Australian OpenGrand Slams

Australian Open 2023 – Day 10 Recap

Paul Progresses into Maiden Grand Slam Semi Final and Djokovic Dismantles Rublev.

The semi-final lineups at the 2023 Australian are complete, with Tommy Paul and Novak Djokovic joining Stefanos Tsitsipas and Karen Khachanov in the last four.

On day 10 in Melbourne, Tommy Paul defeated Ben Shelton in four sets, while Novak Djokovic comprehensively dispatched Andrey Rublev in straight sets.

While the last four of a slam is uncharted territory for the American, it is a second home for Djokovic, who made serene progress in 2 hours and 3 minutes.

It was a hugely impressive victory from the 9-time Australian Open champion, who played with unbelievable control from the baseline.

Day 10 Australian Open 2023 Results

Winner Loser Scoreline
Novak Djokovic Andrey Rublev 6-1, 6-2, 6-4
Tommy Paul Ben Shelton 7-6(6), 6-3, 5-7, 6-4

Paul Progresses to Semi-Final

tommy paul ao qf 2023

In the all-American quarter-final, Tommy Paul came through 7-6(6), 6-3, 5-7, 6-4 against Ben Shelton.

Both players were playing in their first Grand Slam quarter-final, but the higher-ranked Paul produced the better tennis, landing 43 winners to 26 and serving well throughout.

The first set was key, and Paul produced two quality points from 6-6 in the tiebreak to seal it. After falling behind two sets to love, Shelton made a mini-revival in the third set to force a fourth, but Paul raised his level, breaking early and maintaining the advantage to book his spot in the semi-final.

I’m really happy to get through that match. There wasn’t too much rhythm in the match, but Ben’s a very tough player to play against, and he’s going to be in many more matches like this, so I think everyone should be excited for that kid. Making it to the second weekend of a Slam, that’s everyone’s dream when they start playing tennis. So I can’t believe I’m here right now. Tommy Paul on his win over Shelton


On Court Interview

Djokovic Dismantles Rublev

djokovic ao rublev

In a blistering performance, Novak Djokovic defeated Andrey Rublev 6-1, 6-2, 6-4.

There were some close games in the first two sets, but Djokovic was in complete control and the way he can dictate play from the baseline is ridiculous.

The key game was with Djokovic serving at 3-2 in the second set, where has fended off break points to maintain the break, and from there, he never looked back.

His ball striking is scalpal like precise, and it’s hard to see which player currently on tour can put him out of his comfort zone.

Federer could do it with his serve and attacking style, and Nadal could do it with his heavy spin and ability to charge around the court, but from the next-gen, they are essentially reliant on playing at their maximum for the entire match while hoping Novak has a slightly off day.

Take Rublev, for example, he has a huge forehand, but Djokovic took on his strength and never let him settle. There were a few moments where he created some chances, but Djokovic just shut the door with clinical serving, saving all five break points he faced on serve.

Novak’s return game was equally impressive, winning 19 of 28-second serve return points, helping him to break serve five times. Relentless pressure, which is hard to handle.

Overall, I think the scoreline in the first two sets doesn’t speak the truth or the match’s reality. It was some really close games that we had. Andrey is a great opponent and a great player. I’ve got tonnes of respect for him; he is one of the biggest forehands and one of the quickest players on the Tour. If I have to sum it up, all the important shots and moments, I found my best tennis. So that’s what makes me the most pleased tonight. I would rank it as my second-best match, but very close to the performance two nights ago. I cannot be happier with my tennis, honestly. I’m playing very solid from the back of the court and love playing in these conditions on this court. It’s definitely the most special court for me. Djokovic on his win over Rublev


On Court Interview

A skiing race with Federer?

Friday’s Semi Final Lineup

  • Stefanos Tsitsipas vs Karen Khachanov
  • Novak Djokovic vs Tommy Paul

Who are your picks to make the final? Let me know in the comments.


Editor of Perfect Tennis and a big fan of Roger Federer, I've spent countless hours watching and analysing his matches. Alongside playing the sport, I also enjoy writing about the tour, rackets, strings, and the technicalities of the game. Whether it's breaking down the latest tournament results or discussing the latest gear innovations, I'm always eager to share my insights with fellow tennis enthusiasts.

