Match Point Pressure: Why WTA Players Struggle to Close Matches

June 2025 on the WTA Tour has produced a striking and uncomfortable pattern. Players are reaching match point—sometimes repeatedly—only to watch victory slip away. One point from the finish line becomes five, six, or even ten missed chances. Momentum flips, belief shifts, and the player who appeared beaten walks off the court as the winner.

The trend feels impossible to ignore.

Did Jannik Sinner’s defeat to Carlos Alcaraz in the French Open final plant the seed? In the highest‑profile match of 2025, Sinner failed to convert three match points in the fourth set. Alcaraz’s recovery was not just dramatic—it was instructive. It sent a clear message across the sport: winning from match point down is achievable.

When Match Point Becomes the Most Difficult Point

The ripple effect was immediate.

A week later in ’s‑Hertogenbosch, Ekaterina Alexandrova appeared to be cruising into the final against Elise Mertens. She led 6–2, 5–3 and held 11 match points in the second set. She converted none of them. Mertens forced a tiebreak, won it 9–7, and went on to take the final set 6–4.

At Eastbourne, the pattern repeated—repeatedly.

Viktoriya Tomova led Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova 6–1 in the deciding‑set tiebreak. Five match points disappeared. At 7–6, she had one more. That went too.

Barbora Krejčíková then faced two British players on consecutive days. Against Harriet Dart, she survived two match points at 40–15. Against Jodie Burrage, she recovered from 0–40, saving three more. The reigning Wimbledon champion escaped both times.

In the Eastbourne final, Alexandra Eala held four match points in another deciding‑set tiebreak. She did not convert any of them. The title slipped away.

Courage or Collapse?

Some of these points were extraordinary. On several occasions, the defending player produced elite, match‑saving shots that could not be countered.

But on others, the dynamic was clear.

The player with match point changed behaviour.

- Less aggression  
- Greater margin  
- A subconscious desire to not lose rather than to win  

The intention becomes survival rather than execution. Players try to “fall over the line” instead of crossing it with conviction.

The Psychology Behind the Numbers

There is no official statistic tracking matches won from match point down, but estimates place it above 2% of all matches. In reality, 5% appears more accurate.

Elise Mertens alone has won two matches from match point down in 2025, equating to roughly 5% of her victories. Sets won from set point down are significantly more common.

This is not coincidence. It reflects belief.

Once a player saves match point, the psychological balance shifts dramatically. The player who was about to shake hands must now start again, often emotionally deflated. The opponent, by contrast, has already “lost”—and survived. They now play freely.

Accountability at the Top

Elite players are not alone on court anymore. Coaching teams, analysts, and sports psychologists sit courtside.

Yet the same vulnerabilities persist.

- Coco Gauff double‑faulted repeatedly at set point against Sabalenka in Madrid  
- Iga Świątek lost to Madison Keys at the Australian Open after holding match point  

These are players with every possible resource available. Yet when the final point arrives, the same patterns emerge.

DTM believes this exposes a missing piece: match‑point strategy.

Rethinking the Final Point

Why do players practise tie‑breaks endlessly but rarely practise one‑point scenarios?

A small number of players are already experimenting. Amanda Anisimova and Alexander Bublik have, at times, hit two first serves instead of defaulting to a safe second serve. At match point, with two attempts available, a different serve profile makes sense.

- A reverse‑spin serve  
- A heavy kick serve  
- A higher‑risk first‑serve pattern repeated  

The value is not just tactical. It forces focus on process at the exact moment nerves peak. The surprise element shifts pressure back to the returner.

Getting to match point is not a problem. Failing to treat it as an opportunity is.

Why Tennis Allows This to Happen

Tennis scoring magnifies momentum like no other sport.

Saving match points does more than win a game or a tiebreak. It transfers belief. The player who survives often becomes favourite—even if the scoreline suggests otherwise.

Andy Murray’s 2013 Wimbledon final remains the clearest example. Serving at 5–4 in the third set, Murray led 40–0 and lost three match points. He endured multiple deuces and saved a break point before finally converting his fourth match point.

Many believe that had Novak Djokovic won that game to level at 5–5, he would likely have won the match. At two sets down and 5–4 down, Djokovic was only four points from defeat—but psychologically far closer to victory than the score implied.

The Trend Is Not Ending

What we are witnessing on the WTA Tour is not random. Players now believe recovery is possible because they have seen it happen—again and again.

The French Open final reinforced it.
June confirmed it.
Wimbledon will repeat it.

Winning from match point down is no longer extraordinary. It is part of modern tennis.

And until players learn how to truly play the final point, “so close yet so far” will remain one of the defining themes of the season.