Gyeongju, South Korea – As US President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping prepare to meet for the first time since 2019, Washington and Beijing appear poised to reach a deal to lower the temperature of their fierce rivalry.
But while Trump and Xi are widely expected to de-escalate US-China tensions in South Korea on Thursday, expectations are modest for how far any agreement will go to resolve the myriad points of contention between the world’s two largest economies.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Many details of the expected deal that have been flagged in advance relate to avoiding future escalation, rather than rolling back the trade war that Trump launched during his first term and has dramatically expanded since returning to office this year.
Some of the proposed measures involve issues that have only arisen within the last few weeks, including China’s plan to impose strict export controls on rare earths from December 1.
Whatever Trump and Xi agree to on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Gyeongju, there is little doubt that Washington and Beijing will continue to butt heads as they jockey for influence in a rapidly shifting international order, according to analysts.
“I have modest expectations for this meeting,” said Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore.
“I think, no matter what happens this week, we haven’t seen the end of economic tensions, tariff threats, export controls and restrictions, and the use of unusual levers like digital rules,” Elms told Al Jazeera.
US President Donald Trump shakes hands with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a meeting on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, on June 29, 2019. [Susan Walsh/AP]
Contours of a deal
While the exact parameters of any deal are still to be determined by Trump and Xi, the contours of an agreement have emerged in recent days.
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said in media interviews this week that he expected China to defer its restrictions on rare earths and that Trump’s threatened 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods was “effectively off the table”.
Bessent said he also anticipated that the Chinese side would agree to increase purchases of US-grown soya beans, enhance cooperation with the US to halt the flow of chemicals used to manufacture fentanyl, and sign off on a finalised TikTok deal.
While heading off a further spiralling in US-China ties, a deal along these lines would leave intact a wide array of tariffs, sanctions and export controls that hinder trade and business between the sides.
Since Washington and Beijing reached a partial truce in their tit-for-tat tariff salvoes in May, the average US duty on Chinese goods has stood at more than 55 percent, while China’s average levy on US products has hovered at about 32 percent.
Washington has blacklisted hundreds of Chinese firms deemed to pose national security risks, and prohibited the export of advanced chips and key manufacturing equipment related to AI.
China has, in turn, added dozens of US companies to its “unreliable entity” list, launched antitrust investigations into Nvidia and Qualcomm, and restricted exports of more than a dozen rare earths and metallic elements, including gallium and dysprosium.
US-China trade has declined sharply since Trump re-entered the White House.
China’s exports to the US fell 27 percent in September, the sixth straight month of decline, even as outbound shipments rose overall amid expanding trade with Southeast Asia, Latin America, Europe and Africa.
China’s imports of US goods declined 16 percent, continuing a downward trend since April.
“The structural contradictions between China and the United States have not been resolved,” said Wang Wen, dean of the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China in Beijing, predicting continuing friction and “even worse” relations between the superpowers in the future.
“Most importantly, China’s strength is increasing and will surpass that of the United States in the future,” Wang told Al Jazeera.
‘De-escalation unlikely’
Shan Guo, a partner with Shanghai-based Hutong Research, said he expects the “bulk” of the deal between Trump and Xi to be about avoiding escalation. “A fundamental de-escalation is unlikely given the political environment in the US,” Guo told Al Jazeera.
A man films the logo of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit (APEC) outside of the venue in Gyeongju, South Korea, Tuesday, October 28, 2025 [Lee Jin-man/AP]
But with the US having no alternative to Chinese rare earths and minerals in the near-term, Washington and Beijing could put aside their differences for longer than past trade truces, Guo said.
“This means reduced downside risks in US-China relations for at least a year, or perhaps even longer,” he said.
Dennis Wilder, a professor at Georgetown University who worked on China at the CIA and the White House’s National Security Council, said that while he is optimistic the summit will produce “positive tactical results”, it will not mark the end of the trade war.
