
‘Much-awaited': PV Sindhu stuns world No 6 Tomoka Miyazaki at China Open Super 1000 for her biggest win of 2025 yet
Surely, Sindhu must have felt that this year. She is not one to elaborate too much on how she feels, but last week at Japan Open after losing to Korea's Sim Yu Jin for the first time in four meetings, Sindhu dropped a similarly poignant line about her struggles: 'Sometimes it's life. You have to just keep struggling until you get there.' Fast forward a week, Sindhu struggled, sometimes suffered, other times dominated, and often willed herself into believing that she still has that fight in her, as she beat world No 6 Miyazaki 21-15, 8-21, 21-17 at China Open Super 1000. Without doubt, her biggest win of 2025 yet and a first against a top-10 opponent since October last year.
In their only previous meeting – at the 2024 Swiss Open last March – Sindhu found out the hard way just what it would take to beat these much younger challengers of the next generation. Not that the Indian played badly that day, but Miyazaki just did everything a bit better in a 79-minute match that went the distance. Sindhu has indeed spoken recently about what that challenge particularly entails for her ageing body, because the dominant style in women's singles now is one that involves long rallies, and patient point construction.
#ChinaOpenSuper1000
A huge win for PV Sindhu, her biggest match result in quite some time as she stuns world No 6 & teen phenom Tomoka Miyazaki in three games. Relief as much as joy in the end. She had to fight through that.
That roar at the end says it all! pic.twitter.com/k33PWMu39c
— Vinayakk (@vinayakkm) July 23, 2025
That indeed was the key for Sindhu against Miyazaki on Wednesday. Sindhu made a pretty solid start to the match, going up 6-2, playing with decent control on the court, and most importantly, keeping the shuttle in play with her lunges and well-timed lifts. The lead swelled to 10-5 as Sindhu, surprisingly, got a Hawkeye challenge right. In a match that had already witnessed a few net cord interventions, Sindhu did brilliantly to react to one that wrong-footed her, kept the shuttle in play somehow and saw the teenager smash the bird into the middle of the net. The moment that showed Miyazaki wasn't quite at the races but Sindhu was dialled in during the opening game was at 16-9, when the Indian took the shuttle low at the frontcourt after a desperate forward stretch, just about lifting it enough to cross the top of the tape. With the entire court open for the kill, Miyazaki touched the net with her racket for a fault. Miyazaki tried closing the gap down in the endgame, but the lead Sindhu had was big enough.
But the second game saw Miyazaki find her footing, as expected from the better side on the court. After going toe-to-toe in the opening exchanges, Miyazaki opened up a 11-7 lead at the interval, and was playing with a bounce in her step. Soon, Sindhu evidently decided to conserve some fuel for the imminent decider. Perhaps smartly too, as she has run out of steam in third games in the recent past.
And just like that, Sindhu raced off the blocks in Game 3, a 5-1 lead mostly riding on errors from Miyazaki. The point for 6-1 was Sindhu at her absolute gritty best. A backhand retrieve from a Miyazaki smash was the give-it-all-you-got stuff that took Sindhu to the very top before she steadied herself on defence and won the point. With Miyazaki trying some delaying tactics here and there, Sindhu responded by increasing the decibel levels after her winners.
A 11-2 lead at the final change of ends meant Sindhu was in control but – as we saw with Prannoy – the switch to the far side saw Miyazaki steadily wilt away at the Indian's lead. Sindhu sent a lift long and the roar of celebrations from a while back was replaced by the calm-down gesture.
A precise down-the-line smash and then a deft hold-and-flick at the net for back-to-back winners by the Japanese made it a bit more nervy for Sindhu, but once more the Indian responded with three quick points for 17-9. Better tempo accompanied by more roaring, constantly reminding Miyazaki of the advantage she held. She eventually held on to complete the win in 62 minutes.
