Live tennis is the absolute best, and don’t ever let anyone tell you differently. But, particularly during the first few days of tournaments, it’s also a bit of a crapshoot.

There are so many matches going on at once, even at a small tournament like the Winston-Salem Open, that more often than not you circle a match as a must-see, arrange your day around it, and then it turns out to be a dud. At least, that’s what happens to me 99% of the time.

Today, however, I chose correctly.

I have arrived for the Jerzy meltdown. Took the first 6-1, just barely avoided going down by a double break to Sousa in the third. #WSOpen — The Changeover (@The_Changeover) August 19, 2014

Jerzy Janowicz was one of the players at this year’s Winston-Salem Open that I had marked as a must-see. I’d never seen him play live, and the notion of seeing him on a small side-court in Winston was incredibly enticing. Plus, as a writer, I wanted to get to the bottom of what was going on with him. This time last year Jerzy was at a career-high ranking of No. 14. Now, he’s ranked No. 52, and honestly it’s surprising he’s even ranked that high.

I mean, you guys, he’s been very bad lately. Janowicz hasn’t won three matches in a row since making the semifinals of Wimbledon last year. His losses have come to guys like No. 247 Maximo Gonzalez, No. 135 Pierre-Hugues Herbert, and No. 147 Michael Llodra. Ouch.

Whatever happened to the big-serving and charismatic talent that Juan Jose had waxed so poetically about back when we first started this site? Is he gone forever or just temporarily in hiding?

There were signs of life in Cincy when he upset Grigor Dimitrov in the second round, but then he lost meekly to Julien Benneteau in the third round, as you do. So I had no clue what to expect.

Brimming with anticipation, I was courtside for the first set and a half of his first-round match against Carlos Berlocq on Monday. It was, well, not very notable, but it was very loud. (Thanks, Charly!)

In all seriousness, the most noteworthy part about the match was how much everyone adored Jerzy. The small crowd was 99% on his side, hanging on his each and every shot. There were even signs!

The Pole’s shots are so big and powerful when on–and so jaw-droppingly stupid when they’re not–that it’s hard to take your eyes off of him when he’s playing. He’s theatrical and unpredictable, and it’s all rather enthralling.

He won the match fairly easily, 6-1, 6-4, and headed straight to press in the ATP mixed zone.

I was excited to get a chance to talk him, but it turned out to be a very brief interview. He’s one of those insanely frustrating people to talk to because he knows that he has all of the power in the conversation and he somehow manages to be hysterical and engaging while really saying nothing at all. Plus, he’s tall and lanky, and his body kind-of curves and hovers over you like a street lamp. It’s all a bit much.

Anyways, I’ll stop saying things that make no sense because you can just see the whole thing here because embarrassingly enough, it was filmed:

After that incredibly enlightening interview, this tweet exchange happened:

Talked to Jerzy Janowicz. Got about 10 full words out of him. #longread to come. — Lindsay Gibbs (@linzsports) August 18, 2014

@Rob_pal He is a character. — Lindsay Gibbs (@linzsports) August 18, 2014

I laughed it off at first, but then I couldn’t really stop thinking about it. I mean, Janowicz certainly has made headlines for his outbursts and his controversial opinions before.

However, can we just dismiss him as a divalicious jerk, or is there something more to the talented-but-erratic 23-year-old?

Today I decided to continue my research. I made it in time to see the third set of his match against Joao Sousa from Portugal. (Sousa is the No. 6-seed in this tournament, which sounds strange.)

Let’s just say that I got more than I bargained for. I walked into the match when Sousa was serving for a double break in the third set. As I waited outside, Jerzy survived a foot-fault call and break points and held for 2*-1. The crowd was wildly behind him.

For most of the third set, the guys continued to trade breaks, and it was an entertaining and maddening-in-a-fun-way affair.

Jerzy unsuccessfully drop shotted Sousa twice in that game, and he foot faulted. He was broken. #WSOpen — The Changeover (@The_Changeover) August 19, 2014

But I’ll go ahead and fast-forward to the part that I know you want to hear. (I’ve now buried the lede so far down here that you’re basically just trapped forever.)

