—Talent pool: The higher level of interest in tennis in Europe, compared to the U.S., may mean that a higher percentage of promising young athletes choose the sport.
—Coaching: When Patrick McEnroe announced his departure as head of USTA player development a few years ago, he cited “coaching education” as the most important aspect of the U.S. game that needed to be improved. Knowledgeable observers say there’s higher standard of expertise for coaches in Europe, and what’s happening in Canada right now might bear that out. Since hiring the former head of France’s junior development program, Louis Borfiga, Canada has had a surge of success, which peaked this month with Bianca Andreescu’s win at the US Open.
—Surface: The baseline game that was once the exclusive province of clay is now played on every type of court. That seems to give Europeans, who are more likely to play on clay as kids, a leg up in learning the patience and point construction that’s needed to succeed everywhere today. American men, meanwhile, mostly write off the two-month clay season and the ranking points that come with it.
—Mindset: European players, who speak multiple languages and cross national borders regularly, seem to adapt more easily to the disorientingly international nature of tennis. Medvedev, of Russia, made his breakthrough in the foreign lands of Washington, D.C. and Mason, Ohio, and he played the New York crowd like a fiddle during the Open. By contrast, the highest-ranked player in the U.S,
John Isner, has won 14 of his 15 career titles on home soil.
Why does Europe dominate the Laver Cup, and men's tennis at large?