitating that right now. So, uh good to see J.J. back.
Speaker A
Again, he's had so many injuries that it's a it's going to be a process.
Speaker A
And we'll see how far he can get. He's was inside the top 50 back in 2023. Uh also took in some Medvedev Gastone.
Speaker A
Good, solid opening round performance by Medvedev. I do think that he got a really good draw here. I mean, Gastone has not won a tour level match on hard court all year, but he did come through qualifying, and that does count for
Speaker A
something. Think Medvedev's backhand somewhat exposed Gastone's forehand just stylistically. You know, Gastone hits that high spinny forehand, and Medvedev did a good job of taking that ball on early on the rise and dictating with his backhand. Gastone's high forehand was
Speaker A
not effective against a 6'6" Medvedev, who's very comfortable playing on the rise on hard court.
Speaker A
Thought the offensive baselining was was good for Medvedev because that is what this match-up was going to require.
Speaker A
Daniil was competent at the net when he was forced in by Gastone's frequent drop shotting.
Speaker A
And Medvedev's serve was quite effective. So, that was an encouraging performance for Daniil, who came into the event with a one and three record in the US Open lead-ins, but it will get a lot harder from here. Gastone, again, was a good
Speaker A
draw for Daniil. I will end today by talking about my prediction because it did stir up some Reddit tennis controversy.
Speaker A
Obviously, there was the usual debate in my comment section, but that's nothing new. Uh it did seem in some ways unsurprisingly that the prediction of Khachanov to win the US Open created some buzz.
Speaker A
But I would just like to address some of the things I've been seeing online about said prediction. At the US Open yesterday, two people brought up the fact that Reddit was going crazy. So, I did check it out and I read a little bit
Speaker A
of it. And what I mostly saw were people saying some version of how could you pick Alcaraz to be good enough to make the final, healthy enough to make the final, and then he loses to Hurkacz.
Speaker A
That's crazy. That's insane. Of course, that is explicitly a point that I made in the content. So, this was just a screenshot of my predictions.
Speaker A
The very point that was being used to argue against me is a point that I explicitly made, which is that if I actually correctly predict this final, and it is Hurkacz versus Alcaraz, there is almost a 0% chance
Speaker A
that I will come into that final and think that Hurkacz is going to win.
Speaker A
But, here is how the internet works, my friends. If I picked Alcaraz to lose in the first week, let's say I said, "Carlos is going to get taken out in the fourth round by Tommy Paul." Let's just say hypothetically I did
Speaker A
that. And Carlos Alcaraz wins the US Open, which is a possibility that I have great respect for. If I predicted that, the takeaway would have been "Gill is writing off Carlos Alcaraz's chances to win." That would have been what was
Speaker A
communicated. I do not want to communicate that, because that is not what I believe.
Speaker A
And it doesn't matter, as, you know, case in point here. It doesn't matter if I said "Oh, I actually think Carlos could win the tournament." If I predicted him to lose in the first week, what would have been
Speaker A
communicated to many, many viewers and listeners and Redditors is Gil thinks Alcaraz has no shot. And because I want to communicate that I think Carlos Alcaraz has a great chance of winning the US Open title despite not playing a match in 5 months.
Speaker A
Because I want to communicate that, I picked Alcaraz to the final. And then there's the number of sets, which is "How could Hurkacz beat Alcaraz in five? Carlos would never lose a fifth set in a major final." Once again,
Speaker A
I'm not trying to get an exacto here. It's nearly impossible to do. If I'm predicting a match in five, it typically reflects my level of confidence in the prediction.
Speaker A
Right? If If it's 60 to 40 or 55-45, and I'm just leaning one way or the other, I'm saying it's five sets. That doesn't mean that I think the match is necessarily going to go five sets. I'm not thinking about five-set records. So,
Speaker A
again, pretty simple. Straight sets is when I think there's no chance the other player wins.
Speaker A
Or a minuscule chance, because it is tennis and you never know. Four sets is "I could see the other player winning, but like I'm pretty confident and firm in my prediction." Five sets means "I think this player is going to win.
Speaker A
That's my prediction, but I'm not so sure. I think it's a close call." That's how the system works. That's why it's Hurkacz in five.
Speaker A
Last thing I'll say about this. Man, for so long I have been predicting Novak Djokovic, Carlos Alcaraz, and Jannik Sinner to win every single major.
Speaker A
Since 2023, I want to say, it's been one of three guys who I've predicted to win a major. Now we are at the US Open, which is historically the slam of opportunity.
Speaker A
Jannik Sinner's not in the draw. Djokovic I didn't expect much from, and now rightly so.
Speaker A
Carlos Alcaraz hasn't played a match in 4 and 1/2 months. If there were ever a time to take a little shot, to take a little roll of the dice, isn't this the time to do it?
Speaker A
This is content also at the end of the day and this is an opportunity here to finally mix things up a little bit, and I do not want to pass up on that opportunity. I don't want to play
Speaker A
another forehand crosscourt, and I get it. The forehand crosscourt, his you know, recently, it's been the only play to make. It's been the obvious play to make. It's wide open. Open court.
Speaker A
Play the high percentage. That's what I've done now for more than 3 years consistently.
Speaker A
Forehand crosscourt, after rallying crosscourt for 15 balls here over the last few years, I think it's time to flatten one out down the line.
Speaker A
It just feels like it's time. So, I'm going for it. Hope you enjoyed. Don't forget to subscribe. I'll see you next time.
Topics:Novak DjokovicUS Open 2026tennis upsetMariano NavoneDjokovic retirementtennis analysisGrand Slamtennis fitnesshard court tennistennis match review
![[YTP] Jordan Peterson: Rat King — Transcript](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/0qUoznGIe1M/maxresdefault.jpg)
![Nick & Charlie ‣ their story [+heartstopper forever] — Transcript](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/p4TiW1TZM3w/maxresdefault.jpg)
