Connect with us

Business

Elena Rybakina Rallies Past Coco Gauff To Reach US Open Final Against Aryna Sabalenka

Published

on

Elena Rybakina serves against Australia's Emerson Jones

NEW YORK — Elena Rybakina battled back from a set down to defeat Coco Gauff 3-6, 6-4, 6-4 in the U.S. Open women’s semifinals Thursday night, setting up a championship clash Saturday against defending champion Aryna Sabalenka between the top two players in women’s tennis.

The victory guarantees Rybakina will overtake Sabalenka to become the new world No. 1 when the rankings update Monday, regardless of how Saturday’s final unfolds, given she had fewer ranking points to defend heading into the tournament than the defending champion.

Gauff, the fourth-seeded American, brought her best tennis early against Rybakina at Arthur Ashe Stadium, breaking serve in the sixth game to claim the opening set 6-3 in front of a roaring crowd that included former first lady Michelle Obama. Gauff showed off an unusually strong serve throughout the early stages of the match, a notable departure from struggles with that shot earlier in her career, while her forehand gave Rybakina little room to work with during the opening set.

Rybakina steadied herself in the second set, capitalizing on some looser play from Gauff to level the match at one set apiece and quiet the Arthur Ashe crowd. In the decisive third set, Rybakina’s power began to take over, and she broke Gauff’s serve to move ahead 5-3. Gauff fought back with a brilliant backhand passing shot to earn her first break point of the final set, converting it to put the set back on serve. Rybakina responded immediately, breaking again in the 10th game to close out the match in 2 hours and 8 minutes.

Advertisement

The match ended somewhat anticlimactically, with Rybakina winning four consecutive points off Gauff’s serve as the American’s earlier adrenaline appeared to fade, closing out the victory when Gauff sent an overhead smash sailing long on the final point.

Rybakina, the No. 2 seed from Kazakhstan, opened 2026 by winning the Australian Open and has continued closing the gap on Sabalenka in the rankings throughout the year, aided in part by a relatively difficult summer stretch for the Belarusian. Rybakina needed only to reach the semifinals in New York to officially unseat Sabalenka, who had held the top ranking for 99 consecutive weeks heading into this year’s tournament.

Saturday’s final will mark the 18th career meeting between Rybakina and Sabalenka, with Sabalenka currently holding a 10-7 edge in their head-to-head series. The two have split recent meetings on the sport’s biggest stages, with Rybakina defeating Sabalenka in this year’s Australian Open final in January, while Sabalenka had previously beaten Rybakina in the 2023 Australian Open final. More recently, Sabalenka has gotten the better of Rybakina in matches at Indian Wells and Miami.

Sabalenka reached Saturday’s final with a comfortable 7-5, 6-2 win over No. 3 seed Jessica Pegula in the day’s first semifinal, extending her U.S. Open winning streak to 20 consecutive matches and securing her third straight appearance in the tournament’s championship match. The two-time defending champion largely matched Pegula through a tightly contested first set before pulling away decisively in the second.

Advertisement

Speaking after her win over Pegula, Sabalenka expressed satisfaction with how she had performed under pressure.

“No complaints,” Sabalenka said. “I’m just super happy that I was able to pull out such tennis.”

Gauff’s run to the semifinals continued a strong 2026 season for the American, who won her first Grand Slam title as a teenager after rallying past Sabalenka in the 2023 U.S. Open final. Since that breakthrough win, however, no player has managed to knock Sabalenka out of the tournament in Flushing Meadows, with both Pegula, in the 2024 final and last year’s semifinals, and now Gauff, in Thursday’s semifinal loss to Rybakina, unable to end that streak themselves.

Saturday’s championship match will pit two of the sport’s most dominant hardcourt players against one another, with the world’s top ranking already effectively decided heading into the match, even though Sabalenka will still be playing to defend the actual U.S. Open trophy she has won each of the past two years. Rybakina will be seeking her third career Grand Slam singles title, adding to her 2022 Wimbledon championship and this year’s Australian Open triumph, were she able to defeat Sabalenka a second time in a major final this season.

Advertisement

For Sabalenka, Saturday offers an opportunity to close out a third consecutive U.S. Open title and reassert her position at the top of the sport following Rybakina’s guaranteed rankings ascent, continuing what has become one of the most closely contested rivalries in the current era of women’s tennis. The two players have now met repeatedly on tennis’s biggest stages over the past several seasons, trading wins in Grand Slam finals and other high-profile tournaments throughout 2025 and 2026.

