Alcaraz v Sinner and the rest

[Whisper]

I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share the
slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz. To me
it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be. It's a very high
level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be like Murray,
win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.

I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience. There's nothing technical he can improve on except
the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon. He has so many options
that he never really focused on making his serve a huge consistent
weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.

I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do
whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for 20+
slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees himself
as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can indulge in
his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.

1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly
talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he
has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened?
Is that a good thing for tennis?

[Whisper]

Post by Whisper
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly
talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he
has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened?
Is that a good thing for tennis?

I mean 6 slams while 21, and 10 while 22 : )

[*skriptis]

On 18/07/2024 2:39 am, Whisper wrote:> > > 1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly > talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he > has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened? > Is that a good thing for tennis?I mean 6 slams while 21, and 10 while 22 : )

Oh yes

[TT]

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share the
slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz.  To me
it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be.  It's a very high
level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be like Murray,
win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on except
the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so many options
that he never really focused on making his serve a huge consistent
weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do
whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for 20+
slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees himself
as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can indulge in
his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly
talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he
has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened?
Is that a good thing for tennis?

Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that Sinner is
Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray would have had
some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.

I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition to
Sinner. If he improves from here still...well, he's gonna be a nightmare
to beat. And after winning some more he'll develop an aura against the
Davydenkos & Blakes of the tour...

[TT]

Post by TT

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share
the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz.
To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be.  It's a
very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be
like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on
except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so many
options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge
consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do
whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for
20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees
himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can
indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so
amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's
possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if
that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that Sinner is
Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray would have had
some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition to
Sinner. If he improves from here still...well, he's gonna be a nightmare
to beat. And after winning some more he'll develop an aura against the
Davydenkos & Blakes of the tour...

Djokovic after W final loss:

https://youtube.com/shorts/Jx4dHZQzDV0?si=qR46xuhcqfOfETS2

[Sawfish]

Post by TT

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share
the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz. 
To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be.  It's a
very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be
like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on
except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so many
options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge
consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do
whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for
20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees
himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can
indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his
level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so
amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what.
It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21.
Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that Sinner
is Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray would have
had some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition to
Sinner.

Common sense tells me this is true, but I cannot yet see *anyone* on the
horizon.

Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

Post by TT
If he improves from here still...well, he's gonna be a nightmare to
beat. And after winning some more he'll develop an aura against the
Davydenkos & Blakes of the tour...

[TT]

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share
the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz.
To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be.  It's a
very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be
like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on
except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so many
options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge
consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do
whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for
20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees
himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can
indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his
level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so
amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what.
It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21.
Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that Sinner
is Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray would have
had some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition to
Sinner.

Common sense tells me this is true, but I cannot yet see *anyone* on the
horizon.
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I guess Sinner & Djokovic at the moment. Meds. Zverev wasn't far at RG
final. Both Sinner & Zverev took him to 5 at RG. Tiafoe at Wimbledon. So
he's still having 5 set matches & not winning everything in sight.
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only Sinner
wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult opponent he is.
Let's wait and see.

And... if you build it, they will come.

[TT]

Post by TT

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share
the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz.
To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be.  It's a
very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be
like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on
except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so
many options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge
consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and
do whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning
for 20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he
sees himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams
he can indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing
at his level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so
amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what.
It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21.
Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that Sinner
is Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray would
have had some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition
to Sinner.

Common sense tells me this is true, but I cannot yet see *anyone* on
the horizon.
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I guess Sinner & Djokovic at the moment. Meds. Zverev wasn't far at RG
final. Both Sinner & Zverev took him to 5 at RG. Tiafoe at Wimbledon. So
he's still having 5 set matches & not winning everything in sight.
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only Sinner
wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult opponent he is.
Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Nadal: We're talking about a player that is going to be one of the best
in history" (if not injuries)

"I see him - with Sinner - over the rest (of the field) without a doubt,
I mean I don't see a lot of players that can stop him"

'I see his strength as that he's the favourite on every
tournament/surface'...

