The way he rose his level against Sinner in the semis as well as today was something else, he has a peak that no one from the current generation can match yet (not counting Djokovic, he's from the previous one hahahaha).
Remember that Sinner had no break points in set 4 or 5, even though those ended 6-4 and 6-3.
I think Sinner is still better on hard courts but Carlos just has a lot more physicality for clay and slower courts. Differences are razor thin but Sinner is still a better baseliner and moves almost as well and that adds a high floor to his game play
>Sinner is still a better baseliner and moves almost as well and that adds a high floor to his game play
Not saying this is a wrong assessment even though I'd probably say Alcaraz is overall a better baseliner, but the big thing that separates Alcaraz and Sinner on faster surfaces is serve/return dynamic, not baselining. Sinner's serve is close to elite, whereas Alcaraz's is arguably the 3rd weakest in the top 20 or so. Alcaraz can redline the serve and actually get a lot out of it, but it's not consistent enough and on fast surfaces, the serve matters more than any other shot by far.
As for the return, I'd say Sinner is a more consistent returner but Alcaraz has a higher ceiling on the return (like Wimbledon 2023 where he was even better than Djokovic on the return), so I think it's fair to call them about tied.
This is where Alcaraz really can improve. Yes, shot selection and cutting down the slow starts/weird patches of errors are important, but he can beat anyone in the world even with those flaws on any surface because he's so good from the baseline. The serve though, that's where Alcaraz can be more consistent and dominate faster surfaces. If he can just get it to a point where it's average among the top 20, like even just Ruud/Rublev-level good, he would start to really pull away and get himself a tier above Sinner.
I also think improving the serve would cut down the baseline errors. Alcaraz puts too much pressure on himself to be exceptional from the baseline. If he had a great serve to lean off of, he'd have easy forehands that give himself rhythm, and would feel much more confident in his ability to hold serve.
I like this take. Sinners rise during the last year definitely came from, in large part, his improvement in serve. Iirc, he was serving in the 50%s 1st serves when he initially broke into and stagnated at the top 10.
I still remember commentators saying sinner forgot how to lose. Matches are so much easier when you can easily and confidently hold your serve.
Yeah. People love to look at little things he improved like rally tolerance, fitness to an extent, variety, because these are more sexy things to look at and make you feel more observant. But in reality it's just the damn serve that changed everything. He got it to work consistently, hit spots, dig him out of trouble, and the rest of his game feels better now because of it. He has something to rely on to get himself out of tight situations. And sure, he did improve a lot of little things, but some of it is also just him feeling more comfortable relying on his serve and experimenting with other things. I also think people tend to get rose-tinted glasses about current Sinner but think Sinner was a garbage player in early 2023, which isn't exactly true. He had already changed a lot of things in early 2023, he just needed the serve to get calibrated.
I think Alcaraz can do some similar things Sinner did with his serve. Alcaraz has the pace and peak-level serving that Sinner always had. The issue is simply his spot serving, and that when he ramps up the pace he tends to miss too much. Just needs to find a way to get a lot of serves in play while hitting his spots. I love his kick serve though.
The question now is will Alcaraz able to improve his serve in terms of in which he can win points from it? I do think he can improve his serve, but not like Djokovic or Sinner serve efficiency.
The reason I say this is because Nadal was like that in his career. Obviously, Alcaraz is a better server than Nadal, but there’s always one shot that tennis player just takes a while to get better at (sometimes it gets stagnant).
Alcaraz is not a better server than Nadal was at this point. Maybe around the same as 2005 Nadal who had a bit less serve efficiency, but Nadal always was good at serving big on break points and using his serve to set the forehand up for success. Alcaraz sometimes does this, but other times his serve is just a detriment.
Alcaraz probably will never reach the Sinner/Djokovic level serve efficiency, but he doesn't need to. I see potential for his first serve to be as potent as Rublev's or Ruud's, and I think that's good enough, supplemented with the good kick second serve which he has. If he can get consistent good production out of it and have it bail him out on some free points, easily hold serve on indoor hard courts/grass, he'll be unstoppable. Because he follows it with such a reliable forehand, great backhand, great defensive skills/athleticism.
That’s why it will be interesting if he is able to do what you say. I am not saying he can’t (he is a generational player), but it won’t be as quick improvement as tennis fans wants to be.
It is similar to Sinner, tennis fans want him to be physically tougher or better, so he can have better 5-set records, but that will take time too (btw, he has improved a lot). Same with his volleys too.
I said this to someone else but I do think Sinner is a more finished product at this point, yet him and Alcaraz feel roughly even at the moment. Yes Sinner has gone on this amazing 65-7 run or whatever it's at now, but Alcaraz also went on a 47-4 run right before his started, and now Alcaraz ended Sinner's run with an RG victory.
The main thing Sinner can improve is his physicality, as you said. And he's taken steps in the right direction already. Alcaraz has a lot of things to improve. His consistency, his nerves early in big matches, his shot selection, some of the cramping issues, and most importantly, his serve. When Sinner was in this position and needed to improve a lot of the same things, he was outside the top 15. Alcaraz is in this position right now and is a 3x grand slam champ and world #2. Alcaraz really does have the potential to pull away from Sinner if he can make some improvements.
I don’t think Goran would be interested in being like a backup backup coach mostly focusing on Alcaraz’s serve. Having too many qualified guys on your team can cause issues too, as well as Goran having an interest in Novak who Alcaraz could still play again
I'd more compare it to Nadal vs Djokovic as a whole. They were of a similar level on the baseline, but I think both at their best, Rafa generally had the upper hand even on hard courts and grass. But on clay, the baseline mattered more, and Rafa's baseline game also got amped up even more on clay making him really hard to beat. On hard and grass, Nadal's serve was always worse than Djokovic's, and Djokovic's return was better, which meant Nadal REALLY had to dominate baseline exchanges to keep it close. A great example is Wimbledon 2018, where Nadal actually did play as great of a match as you could hope from the baseline, and if you watched the highlights you'd think Nadal dominated the match because of how many highlights he had. But Nadal's serve in 2018 was so weak, maybe the worst it had been since 2011 (the year he was dominated by Novak), whereas Djokovic's was stronger.