“A comprehensive trade deal is still not available,” Wilder told Al Jazeera.
“Bessent and his Chinese counterpart will continue negotiating in hopes of a more lasting agreement if and when President Trump visits China next year.”
Trump and Xi’s go-to language on the US-China relationship itself points to the gulf between the sides.
While Trump often complains about the US being “ripped off” by China, Xi has repeatedly called for their relations to be defined by “mutual respect” and “win-win cooperation”.
“The United States should treat China in a way that China considers respectful,” said Wang of Renmin University.
“They have to respect China, and if they don’t, then the United States will receive an equal response until they become able to respect others,” he added.
Welcome back to the Times of Troy newsletter, where after one last rain-soaked showdown in South Bend, we pour one out for one of the great rivalries in the history of college football. After a century of meeting on the football field, USC and Notre Dame are not currently scheduled to meet again. This, by all accounts, is a terrible shame.
Outside of L.A., the college football world has placed the blame for the rivalry’s demise squarely on USC’s shoulders. Notre Dame made sure that was the case when its athletic director, Pete Bevacqua, ran to Sports Illustrated last spring, immediately after USC made an offer to renew the series for one year.
Fight on! Are you a true Trojans fan?
As PR moves go, it was a smart one: By firing the first missive, Bevacqua knew that Notre Dame could shape the narrative around negotiations. And ever since, as Bevacqua hoped, Notre Dame has been cast by much of the national media as valiantly attempting to save the rivalry at any cost, while USC looks like its running scared away from it.
Which is really quite ironic, if you know the recent history of how Notre Dame has handled its rivalries.
Thirteen years ago, minutes before the two schools were set to face off in South Bend, former Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick famously handed then-Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon a letter as notice that Notre Dame intended to cancel the remainder of their rivalry series. It was as passive aggressive as scheduling changes get. Brandon didn’t even read the letter until after the game.
These two teams went way back, before USC even first fielded a football team. The two Midwest rivals first faced off back in 1887, when Michigan literally taught Notre Dame how to play football. (Not kidding.) Not to mention it was actually a Detroit Free Press columnist who first called Notre Dame the “Fighting Irish.” (Imagine the royalties!)
But in 2012, Notre Dame declared without any further conversation that it was backing out of the game. The reason? As part of its move to the Atlantic Coast Conference in every other sport, the Irish football program agreed to play five games against ACC schools every year.
No one at Notre Dame seemed all that concerned about history and tradition then. Swarbrick, at the time, called canceling the series “a necessary precaution,” given the future uncertainty surrounding its schedule.
Sound familiar?
Except, in this case, Notre Dame kept Purdue on its future schedule. And Michigan State. It chose to maintain its series with Navy, which had beaten the Irish just three times in the previous half-century, as well as Stanford. I wonder why.
Months later, then-Michigan coach Brady Hoke told a crowd at a booster luncheon that Notre Dame was “chickening out” of the rivalry. And he was right.
A dozen years later, Notre Dame is floating the same accusations about USC.
Except, in this case, USC has made efforts to maintain the series after moving to a much less flexible and more difficult schedule in the Big Ten. It has tried to keep the game going despite being locked into nine conference games — and with far less incentive to add strong non-conference opponents than there was in 2012. USC even amended its initial offer to extend the rivalry for multiple years, instead of just one, as a compromise.
Look, USC isn’t blameless in all of this. But no one seems to have acknowledged yet that Notre Dame hasn’t exactly helped negotiations along. It doesn’t want to move the game from October or November to September, as USC has asked — not because of tradition, as has been suggested, but purely because it’s much more convenient to Notre Dame to keep USC later in the season, when no other top programs want a team such as Notre Dame smack dab in the middle of its conference slate.
Who cares about the tradition of when the game is played, if the other option is it’s not played at all? If the Irish are so concerned about maintaining the USC rivalry, why didn’t they insist that Clemson — a team it has much less history with — play their newly signed 12-season series in mid-October?