[Sawfish]

Post by TT

Post by TT

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and
share the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to
Alcaraz. To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever
be.  It's a very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think
Sinner will be like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos
falters.
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on
except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so
many options that he never really focused on making his serve a
huge consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his
arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and
do whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's
gunning for 20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big
3 and he sees himself as the natural successor to those guys.
Outside slams he can indulge in his showboat antics as losses
there mean nothing at his level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so
amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what.
It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21.
Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that
Sinner is Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray
would have had some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition
to Sinner.

Common sense tells me this is true, but I cannot yet see *anyone* on
the horizon.
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I guess Sinner & Djokovic at the moment. Meds. Zverev wasn't far at
RG final. Both Sinner & Zverev took him to 5 at RG. Tiafoe at
Wimbledon. So he's still having 5 set matches & not winning
everything in sight. Watched some interviews from his opponents,
appeared that only Sinner wasn't overly complimentary and telling how
difficult opponent he is. Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Nadal: We're talking about a player that is going to be one of the
best in history" (if not injuries)
"I see him - with Sinner - over the rest (of the field) without a
doubt, I mean I don't see a lot of players that can stop him"
'I see his strength as that he's the favourite on every
tournament/surface'...
http://youtu.be/hVnVcNtIMm4

Alcaraz is so obviously superior to everyone else playing right now that
it doesn't take Rafa to tell us that.

When he loses, he has to *cooperate* in his own demise in some fashion.
He has to be a bit off his game, physically--which he very seldom is for
multiple sets--or he has to have some sort of a mental lapse. This might
include a bit of quiet over-confidence that plays out as poor shot
selection. Sometimes he may lose focus in matches that have little
immediate meaning. But not quarterfinals upward.

I'm not aware of anyone at this point who can go out and *take* a match
from Alcaraz. Alcaraz has to give them parts of the match. A sloppy set
of tie-breaker, maybe.

[Whisper]

Post by Sawfish
When he loses, he has to *cooperate* in his own demise in some fashion.
He has to be a bit off his game, physically--which he very seldom is for
multiple sets--or he has to have some sort of a mental lapse. This might
include a bit of quiet over-confidence that plays out as poor shot
selection. Sometimes he may lose focus in matches that have little
immediate meaning. But not quarterfinals upward.
I'm not aware of anyone at this point who can go out and *take* a match
from Alcaraz. Alcaraz has to give them parts of the match. A sloppy set
of tie-breaker, maybe.

Well said. Sinner in bo3 should still be a handful but in slams Carlos
will probably just become a bigger animal over next few years and harder
to beat. Good luck taking 3 sets off the beast.

[The Iceberg]

Post by Sawfish
When he loses, he has to *cooperate* in his own demise in some
fashion. He has to be a bit off his game, physically--which he very
seldom is for multiple sets--or he has to have some sort of a mental
lapse. This might include a bit of quiet over-confidence that plays
out as poor shot selection. Sometimes he may lose focus in matches
that have little immediate meaning. But not quarterfinals upward.
I'm not aware of anyone at this point who can go out and *take* a
match from Alcaraz. Alcaraz has to give them parts of the match. A
sloppy set of tie-breaker, maybe.

Well said.  Sinner in bo3 should still be a handful but in slams Carlos
will probably just become a bigger animal over next few years and harder
to beat.  Good luck taking 3 sets off the beast.

yes it's an interesting situation, when Fed was peaking there were a few
players that on their day like Gasquet or Nadal on clay who could take
him when given a chance, but Alcaraz there doesn't seem to be any other
than perhaps Zverev if he was less tired on clay?

[Sawfish]

Post by The Iceberg

Post by Sawfish
When he loses, he has to *cooperate* in his own demise in some
fashion. He has to be a bit off his game, physically--which he very
seldom is for multiple sets--or he has to have some sort of a mental
lapse. This might include a bit of quiet over-confidence that plays
out as poor shot selection. Sometimes he may lose focus in matches
that have little immediate meaning. But not quarterfinals upward.
I'm not aware of anyone at this point who can go out and *take* a
match from Alcaraz. Alcaraz has to give them parts of the match. A
sloppy set of tie-breaker, maybe.