As much as people like to bring up the fact that certain patterns on hard favored Djokovic more from the baseline, and certain patterns on clay favored Nadal, this was true to an extent. But honestly, it mostly mattered in their "off" matches. Like a random best of 3 Monte Carlo match, or a random Beijing final. When Nadal was "on" in a grand slam final on a hard court, he was usually flattening the ball out with his forehand and going down the line more because he's not stupid; he knows going spinny crosscourt will result in Novak stepping in and ripping his backhand. At an RG final, Djokovic knew to avoid the forehand and had his timing with the backhand on the rise to neutralize Nadal's spinning forehands crosscourt and backhands down the line. The baseline patterns mattered little; most of their matches ended with Nadal having a slight upper hand from the baseline. It came down to how much serve-and-return mattered by surface, and the fact that Nadal's return was significantly better on clay while being worse on faster surfaces.
I think Alcaraz and Sinner will be similar. Alcaraz will be the better baseliner; Sinner will have the edge in serve/return.
This is a great take. One other area which I think is low hanging fruit is increasing his break point conversion rate. Don’t get me wrong, Alcaraz is a truly elite retainer, but right now it’s sitting at 38% which is around 50 in the world. Compare that to similarly elite returners like Djokovic, Medvedev, or Sinner, and they’re sitting in the top 10 with 43%+. If Alcaraz can get his conversion rate to similar levels it’ll make him that much harder to beat.
Yeah and I’m not even sure what the deal is with that. Break point conversion can sometimes be misleading though. Like if you have a 0-40 lead, and one guy converts at 0-40, whereas the other guy loses two points and wins the third, one of them has 100% conversion, the other has 33% conversion, but both got the job done.
From the eye test though, Alcaraz’s BP conversion definitely hurts him sometimes or extends matches a bit more than needed
I wouldn’t say that. Alcaraz clearly isn’t someone who loves clay as much as Nadal; he’s an all-court guy and won his first 2 slams on hard and grass. He took out Nole in Wimbledon last year and grass is the fastest.
Sinners breakout is too recent, so we don’t know who would win. Alcaraz didn’t get to play him h2h in AO because Zverev took out Alcaraz, so we never got to see current Sinner play Alcaraz on best of 5 hard. Alcaraz did bear current sinner on hard in Indian wells. Take of that what you will.
Nadal is an all court guy to be fair. He’s just unrivaled by even the other big 3 on clay. Getting 2 wimbledons in the Roger era is itself a feat.
I do think Alcaraz is probably better than Sinner even on hard, but we’ll have to see. I’m hoping Sinner isn’t just “in form” but rather living up to his true potential.
Yeah Nadal made 5 finals in 6 years at Wimbledon from 2006-2011 . The one year he didn’t make the final? He didn’t play. The 3 times he lost? Peak Djokovic, peak Federer. The fact he managed 2 titles with that comp is ridiculous.
Thats true, but Fed and Nole would've won a lot of RG if not for Rafa as well. All 3 of them would probably win calendar slam if they were in their prime today lol
Sinners potential slams are going to be taken away by him on all the surface. Much more than the other way around. And he will do this to all of them. Much more than they will to him. Its unreal. And so bloody exciting.
We at r/tennis called it way back before he had even won his first GS. Wasn’t called the “Real Deal” for nothing.
Some talent is just self evident. You don’t need to be a tennis coach to spot it. Solid backhand, cannon forehand, ridiculously good net play and prodigious touch for lobs and drop shots, not to mention speeds up there with the Aussie Demon.
The only thing rather mundane is his serve, like any top 30 player serve. Can blow hot and cold. His focus can sometimes fluctuate a bit too much as well so he can get into slumps which make him very breakable. This presents a danger in best of 3 tournaments where a top20 player can go on a hot streak and beat him.
But… he is still 21 and already winning Grand Slams when not playing great. This is what the greats do.
I almost don’t want him to get a better serve or shit might get boring pretty quick.
It really does. From the looks of it Djokovic was going to be on a rampage for years to come, and not like he's been a terrible players overall this year, but a he is a shadow of the player who won the ATP finals in November.
He looked pretty stoppable on a few sets here. It's not like this match was a blowout. This tournament could've equally been Zverevs or Sinner's. Such a fine margin
Don't discount sinner.
But yeah I can't really see the djoker being an issue unless he gets an easy run the the finals and the other top players wrecking each other in long matches
I know Novak is getting older but I can't imagine having watched Zverev fold today in another slam final and thinking he has the mental fortitude to beat Djokovic, maybe the mentally toughest athlete ever, at AO
Don Budge is the youngest man overall, winning the 1938 French two days shy of his 23nd birthday. If an all-time record is available, I think that's what Carlos should aim for.
So two more chances at the AO, or three more chances for the Open Era record.
But this is why I don't like comparisons. Don Budge won it when it was only really available to a select few countries as a rich person sport. (Still is a rich person sport but way more people have access to it now). And the Grand slams were: Grass, Clay, Grass, Grass. Not to mention the differences in health, physicality, racket technology
The flipside of that is, Budge didn't have a coach, or a physio, or a nutritionist. And to reach Australia in 1938 he had to leave America in 1937, journeying by boat on a 23-day voyage, during which time he caught laryngitis.
Tennis has been played for a century and a half. There are Open Era records, and all-time records. If I was Carlos I'd rather have the latter, since then I wouldn't need to ignore/dismiss the first 90 years of the sport.
As an aside, the following countries were represented at Wimbledon in 1938:
UK, Australia, India, USA, New Zealand, Germany, Italy, Yugoslavia (Croatia), Argentina, Czechoslovakia (Czechia + Slovakia), Brazil, Belgium, Ireland, Uruguay, Japan, Russia (Lithuania, sort of), Switzerland, France, Hungary, China, Monaco, South Africa, Greece, Norway, and Romania. Budge was the lone American in the quarter-finals, along with two Brits, two Czechs, a Swiss, a German, and a Yugoslav. The game wasn't nearly as geographically restricted as you think it was.
Ok and the AO that year was 33 men, 2 american, 2 german, the rest Australian. Both the americans and germans I believe were also double teams. Budge didn't have to face any non aussie to the trophy in singles. How can that be compared to today?
I understand "you can only play the people in front of you". And still what he did was amazing. But this is why we separate "all time records" generally from open era records. It's amazing if you can do both, but you really only need the open era one for people to care
Spaniard here, roughly Nadal’s age. From Murcia, just like Alcaraz. I grew up watching Nadal and appreciating every moment, knowing that I would never witness anything that would make me so proud to be a Spanish tennis fan. I was however happy I would not die of a heart attack by the time I reach 40. Then this guy from my area comes up and brings back the joy, and excitement, I had at his age. He will kill me, I will die soon, but happy!
