If back in 2018…

[Jelenafan]

Someone had been wagered that one of either Zverev, Tsitsipas, Shapovalov or FAA would win a Grand Slam title by the end of 2024 most people around here I would guess would have taken it.

Today, i would say it’s a safe bet none of them will ever win a singles Grand Slam.

Zverev after the US open loss to Fritz did another variation of his excuses tour:

“My backhand, I don't remember since being on tour hitting my backhand this badly. I just don't. I mean, I was missing shots which were in the middle of the court with no pace, and bottom of the net. Terrible. Just absolutely terrible by me.

“My forehand was okay, actually. My serve was okay. But my most reliable shot, the shot that I'm most known for, the shot that you normally wake me up at 3am. and I would not miss was absolutely not there today, and I have no words for it, to be honest.”

 

[El Dude]

Shapo is still basically what he was five years ago, so I don't expect anything more from him. He's a somewhat entertaining player with natural talent, but without the mental game and refinement to be an elite player.

The door isn't closed on Zverev and Tsitsipas - I mean, they're 27 and 25, respectively. But it may be hard for them to get by the Sincaraz Hegemony. I mean, they swapped out Djokodal for Sincaraz, with really no gap in between to "vulture" a Slam or two. But there's still the possibility that, within the next few years, they do a "cilic" and have an incredible Slam tournament, perhaps with the help with an upset or two.

I'm afraid FAA just doesn't have the spine/mentality to win a Slam, but I still see him as likely to win a Masters or two. Who knows, maybe he wins a Masters and finds the desire for more. He's still only 23.

Here's a thought: while the chances that any one of them wins a Slam is probably somewhere quite a bit below 50%, maybe the chances that one of them wins one is a bit higher. Ignoring Shapo, I'd give roughly 50-50 odds that one of the other three wins a Slam.

 

[shawnbm]

It is odd, no? There is such a stark difference between these guys and Carlos and Sinner. It is a lack of focus and intensity that the truly top players have. You can see it viscerally with Nadal, Nole and Carlos, but it is there in the quieter demeanor of Federer and Sinner too. All are supremely confident and believe at crunch time they are going to win. Federer and Novak have been the top tiebreak players for almost twenty years and that says something. They have great down two sets and come back to win records. Carlos does too. Nadal has a great best of five set record and I am sure all of these alpha players have tremendous deciding set records as well. They must have.

 

[Jelenafan]

…
I'm afraid FAA just doesn't have the spine/mentality to win a Slam, but I still see him as likely to win a Masters or two. Who knows, maybe he wins a Masters and finds the desire for more. He's still only 23…

Felix was born in August 2020 so he’s already 24

 

[El Dude]

Felix was born in August 2020 so he’s already 24

You mean 4? Wow, he's an amazing player. ;-)

 

[El Dude]

It is odd, no? There is such a stark difference between these guys and Carlos and Sinner. It is a lack of focus and intensity that the truly top players have. You can see it viscerally with Nadal, Nole and Carlos, but it is there in the quieter demeanor of Federer and Sinner too. All are supremely confident and believe at crunch time they are going to win. Federer and Novak have been the top tiebreak players for almost twenty years and that says something. They have great down two sets and come back to win records. Carlos does too. Nadal has a great best of five set record and I am sure all of these alpha players have tremendous deciding set records as well. They must have.

I'm again reminded of what Novak said about this, that the top 20ish or more players (he might have said 100) are of similar talent, but that the mental game separates them - whether it is confidence, drive to work as hard as possible, etc.

Now it is hard to get one's head around the idea that Carlos Alcaraz and, say, Corentin Moutet are close in talent level. We can even see a big gulf between Alcaraz (et al) and guys like Alex De Minaur, Nadal and Ferrer, Federer and Berdych, etc. But I think that Novak was just highlighting how important the mental game is. I mean, we look at a guy like FAA and he has all the tools to be an elite player and Slam winner, but for whatever reason, he just doesn't have the mental part down.

And of course all roads of this discussion eventually lead back to David Nalbandian.

 

[shawnbm]

Ah yes--the wily Argentine and Cali. Those were the days!

 

[Jelenafan]

Now it is hard to get one's head around the idea that Carlos Alcaraz and, say, Corentin Moutet are close in talent level. We can even see a big gulf between Alcaraz (et al) and guys like Alex De Minaur, Nadal and Ferrer, Federer and Berdych, etc. But I think that Novak was just highlighting how important the mental game is. I mean, we look at a guy like FAA and he has all the tools to be an elite player and Slam winner, but for whatever reason, he just doesn't have the mental part down.