Well said.  Sinner in bo3 should still be a handful but in slams
Carlos will probably just become a bigger animal over next few years
and harder to beat.  Good luck taking 3 sets off the beast.

yes it's an interesting situation, when Fed was peaking there were a
few players that on their day like Gasquet or Nadal on clay who could
take him when given a chance, but Alcaraz there doesn't seem to be any
other than perhaps Zverev if he was less tired on clay?

Zverev is an interesting example of what happens when a player had loads
of natural talent and is physically robust (unlike Sinner) but seems to
have no *hunger*.

Boy, folks like Alcaraz are never satisfied, never "full", and I think
that all great players are that way.

By co-incidence, you mention Gasquet. No hunger. He might have won a
slam or two, but not hungry enough.

By contrast players like Svitolina, a limited player, is always hungry.
You can see it every time she steps onto the court.

Sinner is pretty hungry--could always do with at least a snack. Rafa and
Djok are still hungry--always have been. Fed was not as hungry as them.

What do you think about this idea of tennis hunger, Ice?

[The Iceberg]

Post by Sawfish

Post by The Iceberg

Post by Sawfish
When he loses, he has to *cooperate* in his own demise in some
fashion. He has to be a bit off his game, physically--which he very
seldom is for multiple sets--or he has to have some sort of a mental
lapse. This might include a bit of quiet over-confidence that plays
out as poor shot selection. Sometimes he may lose focus in matches
that have little immediate meaning. But not quarterfinals upward.
I'm not aware of anyone at this point who can go out and *take* a
match from Alcaraz. Alcaraz has to give them parts of the match. A
sloppy set of tie-breaker, maybe.

Well said.  Sinner in bo3 should still be a handful but in slams
Carlos will probably just become a bigger animal over next few years
and harder to beat.  Good luck taking 3 sets off the beast.

yes it's an interesting situation, when Fed was peaking there were a
few players that on their day like Gasquet or Nadal on clay who could
take him when given a chance, but Alcaraz there doesn't seem to be any
other than perhaps Zverev if he was less tired on clay?

Zverev is an interesting example of what happens when a player had loads
of natural talent and is physically robust (unlike Sinner) but seems to
have no *hunger*.
Boy, folks like Alcaraz are never satisfied, never "full", and I think
that all great players are that way.
By co-incidence, you mention Gasquet. No hunger. He might have won a
slam or two, but not hungry enough.
By contrast players like Svitolina, a limited player, is always hungry.
You can see it every time she steps onto the court.
Sinner is pretty hungry--could always do with at least a snack. Rafa and
Djok are still hungry--always have been. Fed was not as hungry as them.
What do you think about this idea of tennis hunger, Ice?

yes "hunger" is a good metaphor for drive/desire to win. The greats like
Sampras/Nadal/Djoker are always hungry and Djoker is prob hungriest of
them all. Think Fed was well into fast food when it was the clown era!
Zverev seems to have only gotten hungry the recent 2.5 years. It might
be that they see that dinner time only lasts a certain time.

[Whisper]

Post by TT

Post by Sawfish
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I guess Sinner & Djokovic at the moment. Meds. Zverev wasn't far at RG
final. Both Sinner & Zverev took him to 5 at RG.

Yes, though winning with pretty much no tune-ups is impressive. He only
played Madrid and lost in q/f, then rested for FO.

Post by TT
Tiafoe at Wimbledon. So

Yes, though watching the match it never felt like he would lose for some
reason. He tends to come out slow and loses focus a lot. If he went
into every match like he did this Wimbledon final he'd prob never lose.

Post by TT
he's still having 5 set matches & not winning everything in sight.

Yes, and that surprising loss to Medvedev in last USO semi. He would
have learned from that, see what happens if they meet again in a few weeks.