Related Articles


  1. Djoker made Rublev look like an amateur/club level player. Doing it all with one leg, its very telling how ‘lack of talent’ the next gen are. Their only weapon – hit big serve and big forehand and hope their opponent misses?? It not going to work against grandpa Federer, injured prone Nadal and one-leg pirate of Serbia Djoker. Can someone build a bionic knee for Roger to make a comeback maybe?

    1. Yup, a few close games but Djoker had another gear.

      Tsitsipas looks to have improved a bit with how he is able to get himself some free points to keep the heat off. Hopefully he makes the final as him and Djoker been the best two so far.

  2. Thanks for report and highlights. Judged from those, I don’t think Rublev looked completely dismantled, there were points much more interesting than that, and Djoko also put in some acknowledgement afterwards. I don’t fall for his celebration of Roger though, trying I think taking some popularity through that, and me remembering how the chemistry was earlier on.
    It looks like Djoko holds on being the strongest for now, credit for that. Although judging from highlights T.P. did look very well playing – so maybe the SF between those hopefully still can bring some interesting tennis too.

    1. Anyone who watched Laver Cup saw there was no bad blood. Just respect.

      Novak needs no extra popularity. Look at the crowds for him in Australia. He has proven himself to be of great character over the last 2 years. While the rest of the world was losing their minds and taking experimental products, he stood firm. I have far more respect for him than those players who faked taking it to get the pass. I am glad that they avoided potential death and a host of other issues, but they are the worst. Instead, they cowered, while people like Novak had to take a stand. People will look back on that with great admiration and respect.

      Meanwhile, Federer was in Davos. Sad to see.

      1. Hard to imagine not. Least he hasn’t put anything about climate change on social media yet, despite spending half his life flying around the world on private jets to tennis tournaments. But I won’t hold my breath.

      2. Hahaha, no I guess, the only thing about the world, Federer understands, is selling gear (currently ON). To be serious – it’s an insult to doubt Federer is not aware what Davos is.

  3. End result is Djoko for no. 22…glad he’ll equal Nadal…and likely pass him later this year. Nadal will not win another major, if even another tournament.

    1. You are the half of FedFans hating Nadal more than Djoker?
      I thought everyone would hate more Djoker right now because he can pass Fed by even more slams.
      But hey – I understand. Nadal was never assumed to pass Fed because of his clay-bound career but he made it. So he deserves the hell right now.
      Djoker is someone from another world (NOT THE WEST) and is allegedly not popular and can be easier erased from the common memory because of being stranger in the mainly Western world of professional sports.

  4. Thanks, Jonathan. Acknowledging Roger gets Djoker brownie pts for sure, lol. I watched some of the Paul vs Shelton match. To me, Shelton wasn’t impressive at all. Am I missing something?

  5. I really do despair of the state of men’s tennis. I know I’ve been saying it for the best part of the past 5 years, but now that it’s no longer being masked by the Big 3 it’s even more obvious. I also said last week that it wouldn’t be the first time Djokovic had supposedly been injured at a slam and made a seemingly miraculous recovery in the later stages, and that I thought he’d likely end up winning the whole thing again. Looks as though I might be right. Oh, I realise that you can be carrying or get an injury and that the days off between matches do give a chance for healing, but I still wouldn’t have expected it of something like a hamstring injury, yet he says he’s fine now.
    And I’d still love to see the alternative universe in which Murray got Djokovic instead of Berrettini in the first round 🙂

    1. Federer was deemed heroic when he won AO 2017 with his groin strain. But Djokovic is faking his injury. Understand what’s going on. the narrative is controlled.

      Murray wouldn’t stand a chance vs Djoker even in the first round. He beat a guy who can’t hit a backhand, and another who missed multiple chances, many of them overheads and forehands into open courts. Fair play, Murray will run all day and chase one more ball down, but as soon as he ran into someone half decent (who isn’t even good form), he lost easily.