Felix doesn’t care if he loses. The very top players seem to have their heart carved out when they experience a loss, Felix just shrugs aka “I’m only 18”, “I’m only 19”, “I’m only 20”, 21, 22, 23, 24, etc.

At the same time, Ive always thought his skills are highly overrated , the “style points” impress other when the main thing is just get the damn ball over the net last.

 

[rafanoy1992]

Shapo is still basically what he was five years ago, so I don't expect anything more from him. He's a somewhat entertaining player with natural talent, but without the mental game and refinement to be an elite player.

The door isn't closed on Zverev and Tsitsipas - I mean, they're 27 and 25, respectively. But it may be hard for them to get by the Sincaraz Hegemony. I mean, they swapped out Djokodal for Sincaraz, with really no gap in between to "vulture" a Slam or two. But there's still the possibility that, within the next few years, they do a "cilic" and have an incredible Slam tournament, perhaps with the help with an upset or two.

I'm afraid FAA just doesn't have the spine/mentality to win a Slam, but I still see him as likely to win a Masters or two. Who knows, maybe he wins a Masters and finds the desire for more. He's still only 23.

Here's a thought: while the chances that any one of them wins a Slam is probably somewhere quite a bit below 50%, maybe the chances that one of them wins one is a bit higher. Ignoring Shapo, I'd give roughly 50-50 odds that one of the other three wins a Slam.

I do not think the door is closed on Zverev. As much he is a "choker" on Slam matches, he still reaching SFs and Final on 3 out of the 4 slams. I could definitely see him do a "Cilic" type of run in a Slam (probably RG).

On the other hand, I do think Tsitsipas' window is closed. To me, it seems like he has regressed overall as a player. The results just speak for itself.

 

[shawnbm]

Felix doesn’t care if he loses. The very top players seem to have their heart carved out when they experience a loss, Felix just shrugs aka “I’m only 18”, “I’m only 19”, “I’m only 20”, 21, 22, 23, 24, etc.

At the same time, Ive always thought his skills are highly overrated , the “style points” impress other when the main thing is just get the damn ball over the net last.

There is always the element of great reward for just being a top 50 player. I see the money these guys are making now which is directly linked to the glory days in the 1970s that got the tour going and then has been greatly expanded and has enriched many more since the rise of the big three in the last two decades. I wonder how much the money dampens the drive in some players, obviously not all. When there is that much money in the pot, I wonder how hard some guys want to fight when the difference is making a $750,000 v. $450,000 – – either way look at it, you are far ahead of most people in life when you get that deep in a major event. If you are playing all the mandatory events throughout the year, there is a lot of money at stake if you can get beyond the third or fourth round, which a lot of players we are talking about will do routinely. This means they make millions of dollars per year or very close to it, particularly when you count in the exhibitions and the endorsement money linked to playing, appearance fees, etc. I may be way off, but it crosses my mind.

 

[Jelenafan]

I do not think the door is closed on Zverev. As much he is a "choker" on Slam matches, he still reaching SFs and Final on 3 out of the 4 slams. I could definitely see him do a "Cilic" type of run in a Slam (probably RG).

On the other hand, I do think Tsitsipas' window is closed. To me, it seems like he has regressed overall as a player. The results just speak for itself.

Zverev lost to Taylor Fritz, a player who is fairly one- dimensional, again to Taylor Fritz.

 

[rafanoy1992]

Zverev lost to Taylor Fritz, a player who is fairly one- dimensional, again to Taylor Fritz.

You are right, but he also reached the AO SF and RG F this year.

Like I said, he is a choker at big slam matches, but he still very talented enough to go deep at slams consistently. Whether or not he wins a slam, that’s a different question.

 

[mrzz]

I see most are assuming Sinner and Alcatraz will keep dominating majors in the short and middle term, as they did this year. It is possible? For sure it is. It is likely? That's debatable to say the least. Is it a given? Hell no.

 

[El Dude]

I see most are assuming Sinner and Alcatraz will keep dominating majors in the short and middle term, as they did this year. It is possible? For sure it is. It is likely? That's debatable to say the least. Is it a given? Hell no.

