Thanks Don,
He should take a page from the Djokovic playbook and do a lot more stretching.
Indeed, being a runner myself I stretch my hamstrings after I have a run.
For an elite athlete, Djokovic has shown that focusing on stretching prevents injury (no matter how much he whines) and lengthens your playing life. I don't know why they're not all paying attention to that.
I feel the wear and tear on hard courts is a reason that Charly has a plantar fascitis, I would suggest getting some orthopedic insoles in his shoes, to help absorb the impact on court, I also wear them, as I am very heavy and put my foot down when I run , mainly on asphalt,even though I am light in frame and taller than Charly, if this is a recurring problem and I hope not, he could look at having his tennis shoes built up, to absorb the impact.Carlos has massive legs. A lifelong discipline of stretching will help. I know he’s not hitting every shot of every point to make the highlight reel, but he’s putting some incredible wear on those legs. My concern is the mention of plantars fasciitis as one of the reasons for passing on Basel. He’s too young to have to deal with that.
But Federer had no contemporaries to challenge him, until Rafa came along. Alcaraz has Sinner, who I think has similar to him in talent, level-headedness, and ambition. I don't see Charly getting freebies.
If/when he hits his stride, I don’t see Sinner at the same level as Alcaraz. Time will tell.
It seems to me that Carlos has had more injuries at a younger age and either the angelic assassin or the Spanish bull. Otherwise, I should think he would have had more tournament victories. But to even be mention as being in the scene echelon as those two all-time greats is enough.
I know this has been batted about before, but I don't think that sells. He came up playing against Sampras in the twilight of his career, Agassi when he had a resurgence at the end of his career, Andy Roddick when he was an upcoming star, number one in the world with a huge serve, to say nothing of the great Australian, Lleyton Hewitt, as well as Marat Safin. These were top players who would have won more majors were it not for the Swiss Maestro. He can't help it that he was just supremely better both mentally and shotmaking-wise then any of his "contemporaries". For years he was better than the young Spaniard and it was Roger, even in the words of the great Spaniard, who pushed him to become the player he ultimately became. If we denigrate Roger as having no contemporaries, then we should denigrate Nadal (which I refuse to do), because he dominated the same people in major championships and masters events in 2004-2007. He was winning tournaments in 2004, only a year and 1/2 or two years after Roger started winning events more regularly. At the end, it is simply a matter of Roger and Rafa being the extra special players that they were. They were just two of the best of all time and nobody was going to be able to be called a contemporary that could challenge them except for themselves--and this guy from Serbia who was just a few years behind them.