'It was a much-awaited win for me,' Sindhu told BWF later, stressing on making the most of playing from the better side of the court. 'I need to win these matches so that it will also give me a morale boost and also that confidence. I need to keep this going. I have been coming close and losing in three games. (Today) I was patient enough to keep the shuttle in play and made fewer errors. I think that's what I'm satisfied about. '
This win wouldn't change the fact that it is indeed 'tough being a veteran out there', which Sindhu very much is in women's singles, as Prannoy is in his discipline. Thirty is not exactly old in modern sport, but for someone who broke through as a teenager – winning the first of her five World Championships medals when she was 18 – the limbs must have been feeling heavier with every passing defeat against players who, during her peak, she would have bulldozed past. She had pushed Chen Yu Fei and Akane Yamaguchi to three games but came up short. And that is why this win against 18-year-old Miyazaki meant the world to Sindhu, as she let out a huge roar – more in relief than celebration – when the shuttle sailed wide on her third match point.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


NDTV
5 minutes ago
- NDTV
Gautam Gambhir's Dressing Room-Shaking Speech Goes Viral, India Star Lauded For Inspiring Act
Indian head coach Gautam Gambhir hailed Rishabh Pant for his steely half-century despite an injured foot, saying that he has "inspired the next generation and created a legacy for himself", which is marked by resilience, bravery and putting the eam first. Pant, though unwillingly, has to bow out of the ongoing Test series against England due to a foot injury, with Tamil Nadu's Narayan Jagadeesan as his replacement. His last gift to the team before being forced to part ways due to injury was a valuable half-century, which he scored despite his injury and added some valuable runs to the first innings total of 358 runs. Speaking in a video by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Gambhir said, "The foundation of this test team will be based on what Rishabh has done for the team. I hate talking about individuals; I have never spoken about individuals in a team sport. You have not only inspired this dressing room, but you have inspired the next generation." View this post on Instagram A post shared by Team India (@indiancricketteam) "This is what you have done, and that is a legacy which you have created for yourself and everyone in this dressing room. So very, very well done from everyone. And the country will always be proud of you," he added. Pant said that his move to bat was a gesture from his side to do whatever it takes to make his team win, and he was not thinking about any personal goals. "It has been amazing the way they have backed me. The team is under pressure, everything is there, but when the whole country stands behind you for the same cause, that is something, that emotion is difficult to explain. How proud I feel to represent my country. The only message I am going to give my team is, Let us win it, guys. Let us do it for the country," he added. All-rounder Washington Sundar also noted how swollen Pant's foot was and called him a "son of the country". "It is very difficult to even put in the feeling that he would be going through in words because he has fractured his toe, and he is in pain no matter what. I even saw his foot; it was swollen badly. So I think for him to even walk around actually takes a lot, but he did a lot more than that. I think the whole country is proud of him, and he is just the son of a country, I would say," he added. Pant finished the series as the second-highest run-getter currently, with 479 runs in four matches and seven innings at an average of 68.42, with two centuries and three fifties, and runs scored at a strike rate of over 77. His best score is 134, and he scored twin tons at Leeds, becoming the first Indian to do so in a Test. He broke several records during the series, establishing his reputation as the best wicketkeeper-batter among all Asians, especially in South Africa, England, New Zealand and Australia (SENA) nations. He also overtook his predecessor, MS Dhoni, for most Test tons by an Indian wicketkeeper, sealing his legacy as an all-time great already.


Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Nasser Hussain slams Ben Stokes' ‘silly' move: ‘He didn't have to bowl Brook… Washington & Jadeja deserved to be there at the end'
The Manchester Test between India and England, which seemed to be ending for a quiet draw took a u-turn quickly after England skipper Ben Stokes went to the Indian batters and offered his hand to call an end to the match before the last hour's play was to start. But with Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar batting on 89 and 80, the Indians didn't take the offer from Stokes and chose to continue batting. Former England captain Nasser Hussain said he didn't have a problem with the call made by the Indian team, and both Jadeja and Sundar deserved to be there at the end. 'I didn't have a problem with it. England did. They had tired bowlers and tired legs and wanted to get off but the two lads had worked hard to get into the 80s and 90s and wanted hundreds,' said Hussain to Sky Sports. 'Stokes didn't have to bowl Harry Brook and it looked a bit silly but we make too much of these things. India deserved the draw and Washington and Jadeja deserved to be there at the end,' he added. Shortly after this drama, Jadeja scored his century as Stokes resorted to bowling loopy deliveries to him through Harry Brook. Jadeja slammed a six down the ground to score his 2nd Test century. Sundar, too, reached his maiden century as India finally agreed to end the hard-fought match in a draw. A visibly frustrated Stokes said after the match, 'I don't think there would have been much more satisfaction in walking off 100 not out, getting your team out of a tricky situation, than walking off at 80 or 90 not out. Scoring 10 more runs isn't going to change the fact you've saved your team from a series defeat.' India head coach Gautam Gambhir asked that if the shoe was on the other foot, would England have done the same? 'If someone is batting on 90 and the other one is batting on 85, don't they deserve a hundred? Would they have walked off? If someone from England side was batting on 90 and 85 and someone had the opportunity to get his first Test 100, wouldn't you allow him to do it? They weathered the storm. It's up to them. If they want to play that way, nothing more to say. I think both those guys deserved a 100 and fortunately they got it,' he said on Sunday at the post-match press conference.