Just about anything is debatable (See; "Internet, but especially Twitter"). But let's also not undersell just how good Sinner and Alcaraz have been. Over the last three years (2022-24), Alcaraz has won more Slams than Andy Murray did for his entire career, and two-thirds the totals of Edberg and Becker. His overall performance level, year to year, is pretty much comparable with peak Becker/Edberg...and he just turned 21. I suppose there's always the ghost of Jim Courier, who pretty much played like an ATG for three years then dropped to being a tier 2 (Berdych) type for a couple years, then a tier 3 guy for a few years more. But he was already Alcaraz's current age when he started his three-year run of almost-greatness, and his decline is unusual for a player that performed as well as he did in 1991-93.

As good as Alcaraz has been for three years, Sinner has been even better in 2024. By my statistical nerdery, his overall performance level this year is better than any season by Agassi, Edberg, and Becker - and the season isn't over.

To put some numbers to it, I use a stat I call "Season Dominance," which basically combines three other made up stats: One that measures good results at every tournament; one that measures shares of titles won; and a third that is a percentage stat of quality of play (that is, how well they did as a percentage of what they played in).

For reference sake, a truly great season is about 100 SD - and ATGs tend to have multiple seasons above 100, with 150 being roughly top 25 in the Open Era. Players like Zverev, Medvedev, Wawrinka, Thiem, Del Potro, Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, and Kuerten peak out in the 70-100 range. Ferrer's best was 68, Davydenko 56, Tsonga 38, Berdych 33, Gasquet 26.

Sinner is at 137 going into Shanghai - which is the same as Roger's 2009, which was his 6th best season by SD. Here are the players who have 137+ SD seasons, in order of highest best season:

Djokovic: 233, 201, 185, 161, 155, 145, 142, 142
Federer: 221, 187, 180, 177, 157, 137
Laver: 216, 138
McEnroe: 215, 150
Lendl: 186, 163, 155, 148, 143
Connors: 184, 145, 143, 140
Borg: 179, 178, 154
Nadal: 178, 173, 158, 138
Murray: 170
Sampras: 162, 146
Wilander: 146
Vilas: 146
Nastase: 145

So by my system, Sinner is the 14th player in the Open Era to have a 137 or higher SD. His 2024 season is already 41st best in the Open Era, and almost certainly going to pass a bunch of those above and reach the top 30 seasons, with a good chance of reaching 150+, which is top 25 in the Open Era.

(And yes: this sort of stat is debatable. I'm sure some will dislike the fact that Andy Murray's 2016 season is better than any by Sampras, or that Wilander's 1988 is so relatively low...but the system weighs all tournaments, all wins - and yes, does heavily weigh Slams, but tries to take into account the fluctuating nature of "Slam prominence").

While this is just one system of accounting, I think it does a pretty good job of giving an overall picture of dominance within a given year. Notably not on the list above are Agassi, Edberg, Becker, Courier, and, well, everyone else. And most importantly: it gives us a way to assess just how good Sinner has been this year.

TLDR: There is every reason to think that both Alcaraz and Sinner are in the process of ATG careers. The question is how great. And yes, it is debatable whether or not they remain this dominance, but given their age and trajectories of improvement (Alcaraz more gradual but younger, Sinner more steep but older), I suspect we haven't even seen their best yet. Or rather, if I were to guess, this will likely be among the best seasons Sinner ever has, but Alcaraz still has great heights that we haven't even seen yet.

 

[Jelenafan]

I see most are assuming Sinner and Alcatraz will keep dominating majors in the short and middle term, as they did this year. It is possible? For sure it is. It is likely? That's debatable to say the least. Is it a given? Hell no.

My thread is more about the relative improbability of Zverev, Tsitsipas, etc & company, suddenly being able to win a Major at this point in their careers.

I personally give the Italian/Spaniard duo better odds of at least maintaining their form, even just one of them for the next 12-18 months.
But IMO say Alcaraz & Sinner *may* dip going forward, I still stand by the odds of those other guys “surging” upward to grab a Major as more of the “hell no” to me.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

El Dude,
I agree with your thoughts " Alcaraz has great heights that we havent seen as yet". Sinner has improved incredibly this year he has the stats to back it up, and to date has had a great year, though as I have said before "Alcaraz has a higher ceiling' to me than Sinner, he has shown that in matches that have been tight, also in his latest title win in China, when he was down in the TB, his self belief in his shots won him the match and the title in China.
I look forward to watch both players in 2025

 

[El Dude]

El Dude,
I agree with your thoughts " Alcaraz has great heights that we havent seen as yet". Sinner has improved incredibly this year he has the stats to back it up, and to date has had a great year, though as I have said before "Alcaraz has a higher ceiling' to me than Sinner, he has shown that in matches that have been tight, also in his latest title win in China, when he was down in the TB, his self belief in his shots won him the match and the title in China.
I look forward to watch both players in 2025

In a way I'm reminded a bit of McEnroe vs. Lendl. Mac had the magic, but Lendl was just incredibly effective - especially once he stole the crown from Mac in '85 - and I think, in the end, they were similarly great, if in different ways.