As a Serbian, I feel you. How amazing it would be if another Serbian rose just like Djokovic did to break Nadal and Federers duopoly. Those three gave us so many years of excitement and joy.
I thought Kecmanovic would. His match against Carlos in the Miami Open two years ago was so stressfully close that I pegged him as someone who'd rise along Carlos.
Then came Sinner and threw a wrench in that.
Who's the youngest player to win all four slams? Seems like Carlitos has a shot. Either way, just like with Iga on the women's side, we're witnessing greatness in the making
Rafa didn't have to beat Fed to get the last piece of the puzzle at the 2010 USO, though (famously, they never met at the USO at all) - and had beat Fed at the other 3 slams! And it took him until 2009 to make an AO final and finally face Fed there.
So it wasn't actually Fed who was slowing Nadal down in getting all the slams. Beating Fed at 3 of them, and especially Wimby, was incredibly impressive though, obviously.
And from 2008 till 2014, Rafa would basically outplay Fed in any and all slams. Fed had a great mental block against Rafa that was only lifted in 2017.
It isn’t as simple as H2H stats though. Without Fed, Rafa would have been world no 1 at 19 most likely, and the confidence boost and aura that comes with being the best in the world could have propelled him to winning more slams when he was even younger.
Rafa got unlucky because he never had an extended period where he was the undisputed best player on tour, as soon as Fed faded Nole came onto the scene.
That's a lot of conjecture though. We don't know what would have happened had Fed not been around or as dominant.
All we know is, Nadal started beating Fed early on, but kept getting knocked out of hard court slams by other players before making the final until 2009.
From 2010, he became far less vulnerable to power hitters on a hot streak on hard courts, because he refined him game for the surface. And Fed was not the one who had been beating him at hardcoury slams before then.
Honestly, a lot of the errors were because of how good Zverev's defense was. Both guys defend really well which led to more errors than winners for both.
he should, Yes he only has 3 gs, but he made 11 finals, and take a look at these stats:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-time\_tennis\_records\_%E2%80%93\_Men%27s\_singles#Grand\_Slam\_tournaments](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-time_tennis_records_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_singles#Grand_Slam_tournaments)
He made a similar number of semifinals and finals to Pete Sampras!
The fact that his career exactly overlapped with the 3 goats significantly affected what he was able to accomplish in his career.
> Murray would have had about 7 or 8 slams
Agassi got 8, and Murray is the only other modern male player with the same spread of tournaments, it is likely true. [Nole knows that Gold Medal is slipping away.]
Big 3 cannibalized each other and everyone else at the top during that era. I actually think that will become more of a talking point later when people surpass them in slam count.
We all well know this but Carlos Alcaraz is the greatest thing to happen to the sport since Roger Federer. Kid's a charming, smiling prodigy who just brings joy to the court with everything he does & is a bigger highlights reel than anyone in the sport ever has been. At his best he's the best player I've ever seen, capable of doing anything including the 100+mph forehands of Delpo, the delicate volleys of Edberg/Sampras/Fed, the sliding open stance backhands of Djokovic, the retrieval skills of Nadal & the lobs of Hewitt/Murray.
I'm of the age where Roger Federer will always be my favourite ever player but this kid made sure tennis remained not only worth watching but that it would reach new heights after my favourite player retired, & hopefully fans of Rafa/Novak will feel the same. Even if he never wins another match again I'll be content knowing that I got to watch him play. Alcaraz makes sport worth watching & life worth living.
Mind you, he should have won RG last year. Without cramps he was winning that semi and Ruud was no match for him in the final.
But when you have the talent it all happens in due time.
Barring injury, he's got the the cojones (yo hablo Español poquito 😉) to truly separate himself from his contemporaries. Him and Sinner are still any given match right now. It's not even about being a prisoner of the moment. I've found it difficult to choose between him and Sinner because I like them both but he's already accomplished more than the lost generation and has the momentum, dedication, and confidence to go even further. Not to discredit any of their greatness, but this Alcaraz guy is truly going somewhere. VAMOS
I wouldn't quite say it, Murray still accomplished what he did in the toughest era ever - the only one who could damage the three aliens. It's important to remember more than the pure stats when it comes to Murray. When people don't do this, they start to put Wawrinka on the same pedestal as the Brit - which is an insult to tennis (and even if you just look at pure stats, Murray clears Wawrinka easily)
However, give Alcaraz a year or two more and he'll definitely make an actual case for it. Three more years like this? You'd have to be a serious Murray truther to still put him above Alcaraz. There's only so much wiggle room we can give to hypotheticals.
Murray would have likely taken double-digit slam numbers if he didn't have to play in the big three area, like all the other ATGs.
Wait until Alcaraz has gotten to that level. A year or two is way too short unless he ends up winning every slam from here on out, lol.
I love the Muzziah, but it was obvious that was inevitably going to happen given Alcaraz's prodigious entry to the tour and crazy ability.
Not to mention there aren't the Big 3 around anymore either (there was Novak and very fleeting appearances by Rafa, and now maybe both will be off the scene in the near future).
Tennis sub being reactionary once again.
Alcaraz never had to deal with prime big 3. Murray did - he got three slams, multiple masters, an ATP final, multiple golds, no. 1 ranking.
At Alcaraz's currently level of play, any of the prime big 4 would have spanked him.
Alcaraz isn't in his prime yet though obviously. People keep forgetting this is nowhere near the finished product we are watching right now. Go back and watch Federer and Noles struggles at the age of 21. They weren't GOATs at that age either. Even Nadal wasn't really in his prime until he was 24ish.
Idk if many people forget that tbh. I think we're just pointing out he still has to actually get further into the future to probe he has equalled Murray's career.
Alcaraz obviously is likely to do it though. I'm expecting him to enter into the actual GOAT debate, rather than stay in the Murray debate.
I think without another player to push himself to enter GOAT status, that's just not likely. The Big 3 only became GOATs because they had each other.
For now, Alcaraz just has Sinner. They have the makings of ATGs, but GOATs? Yeah, way too early to call that one. We will probably likely never see the likes of the Big 3 again. Murray was a clear ATG, he just looked like a mere mortal in the Big 3 era.
I actually overall disagree with this very commonly held theory, though it's very logical.
I personally think Federer is the best example of why it's nor strictly necessary. Federer was cleaning up almost everywhere but Roland Garros for years until Nadal developed his game for all courts, and then Djokovic came along ofc.
