Whatever happened to the Fiero that cared about New Blood? I thought you wanted challengers to the Big 3. Now you spit on those who appreciate Carlos Alcaraz for his achievement today. And as @kskate2 points out, you're making it all about Djokovic, only he didn't play this week. All anyone else is doing is talking about the players who did.
I believe the above have all been discussed by posters other than you. For example:
www.tennisfrontier.com
The reality, Fiero? When a champhion stops competing, inevitably he loses some relevance. Its unfair but that’s life, so once Novak/Nadal retire & Alcaraz & company take over even the Fedalovic buzz will be reduced. They become ex-players, relics of history & soon of a bygone era. Just like us fans. : (I started playing in '71 & Laver was the consensus "greatest" w/ his closest rival being Rosewall! Technically Hoad owned Rod like no other! Laver's given more credit than his achievements due to being banned from the majors in his PRIME due to amateur rule for 5+ yrs.! He won his 1st CYGS in '62 as an amateur, toiled w/ the Pros winning their "majors," then when Open Tennis agreed upon, he performed well enough to take another CYGS in '69! No one saw Fedalovic coming to wipe out the memory of past greats! I seem to be the only one to invoke the names of Tilden, Budge, Kramer, & Gonzalez, but they owned the tour as much as the B3 except for the duration of time! Soon they'll stop even thinking about Laver, Borg, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Agassi, & Sampras! It's all about Fedalovic now and for the foreseeable future!
These halcyon days of men's tennis are ending, but who's to say that another one isn't starting? Not to say that anyone's getting to 23+ Majors in the next 15 years, but why aren't Alcaraz and Rune setting up to be a great rivalry? They don't have all of the differences that made Roger and Rafa such great ink, but there is a certain white hat/black hat to them. There is the Spanish heat vs. Nordic viking thing. And they're both aggressive, ambition and very talented. If there's a 3 or 4 in this equation, I still think they are the "players to be named later." Remember, it took a while to add in Novak and Andy. So it could be Sinner, though I'm inclined to sell on him. Musetti? Seb Korda? Who knows? But if what we get is an Alcaraz/Rune rivalry, I'll stay tuned for that.
We’ll see. Lately Rune has failed to make it far enough to meet Carlos.
They're a week apart in age, and both barely 20. H2H is 1-1. They're both just getting started. Don't you think it's a set up for a good rivalry? I do, personally.
I was half joking and half serious… Rune has the talent, but the maturity and focus that Carlos has do not seem to reside with the Dane at anywhere near the same levels.
I also think at this stage Alcaraz has more gears in his game to go to, when needed than Rune, I also agree with you he is more mature and is more focused than Rune
Well, Novak didn't have it either, in early days, especially v. Nadal. Turned out to be a great rivalry, though, and we didn't have to wait especially long.
For sure, of who is out there, Alcaraz is the prodigy...the first one since Nadal. He seems nearly fully-formed, even at such a young age. Physically, mentally, temperamentally, and in terms of tools in the tool shed. But, likewise, neither Roger nor Novak were that, as young. I still think Rune will get there to make it a good battle over the years. And I don't really think it will take very long. That's my prediction.
I never said Rune would not have a rivalry with Alcaraz, I was talking about the 'present' where I feel Alcaraz has more gears to go to in his game when needed, than Rune and I also feel Alcaraz is more mature and focused, the main part that I was agreeing with NehmethFor sure, of who is out there, Alcaraz is the prodigy...the first one since Nadal. He seems nearly fully-formed, even at such a young age. Physically, mentally, temperamentally, and in terms of tools in the tool shed. But, likewise, neither Roger nor Novak were that, as young. I still think Rune will get there to make it a good battle over the years. And I don't really think it will take very long. That's my prediction.
Understood, and agreed...I was actually talking about the future. Because @Jelenafan was feeling a little bleak about it, in his post. Being optimistic for the future.
So you’re championing a 25 year old player who has only three 250 titles to his name as a slam winner before this year is out - but you’re sceptical about the 20 year old world number one US Open champion, who’s also won 4 MS titles?
Not bleak, but realistic.Understood, and agreed...I was actually talking about the future. Because @Jelenafan was feeling a little bleak about it, in his post. Being optimistic for the future.
I'm not saying Alcaraz isn't going to win anything again (if you ask me right now, I would say he will win several more slams), but you just never know. Nothing is ever guaranteed in tennis, and things have a funny way of changing drastically in such short order. If you don't believe me, look at how the career trajectories of Hewitt and Federer changed between Wimbledon 2002 and the end of 2004. I'm not saying that will happen with Alcaraz and Rune, but it can certainly happen.So you’re championing a 25 year old player who has only three 250 titles to his name as a slam winner before this year is out - but you’re sceptical about the 20 year old world number one US Open champion, who’s also won 4 MS titles?
