Alcaraz vs. Fonseca

[El Dude]

I thought it would be interesting to compare Joao Fonseca now to Carlos Alcaraz at a similar point in his career. Please note that this is, like a lot o my inquiries, more by way of comparing historical precedents and records than it is meant to be predictive. In what follows, I will compare how Fonseca has compared to Alcaraz thus far, at a similar point in their respective careers. I am NOT suggesting that Fonseca will follow the same path (though, as you'll see, it has been quite similar thus far) but I AM speculating on "What If."

I'm as excited about Fonseca as anyone, but I'm also a tiny bit leery of just how hyped he's been - I don't remember any prospect in recent memory being so hyped up before going deep at a Slam or even Masters. By my memory, even Alcaraz wasn't this hyped - not until he broke out in early 2022, starting with Rio a few months shy of his 19th birthday, but really heating up when he won Miami, Barcelona and Madrid, the last just a few days after turning 19. Before that, he was an exciting young player to watch, but--again, if memory serves--he wasn't quite seen as the surefire future elite that Fonseca is now considered to be.

Alcaraz had his breakout into the elite in Feb-May 2022 at the same age that Fonseca will be in May-Aug of this year. In other words, Fonseca is about a month plus younger than Alcaraz was when he started his breakout run. In that span of time, he won two ATP 500s and two Masters in a span of six tournaments and had clearly arrived as one of the big boys. Up until that point, like Fonseca, he had won an ATP 250 and the Next Gen Finals.

Aside from the differences in their games, one clear difference is that Alcaraz had played a lot more ATP level matches before that breakout. If we consider Rio as the start of Alcaraz's run, here is how ATP level events and match time compares to where Fonseca is now (including Next Gen finals and Davis Cup):

ALCARAZ (Feb 22, age 18y 9mo): 35-19 in 21 events (49 matches, 64.8%), 1 ATP 250 title, Next Gen title, ranked #31)
FONSECA (Apr 25, age 18y, 8m): 21-13 in 15 events (34 matches, 61.8%), (1 ATP 250 title, Next Gen title, ranked #59)

Including Challengers and Futures:

ALCARAZ: 109-38 (147 matches, 74.1%)
FONSECA: 50-20 (70 matches, 71.4%)

So as you can see, Alcaraz had played 15 more ATP level matches and more than twice as many matches overall...as of right now. Fonzie still has another month or so before he enters Alcaraz's breakthrough age zone. I'm not sure what his schedule is, but given that Alcaraz won the first of his breakout run within three months of his 19th birthday, the three months prior mark for Fonseca is May 21, and that includes three Masters and one of two ATP 500s.

One final comparison. How had Alcaraz faired through his first 70 matches overall? He was 53-17, just a smidgeon better than Fonseca. And through his first 34 ATP level matches? He was 19-15, a bit worse than Fonseca's 21-13.

The key difference, I'd say, is that Alcaraz played a lot more Futures and Challengers before focusing on the ATP tour. Whether or not this will impact Fonseca's rise remains to be seen. So far he's doing pretty well, I'd say.

Regardless, they are very similar. Now it just remains to be seen when and how Fonseca breaks out into the elite. Will he go on a run like Alcaraz did, who won two ATP 500s and two Masters in a span of six events and three months? Or will it be more gradual? After that run, Alcaraz reached the QF and 4R at Slams, then won the US Open.

If Fonseca were to follow the exact same pattern as Carlos did in terms of age, his breakout run would begin in late May or early June, which is the time of Roland Garros. After that you have Halle/Queen's Club (500s), Wimbledon, Washington (500), the two North American Masters, and then the US Open. But to be fair to Fonzie, the closest Slam to Alcaraz's US Open in terms of age and experience is probably the 2026 Australian Open.

Or to summarize - if Fonzie goes on a breakout run (which I'm defining as winning multiple titles, at least one of them "big"), relative to Alcaraz it will be:

Clay season 2025 (Apr-June): A bit earlier than than Alcaraz
North America 2025 (July-Sept): About the same as Alcaraz
Indoor Hard season 2025 (Oct-Nov): A bit later than Alcaraz
2026 (any time): Later than Alcaraz

And in terms of first Slam title:

RG 2025 : about 6 months ahead of Alcaraz
Wim 2025: about 5 months ahead of Alcaraz
USO 2025: about 3 months ahead of Alcaraz
AO 2025: about 2 months after Alcaraz

 

[mrzz]

Twice I started to write a reply to this thread, and twice I lost it... hope that the third time's a charm.