Because Notre Dame is used to dictating the terms of engagement and getting its way. It has the flexibility of being without a conference. And it also knows it has the narrative firmly on its side. So why bother budging when the pitchforks are already pointed toward USC?
I don’t expect that to change any time soon, even as both athletic directors say they’re “optimistic” an agreement can be reached. Not unless USC is ready to capitulate. Until then, the public pressure will remain on the Trojans alone, while Notre Dame points across the bargaining table and cries chicken. Irony, be damned.
Yes … technically.
If USC wins each of its next five games to finish 10-2, you can count on the Trojans being in the 12-team field. But anything less than that, and they’re going to have a tough time making a case.
Let’s say USC only loses on the road to No. 6 Oregon from this point on. That would put the Trojans at 9-3, with just two Big Ten losses — and three overall. That’s a good season! But no team with three losses has ever made it into the Playoff, and while there’s a legitimate argument that this year will be the first, USC presumably wouldn’t have enough marquee wins to move the needle with the committee.
Michigan is currently USC’s only win over a team above .500. Nebraska, Iowa and Northwestern are all 5-2, but only one of the three has a top 25 win this season — the Huskers won their opener against No. 21 Cincinnati. The toughest test left aside from Oregon could very well be UCLA, which has won three in a row after starting 0-4.
Perhaps there’s a world where USC, with one conference loss, could end up in the Big Ten title game. But in addition to beating the Ducks, that would also require moving past either Ohio State or Indiana, neither of which have looked particularly vulnerable of late.
However you try to spin it, getting USC into the Playoff requires serious finesse. By losing to Notre Dame, the Trojans closed off the easiest path to a postseason run.
More than likely, USC’s hopes now hinge on running the table. But nothing I’ve seen recently suggests that’s a likely option. Instead, with each passing week, my 8-4 prediction is feeling just about right.
Jayden Maiava throws a pass under pressure in the second quarter against Notre Dame.
(Justin Casterline / Getty Images)
—Stop asking if Lincoln Riley is going to give up playcalling. It ain’t happening. It wasn’t that long ago that Riley’s playcalling was the main reason for his historic rise through the coaching ranks. That felt like ancient history on Saturday night, as Riley dialed up a failed trick play to star wideout Makai Lemon that ended in a game-altering fumble. Riley admitted after the game that it was “a stupid call,” which is the closest he’s come to accountability in that department. He added later that his two failed fourth-and-short calls weren’t very good either. “I’ve gotta be way better for our guys,” he said after. It’s good that he recognizes his shortcomings in this situation, but how we’ve gotten to this point, with Riley’s playcalling having a clear negative affect, I can’t quite explain. Riley has had impressive moments calling plays this season, which are easy to forget after such a bad performance. But the fact that he seems to be at his worst in the biggest moments is not the best sign for turning things around in the future. All that said, it would presumably take an intervention from one of his bosses to hand off those duties to Luke Huard. The ego hit would simply be too significant for Riley to initiate that change otherwise.
—USC struggled to protect Jayden Maiava, and it paid the price. The Trojans’ front allowed a season-high 17 pressures to Notre Dame, and Maiava completed a meager 31% of his passes and threw both of his interceptions when under pressure Saturday. The good news is that reinforcements are on the way. Starting left tackle Elijah Paige dressed for Saturday’s game, but was only available in case of emergency. Center Kilian O’Connor, meanwhile, was surprisingly listed as questionable against Notre Dame. Both should be good to go when USC takes on Nebraska in two weeks.
—USC has lost 11 straight on the road to top 25 teams, six of which came under Riley. The last win USC had against a ranked opponent on the road came in November … of 2016! And USC’s last chance this season to rectify this terrible streak will likely be in Eugene next month — a game the Trojans are, as of now, unlikely to win. That means we’re staring down the barrel of an entire decade without a win over a ranked team on the road, which is totally unacceptable for a team that sees itself as a blue blood of college football.