Post by TT
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only Sinner
wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult opponent he is.
Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Hopefully Sinner can sort his fitness issues out. He'll be more
dangerous v Carlos outside slams in bo3.

[Sawfish]

Post by TT

Post by Sawfish
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I guess Sinner & Djokovic at the moment. Meds. Zverev wasn't far at
RG final. Both Sinner & Zverev took him to 5 at RG.

Yes, though winning with pretty much no tune-ups is impressive. He
only played Madrid and lost in q/f, then rested for FO.

Post by TT
Tiafoe at Wimbledon. So

Yes, though watching the match it never felt like he would lose for
some reason.  He tends to come out slow and loses focus a lot.  If he
went into every match like he did this Wimbledon final he'd prob never
lose.

Post by TT
he's still having 5 set matches & not winning everything in sight.

Yes, and that surprising loss to Medvedev in last USO semi.  He would
have learned from that, see what happens if they meet again in a few weeks.

Post by TT
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only Sinner
wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult opponent he is.
Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Hopefully Sinner can sort his fitness issues out.  He'll be more
dangerous v Carlos outside slams in bo3.

Sinner is basically a comparatively frail specimen. I think that right
now he is wringing everything that is there our of his physical abilities.

[Whisper]

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only Sinner
wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult opponent he is.
Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Hopefully Sinner can sort his fitness issues out.  He'll be more
dangerous v Carlos outside slams in bo3.

Sinner is basically a comparatively frail specimen. I think that right
now he is wringing everything that is there our of his physical abilities.

Yes, but super talented before he hits the wall physically. He's never
won a match once it hits the 4 hour mark. This suggests slams may be
hard to come by unless he can win matches quickly and efficiently. I
still think he has a great grass game suited to winning Wimbledon -
remember he led Novak 2-0 a couple yrs ago. Problem is it may well be
Carlos' best surface too so may need him to lose early here and there
when off his game/injured to get a look in.

[Whisper]

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only
Sinner wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult
opponent he is. Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Hopefully Sinner can sort his fitness issues out.  He'll be more
dangerous v Carlos outside slams in bo3.

Sinner is basically a comparatively frail specimen. I think that right
now he is wringing everything that is there our of his physical abilities.

Yes, but super talented before he hits the wall physically.  He's never
won a match once it hits the 4 hour mark.  This suggests slams may be
hard to come by unless he can win matches quickly and efficiently.  I
still think he has a great grass game suited to winning Wimbledon -
remember he led Novak 2-0 a couple yrs ago.  Problem is it may well be
Carlos' best surface too so may need him to lose early here and there
when off his game/injured to get a look in.

He looks like he'll have a Sampras type run at Wimbledon, in his case he
won 7 out of 8 years losing only to Krajicek. Carlos might better that
concentrated hot streak. Too early to speculate but he might do to
Wimbledon what Rafa did to FO : )

[The Iceberg]

Post by Whisper

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only
Sinner wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult
opponent he is. Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Hopefully Sinner can sort his fitness issues out.  He'll be more
dangerous v Carlos outside slams in bo3.

Sinner is basically a comparatively frail specimen. I think that
right now he is wringing everything that is there our of his physical
abilities.

Yes, but super talented before he hits the wall physically.  He's
never won a match once it hits the 4 hour mark.  This suggests slams
may be hard to come by unless he can win matches quickly and
efficiently.  I still think he has a great grass game suited to
winning Wimbledon - remember he led Novak 2-0 a couple yrs ago.
Problem is it may well be Carlos' best surface too so may need him to
lose early here and there when off his game/injured to get a look in.

He looks like he'll have a Sampras type run at Wimbledon, in his case he
won 7 out of 8 years losing only to Krajicek.  Carlos might better that
concentrated hot streak.  Too early to speculate but he might do to
Wimbledon what Rafa did to FO : )

that would be AMAZING!
wonder if Sinner needs to do some Murray/Djoker-like conditioning, his
fading out in those 4 hours matches really reminds of that. Needs to do
some properly long runs.

