In the ever-evolving saga of tennis underdogs who capture the world’s imagination, Emma Raducanu’s fairy-tale 2021 US Open victory remains a benchmark of improbable success. Yet, just as the British star navigates her latest challenges on the court, a retired American powerhouse has stirred the pot with a provocative comparison that has fans up in arms. John Isner, the towering serve specialist who once climbed to world No. 8 and etched his name in tennis lore with marathon matches, has sparked widespread backlash by declaring a recent breakthrough by a lesser-known player as “more impressive” than Raducanu’s Grand Slam conquest. The remarks, delivered with Isner’s trademark candor, have reignited discussions about gender biases, recency effects, and the true measure of sporting miracles in a sport where qualifiers can become kings—or queens—overnight.
The controversy erupted on a recent episode of the Nothing Major Podcast, where Isner dissected the stunning rise of Valentin Vacherot at the Shanghai Masters. Vacherot, a 25-year-old from Monaco ranked a lowly No. 204 before the tournament, clawed his way through qualifiers as an alternate, toppling heavyweights like Novak Djokovic en route to the title. His victory over cousin Arthur Rinderknech in the final not only made him the lowest-ranked champion in Masters 1000 history but also pocketed him a life-changing £838,000 payday, catapulting him to No. 40 in the rankings. Isner, reflecting on this “fairytale run,” drew parallels to Raducanu’s own meteoric ascent but didn’t hesitate to pick a side.
“I think it is more impressive, yes,” Isner asserted, acknowledging the scale of Raducanu’s achievement while doubling down on his preference. “[For Raducanu] it’s a bigger story because it’s the US Open, but I think this is more improbable than what she did. I am giving it to Vacherot there. It’s just unheard of.” His co-host, fellow ex-pro Steve Johnson, added a layer of nuance, suggesting time would be the ultimate judge. “I think time will tell, right? I mean, Raducanu has still been good. She hasn’t won any titles since, but at least she’s been relevant and still good,” Johnson noted. He speculated on Vacherot’s future, warning that without sustained success—perhaps fading back to the Challenger circuit after cashing in on new opportunities like a wildcard into the Basel ATP 500—the Monaco man’s feat might be remembered as a fleeting hot streak. “If this guy gets to 40 [in the world], obviously, then he’s going to be in all these ATP tournaments next year, but doesn’t win any matches, then goes to Shanghai and drops back to 300 next year. Then you’re like, ‘Oh, that was the craziest thing for one week. This guy got hotter than I’ll be, and got a title’. So we’ll see what happens in the next 12 months, but he’s going to have an opportunity to play all the Masters series, 250s, he’s going to have chances to win a lot of tour matches.”
Raducanu’s 2021 triumph, for context, was nothing short of revolutionary. At just 18, she entered the US Open qualifiers as world No. 150, with zero tour-level wins to her name and no full-time coach in her corner. Over 10 grueling matches, she didn’t drop a single set, culminating in a dominant final win over Leylah Fernandez that earned her £1.86 million and a spot in the top 25. It was the first time in the Open Era that a qualifier—man or woman—had claimed a Major title, blending raw talent with unbreakable resolve in a narrative that transcended tennis.
But Isner’s hot take landed like a fault serve in a tiebreaker, drawing swift and sharp rebuke from the tennis faithful. Social media erupted with accusations of “recency bias” and outright dismissal of women’s achievements. One fan fumed, “People are so twisted when it comes to Raducanu. She won a slam. Her win as a qualifier >>>” Another highlighted the disparity: “This recency bias is ridiculous lol. Emma won the US Open as a QUALIFIER without dropping a single set. Yes Vacherot‘s run was impressive too but its nowhere near emma‘s achievement. Thank you.” Gender undertones surfaced in critiques like, “Just a ridiculous biased statement lol. Tell me you underestimate women and think men’s tennis is superior without telling me.” Others questioned the need for comparison at all: “I mean, first of all, obviously not. But why is someone asking him this obvious ‘set up to fail’ question? Why does there need to be a comparison?” And in a blunt takedown, one user declared, “I don’t respect any opinion from ‘john isner’.” The outcry underscores a broader frustration with how Raducanu’s legacy is often scrutinized, especially amid her post-US Open struggles with injuries and form.
This dust-up couldn’t have come at a more poignant time for Raducanu, now 22 and battling to reclaim her peak. Fresh off a grueling Asian Swing, she endured a first-round exit at the Ningbo Open against Zhu Lin, a match marred by medical timeouts for blood pressure checks and lower back treatment amid sweltering conditions. It followed a retirement in Wuhan due to heat-related issues, a second-round showing in Korea, and a third-round loss in Beijing. Despite these setbacks, Raducanu’s resilience shines through; she’s remained “relevant,” as Johnson put it, with flashes of brilliance like her Eastbourne quarter-final run earlier this year. Vacherot, meanwhile, rides his wave with upcoming chances in Basel and potentially Paris, though his entry into most events was locked before his Shanghai heroics.
At its core, this debate isn’t just about who had the “better” Cinderella story—it’s a reflection of tennis’s subjective soul, where metrics like ranking jumps, prize hauls, and opponent scalps fuel endless arguments. Isner’s words, while bold, have amplified voices defending Raducanu’s indelible mark on the sport. As Vacherot embarks on his next chapter, and Raducanu gears up for whatever lies ahead—perhaps the Australian Open in January—the tennis world watches, reminded that greatness isn’t always quantifiable. In a game of fine margins, opinions like these keep the conversation as lively as a five-set thriller, proving that even off the court, the drama never ends.
Leave a Reply