"His behaviour annoys and affects the public": Daniil Medvedev's psychologist admits Russian tennis star suffers from 'certain mood swings'

Russia’s Daniil Medvedev's psychologist, Francisca Dauzet, has shared her views about the one-time Grand Slam winner’s reaction during the US Open 2025, which ended up costing him thousands of dollars. The 29-year-old suffered a hard-fought defeat in the first round of the fourth and final Grand Slam of the year to France’s Benjamin Bonzi in a five-set thriller with a score of 6-3, 7-5, 6-7, 0-6, 6-4.

The match, however, is unlikely to be remembered for the performance of the players but will rather remain in the history books because of Medvedev’s reaction on the match point in the third set. Medvedev was left furious when chair umpire Greg Allensworth awarded a first serve to Bonzi while asking the cameraman, a US Open photographer, who had encroached onto the court in anticipation that the match would soon finish.

As soon as Allensworth announced it, Medvedev went to the chair umpire and argued about the decision. "Are you a man? Are you a man? Why are you shaking? What's wrong, huh?" said Medvedev then. He then went on to remind the crowd sitting in the arena abou what America’s Reilly Opelka had to say about the same umpire in the past. "What did Reilly Opelka say?,” asked Medvedev. “He earns by the match, not by the hour. Umpire just wants to go home." He then screamed three times: "What did Reilly Opelka say?" before returning to his baseline.

The incident did not go down well for Medvedev, who, after the match, while talking to the press, admitted that he would receive a big fine. "I am getting a big enough fine, so if I speak, I'm in big trouble, so I'm not going to speak,” said Medvedev back. “Not everyone knows what I'm talking about when I said Reilly. Reilly got fined big time for this, so I'm going to get a big fine too."

His fear turned out to be a reality as Medvedev was handed a collective fine exceeding $40,000. Out of that, $30,000 is for his ‘unsportsmanlike conduct’ and $12,5000 is for the abuse of equipment. The amount of $40,000 was equivalent to nearly 40 per cent of what Medvedev earned for participating in the first round of the US Open. The prize money to feature in the first round at the Flashing Meadows is about $110,000.

Medvedev’s psychologist, Dauzet, has recently spoken to Tennis Majors, where she explained her point of view about the player’s reaction in the match. Dauzet , who rejoined Medvedev’s team just before the start of the Halle Open earlier this year, was of the opinion that Medvedev’s reaction did not ‘surprise’ her. Dauzet admitted that Medvedev struggles with mood swings, which can end up provoking others around him. Dauzet also did not support Medvedev for what he did during the US Open and admitted that what he did was ‘politically’ incorrect.

“I can say that I am surprised and not at the same time,” said Medvedev. “Because he is not the first and only one to do this kind of thing. Tennis is a sport that provokes this kind of overreaction. Daniil is a bit used to certain mood swings and yes they can be caustic and unwelcome sometimes. His behaviour annoys and also affects the public. We remember John McEnroe, for example, in his time who inspired similar feelings. Nevertheless, it seems important to me to clearly distinguish what is being commented on: the match fact about the stoppage, the racket breaking, what he says to the umpire? These are not the same facts. I have the impression that there was an amalgamation and that everything was put on the same level.”

She continued by saying: “What Daniil does is not very politically correct, to say the least. It is not accepted and perhaps it is not acceptable, especially because many players know how to hold back and contain themselves in the face of the same annoyances. In the same way, we could say this on the part of the public who reacts. We therefore see that the exaggerations are present on both sides of the ‘stage’, one arousing the other and vice versa. But there is no deep malice or intention to harm when this kind of situation happens on the part of the athletes. For players with a great liveliness of mind like Daniil, what happens at that moment is both unconscious and conscious, between non-control and control of what is emerging in space-time. This interruption of the photographer on the court was at the very least impromptu and gave rise to an extrapolation of perceptions. Which leads to an exaggeration of reactions. And, perhaps, creates the situation in which the player can take advantage of.”