Sousa, who is super fast and hits the ball flat like a pancake, ended up serving for the match at 5-4 in the third. He faced a break point, and after a mid-range rally, Jerzy once again hit an idiotic drop shot and stood back at the baseline just watching it.

However, since history repeats itself, speedy Sousa got to the ball and hit it over the net. An out-of-position Jerzy threw his racket out, and the ball very clearly tipped his racket and ended up landing out, behind the baseline on Jerzy’s side.

Joao breathed a sigh of relief and went back to the baseline ready to serve at deuce, when the umpire Pierre Bacchi called out, “5-all.”

Everyone, including the crowd, was STUNNED. Sousa immediately started arguing with Bacchi that Jerzy’s racket had touched the ball, and the entire crowd was shouting in support of him.

Sousa asked Jerzy point blank if his racket had touched the ball, and Jerzy did not deny it. But the umpire wouldn’t change the score. Sousa was yelling at Jerzy, telling him that if he was in his shoes, he would concede the point. Jerzy kept telling Sousa, “This isn’t about you,” and telling Bacchi that he was “ruining the game.” He implied in his arguments that he felt like this was a make-up call, that the umpire had called against him earlier in the match and this was just how it was.

At one point, Bacchi had to get down from his chair and get in between the two, which really didn’t help anything, because nobody was a fan of his.

Eventually, somehow, the match moved on. The crowd, who had been fully behind Jerzy, was absolutely dumbfounded, and ended up clearly on Sousa’s side.

Both guys were clearly rattled after the long exchange. Jerzy DFed a lot in the next game but ended up holding. During the ensuing changeover with Jerzy up 6-5, he tried to go over to Sousa’s chair to talk to him, but Sousa pushed Jerzy’s hand off of his shoulder and screamed, “No, I don’t want to hear it.”

Sousa ended up heroically holding to force a third-set tiebreaker. After a lot of misses from both guys, Jerzy finally came away with the win, 6-1, 3-6, 7-6(5).

I talked with Jerzy afterwards, and this interview was slightly more in depth than the last. Though he told me he did not ever consider conceding the point, he also did not deny that his racket had hit touched the ball:

“Actually, I don’t know how to explain this, because Joao just asked me if I touched the ball, I said I did, now it’s the decision of the umpire.”

“So it’s a huge mistake from the chair umpire, he gave me the point. Because I didn’t lie, I didn’t say I didn’t touch the ball, I said I touched the ball.”

“The decision belongs to the umpire.”

“I just wanted to explain the situation. We had the same kind of problem in the second set, it was 15-30, I was 3-2 up I think, he served huge DF. I stopped, I played the return down-the-line, the ball bounces exactly on the line, and the umpire didn’t see twice the ball. Sousa even stopped because he was sure it’s out, he didn’t give me the point. It was the same situation.”

(Note that I wasn’t there in the second set, so I can’t confirm or deny what he said in the above quote. Sorry.)

“I was just pissed at the umpire. I was just so pissed about the umpire because he made so many huge mistakes.”

“I’m not happy after this win, because I hate when umpires make huge mistakes, and today this was beyond anything for me. I feel sorry for Joao also, because I think it shouldn’t have happened. From my side I understand Joao completely, 100%, but I didn’t understand the decision of the umpire. I didn’t lie, Joao asked me and I said the truth. So now the decision belongs to the umpire.”

So…what does all of this mean, you ask?

Hah, like I know.

Some will think that Janowicz is noble for admitting the truth, others will be infuriated that he didn’t concede the point. Some will continue to find him an arrogant jerk, while many will be forever charmed by his every move.

I also don’t know if he will go on to win the tournament and make it to the second week at the U.S. Open, or whether he will be double bageled by Edouard Roger-Vasselin.

Two matches and two interviews with Janowicz later, and I’m officially more confused about him than I was when this tournament began. But this much is certain–I’ll be courtside at his matches every chance I get.