Pre-Gaming Roland Garros

[Moxie]

I think what makes Tsitsipas and Zverev interesting is that they're in a weird category of player that is better than the standard 2nd tier types (Berdych, Tsonga, even Ferrer) but don't seem to be able to get over the hump and win a Slam (yet).

I've pointed out that Zverev arguably has the best record of any non-Slam winner, and if he wins a single Slam, he'll also be among the best single-Slam winners (right now I'd say that title belongs to either Thomas Muster, Michael Chang, or Daniil Medvedev - or possibly Tony Roche, if we count pre-Open Era records). He's the only player with more than 7+ big titles and no Slams - and he's won 8, including 2 Tour Finals, 1 Olympics, and 5 Masters. The next guy is Marcelo Rios with 6, and then a bunch of guys with fewer:

8: Zverev
6: Rios
4: Okker, A Medvedev, Mecir, Davydenko, and Tsitsipas.
3: Gottfried, Solomon, Clerc, Chesnokov, Corretja, Enqvist, Nalbandian
2: 17 players (incl. Tsonga)
1: 45 players (incl. Berdych, Ferrer)

So Zverev stands alone. Rios had a short career and a shorter peak, with one of the best Slam-less years in 1998 (Sascha's 2021 might be the greatest Slamless year).

Tsitsipas will almost certainly win at least two or three more big titles, so if he doesn't win a Slam, he and Zverev will stand in a unique position in tennis history.

Or to put it another way, there are 25 players with 8 or more big titles, and all but Zverev have won Slams. And Tsitsipas has already won more big titles than guys like Jan Kodes, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Manuel Orantes, Petr Korda, Richard Krajicek, and Andres Gomez (all with 3, and 1-3 Slams each).

They are in "weird" category because they put themselves there. They have been tapped for some version of greatness for years. But they can't seem to get over the hump, as you say. Why? I put up my argument above. They bought the hype on themselves. They think too much of themselves. When things fall apart in a match, they don't have great emotional resources. Even if I leave off the notion that they are spoiled brats, it is clear that, for some reason, they don't have wells to tap into of deep personal fortitude. Both are talented. I think Tsitsipas is the more talented, feet to the fire. But even weaker in the ambition. They have reached the age when rubber meets the road. If they don't make a change in attitude soon, they will be left behind. Other, and better players seem to care more.

 

[rafanoy1992]

Adding to what @Moxie is saying about Tsitsipas and Zverev: it is why I respect the heck out of Casper Ruud. He might not have a flashy game or flashy personality (I don’t even have a strong opinion), but he has still reached 3 Slam Finals (the total amount between Tsitsipas and Zverev combined).

Yes, Ruud had “easy” draws, but he took advantage of those draws. With Tsitsipas and Zverev, they can’t even do that OR they have a hard time taking the opportunity to take advantage of a “soft” or “easy” draw.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Adding to what @Moxie is saying about Tsitsipas and Zverev: it is why I respect the heck out of Casper Ruud. He might not have a flashy game or flashy personality (I don’t even have a strong opinion), but he has still reached 3 Slam Finals (the total amount between Tsitsipas and Zverev combined).

Yes, Ruud had “easy” draws, but he took advantage of those draws. With Tsitsipas and Zverev, they can’t even do that OR they have a hard time taking the opportunity to take advantage of a “soft” or “easy” draw.

Yeah, I respect Ruud, as well as guys like Hurkacz and de Minaur. They may not be as talented as those ranked above them, but at least I know what I'm seeing from them is they best they have. If only we could pair Tsitsipas's talent with one of those guys work ethic. Tsitsipas seems to be okay with doing the bare minimum. It kind of reminds me of the Bernard Tomic "I have $10 million dollars, so I don't care" work ethic.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Yeah, I respect Ruud, as well as guys like Hurkacz and de Minaur. They may not be as talented as those ranked above them, but at least I know what I'm seeing from them is they best they have. If only we could pair Tsitsipas's talent with one of those guys work ethic. Tsitsipas seems to be okay with doing the bare minimum. It kind of reminds me of the Bernard Tomic "I have $10 million dollars, so I don't care" work ethic.

Entitlement that is what both Tstsipas and Zverev both have?
" the feeling that you have the right to do or have what you want without having to work for it or deserve it, just because of who you are"

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

I have to wonder if the absurd prize money is partly to blame for the entitlement of too many players in this generation. When a player like Tomic, who barely achieved a thing in his career, has $10 million in his bank, I can see why there is less incentive for players to work hard and improve their game.

 

[El Dude]

I'm frequently reminded of this:

 

[Moxie]

I have to wonder if the absurd prize money is partly to blame for the entitlement of too many players in this generation. When a player like Tomic, who barely achieved a thing in his career, has $10 million in his bank, I can see why there is less incentive for players to work hard and improve their game.