  6. Main thing self-called Fedfans are busy with since long time is the hamletic question whom to hate more. Rafa or Novak? The problem is quite solved as Rafa is almost done because of amassed injuries, so the enemy no. 1 is of course Novak. I can recall the dominating attitude here about Nadal’s “fake injuries and alleged doping” so long Rafa was still competitive and a danger for Federer’s legacy.
    It’s easy to understand you dream of the rival of your hero to die day before the final and never see the potentially epic match, because such matches can be won and lost by anyone. This is just how the top sport looks like. Top fandom never existed – all fans come from medieval villages “playing” ancient soccer on terms of the war. It’s sad and probably one of reasons, Federer will think twice before appearing anywhere in pro tennis environment to hear the noise of hate being sold as love.

    1. Dream of the rival of your hero to die day before the final?
      I think that’s honestly the stupidest thing you’ve attributed to tennis fans yet. The vocal extremists are not the majority.

      1. Can’t you get the irony?
        What about having some minor injury or simply bad day in the office?
        It seems you need an explanation.
        Most fans think more about the rival to lose than about the hero to win.

      2. Thanks that does make more sense but “die” is quite the metaphor you must admit.
        A bad day in the office happens to everyone, but yes I guess some may prefer the epic match to never happen. Me – I love epic matches.
        One of my favourites in recent years was Rog vs Novak at Paris Masters. Very close and felt quite a roller coaster ride – Novak won but Federer didn’t give up and much better for that match to have happened rather than not.

      3. Of course “die” was metaphor. Thought it would be obvious or would not use the word.
        Principally we agree, I see 🙂

    2. Sport is absurd. To feel happy just because of some more or less difficult win. To get angry at the opponent just because he’s good enough to be a challenge? Ah well. The path to suspect of foul play is short and easy, too short and easy most times, yes. But to wish him dead the day before the final? That wouldn’t be a win at all, would it? Not in sport anyway.
      Yes, some of the fans (me included, although I’m getting growing indifferent) would prefer somebody else than the evident in-form-favorit to win this slam, for sure. And for me it’s mostly because of my individual taste of style. But prefer him to be dead? Wouldn’t be a win, and too easy a loss.
      And the miss of RF stays, whatever.

      1. “Most fans think more about the rival to lose than about the hero to win.” Is that irony too? If not, how do you know?

      2. Sorry, some of my statements are not ironic. It’s up to you to guess 🙂
        How do I know? I have eyes and ears. I can read (with understanding). I can analyze myself. And … of course, on the end I can be wrong 🙁

      3. Who reads this blog from time to time, can find him/herself out, if it’s true. Assuming everyone here is telling what he/she thinks and not what he/she believes to fit well the atmosphere (Jonathan’s articles excluded – they never spread this kind of atmosphere. It starts with the “First” comment 😉

    1. Unfortunately you miss the point. So long anyone remains private, it’s up to them. Since they start to present their views in internet and behaviors on stadiums, they are no more private and everyone (yes, me too) can observe, analyze, assess and get a founded view of who they are. Which of course applies to myself and I have (and cannot have) anything against someone else thinking and telling, what they think about me. And they do this regularly.
      While you express your (negative) emotions, you forgot logic, which you are able to use but it’s up to you to use it.
      Don’t like to be observed, assessed and commented by others, stay home.
      On the forums like this (especially this because it is declared to be free speech place) you may be ignored (but you just post here not to be ignored) but you cannot tell anyone, what is up to anyone, who decided to do the same.
      Do and think what you want and don’t express it here or on another similar place and you have your privacy and everything up to you.
      I have learned a lot about fans (Federer’s fans in this case) on the old Federer’s website and you know very well, how it looked like. This atmosphere was unfortunately transplanted to this blog (probably together with a large group of old website’s users). It seems, that I’m alone still using the same nick, while others are hiding. Not very important because we are all virtual beings here, but also telling a bit about characters. And the thing with Nadal and Djokovic was quite extensively explored there, just because it was time when both were “stealing” Federer so many titles.
      I don’t know much about other fan families, but I don’t see why it should look differently elsewhere.
      That’s why I’m generalizing my conclusions.