[Sawfish]

Post by The Iceberg

Post by Whisper

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT
Watched some interviews from his opponents, appeared that only
Sinner wasn't overly complimentary and telling how difficult
opponent he is. Let's wait and see.
And... if you build it, they will come.

Hopefully Sinner can sort his fitness issues out.  He'll be more
dangerous v Carlos outside slams in bo3.

Sinner is basically a comparatively frail specimen. I think that
right now he is wringing everything that is there our of his
physical abilities.

Yes, but super talented before he hits the wall physically. He's
never won a match once it hits the 4 hour mark.  This suggests slams
may be hard to come by unless he can win matches quickly and
efficiently.  I still think he has a great grass game suited to
winning Wimbledon - remember he led Novak 2-0 a couple yrs ago. 
Problem is it may well be Carlos' best surface too so may need him
to lose early here and there when off his game/injured to get a look
in.

He looks like he'll have a Sampras type run at Wimbledon, in his case
he won 7 out of 8 years losing only to Krajicek.  Carlos might better
that concentrated hot streak.  Too early to speculate but he might do
to Wimbledon what Rafa did to FO : )

that would be AMAZING!
wonder if Sinner needs to do some Murray/Djoker-like conditioning, his
fading out in those 4 hours matches really reminds of that. Needs to
do some properly long runs.

I'm beginning to think that he's at his physical limit now.

Stamina, like physical strength, is finite, has an upper limit per
individual. I see Sinner as a very willing, positive player who indeed
has made strides toward better conditioning over two years ago. He's not
like some players who don't care to put much effort into their game,
like Kyrgios as an extreme example.

What would be definitive is if we could see his training routine and
compare it to someone like Djok's to see how it compares.  But likely we
never will, and we can continue to argue Ford vs Chevy or Colt vs S&W.

Like Whisp said, I think he's about as far as he can go, and the
question now is: how long can he stay at this relative position?

[Whisper]

Post by The Iceberg

Post by Whisper

Yes, but super talented before he hits the wall physically.  He's
never won a match once it hits the 4 hour mark.  This suggests slams
may be hard to come by unless he can win matches quickly and
efficiently.  I still think he has a great grass game suited to
winning Wimbledon - remember he led Novak 2-0 a couple yrs ago.
Problem is it may well be Carlos' best surface too so may need him to
lose early here and there when off his game/injured to get a look in.

He looks like he'll have a Sampras type run at Wimbledon, in his case
he won 7 out of 8 years losing only to Krajicek.  Carlos might better
that concentrated hot streak.  Too early to speculate but he might do
to Wimbledon what Rafa did to FO : )

that would be AMAZING!
wonder if Sinner needs to do some Murray/Djoker-like conditioning, his
fading out in those 4 hours matches really reminds of that. Needs to do
some properly long runs.

Yes, or try and win matches quickly, before they turn into 4+ hour
slugfests.

[Whisper]

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT
Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that Sinner
is Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray would have
had some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition to
Sinner.

Common sense tells me this is true, but I cannot yet see *anyone* on the
horizon.
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I can't, but would be great if another top talent emerges. I wonder how
much Carlos can improve in the absence of opposition who can seriously
challenge him? 'If it's not broken don't fix it' mentality rather than
there being a real need to improve due to better rivals/technical
weaknesses etc.

Sampras is probably the closest thing we've seen to a great player
having no real rivals. Agassi came closest, but it's 6-0 at Wim/USO and
thrashed him in ATP finals etc. When I look at Sampras I see a guy who
didn't need to improve to dominate, so he didn't. He was actually
better from the baseline at 19 than he was later. He developed an
efficient style based on holding serve and getting 1 break per set.
Nothing wrong with that approach, but it could be boring to watch him
half arse certain games rather than fight for every point. Navratilova
zoomed up a few levels above Evert and the field in early 80's and was
almost unbeatable. It didn't last for a combination of reasons;

- She stopped improving as there was no need
- Evert stepped up and got a bit better
- She got older
- Lost a little motivation/hunger?
- Better players emerged eg Graf, helped by her getting older etc

Unless better players emerge I think we'll see more showboating from
Carlos, taking risks then backing himself to come back strong from big
deficits etc - bit like Tilden used to drop sets on purpose just to
prove he could still win : )

Should be fun next few years watching how he goes about it, hopefully no
major injuries get in the way.