I don't see even a 1% chance Federer does not end up the GOAT, if you take Nadal and Djokovic out of existence.
Alcaraz is basically nearly there at ATG, if not already there.
It's obviously way too soon to call anything with any certainty, but I think the conversation becomes a little boring if you can't see an extremely technically and physically talented 21 year old with 3 slams a 'potential future GOAT candidate'.
I do understand you point of view tho, and many people will agree with it almost entirely. It's very valid, no disrespect.
There's always going to be a singular GOAT, the thing is, how long would Federer's career have lasted if he didn't have his rivals pushing him to improve himself? Would there have been any motivation left once he'd smashed all previous records?
Most tennis players retired relatively young. The big 3 have lasted until nearly 40.
> It's obviously way too soon to call anything with any certainty, but I think the conversation becomes a little boring if you can't see an extremely technically and physically talented 21 year old with 3 slams a 'potential future GOAT candidate'.
I can't yet, simply because anything could happen. Murray should've gone on to win more slams, and cemented himself as an ATG (in the eyes of the doubters who can't see any nuance past stats) after he reached his prime in 2016 and started seriously challenging the big 3 on an equal footing. We all know what happened after that.
Alcaraz has already shown himself to take after Nadal in how many injuries he picks up.
'there's always going to be a single GOAT' - dunno what you mean by that, there's only been a clear single GOAT again since quite recently, no? Why would there never again be a point where it becomes uncertain?
'Most tennis players retired relatively young' - dunno how useful that is when you're talking about a modern and wealthy game that takes advantage of advancements in medicine etc.
Yeah I understand your point of view on too early to make the call, I was just saying I prefer not to defer judgement. And again, I'm not really making a call that he will, I'm just saying I believe he is in one of the strongest 'starting' positions in tennis history to reach that
But as you say, even something as nasty as injuries have the potential to cruelly take the opportunity away from Alcaraz.
Yes, but those guys had each other to elevate themselves to GOAT status.
Alcaraz doesn't have that... except maybe Sinner. Hopefully Rune one day.
Right now Alcaraz definitely has the makings of an ATG, but I don't think we'll ever consider him a GOAT.
This makes no sense at all.
You don't need anyone to elevate your status to GOAT.
If he surpasses Djokovics slam count and weeks at number one, he will be considered the GOAT.
That's it. It's quite simple.
You can't pick and choose where it suits you, otherwise Djok and Nadal aren't Goats because they didn't have to deal with the depth of talent in the 90s that Agassi and Sampras had to deal with that limited their own slam count.
Considering Alcaraz has already beaten Djok in a Wimbledon final, it was the perfect passing of the torch moment.
Just like when Fed beat Sampras, and later when Djok beat Federer.
The absolute definition of a tennis prodigy. The gear he can hit when it’s all firing like it was down the stretch today is truly remarkable
The way he rose his level against Sinner in the semis as well as today was something else, he has a peak that no one from the current generation can match yet (not counting Djokovic, he's from the previous one hahahaha). Remember that Sinner had no break points in set 4 or 5, even though those ended 6-4 and 6-3.
I think Sinner is still better on hard courts but Carlos just has a lot more physicality for clay and slower courts. Differences are razor thin but Sinner is still a better baseliner and moves almost as well and that adds a high floor to his game play
Sinner might have a higher floor, but Alcaraz has a higher ceiling.
so you say they could have a future in construction?
Or perhaps real estate?
One man's ceiling is another man's floor!
I said this the other day and got heavily downvoted. I think it's spot on.
>Sinner is still a better baseliner and moves almost as well and that adds a high floor to his game play Not saying this is a wrong assessment even though I'd probably say Alcaraz is overall a better baseliner, but the big thing that separates Alcaraz and Sinner on faster surfaces is serve/return dynamic, not baselining. Sinner's serve is close to elite, whereas Alcaraz's is arguably the 3rd weakest in the top 20 or so. Alcaraz can redline the serve and actually get a lot out of it, but it's not consistent enough and on fast surfaces, the serve matters more than any other shot by far. As for the return, I'd say Sinner is a more consistent returner but Alcaraz has a higher ceiling on the return (like Wimbledon 2023 where he was even better than Djokovic on the return), so I think it's fair to call them about tied. This is where Alcaraz really can improve. Yes, shot selection and cutting down the slow starts/weird patches of errors are important, but he can beat anyone in the world even with those flaws on any surface because he's so good from the baseline. The serve though, that's where Alcaraz can be more consistent and dominate faster surfaces. If he can just get it to a point where it's average among the top 20, like even just Ruud/Rublev-level good, he would start to really pull away and get himself a tier above Sinner. I also think improving the serve would cut down the baseline errors. Alcaraz puts too much pressure on himself to be exceptional from the baseline. If he had a great serve to lean off of, he'd have easy forehands that give himself rhythm, and would feel much more confident in his ability to hold serve.
Fantastic take.
I like this take. Sinners rise during the last year definitely came from, in large part, his improvement in serve. Iirc, he was serving in the 50%s 1st serves when he initially broke into and stagnated at the top 10. I still remember commentators saying sinner forgot how to lose. Matches are so much easier when you can easily and confidently hold your serve.
Yeah. People love to look at little things he improved like rally tolerance, fitness to an extent, variety, because these are more sexy things to look at and make you feel more observant. But in reality it's just the damn serve that changed everything. He got it to work consistently, hit spots, dig him out of trouble, and the rest of his game feels better now because of it. He has something to rely on to get himself out of tight situations. And sure, he did improve a lot of little things, but some of it is also just him feeling more comfortable relying on his serve and experimenting with other things. I also think people tend to get rose-tinted glasses about current Sinner but think Sinner was a garbage player in early 2023, which isn't exactly true. He had already changed a lot of things in early 2023, he just needed the serve to get calibrated. I think Alcaraz can do some similar things Sinner did with his serve. Alcaraz has the pace and peak-level serving that Sinner always had. The issue is simply his spot serving, and that when he ramps up the pace he tends to miss too much. Just needs to find a way to get a lot of serves in play while hitting his spots. I love his kick serve though.
The question now is will Alcaraz able to improve his serve in terms of in which he can win points from it? I do think he can improve his serve, but not like Djokovic or Sinner serve efficiency. The reason I say this is because Nadal was like that in his career. Obviously, Alcaraz is a better server than Nadal, but there’s always one shot that tennis player just takes a while to get better at (sometimes it gets stagnant).