—After having zero rim protection a year ago, USC might have one of the best rim protectors in the Big Ten this season. Just take a look at the statline for new 7-foot-5 center Gabe Dynes from USC’s exhibition against Loyola Marymount. Dynes had six blocks, three of which came in his first 10 minutes of the game. Dynes also had nine points, eight rebounds and even three assists, as the USC took care of business in a 60-51 win. The Trojans shot just 33%, but showed that their defense can be a strength by holding Loyola Marymount to just 28% from the field. Dynes will be an important part of that equation and if he can contribute on offense, well … the sky could be the limit for the 7-footer.
Olympic sports spotlight
After losing four of six to start its Big Ten slate, USC’s women’s volleyball team bounced back in a big way over the past weekend, winning two critical matches on the road. The highlight of the weekend was a 3-1 win over No. 9 Wisconsin, USC’s best win yet of this season.
Redshirt freshman outside hitter London Wijay had a career performance in the win over Wisconsin, tying a career-high with 24 kills, while freshman libero Taylor Deckert tallied back-to-back 20-dig performances over the weekend. USC also handled Iowa in four sets, to bring its Big Ten record to 4-4 on the season.
Jason Bateman as Vince, Jude Law as Jake in “Black Rabbit.”
(Courtesy of Netflix)
The last time Jason Bateman got in with the wrong crowd on a Netflix show, one of the best shows of the last decade was born. I didn’t want to place “Ozark”-level expectations on “Black Rabbit,” Bateman’s new show on Netflix with Jude Law, but after watching the first two episodes, I can say with confidence that it’s off to just as strong of a start.
Law stars as a New York restaurateur whose life is upended when his estranged brother, played by Bateman, suddenly comes back into his life and drags him unwillingly into New York’s criminal underworld. The show’s tone is about as tense as it gets — think “The Bear” meets “Uncut Gems” — but if you’re in the mood for a thrill ride, then this show is worth your time.
Until next time …
That concludes today’s newsletter. If you have any feedback, ideas for improvement or things you’d like to see, email me at [email protected], and follow me on X at @Ryan_Kartje. To get this newsletter in your inbox, click here.
Longtime rivals Sylmar and San Fernando are set to meet on Saturday at the Coliseum in a tripleheader for high school football.
The junior varsity teams will play at 2:30 p.m., followed by a girls flag football game at 5 p.m. and the varsity 11-man game at 7:30 p.m. Tickets are $15 and available for purchase at each school this week, with $12 going back to the schools. Tickets also will be available at the Coliseum on Saturday.
San Fernando is an eight-time City Section champion with a rich history that includes its wishbone teams of the 1970s featuring the late Charles White, who won the Heisman Trophy at USC. Sylmar won City titles in 1992 and 1994 under coach Jeff Engilman.
“This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for our student-athletes, families, alumni and the broader community to come together and celebrate the legacy and rivalry of two proud programs in a truly iconic venue,” Sylmar athletic director Wilquin Garcia said.
It will be a Valley Mission League game, with Sylmar 4-3 and 1-2 in league and San Fernando 5-2 and 2-1. In flag football, San Fernando is 7-6 and Sylmar is 4-5.
This is a daily look at the positive happenings in high school sports. To submit any news, please email [email protected].
Borg won 66 singles titles, spent 109 weeks as world number one and claimed a record 41 successive wins at Wimbledon.
His retirement at 25 – a time when tennis players are starting to peak – was a shock.
“I had enough. I lost the interest and the motivation,” he said.
“If I knew what was going to happen in the years after, I would continue to play tennis.”
In his autobiography, Heartbeats: A Memoir, co-written with his wife Patricia, the notoriously private Borg speaks about his post-playing career struggles.
“I had no plan. People today, they have guidance. I was lost in the world,” he said.