[Sawfish]

Post by Sawfish

Post by TT
Yeah, I agree that Carlos is better than Sinner. And also that
Sinner is Murray-talent level... which is not bad at all... Murray
would have had some slams more if not for Nadal & Djokovic.
I think Carlos will have some other competition though, in addition
to Sinner.

Common sense tells me this is true, but I cannot yet see *anyone* on
the horizon.
Do you see even an inkling of a serious and consistent threat?

I can't, but would be great if another top talent emerges.  I wonder
how much Carlos can improve in the absence of opposition who can
seriously challenge him?  'If it's not broken don't fix it' mentality
rather than there being a real need to improve due to better
rivals/technical weaknesses etc.

Yes.

In earlier matches he plays a sort of *bored* game. He's not lethargic
or anything like that, but obviously lacks challenge and it's then when
he tends to make some poor shot selections, simply to challenge himself.
Sometimes this backfires a bit, but over the course of 3 sets (or five
in a major) he can basically rescue himself.

I'm overstating this a bit, to more clearly illustrate what I think goes
on in matches of lesser importance. He's never mentally out of a match,
like Zverev can be, but is not forced to fully concentrate for the whole
match, and so is mentally "loose" at that point.

And when we see poor shot selection, I think that's how this habit
developed: in his tennis life, he's not really had to concentrate
consistently as he came up thru the ranks.

...and damned, he *still* doesn't, truth be told.

There'll come a time when he physically slows down, and he'll need to
tool his game. Rafa was just great at that part. We'll see if Alcaraz
can do it, too.

Sampras is probably the closest thing we've seen to a great player
having no real rivals.  Agassi came closest, but it's 6-0 at Wim/USO
and thrashed him in ATP finals etc.  When I look at Sampras I see a
guy who didn't need to improve to dominate, so he didn't.  He was
actually better from the baseline at 19 than he was later.  He
developed an efficient style based on holding serve and getting 1
break per set. Nothing wrong with that approach, but it could be
boring to watch him half arse certain games rather than fight for
every point.  Navratilova zoomed up a few levels above Evert and the
field in early 80's and was almost unbeatable.  It didn't last for a
combination of reasons;
- She stopped improving as there was no need
- Evert stepped up and got a bit better
- She got older
- Lost a little motivation/hunger?
- Better players emerged eg Graf, helped by her getting older etc
Unless better players emerge I think we'll see more showboating from
Carlos, taking risks then backing himself to come back strong from big
deficits etc - bit like Tilden used to drop sets on purpose just to
prove he could still win : )
Should be fun next few years watching how he goes about it, hopefully
no major injuries get in the way.

[*skriptis]

I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz. To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be. It's a very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around strategy/experience. There's nothing technical he can improve on except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon. He has so many options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for 20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

How is that possible if he's turning 22 in September?

He can break the record to become youngest 5-time slam champion through?

Perhaps he's already youngest 4-time slam champion?

[Sawfish]

Post by Whisper
I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share
the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz.

He's not.

I've heard from people here on RST how good he is for over a year, so I
watched closely, and especially VS the top younger players, and also
against Alacarz. It's not that Sinner isn't a top-notch player, it's
that Alcaraz, without effort and unself-consciously, is much better than
top-notch. He may the best physically talented player I've ever seen.

Post by Whisper
To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be.  It's a
very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz.

Exactly.

Post by Whisper
I think Sinner will be like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos
falters.

Hah! Murray is who I thought of when I started this reply.