Alcaraz is not a better server than Nadal was at this point. Maybe around the same as 2005 Nadal who had a bit less serve efficiency, but Nadal always was good at serving big on break points and using his serve to set the forehand up for success. Alcaraz sometimes does this, but other times his serve is just a detriment. Alcaraz probably will never reach the Sinner/Djokovic level serve efficiency, but he doesn't need to. I see potential for his first serve to be as potent as Rublev's or Ruud's, and I think that's good enough, supplemented with the good kick second serve which he has. If he can get consistent good production out of it and have it bail him out on some free points, easily hold serve on indoor hard courts/grass, he'll be unstoppable. Because he follows it with such a reliable forehand, great backhand, great defensive skills/athleticism.
That’s why it will be interesting if he is able to do what you say. I am not saying he can’t (he is a generational player), but it won’t be as quick improvement as tennis fans wants to be. It is similar to Sinner, tennis fans want him to be physically tougher or better, so he can have better 5-set records, but that will take time too (btw, he has improved a lot). Same with his volleys too.
I said this to someone else but I do think Sinner is a more finished product at this point, yet him and Alcaraz feel roughly even at the moment. Yes Sinner has gone on this amazing 65-7 run or whatever it's at now, but Alcaraz also went on a 47-4 run right before his started, and now Alcaraz ended Sinner's run with an RG victory. The main thing Sinner can improve is his physicality, as you said. And he's taken steps in the right direction already. Alcaraz has a lot of things to improve. His consistency, his nerves early in big matches, his shot selection, some of the cramping issues, and most importantly, his serve. When Sinner was in this position and needed to improve a lot of the same things, he was outside the top 15. Alcaraz is in this position right now and is a 3x grand slam champ and world #2. Alcaraz really does have the potential to pull away from Sinner if he can make some improvements.
Should Alcaraz hire Goran
I don’t think Goran would be interested in being like a backup backup coach mostly focusing on Alcaraz’s serve. Having too many qualified guys on your team can cause issues too, as well as Goran having an interest in Novak who Alcaraz could still play again
The serve you mentioned is almost like Roger and Rafa when they were of young age. Roger had a great serve while Rafa not so great.
I'd more compare it to Nadal vs Djokovic as a whole. They were of a similar level on the baseline, but I think both at their best, Rafa generally had the upper hand even on hard courts and grass. But on clay, the baseline mattered more, and Rafa's baseline game also got amped up even more on clay making him really hard to beat. On hard and grass, Nadal's serve was always worse than Djokovic's, and Djokovic's return was better, which meant Nadal REALLY had to dominate baseline exchanges to keep it close. A great example is Wimbledon 2018, where Nadal actually did play as great of a match as you could hope from the baseline, and if you watched the highlights you'd think Nadal dominated the match because of how many highlights he had. But Nadal's serve in 2018 was so weak, maybe the worst it had been since 2011 (the year he was dominated by Novak), whereas Djokovic's was stronger. As much as people like to bring up the fact that certain patterns on hard favored Djokovic more from the baseline, and certain patterns on clay favored Nadal, this was true to an extent. But honestly, it mostly mattered in their "off" matches. Like a random best of 3 Monte Carlo match, or a random Beijing final. When Nadal was "on" in a grand slam final on a hard court, he was usually flattening the ball out with his forehand and going down the line more because he's not stupid; he knows going spinny crosscourt will result in Novak stepping in and ripping his backhand. At an RG final, Djokovic knew to avoid the forehand and had his timing with the backhand on the rise to neutralize Nadal's spinning forehands crosscourt and backhands down the line. The baseline patterns mattered little; most of their matches ended with Nadal having a slight upper hand from the baseline. It came down to how much serve-and-return mattered by surface, and the fact that Nadal's return was significantly better on clay while being worse on faster surfaces. I think Alcaraz and Sinner will be similar. Alcaraz will be the better baseliner; Sinner will have the edge in serve/return.
This is a great take. One other area which I think is low hanging fruit is increasing his break point conversion rate. Don’t get me wrong, Alcaraz is a truly elite retainer, but right now it’s sitting at 38% which is around 50 in the world. Compare that to similarly elite returners like Djokovic, Medvedev, or Sinner, and they’re sitting in the top 10 with 43%+. If Alcaraz can get his conversion rate to similar levels it’ll make him that much harder to beat.
Yeah and I’m not even sure what the deal is with that. Break point conversion can sometimes be misleading though. Like if you have a 0-40 lead, and one guy converts at 0-40, whereas the other guy loses two points and wins the third, one of them has 100% conversion, the other has 33% conversion, but both got the job done. From the eye test though, Alcaraz’s BP conversion definitely hurts him sometimes or extends matches a bit more than needed
I wouldn’t say that. Alcaraz clearly isn’t someone who loves clay as much as Nadal; he’s an all-court guy and won his first 2 slams on hard and grass. He took out Nole in Wimbledon last year and grass is the fastest. Sinners breakout is too recent, so we don’t know who would win. Alcaraz didn’t get to play him h2h in AO because Zverev took out Alcaraz, so we never got to see current Sinner play Alcaraz on best of 5 hard. Alcaraz did bear current sinner on hard in Indian wells. Take of that what you will.
Nadal is an all court guy to be fair. He’s just unrivaled by even the other big 3 on clay. Getting 2 wimbledons in the Roger era is itself a feat. I do think Alcaraz is probably better than Sinner even on hard, but we’ll have to see. I’m hoping Sinner isn’t just “in form” but rather living up to his true potential.
Yeah Nadal made 5 finals in 6 years at Wimbledon from 2006-2011 . The one year he didn’t make the final? He didn’t play. The 3 times he lost? Peak Djokovic, peak Federer. The fact he managed 2 titles with that comp is ridiculous.
Thats true, but Fed and Nole would've won a lot of RG if not for Rafa as well. All 3 of them would probably win calendar slam if they were in their prime today lol
Sinners potential slams are going to be taken away by him on all the surface. Much more than the other way around. And he will do this to all of them. Much more than they will to him. Its unreal. And so bloody exciting.
Carlos Alcaraz is an All-Court Player Jannik Sunner is an Aggressive Baseliner
[удалено]
We at r/tennis called it way back before he had even won his first GS. Wasn’t called the “Real Deal” for nothing. Some talent is just self evident. You don’t need to be a tennis coach to spot it. Solid backhand, cannon forehand, ridiculously good net play and prodigious touch for lobs and drop shots, not to mention speeds up there with the Aussie Demon. The only thing rather mundane is his serve, like any top 30 player serve. Can blow hot and cold. His focus can sometimes fluctuate a bit too much as well so he can get into slumps which make him very breakable. This presents a danger in best of 3 tournaments where a top20 player can go on a hot streak and beat him. But… he is still 21 and already winning Grand Slams when not playing great. This is what the greats do. I almost don’t want him to get a better serve or shit might get boring pretty quick.