“There was more drugs, there was pills, alcohol, to escape myself from reality.
“I didn’t have to think about it. Of course it’s not good, it destroys you as a person.”
Scotland have not been able to lay so much as a glove on England since however.
Instead it has been one-way traffic, with the Red Roses juggernaut steaming through Scotland again and again.
England have played Scotland 34 times in total, and, apart from those two defeats from another millennia, have won every time.
In the past five meetings, the average points difference between the teams has stretched to nearly 50.
The Auld Enemy has become old news; a rivalry devoid of jeopardy, a bitter punchline delivered on repeat for the Scots.
Kennedy believes the current gap between the teams is due to three things; structure, investment and raw numbers.
“There are a lot more players in England, firstly,” she says.
“Secondly, it is the pathways for players to become internationals. England set them up early on. They were ahead of every nation in that, not just Scotland.
“England were a lot quicker off the mark with investing in both sevens and XVs, which then feeds into domestic rugby. You don’t just become an international player, you have to come though those clubs.”
Kennedy is hopeful that the Celtic Challenge, a cross-border club competition with teams from Scotland, Ireland and Wales that launched in 2023, can provide a proving ground to rival England’s PWR in time.
The cause of this friction, Liverpool’s interest in Isak, will continue to the end of the transfer window and probably beyond.
Newcastle’s supporters were in no mood to forgive or forget how their star striker has, in their eyes, betrayed them, and they were unsparing towards the club they hold responsible as the catalyst for his desire to leave.
This is now shaping up as a conflict for the ages, especially as it is unclear how the story that has caused the antagonism will end.
Liverpool’s fans revelled in how their interest in Isak has caused such rage among the Toon Army, their chants of “Hand Him Over Newcastle” greeted with a frenzy of indignation.
Newcastle need a resolution somehow, even if fences look almost impossible to repair with Isak. They cannot allow him to be the spectre hanging over every game.
Liverpool won this particular battle, but the other big takeaway on this evidence is that they need to focus their attention on signing a defender, presumably Crystal Palace’s Marc Guehi, before making any definitive decision on Isak.
As against Bournemouth in their first game of the season at Anfield, Liverpool let slip a 2-0 lead before winning late on, looking horribly vulnerable in defence in the process.
The advantage they forged for themselves here flattered them as they piled up mistakes at the back and carelessly conceded possession with regularity.
Slot should be seriously concerned about how they were shaken up so badly by Newcastle’s 10 men. Indeed, before Ngumoha’s strike, it was Newcastle who looked more likely to score.
Liverpool, in only two games admittedly, have looked nothing like the side that strolled to the Premier League last season with such poise, apart from the fact they are still winning games.
Ibrahima Konate, the player most at risk from Guehi’s potential arrival and one who has yet to agree a new contract, was as uncertain as he was against Bournemouth. Slot also has yet to find the tweak to ensure he brings the best out of £116m attacker Florian Wirtz, who was substituted with 10 minutes left.
Left-back Milos Kerkez is still settling in, but the chaotic nature of Liverpool’s backline could have Slot pondering the return of the experienced Andy Robertson, who has the proven quality and greater understanding with his defensive colleagues.
Newcastle will be nursing their wounds over this loss as they try to find a way to end the Isak impasse.
This rivalry, like the discussions around Isak’s future, is one that will run and run.
Rob Manfred normally does what many fans consider an annoyingly effective job of keeping Major League Baseball’s strategic plans out of the public square.
So maybe the MLB commissioner was caught in an unguarded moment, staring down at a diamond from the ESPN “Sunday Night Baseball” booth in the cozy confines of Williamsport, Pa., and the Little League World Series.
Or maybe his comments were calculated. Either way, he spoke freely about how expanding from the current 30 teams could create an ideal chance to reset the way teams are aligned in divisions and leagues.
Manfred was asked on air for a window into the future. Expansion, realignment, both?
