Post-2024 US Open WTA storylines: The Age of Aryna; what's next for Swiatek and Gauff?

The Grand Slam season has ended. But while the last of this year’s majors is behind us, many WTA-related story lines remain in flux. Here are five worthy of continued consideration.

The Age of Aryna Is Upon Us

The latest rankings won’t show it, but there’s no question the world’s No. 1 player is Aryna Sabalenka. The firepower has always been there, but over the last two years, the Belarusian has made major strides, first in mental strength, second in tennis’ subtle companion piece known as point-building.

Sabalenka commenced the year with a title run at the Australian Open. Now she’s bookended that by taking the US Open.

“I mean, I’m not trying to focus on ranking, to be honest,” Sabalenka said after the final. “Not like I’m checking where I’m gonna be after the tournament. I’m just trying to focus on myself, and I know that if on each tournament I’ll be able to play my best tennis and I’ll be able to bring this fight spirit on each game, I’ll be able to become world No. 1 again.”

Following her victory in Melbourne, I wondered how it would go should Sabalenka and No. 1-ranked Iga Swiatek meet on high-stakes occasions. Alas, not once this year did these two play each other at a major. Swiatek won their two matches on clay, including a brilliant final in Madrid. More recently, Sabalenka defeated Swiatek in the semis of Cincinnati on her way to the title. Though they might meet again this fall, as I see it, we must wait until 2025 to witness their battles of consequence.

Regardless of what the computer says, history will view Sabalenka as 2024’s top player.

What’s Next for Swiatek, Gauff After Bummer Summers?

When summer began, Swiatek and Coco Gauff were ranked first and second in the world. All signs pointed upward. But in New York, each of these past US Open champions exited far earlier than anticipated. Swiatek was beaten in the quarters by Jessica Pegula, and for the second consecutive major, Gauff lost in the round of 16 to her fellow American, Emma Navarro.

More disturbing was the way those losses happened. Swiatek repeatedly misfired badly, while Gauff served 19 double-faults. From nerves to serves, each of these great players has much to ponder.

When Swiatek loses, she often looks helpless, unable to find and deploy alternative tactics as her support team witnesses in rather grim fashion. For Gauff, there are technical issues. Speaking about her serve after the Navarro match, Gauff said, “I think it’s also just kind of a mental hurdle that I have to get over when it comes with that … I don’t want to lose matches like this anymore.”

Swiatek is just 23, Gauff 21. Perhaps, after being so immersed in the pro life for a solid half-decade, each needs a respite to catch her breath, take into account all that’s been accomplished and learned, and plan strategically for the next big phase.

Pegula & Navarro: Built, Not Born

There are those who think athletic achievements are simply the result of natural talent, skills genetically conferred as obviously as eye color or foot size. The rest of us believe in work. This is why the US Open runs of Jessica Pegula and Emma Navarro were so inspiring.

The 30-year-old Pegula has long been tennis’ classic late bloomer. Even once she reached the Top 10 two years ago, Pegula continued to struggle like Sisyphus, going 0-6 in Grand Slam quarterfinals before at last breaking through in New York this year. Highlighting Pegula’s run to the finals were cucumber-cool like wins over Swiatek in the quarters and—after rallying from a big deficit—Karolina Muchova in the semis.

“My movement and my serve has gotten a little bit better,” Pegula said following the US Open final. “So I think there are certain parts that maybe are a little bit more consistent than they used to be.”

For the 23-year-old Navarro, the path to a first Slam semi was far swifter. Still, her ascent is hardly random, but instead the result of a long-term skill-building program she’s created with coach for nearly a decade, Peter Ayers.

In a brilliant interview conducted by veteran journalist Christopher Clarey, Ayers said,

“We’ve had to redefine what a mistake is. To some it means hitting the net, hitting the ball wide or hitting the ball long, and that maybe held too much sway over her. I would say sometimes that ball you’re hitting right in the middle of the court, that’s a worse mistake than the one that misses a little bit long. You’re losing the point either way, but you’re allowing the player to step up in the court, crack a winner, pump their fist and feel good about themselves.

“Whereas when you go after the shot and you miss it six inches long, you lose the point. But you don’t allow for all that other stuff to happen and what effect that has on them that was lost.”

Be it in tennis or any other endeavor, Pegula and Navarro give hope to all.

Once Again, A Czech Shows the True Meaning of Player Development

For the second major in a row, a woman from the Czech Republic displayed an exceptionally eclectic array of speeds, spins, and tactics. Although Muchova did not equal her compatriot Barbora Krejcikova’s feat of winning the title, in reaching the semis of the US Open (for the second year in a row), her dazzling all-court game posed significant implications for player development. Why not cultivate a slice backhand? Learn to deploy the volley more effectively? Come to net on returns?

“When I’m aggressive on the court and hitting winners down the line, going to the net when I feel confident to do that,” said Muchova following her quarterfinal win over Beatriz Haddad Maia, “they kind of, yeah, gives me the good feeling on the court, and then I trust my shots and I would say then it kind of creates my game.”

All these allegedly “creative” techniques and tactics can be learned and practiced from an early age. When it comes to teaching them, it’s time instructors abandon the phrase “adding variety” and instead employ this term: “teaching the game.”

Stock Watch: Elena Rybakina and Naomi Osaka

Rybakina’s withdrawal from the US Open marked the seventh time this year she withdrew from a tournament due to illness or injury. Added to the mix was that, just prior to the US Open, Rybakina parted ways with her longstanding coach, Stefano Vukov.

One awaits a new statement from this highly skilled player. Given Rybakina’s taciturn nature, it will likely come much more loudly from her racquet. Let’s hope, though, that her various health woes become a thing of the past, and she can continue contending.

As for Osaka, my expectation was that she’d reach peak form by the US Open. An encouraging sign came at Roland Garros, where she played superb tennis and held a match point versus clay-court savant Swiatek. In the two majors since, though, Osaka was beaten both times in the second round, first by Navarro at Wimbledon, then by Muchova in New York.

In both of those losses, Osaka’s power game wasn’t enough to overtake two court-savvy opponents. In the months to come, it will be interesting to see how Osaka continues to find more consistency and perhaps add a few tactical wrinkles.

“Yeah, I just feel like this year I’m experiencing so many new things,” said Osaka on the eve of the US Open. “I’ve definitely played way more tournaments than I have played before.

“I don’t know. It’s very interesting because I have had practices here where I feel like I’m getting a lot better, and I realize, like, there are so many things that I can do throughout the year that would make me a better tennis player, and I hope that I can just keep learning that way.”