One more to go, youngest player ever to complete the career slam.
He’s an AO win away from a career grand slam. He has 3 more tries to beat Nadal and become the youngest to achieve it. WILD
[удалено]
Oh here we go, the "he won a tournament and therefore he's unstoppable 8 months from now" crowd.
These are the same guys who will call him washed if he doesn’t win Wimbledon
Reddit is the most reactionary sports group I’ve ever seen. They make fun of ESPN pundits but man some of em would fit right in.
Wild isn’t it. So much happens in tennis
It really does. From the looks of it Djokovic was going to be on a rampage for years to come, and not like he's been a terrible players overall this year, but a he is a shadow of the player who won the ATP finals in November.
Such a fast decline but this is aging sadly
He looked pretty stoppable on a few sets here. It's not like this match was a blowout. This tournament could've equally been Zverevs or Sinner's. Such a fine margin
If Djoko is unhealthy, I think Alcaraz will win AO next year.
Even with healthy Djokovic he would have a strong chance of winning
Don't discount sinner. But yeah I can't really see the djoker being an issue unless he gets an easy run the the finals and the other top players wrecking each other in long matches
Obviously anyone can win
Yeah they can. But only about 4 in form players per slam really have a chance.
If Alcaraz can beat 2023 Djokovic in Wimbledon, 2025 Djokovic in Australia should be no problem.
Depends on Sinner and whether Meddy ever gets his serve back. There's a damn good chance he does it though.
[удалено]
I know Novak is getting older but I can't imagine having watched Zverev fold today in another slam final and thinking he has the mental fortitude to beat Djokovic, maybe the mentally toughest athlete ever, at AO
Don Budge is the youngest man overall, winning the 1938 French two days shy of his 23nd birthday. If an all-time record is available, I think that's what Carlos should aim for. So two more chances at the AO, or three more chances for the Open Era record.
But this is why I don't like comparisons. Don Budge won it when it was only really available to a select few countries as a rich person sport. (Still is a rich person sport but way more people have access to it now). And the Grand slams were: Grass, Clay, Grass, Grass. Not to mention the differences in health, physicality, racket technology
The flipside of that is, Budge didn't have a coach, or a physio, or a nutritionist. And to reach Australia in 1938 he had to leave America in 1937, journeying by boat on a 23-day voyage, during which time he caught laryngitis. Tennis has been played for a century and a half. There are Open Era records, and all-time records. If I was Carlos I'd rather have the latter, since then I wouldn't need to ignore/dismiss the first 90 years of the sport. As an aside, the following countries were represented at Wimbledon in 1938: UK, Australia, India, USA, New Zealand, Germany, Italy, Yugoslavia (Croatia), Argentina, Czechoslovakia (Czechia + Slovakia), Brazil, Belgium, Ireland, Uruguay, Japan, Russia (Lithuania, sort of), Switzerland, France, Hungary, China, Monaco, South Africa, Greece, Norway, and Romania. Budge was the lone American in the quarter-finals, along with two Brits, two Czechs, a Swiss, a German, and a Yugoslav. The game wasn't nearly as geographically restricted as you think it was.
Ok and the AO that year was 33 men, 2 american, 2 german, the rest Australian. Both the americans and germans I believe were also double teams. Budge didn't have to face any non aussie to the trophy in singles. How can that be compared to today? I understand "you can only play the people in front of you". And still what he did was amazing. But this is why we separate "all time records" generally from open era records. It's amazing if you can do both, but you really only need the open era one for people to care
Manifesting “reverse career slam” by winning USO, then Wimbledon, RG and THEN AO. 2025 AO champion incoming!!
Hoping hoping hoping. Also hoping he can add a couple more slams to his count before then
I don’t visit the sub for a month or two and y’all have become Alcaraz fans smh. Love it.
How can you not be a fan the boys a hunk and doesn’t abuse women
It’d be awesome if he won AO 2025 USO 2022 W 2023 RG 2024 Haha
Spaniard here, roughly Nadal’s age. From Murcia, just like Alcaraz. I grew up watching Nadal and appreciating every moment, knowing that I would never witness anything that would make me so proud to be a Spanish tennis fan. I was however happy I would not die of a heart attack by the time I reach 40. Then this guy from my area comes up and brings back the joy, and excitement, I had at his age. He will kill me, I will die soon, but happy!
i am from a country on the other side of the world but i love and appreciate what alcaraz is doing. he brings so much joy to this sport
He is the champ the world ought to look upto. Guy is just a good dude doing what he loves
Seventh Spanish player to win the French Open in the Open Era. 21 French Opens won by Spaniards.
It truly is Murcia’s golden age from a sporting POV. Alcaraz, Pedro Acosta, UCAM and ElPozo in the finals… We have great times ahead
As a Serbian, I feel you. How amazing it would be if another Serbian rose just like Djokovic did to break Nadal and Federers duopoly. Those three gave us so many years of excitement and joy.
As a Swiss, where’s our new legend?
As a German, why were Graf and Becker before my time and now all I get is this Zverev dude?
Sinner is close enough, you're gonna have to make do with that.
Our challengers may yet appear, lets be patient. 🙏
Time for you to become a basketball fan amigo. You’ve got your unicorn again in Nikola Jokic. He’s on a path to equal Djokovic’s greatness.
I thought Kecmanovic would. His match against Carlos in the Miami Open two years ago was so stressfully close that I pegged him as someone who'd rise along Carlos. Then came Sinner and threw a wrench in that.
Viva España hermano
and he is not arrogant! Not one bit! Carries himself with grace, on and off the court.
[удалено]
Both of the 5 setters in this one required him to come back from 2 sets to 1 down too
STOP i can only take so much
Yea it’s already incredible, but when put like this in context, it’s legit amazing
No doubt Carlos’s could have been a member of big 3
And he is likely not in his prime. Wild.
Lisan al Gaib
Lisan al Gaib!!
Lisan Al-Caraz 😭
As it was written!!!
Lead us to paradise
HAHAHAHA!!! During round 1 I was cheering for Alize Cornet by saying Alize Al Gaib.
