Alcaraz overcomes first-set scare at US Open: When resilience is only part of the story

When Carlos Alcaraz lost the first set to Alex Michelsen in his opening match at the 2026 US Open, the Arthur Ashe Stadium fell into an unusual silence. Not because the fans were surprised, but because they were accustomed to Alcaraz handling such situations with ease. But this time, something felt different. The Spanish player glanced toward the corner of the court where coach Juan Carlos Ferrero was sitting, and I noticed a change in the way he held his racket. Alcaraz arrived in New York as the second seed, after winning his third Wimbledon title in July. He had a 12-match winning streak on grass, but on hard courts, his form was inconsistent. At the Cincinnati Masters earlier, he was eliminated in the second round. This raised questions about his ability to adapt to fast surfaces. Michelsen, a young American player, is known for his powerful serve and aggressive, no-holds-barred style. He had won 10 of his last 12 matches on hard courts. People call it a double contract; I call it the first lesson on home soil. In the first set, Michelsen dominated completely. He hit 15 winners, while Alcaraz had only 4. Michelsen's first-serve percentage was 78%, and he broke early in the third game. Alcaraz seemed slow, moved imprecisely, and often hit the ball out. But I noticed an important detail: Alcaraz was not panicking. He kept adjusting his position, stepping deeper to receive serve, and began reading the opponent's serve direction. In the second set, Alcaraz changed his return tactics. He stood closer to the baseline, using chip returns to slow down the pace. This made Michelsen lose confidence. Alcaraz broke in the sixth game, and from then on, he controlled everything. Statistics show that in the next three sets, Alcaraz made only 6 unforced errors, compared to 14 in the first set. He also increased his winners from 4 to 32. This shows a clear mental and tactical adjustment. I record every footprint on the court so that when they wipe their hands, I can identify each hand. But what interests me more is how Alcaraz handled pressure. In the first set, he seemed to be experimenting, as if he wanted to see how long Michelsen could sustain that pace. This was a psychological tactic, not weakness. I remember the 2026 Wimbledon final, where he also lost the first set to Novak Djokovic, then won 3-1. There is a repetition here. Alcaraz is a player who knows how to extend matches, tire opponents, then attack at the decisive moment. However, losing the first set in an opening match could be a sign of a lack of focus, and if he faces a stronger opponent than Michelsen, he might pay the price. Since Moscow 2026, I no longer watch the World Cup as a match, but as a cash flow balance sheet. Many commentators argue that Alcaraz's comeback is proof of champion resilience. But I think that is not entirely true. In reality, Michelsen overexerted himself in the first set, and his energy dropped significantly afterward. Michelsen's first-serve percentage fell from 78% to 52% in the next three sets. This was not Alcaraz's adjustment, but the opponent's collapse. If Alcaraz cannot find solutions while the opponent is still fresh, he will face trouble. Look at how he lost in Cincinnati, where he was beaten by a player with a similar style to Michelsen. This reveals an inherent weakness in Alcaraz's game against powerful serves. Alcaraz has passed the first round, but the lesson from home soil remains. He needs to start matches with high concentration from the very first games, rather than waiting for opponents to collapse. Otherwise, he will not be able to defend his title at Flushing Meadows. And I will watch every step he takes on the court, so that when he wipes his hands, I can identify whether it is the hand of a champion or just a stroke of luck.