First -- and actually the least important to the argument, but it is something that became very clear to me in the last few years -- about the hype: Yes, as good as Fonseca's results are, he is over hyped. This is a fact. But I get from where it comes. As said in another post, it is not just what you do in terms of results, it is how you do it. And the way Fonseca win points and matches is simply different. It is not just pure power -- it is the timing, it is this never ending feeling that he is hanging on the balance all the time, flirting with disaster. Everything can turn on its head from one moment to another. I get that Alcaraz can display some magical skills, but... it is different, the way Fonseca impacts the audience is simply on another level. And Sinner does not even belong in this conversation.

But this was about the hype. The actual results, this is a completely different matter. Fonseca will have to get there first, and that is not a given. What I think he has on his side is his planning: he (and his team) is thinking long term from the get go, and you can see that by the number of tournaments played.

But... against him there are two important factors: One, he is Brazilian. We simply have way less tradition. We lack the culture of living in the thin air of the top 20. This will get him somehow, plus the pressure of getting the results that the whole country expects from him. He is kind of the nation's new found hope. As cool headed as think the kid is, there is no way this is not getting to him at least a tinny bit. No wonder he won in Buenos Aires and lost the first match in Rio..

Second one is his style. Purely aggressive tennis is less effective, period. It is in his DNA. He is learning to defend, he is learning to control the aggression, bladahbladahbladah. It will all pay dividends, yes, but he will always be who he is. There will always be matches were that winner that landed wide by millimeters will cost him (the Draper match at IW was an example).

All in all, I think if he becomes a major winner, at any point, is good enough for me. I know that most, including my friend @El Dude , would be disappointed, and I get that. On one hand, I am keeping my expectations as low as I can. On the other, I know how many invisible barriers there will be in front of him.

The crazy thing is that I am over 50, this kid is a teenager, and I learnt already a lot from him.

 

[El Dude]

Andy Roddick said something recently, @mrzz, about the Fonseca hype: that when prospects get hyped, he looks to what the players say - and he said that the players are saying that Fonseca is special. You could see that in Djokovic's estimation, as well. He isn't a guy like Rune or Mensik that they're saying will be good, but a guy that is special.

Of course as special as he is, there are hurdles to overcome - the Brazilian thing, as you say (though he can build on Guga, no?), and the potential for injury. I don't worry as much about his offensive style, because I do think the defense is coming along. But really, as different as he and Alcaraz are, they share a similarity of seemingly believing they can win every point. With Alcaraz, it is get to any ball and win the point that way; with Fonseca, it is hit any shot and win the point that way. At times, for both, it seems true.

In that sense, Fonseca may share Alcaraz's boom-or-bust pattern, more than Sinner's steady hegemony - at least for a time. There might be spans of time in which Fonzie is hitting every shot, then spans when he's just missing. And in that sense, I think his game will take more naturally to best-of-threes and it will take longer to translate to best-of-fives (than it did for Alcaraz).

As for how good he'll get, I think there's no doubt that he's the most promising of the post-Alcaraz generation - which I see as basically starting with Fils and continuing with Mensik, Tien, Shang, and guys we don't know much about yet - like Cina and Engel...and ending with 16-year old Cruz Hewitt (we'll see if his pedigree translates). How good he'll be remains to be seen, but we'll be watching him for years to come. I suspect, though, at the very least we'll get something approximating what a healthier Del Potro might have been.

 

[mrzz]

Andy Roddick said something recently, @mrzz, about the Fonseca hype: that when prospects get hyped, he looks to what the players say - and he said that the players are saying that Fonseca is special. You could see that in Djokovic's estimation, as well. He isn't a guy like Rune or Mensik that they're saying will be good, but a guy that is special.

Can't argue with that. You probably noticed a while ago that I am trying very hard not to be carried away -- and probably in the process I might be "bending the rod the other way", as we say in Portuguese. Strangely enough I cannot say that he is my favorite player (yet, at least, but it seems he won't ever be). Strange how these things actually click.

though he can build on Guga, no?

In theory, yes. But Kuerten was himself a point out of the curve. His talent is extremely underrated. I was writing a very long paragraph and just deleted it... The hard fact is that his legacy here is more in the collective imaginary than anything else. About Kuerten, I will only say this one thing: people say great champions are selfish. He is the exception that proves the rule.

Interesting point about five setters. It makes total sense. But somehow I think that Fonseca will overcome that with his brains.