      1. Of course you are free to interpret as foolish as you want. And imo any answer may be more entertaining than none. And yes, many have the wishes been Roger to win, – every time! –this is what a fan wants? But is a win because of the opponents sickness a real win? and isn’t it with a bit dubious honor? I have seen sometimes a a few fans consoling themselves by writing “oh well a win is a win”, – somehow better than a loss. I have also seen numerous writing – myself as well – that “win or lose, RF is my number one”. And it could be, that a more or less secret wish when doubting him to win a match, would be a “bad day at the office” for the other one. The logic for me is that all fans prefer their hero to win, and to allege that “the fans” prefer the opponent to be sick rather than their hero to win is out of any logical thinking, not to say knowing. But of course an entertaining allegation. Might be true for a few “vindictives” – sometimes, in a more or less short time. But “the fans”? This isn’t knowledge, it is an allegation. In which I don’t agree.

      2. I cannot analyze what people think directly. I can do it only based on their behaviors and expressions. If I see more often than not people expressing joy about “beloved” rival fighting an injury, how can I interpret this? It’s nothing new for me. It is still alive even after Fed’s retirement. Maybe it will grow so long Nadal and Djoker are alive, active, still a kind of opponents, now worse than ever because Fed cannot defend his records anymore.
        Now everyone waiting impatiently for the moment they both disappear (die, retire, whatever). Not much traces of the hatred and anger disappearing. Not much traces of understanding, their rivalry was bigger than anyone of them and they seem to understand it very well.
        The . big misfortune of tennis (other sports too) is, the fanatic audience don’t understand the game and instead of being happy about having seen a big match between big rivals, they are unhappy about 1, 2 or 3 points, which went in favor of the rival. Rather blaming own hero for not having won them than understand the big effort of own hero to win but to win beautifully. And not accepting things like “good loss”.
        Somehow I started my “fandom” in tennis from scratch thanks to Thiem, who was (and still is) nobody compared to Big3 and maybe everyone will be. In terms of stats. Maybe in terms of beauty of the game or personal charisma.
        I have learned something I called “transcend win”, the loss, in which any given player delivered such a fight and beauty and ability to respect the greatness of the other and be happy over having achieved such a good loss. Probably everyone, Federer included, have had such wins, but somehow fans could not see and value them, because it was always about blaming the hero for having lost 2-3 points he definitely SHOULD HAVE WON, which was only the cover for frustration, this given day the opponent was a bit better.
        Rivalry among many greats is the best thing to happen to any sports. Achievements in terms of numbers come and go. The taste of the great rivalry can survive but can be easily killed by the kind of fans, which are dominating the scene and will die (as fans) still frustrated. Happy death!

      3. The mantra “XXX will be my no. 1 for ever, whatever happens” is unfortunately also a kind of expressing frustration and other negative thinking. “My no. 1”-thinking is killing the joy of tennis fans. Well, it’s easy to understand. They are mostly fans of themselves. If their hero loses a match they see in the mirror the face of a bad loser. Most fans are quite bad losers. Because – again – they are fans and slaves of their own choices, not of the game itself.
        Imagine, you watch an amazing match but you don’t recall the cases and names are not displayed. For most of “fans” 99% of joy vanished. They are not able to cheer for the game, only to cheer for names and faces.
        My second “hero” is still alive and even trying to get back to playing some good tennis and achieve some good wins. But now expressing the joy about small victories. Small? Not really. The most valuable victory is over yourself. You can probably understand and live this joy only if you play yourself – on any level – in any sport.

  7. OK PRF, thanks for answers of good quality as I see it, and I agree in most – this time. Not least “The most valuable victory is over yourself.” And what from I have seen from Fed himself, he also agrees in the essential.

    1. Thank you for kind of “Fed-validation” of my stance 🙂 Highly appreciated 🙂 Even if according to the course of time, I was first with all my principles and views, but I can of course validate Fed’s principles, because I believe, it does belong to his canon.
      Winning (somehow don’t like the word “defeat” in a fair duel with others is only possibly via winning over yourself. If you didn’t need it to get the win, you probably didn’t get the right opponent (that’s what false fans would see at the front) or you had just a moment of weakness and didn’t realize, you needed to win over yourself even when playing the weakest opponent (or you have lost whole respect for yourself).
      Fed is of course ultimate measure in tennis and good one in general life, but Fed would certainly not feel disrespected hearing about me validating his life’s principles. I’m sorry, I cannot feel younger than him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button