Jannik never wows me with magic like Alcaraz does, so in my analogy he's more Lendl, with Alcaraz being more McEnroe. He's a great player, but it just doesn't have the same fairy dust. I suppose the question is whether or not Alcaraz can be more consistent in summoning the magic. If he is, we might see an inner circle great emerge. But as things stand, both are already on the path to greatness.

But back to the original topic, Tsitsipas looks like he's teetering on the edge of collapse. If he doesn't change course, he'll be done in a few years. But he's got the game to win a Slam; if you look at what he can do on court, I think it is more than Zverev or Medvedev. But his mental game is worse, and I think Zverev has a significantly better chance of winning a Slam. So I'd order them:

Zverev: Maybe 50-50? No way to quantify it, but "50-50" means that he's got the game (and especially serve) to do it. I mean, he's a significantly better player than Cilic, who won a Slam during the height of the Big Four era.

Tsitsipas: Unlikely, unless he has a come to Jesus/ayahuasca moment and really works hard. It isn't impossible, though. Again, I like his overall skillset and game better than Zverev or Medvedev, but he just doesn't seem to want it enough - or perhaps has a particularly bad case of "Millenial entitlement."

FAA: Similar to Tsitsipas, but with more time. But FAA's problem isn't as much a bad attitude as almost...too good of an attitude? He's just so laid back. Actually, he kind of reminds me of Grigor a bit...and maybe will end up with a similar career. Grigor had that one really good year in 2017, when he was 25-26, winning a Masters and the Tour Finals. He's also resurged over the last couple years, but in the end he's sort of like Gasquet with one really good year.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

In order for Zverev to win a GS, I question his mental ability, 2020 USO final, where he had CH points and let them slip, to me he plays safe, and too defensive tennis, when he has a lead in a big match, RG GS final in 2024,? and waits for his opponent to make a mistake, instead of maintaining his lead and going for his shots, his 2nd serve can break down as well as his fhand as we have seen in the past GS finals he has competed in. I also feel he suffers from "entitlement issues" .

Tsitsipas, has a all round better game than Zverev, though to me he has real technical problems on his bhand and it has never been corrected, his bhand slice is another area that needs help, also suffers from " entitlement issues". This year has been a disaster in terms of winning tournaments, he has sacked his dad, to date no new coach, I dont know if a new coach can help Tsitsipas game at present, as a lot of it is in his head, personally I feel Craig Boynton, who has been successful in the past/present developing players, could be a good fit for Tsitsipas, ( Craig no longer coaches Hurkacz). 2025 will be a telling year for Tsitispas, as he cannot afford to have another year like 2024.

FAA to me, he hasnt got the 'killer instinct' in matches when it matters, players are either born with such mentality or they develop it in their career, agree he is 'too nice'. When you consider in 2022 his ranking was No 6 in the world, in 2024 ranked No 22, quite a slide backwards.Felix hired Toni Nadal to help primarily for his clay game, ( no longer working together) and he is still with his long time coach Federic Fontang. A new coach for Felix to me at this point in his career would be most beneifcial for Felix, a new voice, he has the talent and he is a better player than his current ranking of #22.

 

[mrzz]

Just about anything is debatable (See; "Internet, but especially Twitter"). But let's also not undersell just how good Sinner and Alcaraz have been. Over the last three years (2022-24), Alcaraz has won more Slams than Andy Murray did for his entire career, and two-thirds the totals of Edberg and Becker. His overall performance level, year to year, is pretty much comparable with peak Becker/Edberg...and he just turned 21. I suppose there's always the ghost of Jim Courier, who pretty much played like an ATG for three years then dropped to being a tier 2 (Berdych) type for a couple years, then a tier 3 guy for a few years more. But he was already Alcaraz's current age when he started his three-year run of almost-greatness, and his decline is unusual for a player that performed as well as he did in 1991-93.

As good as Alcaraz has been for three years, Sinner has been even better in 2024. By my statistical nerdery, his overall performance level this year is better than any season by Agassi, Edberg, and Becker - and the season isn't over.

