Australian Open men’s singles final: Rafael Nadal v Daniil Medvedev – live!

It’s brilliant that people, Nadal included, are surprised that Nadal has been playing tennis well. Of all the things! Whatever next?!

And yet, it is surprising. Sport!

Medvedev’s interviews have become as unmissable as his tennis over the last bit. He’s got just the right mix of honesty, earnesty and edge, somehow humble and likable while nurturing indiscriminate grievances. A heady mix.

Mac has gone for Medvedev in five, which sounds fair, but you could pretty much pick and justify any outcome.

Both our finalists have been back from the brink. Medvedev did brilliantly to fight back from 0-2 down to Auger-Aliassime, saving a match point, while Nadal did likewise against Shapovalov – though his was a more compliant opponent. We could be here some time.

We’re now watching the wonderful Ash Barty. What a human being she is, and if she can keep at it there are a fair few Slams out there for her because no one can match her consistency or equanimity.

Not gonna lie, I’m still buzzing from yesterday’s men’s doubles. Winning a major with my best mate is extremely high on my to-do list, and seeing Kyrgios and Kokkinakis pull it off did my soul good.

He can’t do it again can he? Er yeah, he can. In 2017, Rafael Nadal won the US Open without beating a single top-20, opponent, the only time that’s ever happened. And though this won’t be that, there’d still be something of the sneak about it: in the weaker half of the draw, with no Novak Djokovic (and no, Novak Djokovic) and Alexander Zverev eliminated early.

But to win the final, he’ll have to go some. Daniil Medvedev is a serious business and, having won Flushing Meadow, holds himself like a champion and knows he can do it when he really needs to.

We still can’t be certain about him – he’ll probably turn up – in the way we can be certain about Nadal – he’ll definitely turn up. But this has the makings of a terrific contest, because the match-up is tight. Historically, Nadal struggles – relatively speaking! – against tall players with good backhands – think Murray, Djokovic, Wawrinka and early Del Potro – because their height neutralises his biggest weapon, the high forehand into the aforementioned good backhand – and Medvedev is absolutely in their category.

One way of looking at things. Another, though, would note that Medvedev tends to win matches by serving big, keeping a good length and not missing from the back – he doesn’t hit many winners off the ground, so if he doesn’t make his first serves he can struggle to close out big matches because he’s relying on his opponent missing. Nadal, on the other hand, is similar in that he doesn’t miss many from the baseline, but different in that he also hits plenty of winners.

That’s one reason this blog leans towards a 21st major rather than a second. But the main motivator is that number and what it means: Nadal knows he won’t get many more goes at being tennis’ most, er, winningest man of all time, which is to say he’ll be absolutely feral out there, in the best possible way. Get settled, because this is going to be great.

Play: 7.30pm local, 8.30am GMT