India.com
5 minutes ago
- India.com
India vs England: Was Ben Stokes Right To Offer Early Draw? ICC Rules And Team India's Response Explained
The final day of the fourth Test between India and England at Old Trafford offered high-quality cricket — and an unexpected flashpoint. With just an hour left, England captain Ben Stokes invoked ICC Playing Condition 16.1.1, offering an early draw under the provision that allows both captains to agree that no result is possible. But when India declined — with Ravindra Jadeja on 89* and Washington Sundar on 80* — tensions flared, and the spirit of cricket was suddenly up for debate. Also Read: Explained: Why India Can't Withdraw From Asia Cup 2025 Fixture Against Pakistan – BCCI's Hands Tied So, who was right? Was Stokes justified in wanting to end early? Or did India have every right to chase personal milestones within the laws of the game? The ICC Rule Explained: What Does Law 16.1.1 Say? According to ICC Test Match Playing Conditions, Clause 16.1.1 states: "A match is drawn if no result is possible and both captains agree to terminate play." Importantly, this is not mandatory. It's a mutual decision — and a captain has every right to decline the offer. In this case, India exercised that right, with Jadeja and Sundar closing in on well-earned centuries after saving the match. India had lost only four wickets and were 75 runs ahead. The pitch was docile. The threat of collapse had passed. The team was safe — but the batters still had personal landmarks within reach. The match situation allowed it. The ICC rules allowed it. And so did the unwritten rules of Test cricket pride. Stokes Offers Draw, India Declines — Tension Follows Ben Stokes, nursing niggles and mindful of his bowling unit's workload, decided enough was enough. England had bowled 257.1 overs across five days. Archer and Woakes were visibly fatigued. Liam Dawson, the left-arm spinner, had bowled long spells exploiting the rough. Stokes offered the draw under Law 16.1.1 — and when India declined, frustration took over. Stokes turned to Jadeja and sarcastically asked: 'Jaddu, you want to get a Test hundred against Harry Brook and Joe Root?' The remark, caught on stump mic, sparked immediate criticism. Was it fair for Stokes to question India's intent when the law clearly permitted them to continue? Gavaskar, Gambhir, Manjrekar: The Verdict from Indian Legends Veteran commentator Sunil Gavaskar was quick to defend India. 'If a batter has weathered two sessions and saved the game, why shouldn't he aim for a century?' Gautam Gambhir, India's head coach, echoed the sentiment: 'They deserved that hundred. They fought hard. You don't walk off just because the opposition is tired.' Sanjay Manjrekar didn't hold back: 'Stokes behaved like a spoilt kid. Everything won't go your way just because you ask nicely.' Brook's Bowling and the Protest in Disguise After India declined the draw offer, England made a mockery of the final overs. Harry Brook, not a frontline bowler, sent down underarm lobs at 60 kmph. Jadeja responded by launching one for six to complete his century. Sundar followed soon after with his maiden Test hundred. Only then did India agree to shake hands. Was this England's passive-aggressive protest? Or was it a moment of sportsmanship gone wrong? What Does the ICC Rule Say About This? Crucially, nowhere in the ICC rules is there a stipulation that batters must accept a draw if offered. Nor is there any provision for enforcing one without mutual agreement. Law 16.1.1 exists to allow a draw — not force one. India, having secured the draw on merit, played well within the framework. In fact, continuing to bat — while seemingly milestone-driven — also served strategic goals. With just three days before the final Test at The Oval, India kept England's tired bowlers in the field longer. Tactical? Yes. Petty? Not at all.