Look at the match between Franziska and Alexis. Alexis was 2:0, 5:0 up. Franziska seemed to gain more momentum after winning a point that Alexis lobbed. Lobbing gives attackers more time to attack and gain confidence. Well, that was an observation. But my feeling is that Simon tried showing a little too much on game 3 (and he was still ahead), and LJK grasped that momentum and never went back.
I think this is a classic case of applying what might happen at an intermediate amateur level to what happens at the elite pro level, when it doesn't apply.
Yes Simon was up 2-0 but the first 2 games were 11-9 and LJK has a years long history of being a slow starter and coming back against players who don't lob much. This was hardly a slow start by LJK standards, just two coinflip games that didn't go his way.
Simon also historically has won many points playing defensively against LJK and this match was no exception. It's a defining part of his playstyle when he gets moved around or the opponent sustains his first few attacks. Also, why no discussion of how staying in the points could wear down LJK? It's just pure hindsight to point at that as the reason he lost.
To suggest that someone should have lost a point on purpose to not give "confidence" to a seasoned veteran who doesn't lack confidence, is an absolutely ridiculous suggestion and I'm going a bit hard on your post because I hope these type of theories don't start sticking.