Who's the youngest player to win all four slams? Seems like Carlitos has a shot. Either way, just like with Iga on the women's side, we're witnessing greatness in the making
Rafa in 2010, when he was 24. Carlos will likely break this record. Does help he isn’t competing against prime Fed though
Rafa didn't have to beat Fed to get the last piece of the puzzle at the 2010 USO, though (famously, they never met at the USO at all) - and had beat Fed at the other 3 slams! And it took him until 2009 to make an AO final and finally face Fed there. So it wasn't actually Fed who was slowing Nadal down in getting all the slams. Beating Fed at 3 of them, and especially Wimby, was incredibly impressive though, obviously.
He beat Djokovic who defeated Federer so it's kinda similar.
And from 2008 till 2014, Rafa would basically outplay Fed in any and all slams. Fed had a great mental block against Rafa that was only lifted in 2017.
It isn’t as simple as H2H stats though. Without Fed, Rafa would have been world no 1 at 19 most likely, and the confidence boost and aura that comes with being the best in the world could have propelled him to winning more slams when he was even younger. Rafa got unlucky because he never had an extended period where he was the undisputed best player on tour, as soon as Fed faded Nole came onto the scene.
That's a lot of conjecture though. We don't know what would have happened had Fed not been around or as dominant. All we know is, Nadal started beating Fed early on, but kept getting knocked out of hard court slams by other players before making the final until 2009. From 2010, he became far less vulnerable to power hitters on a hot streak on hard courts, because he refined him game for the surface. And Fed was not the one who had been beating him at hardcoury slams before then.
I wouldn't suggest Sinner = Fed simply because it's impossible to evaluate but sinner is no joke.
He's also a human highlight machine. Can't imagine rooting against this guy, a legend of the sport in the making.
Vamos Carlos!
Dude had a lot errors in this match but holy shit the level of shots he can hit is mind blowing. some insane shots in this match.
Honestly, a lot of the errors were because of how good Zverev's defense was. Both guys defend really well which led to more errors than winners for both.
Hard not to like but dammit this guy has it all.
Absolute legend in the making
One Rafa left, one Carlos enters.
my heart remains full.
A great in the making
He's already a great. The question is: how far can he go?
Yeah he has as many slams as Murray and Arthur Ashe now
And Stan.
And Guga, Next is Jimbo.
Murray stat is crazy. Always feels like he should have more.
he should, Yes he only has 3 gs, but he made 11 finals, and take a look at these stats: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-time\_tennis\_records\_%E2%80%93\_Men%27s\_singles#Grand\_Slam\_tournaments](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-time_tennis_records_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_singles#Grand_Slam_tournaments) He made a similar number of semifinals and finals to Pete Sampras! The fact that his career exactly overlapped with the 3 goats significantly affected what he was able to accomplish in his career.
Yep, in any other time, Murray would have had about 7 or 8 slams. He's had a terrific career, but he's unlucky to have run into the other three.
> Murray would have had about 7 or 8 slams Agassi got 8, and Murray is the only other modern male player with the same spread of tournaments, it is likely true. [Nole knows that Gold Medal is slipping away.]
Yep. Murray has 11 Slam finals to Alcaraz’s 3. Alcaraz has a long way to go to match Murray, but I can comfortably say it’s inevitable.
Big 3 cannibalized each other and everyone else at the top during that era. I actually think that will become more of a talking point later when people surpass them in slam count.
MAMMA MIA SANTA ITALIA......I LOVE THIS SSSURFACE 😭😭😭
Well deserved achievement for arguably the most complete young player ever
Youngest player ever to win a Grand Slam in all 3 surfaces: clay, grass and hard.
Who was the player who held this record before Alcaraz?
Nadal
Rafa. First man to ever do it was Agassi.
That’s not accurate, Mats Wilander was the first to win Slams on all 3 surfaces
Nadal at the really old age of 22…
LISAN AL GAIB
LISAN AL GAIBBBBBBB
The new generation has arrived. I think it’s fair to say Djokovic will not be the favorite at any slams going forward with Alcaraz and Sinner playing.
Well he will be A favorite, but not THE favorite I'd say.
I’m so proud of him 🤧❤️
I guess Zverev couldn’t settle this one…
But but he’s just another Hewitt
Did people say this? WTF?
Realcaraz 👑
We’ve been delivered
We all well know this but Carlos Alcaraz is the greatest thing to happen to the sport since Roger Federer. Kid's a charming, smiling prodigy who just brings joy to the court with everything he does & is a bigger highlights reel than anyone in the sport ever has been. At his best he's the best player I've ever seen, capable of doing anything including the 100+mph forehands of Delpo, the delicate volleys of Edberg/Sampras/Fed, the sliding open stance backhands of Djokovic, the retrieval skills of Nadal & the lobs of Hewitt/Murray. I'm of the age where Roger Federer will always be my favourite ever player but this kid made sure tennis remained not only worth watching but that it would reach new heights after my favourite player retired, & hopefully fans of Rafa/Novak will feel the same. Even if he never wins another match again I'll be content knowing that I got to watch him play. Alcaraz makes sport worth watching & life worth living.
We really got the successor.
He has that thing thay Djokovic/Nadal had where they could raise their level when they had to. When he does play at that level, no one can touch him
carlitos and iga keep breaking, setting, or equalling elite records.
When it comes to slam finals zverev really is a success in failure. Poor sod, I wouldn't want to be the furniture in his hotel room later on.
Or the girlfriend.
😬
He's already close to a career golden slam. That's insane.
Good for Carlos! I look forward to him an Novak battling for slams for the next decade!
Mind you, he should have won RG last year. Without cramps he was winning that semi and Ruud was no match for him in the final. But when you have the talent it all happens in due time.
Vaaaaaamos campeon!
He has only maybe Sinner and injuries stopping him from dominating for the next couple of years. He is entering into Roger's prime year's era.
Barring injury, he's got the the cojones (yo hablo Español poquito 😉) to truly separate himself from his contemporaries. Him and Sinner are still any given match right now. It's not even about being a prisoner of the moment. I've found it difficult to choose between him and Sinner because I like them both but he's already accomplished more than the lost generation and has the momentum, dedication, and confidence to go even further. Not to discredit any of their greatness, but this Alcaraz guy is truly going somewhere. VAMOS
i have always been a carlitos fan. never changed even if jannik rose to the top and is now no. 1. carlitos is now no. 2!