With Rybakina already assured of the No. 1 ranking regardless of Saturday’s outcome, the primary stakes for the final center squarely on the U.S. Open trophy itself, along with the broader psychological edge that would come with either player extending their recent dominance over the other in the sport’s most closely watched individual rivalry. Saturday’s championship match is set to close out the women’s singles competition at this year’s U.S. Open, capping a tournament that has already produced significant storylines on both the men’s and women’s sides of the draw at Flushing Meadows.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Business

European stocks heading for worst week since April as ECB hike batters risk

Published

on


European stocks heading for worst week since April as ECB hike batters risk

Continue Reading

Business

Elon Musk Threatens Legal Action Against Alex Gibney’s ‘Musk’ Documentary, Calls It ‘Hit Piece’ After Venice

Published

on

There are similarities with fellow tech mogul Elon Musk

VENICE, Italy — Elon Musk is threatening legal action against filmmaker Alex Gibney over a nearly four-hour documentary examining the billionaire’s influence across technology, business and politics, following the film’s world premiere at the Venice Film Festival this week, where it received a five-minute standing ovation.

Musk’s attorney, Alex Spiro, sent a letter to Gibney’s production company, Jigsaw Productions, on Sept. 3, putting the team on “formal legal notice” over claims made in the documentary, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The letter specifically focuses on an insinuation the film makes suggesting Musk used his Starlink satellite network to help influence the 2024 U.S. presidential election in favor of President Donald Trump.

Spiro’s letter argued that Gibney’s production failed to properly verify its claims before moving forward with the film.

“You are on notice, before release, that the insinuation is false, that the material refuting it is public, and that you chose not to be told the rest,” Spiro wrote to Jigsaw Productions.

Advertisement

The letter also accused the production of declining multiple opportunities to fact-check its reporting directly with Musk’s team or with individuals who could have offered contradicting testimony.

“This project did not begin as an inquiry,” Spiro wrote. “It began with a conclusion … Because you have refused to screen the film, refused to fact-check it with us, and refused the witnesses who came to you, we have every reason to expect that it contains further statements about Mr. Musk that you know to be false, or whose falsity you have deliberately chosen not to investigate. We therefore have no choice but to put you on formal legal notice regarding your upcoming piece and to reserve all rights. Our door is open if you decide to check your facts with the people who know them.”

Musk himself took to X in the days following the premiere to publicly attack both the film and Gibney directly, despite reportedly not yet having watched the documentary himself.

“Gibney just assembled a hit list of people who either have an axe to grind or don’t even know me,” Musk wrote. “Horrible human.” In a separate post, Musk added: “Gutless Gibney’s fatal flaw of fabricating a false film.” Musk also described the film elsewhere on X as “a hit piece that misses and makes the fatal sin of being boring for 4 hours,” and separately wrote, “Gibney deliberately set out to make a hit piece and lacks any integrity whatsoever.”

Advertisement

Jigsaw Productions responded to Musk’s legal threat with a statement defending Gibney’s journalistic track record.

“Alex Gibney’s films are consistently recognized for their in-depth, fact-driven explorations of influential figures and corporations, coupled with his bold and engaging directorial style,” the statement read. “This approach has garnered him international praise, an Academy Award among other accolades, and a reputation that The Times of London recently lauded as the ‘gold standard for fearless journalistic integrity.’ The right to engage in open debate and fact-based examinations of powerful public figures is protected by the first amendment — something that should be recognized and defended by all Americans, including the associates of Elon Musk, who has proclaimed himself to be a ‘free speech absolutist.’”

The documentary, titled simply “Musk,” runs 225 minutes and examines the tech billionaire’s expanding influence across Tesla, SpaceX, X and his broader political activities. According to Deadline’s review of the film, it takes a particularly critical look at Tesla’s safety record and fatal incidents involving the company’s self-driving technology, with experts featured in the documentary accusing Tesla of overstating its vehicles’ battery range, misleading regulators, and promoting a battery-swapping network specifically to obtain government subsidies. The film also raises concerns about how Musk’s companies collect and could potentially use massive amounts of data to support his broader artificial intelligence ambitions.

Musk declined to participate directly in the documentary, though Gibney has said he had initially invited Musk to take part in the project. Because Musk himself did not sit for interviews, the film reportedly uses an AI-generated version of Musk’s voice to repeat his own previously made public statements throughout the documentary.

Advertisement

The film has drawn strongly positive reviews from critics following its Venice premiere, holding a 100% average critics’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes as of this week. The platform’s synopsis describes the documentary as “an incisive look behind the legend of Elon Musk, the world’s most heralded ‘inventor-entrepreneur’ who has enormous influence on the world in which we all live.”

The dispute between Musk and Gibney is not entirely new. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Musk predicted back in 2023 that the eventual documentary would amount to a “hit piece,” a characterization Gibney reportedly pushed back on at the time before proceeding with the project regardless.

