Can Nick Kyrgios back up his performance at Wimbledon and go one step further at the US Open?
I think it's a little bit early to project that he could go further. I think we have to be careful because it's hardcourts - I think hardcourts is the main difference, pretty much every player in the draw likes to play on hardcourts, Rafa Nadal included. And we know that on grass, that is not the case at all. People love to play at Wimbledon, but they don't love the grass - And I think Nick Kyrgios does, of course like Wimbledon, but also the grass. 

So, I think that he's going to have a tougher time against players that we might not expect him to have a tougher time against, of course it helps to win in Washington and to get that confidence. Maybe because he hasn't played many matches in the last couple of weeks, it will keep him fresh but I think we have to be a little careful.

But I do believe after Wimbledon that we will see him take that step at some point, whether it's in Australia or in Wimbledon, I'm not sure. I do think that there is a very good chance he will win a Major before he's done. I don't know if his US Open record shows that he's that keen as it’s not as easy to just say, “Oh, he must have confidence, he's got the level.” You also have to like the place and I don't think I’ve seen enough of his love for the US Open yet to say that this is a tournament that he's dying to do his best at all times. There's no switch. You either feel it or you don't feel it. And you can force yourself to do your best but in your heart, you have got to feel that this is the most important tournament in my life. It's not fair to expect him to feel like that just because he made a Grand Slam final.

Do you think it’s realistic to expect Emma Raducanu to get anywhere near where she did last year – a quarter-finals, or a semi-finals perhaps?
I think we have to be prepared that she can take another run, for sure because when she plays well, she has a consistency in her game that is incredible and mentally she is there all the time, every point. The question, though, is, I think because she won it, there's so many women that either believe it themselves, or they are told by their teams and their coaches that “Hey, Emma Raducanu won the US Open, so why can’t you?”

So, I think that by her winning, she's opened up a can of worms where it used to be maybe five to 10 players that literally believed they could win it. Now you have got 50 players that think they can win it and that makes it much harder. But I think Emma, the only thing that I'm a little concerned is that last year at the US Open, I thought we were watching someone who a) was moving better than most; b) was mentally stronger than most. And then c) nearly the most important - she was actually overpowering some of these women and I think that is the question mark. I haven't seen her overpower any other women. She's won matches by fighting and by moving well and by being consistent, but I thought that during last year’s US Open she showed that she has that little extra in both sides, forehand and backhand, she has a little extra in the serve as well. Of course, she is complete but the question is, is she may be lacking that killer shot that Rybakina has or Iga Swiatek has? Will that be the difference in the end?

I believe Emma is going to make 15-20 quarter-finals in Grand Slams before she's done because of her consistency. But does she have the weapons on the day that the likes of Rybakina and Swiatek are playing great. How can Emma Raducanu then hurt them? We have to be so careful with Emma Raducanu. We have got to give her a few years to be on Tour. She hasn't been on Tour, she doesn't know what that means.

What are the chances for Carlos Alcaraz at the US Open?
I think that because the way he plays we have to slow down a lot because when you watch him play, he has every weapon, every shot, he has feel, he has speed, he is having fun. So that's unbelievable. If you watch the end of the match against Cameron Norrie in Cincinnati, he makes some choices tactically, that I am a little concerned about - he might be hitting too many drop shots at times, he might be taking too many risks at times. Some of the great players of the past, like Rafa Nadal they didn't do that as young players - they were using consistency, more than using their weapons.

I think with Carlos, he has had unbelievable results. He has an unbelievably exciting game of tennis. But I still am waiting to see that tactically he will make the choices that will win him 10-15 Grand Slam tournaments. I think he can, but I think we do see sometimes someone who's a little bit wild and a little bit young, but that's also very exciting.

If I was coaching him, I say Carlos keep going for it because one day you will realise what it is you need to do. But it's also something that you have to pay attention to as a coach, for Juan Carlos, and - why did I lose this match? What did I do on the big points? Was that the right shot or the wrong shot? With Rafa, you don't have to ask that question. You know Rafa is going to hit the right shot at the right time nearly every single big point. With Carlos, because he has so many choices, it's more difficult for him to pick a drop shot, is it a big forehand, is it a serve and volley? Is it a backhand as hard as he can from inside the court? For me, that's what makes him so exciting.

Are you able to explain what Rafa Nadal is doing in 2022?
With Nadal, I don't really think anything anymore because when he's healthy, he's the best player in the world or number two, but we don't know from day to day. So, I don't understand how someone like Rafa is approaching every day because to not know if you can practice today, or if you can play the match, today or tomorrow, that's going to be so hard. And then suddenly you realise “Oh, I can practice, I can play” and then to mentally to just turn the switch and say, “Okay, I can play, I am going to try 100% every part of my game, emotionally, physically, tactically, I am going to try 100% I don't think we ever had that player in the past”.