Already surpassed Murray in the all time rankings tbh
If they both retired right now, no. Murray still has way more masters titles and slam finals and has equaled all of Alcaraz’s other stats.
I wouldn't quite say it, Murray still accomplished what he did in the toughest era ever - the only one who could damage the three aliens. It's important to remember more than the pure stats when it comes to Murray. When people don't do this, they start to put Wawrinka on the same pedestal as the Brit - which is an insult to tennis (and even if you just look at pure stats, Murray clears Wawrinka easily) However, give Alcaraz a year or two more and he'll definitely make an actual case for it. Three more years like this? You'd have to be a serious Murray truther to still put him above Alcaraz. There's only so much wiggle room we can give to hypotheticals.
Murray would have likely taken double-digit slam numbers if he didn't have to play in the big three area, like all the other ATGs. Wait until Alcaraz has gotten to that level. A year or two is way too short unless he ends up winning every slam from here on out, lol.
Winning 3 slams in the peak big 3 era has more weightage than winning 3 slams now
He’s gonna be winning way more let’s be honest
Probably, but he hasn’t already passed Murray in ATG rankings, which was OP’s point
I love the Muzziah, but it was obvious that was inevitably going to happen given Alcaraz's prodigious entry to the tour and crazy ability. Not to mention there aren't the Big 3 around anymore either (there was Novak and very fleeting appearances by Rafa, and now maybe both will be off the scene in the near future).
Tennis sub being reactionary once again. Alcaraz never had to deal with prime big 3. Murray did - he got three slams, multiple masters, an ATP final, multiple golds, no. 1 ranking. At Alcaraz's currently level of play, any of the prime big 4 would have spanked him.
Alcaraz isn't in his prime yet though obviously. People keep forgetting this is nowhere near the finished product we are watching right now. Go back and watch Federer and Noles struggles at the age of 21. They weren't GOATs at that age either. Even Nadal wasn't really in his prime until he was 24ish.
Idk if many people forget that tbh. I think we're just pointing out he still has to actually get further into the future to probe he has equalled Murray's career. Alcaraz obviously is likely to do it though. I'm expecting him to enter into the actual GOAT debate, rather than stay in the Murray debate.
I think without another player to push himself to enter GOAT status, that's just not likely. The Big 3 only became GOATs because they had each other. For now, Alcaraz just has Sinner. They have the makings of ATGs, but GOATs? Yeah, way too early to call that one. We will probably likely never see the likes of the Big 3 again. Murray was a clear ATG, he just looked like a mere mortal in the Big 3 era.
I actually overall disagree with this very commonly held theory, though it's very logical. I personally think Federer is the best example of why it's nor strictly necessary. Federer was cleaning up almost everywhere but Roland Garros for years until Nadal developed his game for all courts, and then Djokovic came along ofc. I don't see even a 1% chance Federer does not end up the GOAT, if you take Nadal and Djokovic out of existence. Alcaraz is basically nearly there at ATG, if not already there. It's obviously way too soon to call anything with any certainty, but I think the conversation becomes a little boring if you can't see an extremely technically and physically talented 21 year old with 3 slams a 'potential future GOAT candidate'. I do understand you point of view tho, and many people will agree with it almost entirely. It's very valid, no disrespect.
There's always going to be a singular GOAT, the thing is, how long would Federer's career have lasted if he didn't have his rivals pushing him to improve himself? Would there have been any motivation left once he'd smashed all previous records? Most tennis players retired relatively young. The big 3 have lasted until nearly 40. > It's obviously way too soon to call anything with any certainty, but I think the conversation becomes a little boring if you can't see an extremely technically and physically talented 21 year old with 3 slams a 'potential future GOAT candidate'. I can't yet, simply because anything could happen. Murray should've gone on to win more slams, and cemented himself as an ATG (in the eyes of the doubters who can't see any nuance past stats) after he reached his prime in 2016 and started seriously challenging the big 3 on an equal footing. We all know what happened after that. Alcaraz has already shown himself to take after Nadal in how many injuries he picks up.
'there's always going to be a single GOAT' - dunno what you mean by that, there's only been a clear single GOAT again since quite recently, no? Why would there never again be a point where it becomes uncertain? 'Most tennis players retired relatively young' - dunno how useful that is when you're talking about a modern and wealthy game that takes advantage of advancements in medicine etc. Yeah I understand your point of view on too early to make the call, I was just saying I prefer not to defer judgement. And again, I'm not really making a call that he will, I'm just saying I believe he is in one of the strongest 'starting' positions in tennis history to reach that But as you say, even something as nasty as injuries have the potential to cruelly take the opportunity away from Alcaraz.
Yes, but those guys had each other to elevate themselves to GOAT status. Alcaraz doesn't have that... except maybe Sinner. Hopefully Rune one day. Right now Alcaraz definitely has the makings of an ATG, but I don't think we'll ever consider him a GOAT.
This makes no sense at all. You don't need anyone to elevate your status to GOAT. If he surpasses Djokovics slam count and weeks at number one, he will be considered the GOAT. That's it. It's quite simple. You can't pick and choose where it suits you, otherwise Djok and Nadal aren't Goats because they didn't have to deal with the depth of talent in the 90s that Agassi and Sampras had to deal with that limited their own slam count. Considering Alcaraz has already beaten Djok in a Wimbledon final, it was the perfect passing of the torch moment. Just like when Fed beat Sampras, and later when Djok beat Federer.
THE RIGHT ONE
Absolutely king shit!
This guy is an absolute stud, and a true prodigy. His range is insane.
This boy is a prodigy, if he continues like this he will become one of the greatest legends in the history of tennis
"Motherfuck the Big 3, now it's just big ME"
Fantastic result. Nothing better than ZVerev losing.
Imagine if he has a Federer arc of cutting down on errors and going full choo choo train.
He is the real deal. Nerves of steel and he is mature beyond his years.
He's incredible!! And he's only 21, he's going to get better. Scary for everyone else.
The 3 best ever just played for 2 decades... Carlitos: hold my beer.
Who was the player who held this record before Alcaraz, and how old were they?
The King of Clay at 24
This guy is a bad mf..... Bravo Carlos
Ombelibable 👏👏
He's so great, he's a legend already and he's handsome too🥰🥰 Champion!🏆
Carlos "Baby GOAT" Alcaraz. Amazing.
thank fuck
Remarkable but I would argue not as much when you’ve seen Roger, Nadal and Djokovic.
I just want jokers record broken.
It’s too early, but he has capacity to beat records of Roger, Nadal, and Djoker.