Funny, I mentioned Tomic in a post recently, having not thought of him in ages. I seem to remember that he bought a fancy sports car before he was even old enough to legally drive it in Australia. I do think of him as someone who was distracted by the money, amongst other things. (Terrible father, for one.) I definitely think some players get complacent with making a lot of money and having "good enough" careers. I don't think it explains a sense of entitlement, though, which is different. But it's one of the reasons that Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are so impressive. Obviously, they're extraordinarily talented, but they combined that with tons of ambition, love of competition and will to win. They certainly stopped doing it for the money years and years ago.

I don't agree that the money is "absurd," if the tour can sustain it, but I do agree that the money can blunt the ambitions of some. Ambition, like talent, tends to find its own level.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Funny, I mentioned Tomic in a post recently, having not thought of him in ages. I seem to remember that he bought a fancy sports car before he was even old enough to legally drive it in Australia. I do think of him as someone who was distracted by the money, amongst other things. (Terrible father, for one.) I definitely think some players get complacent with making a lot of money and having "good enough" careers. I don't think it explains a sense of entitlement, though, which is different. But it's one of the reasons that Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are so impressive. Obviously, they're extraordinarily talented, but they combined that with tons of ambition, love of competition and will to win. They certainly stopped doing it for the money years and years ago.

I don't agree that the money is "absurd," if the tour can sustain it, but I do agree that the money can blunt the ambitions of some. Ambition, like talent, tends to find its own level.

To his credit Tomic is playing challengers at present yes the sports car made major news here in Aussie you know he was to be our White Knight in Shining Armour to save mens tennis for Australia.? he did show some early promise then went off the rails, his father should have been locked up in jail for him physical abuse, also his mental abuse, he used to hit him on the court while training at the Gold Coast, before the allegations of physical abuse overseas.Mark P is your typical case of how money got in the way of his talent, fast cars and girls were more important to Mark than training, he had all the talent,shame he never reached his true potential

 

[mrzz]

Small correction, Tomic is playing both futures and challengers. If I am not mistaken his last tournament was a future in Mexico (runner up). Ranked around 250

 

[britbox]

Not too many have longevity when living out Daddy's dreams... Graf and Agassi are probably the exceptions to the rule. Connors had the dominant mother. Most tend to burn out when they break free from the apron strings.

 

[El Dude]

I personally think too much is made of Tomic being a failed prospect. Some potential, but it was mostly over-hype based on one Slam QF appearance at 18, and for doing it when there were so few promising youngsters (and perhaps a bit of Aussie wishful thinking). But he didn't follow it up with much of anything, and was what he was: a journeyman type player who snuck into the top 20 for a bit, but was mostly in around 40-60 for his prime.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I personally think too much is made of Tomic being a failed prospect. Some potential, but it was mostly over-hype based on one Slam QF appearance at 18, and for doing it when there were so few promising youngsters (and perhaps a bit of Aussie wishful thinking). But he didn't follow it up with much of anything, and was what he was: a journeyman type player who snuck into the top 20 for a bit, but was mostly in around 40-60 for his prime.

I agree, from memory he made that slam QF at the AO? at the time there werent very many promising players, when he did make that slam QF Aussie's seem to jump on board hoping he could be 'the next big thing' actually there was more news about him and his flashy sports car,etc, compared to his tennis.
Another player who had this 'entitlement' air about him as well.

 

[Front242]

I agree, from memory he made that slam QF at the AO? at the time there werent very many promising players, when he did make that slam QF Aussie's seem to jump on board hoping he could be 'the next big thing' actually there was more news about him and his flashy sports car,etc, compared to his tennis.

Wimbledon wasn't it?

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Wimbledon wasn't it?

You are probably right, I really could not remember, goes to show how important he was to me lol!

 

[Front242]

Yeah it was Wimbledon 2011. He lost to Djokovic in the 1/4s.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Yeah it was Wimbledon 2011. He lost to Djokovic in the 1/4s.

Just checked you are correct.

 

[Front242]

A cool shot here from Tomic. Benneteau's reaction was funny.

 

[Moxie]

Latest check on the odds has Alcaraz the favorite. However, he and Sinner and Novak go in without a lot of matches played on clay. It has been suggested on TC that that favor Novak, given BO5 format, and experience. I feel we're in for a wild ride.

 

[El Dude]

I'm pretty excited about this Roland Garros - definitely feels like an open field.

 

[Moxie]

I'm pretty excited about this Roland Garros - definitely feels like an open field.

I absolutely is, if you ask me. First of all, and forgive me the fandom, but it IS Roland Garros: Rafa is a question mark, in terms of level, and even if he'll play, so that's something opened up. (His record there is 112-3. Sorry, I couldn't help myself.) Next question mark is Novak, who is defending. Sinner and Alcaraz skipped Rome due to injury. Will Tsitsipas and Zverev rise to the occasion? It also feels like there are a lot of potential spoilers out there. And maybe it's time to bring back the concept of the Dark Horse.