belinda bencic has weighed in on the growing scrutiny around Coco Gauff’s serve, offering a clear defense of the American’s game after the two met in a recent Miami Open quarter-final. The comments land at a moment when Gauff’s serving struggles, coaching changes, and public analysis from prominent tennis figures have kept the issue at the center of debate.
What happens when Belinda Bencic pushes back on the serve narrative?
Fresh off facing Gauff less than a week earlier, belinda bencic described the matchup as consistently demanding and framed Gauff’s serve as a strength rather than a weakness. Bencic called Gauff “a tough opponent, ” pointing to how Gauff’s movement changes the geometry of the court and makes points feel harder to finish.
Bencic went further, addressing the criticism directly. She said Gauff’s serve is “very tough” and argued Gauff should not receive “so much negative comments, ” emphasizing that the delivery can be “very fast when she puts it in. ” While acknowledging that rhythm can sometimes be an issue, Bencic positioned that fluctuation as part of a broader, unusual playing style: changing speed, spins, and rhythm while covering the court effectively.
The context for Bencic’s defense is their Miami Open quarter-final, which Gauff won 6-3 1-6 6-3. The match was one of four early Miami wins for Gauff that went the distance, before she beat Karolina Muchova in the semifinals and then lost a three-set final to world No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka. The overall Miami run marked Gauff reaching the final of her home tournament for the first time in her career, a sign of improved form and confidence even as the serve remains a recurring talking point.
What if the mechanics are the main problem, not confidence?
The numbers tied to Gauff’s serving have kept the issue alive. In 2024, she served 430 double faults across the season, and she hit 431 the year before. Gauff has responded by hiring biomechanics specialist Gavin MacMillan, who previously helped Sabalenka with double-fault problems. During a tournament in Dubai last month, Gauff appeared to turn to her box and gesture to MacMillan about her serve, saying: “I’ve done everything you’ve asked, and it’s not gotten better. ”
Other voices have been less convinced than Bencic that the serve should be described as a reliable weapon. Rennae Stubbs, a former doubles world No. 1 and a former coach of Serena Williams, said the world No. 4’s serving problems were “90 per cent mechanical and 10 per cent mental. ” Stubbs added that the mental component can expand under pressure when technique breaks down, and she characterized the mechanical issues as significant while still believing change is possible.
The recent debate also echoes a flashpoint at the 2024 US Open, where Gauff—then the defending champion—hit 19 double faults in a fourth-round loss to Emma Navarro. Gauff later admitted she “didn’t take care of her serve, ” a concession that fed broader concern around whether the issue would persist at the biggest moments.
What happens next as scrutiny meets results on court?
Not everyone has interpreted Gauff’s serve struggles in the same way. After the US Open loss, John McEnroe said he was unsure what had happened and pointed to ongoing issues with the serve and forehand, while also noting more visible frustration on court and linking some of that to pressure and expectations. The contrast between that critique and Bencic’s praise highlights a key tension in how Gauff’s game is being evaluated: outside analysis often isolates the serve as a liability, while an opponent who has just played her emphasizes the overall difficulty of solving the full package—movement, defense, and changing rhythms included.
For Gauff, the near-term reality is that scrutiny has not disappeared, but results at Miami provide a counterweight. Reaching the final for the first time at her home tournament suggests progress in confidence and match management, even with periods of instability that still show up in three-setters and in the ongoing discussion of technique.
For Bencic, the public defense adds another layer to the story: rivals can see the serve differently than commentators do, especially when the speed and effectiveness are judged from the returning side of the net. As Gauff prepares for whatever comes next, the debate is likely to continue—split between the statistical record of double faults, the mechanical critique, and the match-level reality opponents describe after facing her.