The film’s premiere also drew attention for a separate development involving Ashley St. Clair, who gave birth to Musk’s 13th child last year. According to Variety, St. Clair revealed following the Venice premiere that her decision not to sign a nondisclosure agreement with Musk, one she said would have included a $40 million payment, ultimately allowed her to speak publicly about her former partner within the documentary itself.

“Musk,” distributed by Bleecker Street, is scheduled to hit U.S. theaters in October, following its Venice debut. With Musk’s attorney having formally put the production on legal notice and Musk himself continuing to publicly denounce the film on social media, the documentary’s theatrical release next month appears likely to arrive amid continued public sparring between the world’s wealthiest man and the Oscar-winning filmmaker behind one of the more closely watched documentaries of this year’s festival circuit.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

LG Denies Smart TVs Secretly Record Conversations After Researchers Allege Standby Spying

Published

on

LG CEO AT CES 2025

SEOUL — LG Electronics said claims that its smart televisions record living-room conversations, even when the screen is dark, are “not true,” after a two-hour investigation alleged the sets can capture audio and map home networks.

The company issued the denial to Tom’s Hardware, CNET and Al Jazeera after Gamers Nexus, working with Level1Techs and independent researchers, published a 135-minute report on Monday. The video said testers pulled conversation transcripts from an LG set in standby, logged other devices on the same Wi-Fi network and sent data toward LG Ad Solutions. The report put the installed base at about 216 million smart TVs.

“The claims made in the recently published video are not true,” LG said. “LG TVs process voice data only when the voice button on the remote control is pressed and held, or when a wake word such as ‘Hi LG’ is recognized after the user has activated the Far-Field voice recognition feature. Other than these instances, the TVs do not collect or record ambient conversations.”

If the wake word is not recognized, the company said, “no voice data is transmitted to the server; the audio processing for wake word detection is performed locally on the device and is immediately deleted.” In a longer privacy note it added that sets “do not collect, record or transmit ambient conversations in your home, unless voice functionality has been intentionally activated by the user.” In standby, it said, the television “only monitors for the wake word if you have previously enabled the Far-Field feature.”

Advertisement

LG did not deny that its televisions scan the local network. “To provide smart TV functionalities, LG TVs feature the ability to scan for and connect to nearby devices on the same network,” the statement said. It called that “a standard function commonly provided by smart TVs and smart home devices.” On Automatic Content Recognition, which fingerprints what is playing on HDMI and other inputs for ads and recommendations, LG said the feature “is offered on an opt-in basis” and that without consent “ACR data is not used for advertising purposes.”

What the company did not address, several outlets noted, was the researchers’ claim that voice commands can sit in plaintext on servers and that a webOS flaw could let an attacker use the microphone even after a user flips a hardware mute. Gamers Nexus said a man-in-the-middle test on an OLED G5 produced live audio from a dark screen and again after the set was pulled off the internet. It also said the remote’s microphone can stay live when a switch on the set is off.

Smart-TV listening is not new. Wake-word systems from Amazon, Google and Apple keep a short audio buffer on the device. Content recognition is industry practice. What made this report travel is the combination of standby capture, network inventory and an advertising subsidiary that already faced a U.S. state case.

In May, LG Electronics USA settled a Texas lawsuit over ACR. Attorney General Ken Paxton said the company would obtain consent before collecting viewing data and add a pop-up that explains the practice and lets owners opt out. “LG has now taken important steps to ensure that users’ viewing data will not be collected without their informed consent,” Paxton said then. LG said it had worked with the state to strengthen an existing consent practice. Texas had sued LG and other brands in late 2025 over tracking without proper notice.

Advertisement

Owners who do not want a far-field mic can leave that setting off and avoid holding the remote’s voice key. That does not stop ACR if it was accepted at setup, and it does not stop the set from seeing a phone or speaker on the same router. Unplugging the Ethernet or cutting Wi-Fi stops cloud uploads. It does not, according to the researchers, silence a local microphone path.

LG is one of the largest TV brands in the United States and Europe. webOS sits on OLEDs that sell for more than $2,000 and on cheaper LCD sets. Advertising through LG Ad Solutions is part of how those boxes are priced. The company’s position is that voice is a button or a phrase the owner turned on, that network discovery is how Cast and AirPlay work, and that ads require a check box.

The investigators’ position is that a dark screen is not an off switch. LG’s statement draws a bright line at the wake word. It leaves the network scan on the table and leaves the plaintext and exploit claims unanswered. Until a regulator or a court tests those packets, owners have the company’s word, a Texas consent screen and a remote they can put in a drawer.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Cricut, Inc. (CRCT) Presents at Goldman Sachs Communacopia + Technology Conference 2026 Transcript

Published

on

OneWater Marine Inc. (ONEW) Q1 2026 Earnings Call Transcript