“The first two topics are related, in my mind,” he replied. “I think if we expand, it provides us with an opportunity to geographically realign. I think we could save a lot of wear and tear on our players in terms of travel. And I think our postseason format would be even more appealing for entities like ESPN, because you’d be playing out of the East and out of the West.”
Taking that thinking to an extreme would put the Dodgers and Angels in a division with, say, the San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants, Las Vegas Athletics and Seattle Mariners.
Would that collection — let’s call it the Pacific Division — be part of the American or National League? Maybe neither. Instead, geographic realignment could result in Eastern and Western Conferences similar to the NBA.
Pushback from traditionalists might be vigorous. Call them leagues, call them conferences, geographical realignment would make for some strange bedfellows.
Former MLB player and current MLB Network analyst Cameron Maybin posted on X that making sure the divisions are balanced is more important than geography.
“Manfred’s realignment talk isn’t just about moving teams around, it tilts playoff balance,” Maybin said on X. “Some divisions get watered down others overloaded and rivalries that drive October story lines we love, vanish. Baseball needs competitive integrity not manufactured shakeups.”
Manfreds realignment talk isnt just about moving teams around it tilts playoff balance. Some divisions get watered down others overloaded and rivalries that drive October storylines we love, vanish. Baseball needs competitive integrity not manufactured shakeups.
Yet Manfred makes a persuasive argument that grouping teams by geographic location would have its benefits.
“That 10 o’clock time slot where we sometimes get lost in Anaheim would be two West Coast teams,” he said. “Then that 10 o’clock spot that’s a problem for us becomes an opportunity for our West Coast audience. I think the owners realize there is a demand for Major League Baseball in a lot of great cities, and we have an opportunity to do something good around that expansion process.”
Manfred said in February that he’d like expansion to be approved by 2029, his last year as commissioner. MLB hasn’t expanded since the Arizona Diamondbacks and Tampa Bay (Devil) Rays were added in 1998.
Expansion teams “won’t be playing by the time I’m done, but I would like the process along and [locations] selected,” Manfred said.
Several cities are courting MLB for a franchise, and the league is reported to be leaning toward Nashville and Salt Lake City as favorites. Portland, Orlando, San Antonio and Charlotte are other possibilities.
The Times’ Bill Shaikin has pointed out that geographical realignment would be tied to schedule reform that could help kindle rivalries and encourage fans to visit opposing ballparks that are within driving distance.
The future home of the Rays is in flux, and that decision likely will precede MLB choosing expansion cities, even after the recent news that Florida developer Patrick Zalupski has agreed to pay $1.7 billion for the team.
And soon afterward, if Manfred’s vision comes to fruition, geographical realignment would follow, and the Southern California Freeway Series could become just another series between divisional rivals.
Sinner, 23, and 22-year-old Alcaraz have created a duopoly in the men’s game over the past two seasons.
Because of his brilliance, Sinner has remained the world number one – despite serving a three-month doping ban this year in a case which rocked the sport.
The pair have gained a grip on the Grand Slam tournaments, winning the past six majors between them.
Their epic French Open battle was another demonstration of how the absorbing rivalry – which the ATP Tour has long pinned its hopes on filling the Federer-Nadal-Novak Djokovic void – could be a blockbuster for years to come.
“You cannot compare what the ‘Big Three’ did for 15-plus years. [Our rivalry] is not that big yet,” said three-time Grand Slam champion Sinner, who is aiming for his first non-hard court major.
“This is the second consecutive Grand Slam that we are in the final and playing each other – I believe it’s good for the sport.
“The more rivalries we have from now on, the better it is, because people want to see young player going against each other.”
The quality, excitement and tension of the recent Roland Garros final accelerated interest in the pair.
Alcaraz fighting back from two sets down – and having saved three championship points – to win a five-setter in over five hours has whetted the appetite for Wimbledon.