To put some numbers to it, I use a stat I call "Season Dominance," which basically combines three other made up stats: One that measures good results at every tournament; one that measures shares of titles won; and a third that is a percentage stat of quality of play (that is, how well they did as a percentage of what they played in).

For reference sake, a truly great season is about 100 SD - and ATGs tend to have multiple seasons above 100, with 150 being roughly top 25 in the Open Era. Players like Zverev, Medvedev, Wawrinka, Thiem, Del Potro, Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, and Kuerten peak out in the 70-100 range. Ferrer's best was 68, Davydenko 56, Tsonga 38, Berdych 33, Gasquet 26.

Sinner is at 137 going into Shanghai - which is the same as Roger's 2009, which was his 6th best season by SD. Here are the players who have 137+ SD seasons, in order of highest best season:

Djokovic: 233, 201, 185, 161, 155, 145, 142, 142
Federer: 221, 187, 180, 177, 157, 137
Laver: 216, 138
McEnroe: 215, 150
Lendl: 186, 163, 155, 148, 143
Connors: 184, 145, 143, 140
Borg: 179, 178, 154
Nadal: 178, 173, 158, 138
Murray: 170
Sampras: 162, 146
Wilander: 146
Vilas: 146
Nastase: 145

So by my system, Sinner is the 14th player in the Open Era to have a 137 or higher SD. His 2024 season is already 41st best in the Open Era, and almost certainly going to pass a bunch of those above and reach the top 30 seasons, with a good chance of reaching 150+, which is top 25 in the Open Era.

(And yes: this sort of stat is debatable. I'm sure some will dislike the fact that Andy Murray's 2016 season is better than any by Sampras, or that Wilander's 1988 is so relatively low...but the system weighs all tournaments, all wins - and yes, does heavily weigh Slams, but tries to take into account the fluctuating nature of "Slam prominence").

While this is just one system of accounting, I think it does a pretty good job of giving an overall picture of dominance within a given year. Notably not on the list above are Agassi, Edberg, Becker, Courier, and, well, everyone else. And most importantly: it gives us a way to assess just how good Sinner has been this year.

TLDR: There is every reason to think that both Alcaraz and Sinner are in the process of ATG careers. The question is how great. And yes, it is debatable whether or not they remain this dominance, but given their age and trajectories of improvement (Alcaraz more gradual but younger, Sinner more steep but older), I suspect we haven't even seen their best yet. Or rather, if I were to guess, this will likely be among the best seasons Sinner ever has, but Alcaraz still has great heights that we haven't even seen yet.

Your statistical/historical analysis is, as always, very sound. I did not realize how good Sinner's season is. And, yes, Alcaraz has already won an impressive number of majors. I agree that those are two compelling reasons to suppose that they will dominate.

But there are also good reasons to suppose they won't (which is the point here).

First, they are only two -- the big three were three, and for a long while there was a fourth very consistent player getting to the semis and finals as well. So for them to repeat the kind of dominance that we got used too is way harder. An occasional loss from one of the big three (or big 3.25) a lot of times still led to a all big 3.25 final. Now, one occasional loss from Alcaraz or Sinner means another face on the final. And, still, if they are not the #1 and #2 seeds, they might face off in the semis.

So, even if they are as good as the big 3 were, they will still not dominate as much.

Second factor is psychological. The aura of invincibility of the big three, plus (and way more importantly), the relative tranquility in which they played big matches against lower level players is a key factor of their dominance. I do not think that Alcaraz/Sinner reached that level, and maybe they never will. Players enter the court to play them believing they can win. Players entered the court to play the big 3 to get an autograph and smile in the photo.

Third factor is completely subjective, but I simply do not think they are that good. Yes, they are extremely good, but they do not seem superhuman as the big 3 seemed.

Just to be clear, I am making the point that they won't dominate the way the big three did, not that they won't dominate at all. They did share all the majors this year, but I think this will not be the rule going forward.

 

[mrzz]

My thread is more about the relative improbability of Zverev, Tsitsipas, etc & company, suddenly being able to win a Major at this point in their careers.

I personally give the Italian/Spaniard duo better odds of at least maintaining their form, even just one of them for the next 12-18 months.
But IMO say Alcaraz & Sinner *may* dip going forward, I still stand by the odds of those other guys “surging” upward to grab a Major as more of the “hell no” to me.

I got the spirit of the thread. But I pointed out one factor which I believe for most people will be the main reason those players will not win a major.

Once you take out that "excuse" (two all time greats were their glass ceiling), the point you make about them becomes way more negative.