So, he's doing something that no one has ever done before, which is waking up in the morning, not knowing if he is going to be able to play or walk or if he’s going home tomorrow, that's very, very different. So, I don't really understand a player that can do that. I admire him for that, more than I admire him for winning 14 Roland-Garros - the fact that he's willing and able to do what he's doing, at his age, with all the injuries is incredible.

Does Simona Halep have the power to win the US Open this year?
She does have the power to win any tournament because she is working on the power with Patrick and she's working on her serve with Patrick. And I think that she has. The easy part is to have more power and doing more with a tennis ball. The hard part is to get to a point where you believe that this is how I have to play, because she has had such great success being a little bit defensive at times, but still winning and beating the best players in the world. And then today, believe that this is what I have to do to win Grand Slams - I have to be taking more risks. We don't know if that's what she has to do, maybe consistency is going to win her Grand Slams in the future?

I think that when you watch Simona, and I am able to do this because I am a former player and I went through that the same situation, we have to look at Simone as development and improvement as a player, and not really improvement in the results because the results might not come just because she served better or because she hits the ball harder. It doesn't mean she's going to naturally win Grand Slam tournaments. But the look in Simona’s eyes during Wimbledon, the times that I interviewed her, was a look of excitement. She's excited about every day of practising with Patrick Mouratoglou, she's excited about her development and if you don't have that excitement, you're not going to be able to keep working. She had it in Wimbledon and I'm sure that she's going to have that same look in her eye at the US Open. Simona believes she can win Slams, I believe she can.

What changes do you see in Simona’s game since she started working with Patrick Mouratoglou and the differences with Darren Cahill?
I think the differences with Darren Cahill was, I think, trying to take Simona to the next level, in terms of winning. That is a big difference from what Patrick is doing, because he's trying to take her to the next level in terms of playing - and the two are completely different and must never be confused with one another.

With Darren, I think he realised that she's got the level, she's there, we just have to get her to understand what winning looks like and what winning feels like. Then it's very much like an Andy Murray. Now Patrick is trying to improve things in her game and I think Darren was trying to make Simona more consistent emotionally because he realised that she's got the game. She's got the understanding, she's got the legs, she's got everything to win Grand Slams, she just emotionally was not as stable every day, every point that she needed to be and he got her there.

Now I think Patrick is understanding that she's got everything except she needs a few more weapons. And we're not talking about a new shot, we're talking about maybe five percentage points, more power in the serve, more power in the forehand, maybe playing one metre closer to the baseline. Those things are very, very difficult to change, but it starts with understanding and being willing to work on those development skills that they think she needs. I don't know if she needs it, but it's exciting to see that she's willing to take this risk.

What do you make of the form of Iga Swiatek?
If you look back at history of tennis, this is going to be a much more common way of young players reacting to great success. They love every minute of practising and playing, and then suddenly, one match turns it around, or a tournament turns it around and now we have to start looking at long term again. I think that's what happened with Iga. You win 37 matches in a row as a 20 year old on all the different surfaces, I don't think she's playing worse, she's just not winning matches. You don't get worse at tennis, you lose a little bit confidence, you lose a little bit of joy. But you also realise you have expectations of playing well and winning, but I have over-exceeded my expectations beyond my wildest dreams. Then the reaction comes when you lose a match like she did at Wimbledon. It happened to me. It's happened to pretty much every player in the world that has done what she did.

The question is how long is the period before she feels that she is one of the best players in the world again? It could very well be at the US Open? I think that grass is her worst surface and the effect of Wimbledon is still with her, or the effect of playing so many matches in her winning streak is still with her. But I think we have to understand Iga Swiatek does not need to win every tournament to be a threat at the Grand Slams anymore. She is proven that she can win them and she's proven that she is a worthy number one.

It's about the first round to me, when she plays her first round at US Open, I will have a much better answer because you can tell by her happiness and excitement in every point in her first round where she is mentally because physically I don't think she's gone necessarily anywhere. It's just a mental thing - we wake up and it's not as good a day today as it was yesterday. As a professional athlete, physically we can be the same, emotionally we can not - just like human beings.

Mats Wilander will be working as an expert for Warner Bros. Discovery's coverage of the US Open, which starts on Monday 29 August. Watch the US Open LIVE across Europe (ex UK&Ire) on discovery+, Eurosport and Eurosport App.