The five-time major champion expects to be pushed “to the limit” again at the All England Club.
“It’s going to be a great day, a great final. I’m just excited about it,” he said.
“I just hope not to be five and a half hours again. But if I have to, I will.”
Wimbledon, United Kingdom – Expectations will run high, and so will the temperatures in southwest London, when Carlos Alcaraz steps on Centre Court to defend his Wimbledon title against Jannik Sinner on Sunday.
The next instalment of an enthralling rivalry between the top two players in men’s tennis will come under the limelight once again at one of the biggest stages in the game – the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club – on a hot afternoon in the United Kingdom’s capital.
Two-time Wimbledon champion Alcaraz expects to be pushed to the limit by world number one Sinner in a meeting that has already drawn comparisons with the great Wimbledon finals of the modern era.
“I expect to be on the limit, to be on the line [in the final],” Alcaraz said while speaking to the media moments after Sinner’s near-faultless semifinal 6-3, 6-3, 6-4 win over Novak Djokovic on Friday.
A few hours earlier, the Spaniard had booked a spot in his third consecutive Wimbledon final with a resilient performance against Taylor Fritz, which brought him a 6-4, 5-7, 6-3, 7-6 (8-6) win.
It will be the 13th on-court meeting between the two, and their second Grand Slam final in the space of five weeks.
Their duel in the French Open final lasted five hours and 29 minutes and added fuel to the fiery-yet-friendly rivalry between the young tennis stars.
Alcaraz knows his opponent all too well and expects nothing short of another spectacle.
“Whatever Jannik has is because he has learned from everything – he just gets better after every match, every day,” Alcaraz said of the top seed.
The Spaniard said he expected Sinner to be in better shape mentally and physically for the Wimbledon final, but that he was not looking forward to another hours-long match.
“I just hope not to be five and a half hours on court again. But if I have to, I will.”
Meanwhile, Sinner – the tall, stoic and speedy Italian who stands between Alcaraz and a chance to become only the fifth man to win three straight Wimbledon titles – believes beating the holder will be “very tough”.
“I’m very happy to share the court with Carlos once again. It’s going to be difficult, I know that,” Sinner said on Friday.
The Australian Open champion said he loves playing Grand Slam finals – Sunday’s will be his fifth in two years.
“I always try to put myself in these kinds of situations that I really love. Sundays at every tournament are very special.”
The 23-year-old from northern Italy termed Alcaraz as the favourite, given his record at the tournament and on grass courts.
“He is the favourite. He won here the last two times. He’s again in the final. It’s very tough to beat him on grass, but I like these challenges.”
Alcaraz and Sinner after their epic French Open final [File: Susan Mullane/Imagn Images via Reuters]
‘Fire vs ice’
Out of the 12 occasions that both players have met, four have been at Grand Slams, but this is only their second meeting in the final.
The pair’s only other meeting at Wimbledon came in the fourth round in 2022, when Sinner won 6-1, 6-4, 6-7 (6-8), 6-3. Alcaraz, however, brushed aside the reference by saying that both men are changed players from what they were three years ago.
“We’re completely different players on grass and on all surfaces.”
The 22-year-old from Murcia, in southeastern Spain, will be buoyed by his 5-0 record against Sinner in the past two years.
Despite Alcaraz’s success against his nemesis, it is Sinner who has consistently topped the men’s rankings by racking up regular wins and points on the ATP circuit.
All things considered, there is not much that separates the two ahead of their highly anticipated match.
Just ask Djokovic.
While the 24-time Grand Slam champion picked Alcaraz due to his past success at Wimbledon, Djokovic predicted “a very close match-up, like they had in Paris” when asked to choose a winner.
“I think I will give a slight edge to Carlos because of the two titles he’s won here and the way he’s playing and the confidence he has right now, but it’s just a slight advantage, because Jannik is hitting the ball extremely well.”