Post by Whisper
I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around
strategy/experience.  There's nothing technical he can improve on
except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon.  He has so many
options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge
consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.
I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do
whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for
20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees
himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can
indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.
1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so
amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's
possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if
that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

[PeteWasLucky]

I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz. To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be. It's a very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around strategy/experience. There's nothing technical he can improve on except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon. He has so many options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for 20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Definitely Alcaraz is more physically and technically gifted than Sinner, but Sinner isn't bad and definitely he isn't a Murray.
Sinner was two sets up to one against Alcaraz in the French Open if I remember correctly.
I think Sinner will have chances on HC and clay. Also he will have great chances on grass when Carlos isn't there or isn't in great form.

Alcaraz play and movement is a little abusive for his body in my opinion, and as I mentioned before, I worry about him getting injured more frequently. This will create chances for other players.

[TT]

Post by PeteWasLucky

I know people are saying Sinner and Alcaraz will dominate and share the slams but I'm really not sold on Sinner as an equal to Alcaraz. To me it looks like this is as good as Sinner will ever be. It's a very high level, but it's well below Alcaraz. I think Sinner will be like Murray, win a handful of slams when Carlos falters.I also think Alcaraz can get a lot better, mainly around strategy/experience. There's nothing technical he can improve on except the serve, which he improved during Wimbledon. He has so many options that he never really focused on making his serve a huge consistent weapon, but he may as well add serve bot to his arsenal.I think going forward Carlos will take no chances in the slams and do whatever it takes to win. He's pretty much admitted he's gunning for 20+ slams, because that's the standard set by the big 3 and he sees himself as the natural successor to those guys. Outside slams he can indulge in his showboat antics as losses there mean nothing at his level.1 player dominance can be detrimental to tennis, but he is so amazingly talented crowds will flock to watch him no matter what. It's possible he has 10 slams to his name while he's still 21. Imagine if that happened? Is that a good thing for tennis?

Definitely Alcaraz is more physically and technically gifted than Sinner, but Sinner isn't bad and definitely he isn't a Murray.
Sinner was two sets up to one against Alcaraz in the French Open if I remember correctly.
I think Sinner will have chances on HC and clay. Also he will have great chances on grass when Carlos isn't there or isn't in great form.
Alcaraz play and movement is a little abusive for his body in my opinion, and as I mentioned before, I worry about him getting injured more frequently. This will create chances for other players.

Maybe Sinner is like a more aggressive version of Murray...
Something between Murray & Djokovic perhaps. Hell, let's pu

[PeteWasLucky]

No, Sinner is extremely fast on the court and his ground strokes are awesome. Add to this an awesome server. Murray was a counter-puncher

[TT]

Post by PeteWasLucky
No, Sinner is extremely fast on the court and his ground strokes are awesome. Add to this an awesome server. Murray was a counter-puncher

That's why we added Blake

[Sawfish]

Post by PeteWasLucky
No, Sinner is extremely fast on the court and his ground strokes are awesome. Add to this an awesome server. Murray was a counter-puncher

Trying to recall them at their primes, but I think that both Rafa and
Murray were what I'd call "aggressive counter-punchers".

Sinner attempts to dictate the point more often than either of these
guys did.

What do you think?

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The world's truth constitutes a vision so terrifying as to beggar the prophecies of the bleakest seer who ever walked it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Whisper]

Post by Sawfish

Post by PeteWasLucky

more aggressive version of Murray...Something between Murray &
Djokovic perhaps. Hell, let's put a James Blake in the mix! :))

No, Sinner is extremely fast on the court and his ground strokes are
awesome. Add to this an awesome server. Murray was a counter-puncher

Trying to recall them at their primes, but I think that both Rafa and
Murray were what I'd call "aggressive counter-punchers".
Sinner attempts to dictate the point more often than either of these
guys did.
What do you think?

Yes, I think these days if you want to win at the elite level and win
slams you have to dictate or attack at the 1st opportunity. If you
don't someone else will win the slam. The next level guys like
Zverev/Tsitsipas don't attack anywhere near the same level. Alcaraz and
Sinner are both attacking 1st opportunity they get.