It is not just their contrasting styles of play – Sinner relies on his baseline game and shot speed, while Alcaraz likes to cover the court with his nimble footwork and excellent coverage – but also their on-court personalities that set the two apart while making them an engaging pair to watch.
Before the French Open final, Alcaraz said in an interview that a “fire vs ice” analogy fits them perfectly.
“I guess you can say I am like fire because of the way I react on court and show emotions, while Jannik remains calm,” the Spaniard said with his trademark smile.
Alcaraz is never shy of showing his emotions on court [File: Stephanie Lecocq/Reuters]
In the shadow of the greats
For the fans, though, the pair offer another chance to pick sides and look forward to tennis tournaments that could pit the two against each other.
“It’s a dream final,” Catherine Shaw, a tennis fan who watched both the men’s semifinals on Centre Court, told Al Jazeera.
“They are the next big thing when it comes to tennis rivalries, so it’s exciting times for tennis fans.”
Stepping out in the shadows of some of the greatest players and rivals – Stefan Edberg vs Ivan Lendl, Bjorn Borg vs John McEnroe, Andre Agassi vs Pete Sampras and Rafael Nadal vs Roger Federer – the young players will have big shoes to fill.
Both are aware of the weight their match-up carries but refuse to be compared with their heroes just yet.
“I think the things that we are doing right now are great for tennis,” Alcaraz said ahead of the final.
“We just fight to engage more people to watch tennis. We’re fighting for tennis to be bigger, as all the tennis players are doing.
“For me, it’s sharing the big tournaments with Jannik, or just playing in the finals of the tournaments… We’re still really young.
“I hope to keep doing the right things for the next five to 10 years, so our rivalry is on the same table as those players.”
Sinner and Alcaraz will meet again on the iconic Centre Court at Wimbledon after their meeting in 2022 [File: Hannah Mckay/Reuters]
Jude Bellingham presents a tactical conundrum for new manager Xabi Alonso.
In his first season at Real Madrid he was fantastic, scoring 23 goals in 42 games while playing in an advanced midfield role to help Real Madrid to the 2023-24 La Liga and Champions League titles.
Last term he was pushed deeper and wider to accommodate Kylian Mbappe and only managed 14 strikes in 53 games as Real failed to win a major trophy.
At Alonso’s unveiling as Real manager he said he saw Bellingham more as a central midfielder and that’s where he started against Pachuca on Sunday – in the central left position of a 4-3-3.
But, when Raul Asencio was sent off after seven minutes, Madrid switched to a 4-4-1 with Bellingham playing even more centrally and driving from deep.
Two minutes after the tactics were tweaked during a first-half drinks break Bellingham made a late run into the box, picked up the ball from Fran Garcia and smashed a shot into the bottom corner.
It was 10-man Madrid’s first meaningful attack and changed the entire momentum of the match.
“When Bellingham comes from deep and arrives, he is phenomenal. That is an amazing goal and that is where he plays best,” former Italy striker Christian Vieri told DAZN.
“Alonso is the coach, he has to find a way to make them play. Bellingham scored so many goals before Mbappe arrived.
“It’s not our problem, it is Alonso’s problem and he is going to be having sleepless nights.”
Ex-Chelsea midfielder Jon-Obi Mikel added: “That is where Bellingham is best, when he arrives late from midfield.
“No one can stop Jude in that role because he has the power and energy, he can be very special when doing that.”
One of Alonso’s biggest problems this season – and one which former boss Carlo Ancelotti struggled to solve – will be keeping all his stars happy.
Mikel added: “You have to play the players in their best positions because big players want to play in their best positions and that is the problem Xabi Alonso is going to have.
“We know Mbappe wants to play out on the left but they have one of the best players there in Vinicius Jr so where do you play him? He doesn’t like playing through the middle.
“It is a massive problem for Xabi Alonso. If he can find a way to solve the problem then he may have a team. They need to play as a team not as individuals.”
