Top 5 in 2025

[Moxie]

100% agreed so far on Zverev. A case of "You 'aven't got the technology, mate!" (in a Cockney accent)

I'm revising him out of my predictions, too.

 

[Jelenafan]

None of them will retire until it is clear they can't win another Slam. If Roger doesn't win one this year, I would guess 2022 will be his last year - and probably much diminished. Rafa has at least two more years. Novak will stick around and try to pass them both in the Slam count, so could still be around in five years, but likely won't be in the top 5.

I just hope none of them do a version of the Michael Chang Farewell tour lapping up accolades that seemed to go on and on and on and on... I swear Chang's farewell lasted longer than other players careers....

 

[Front242]

I'm revising him out of my predictions, too.

Once in a blue moon he serves like a beast and then he can beat anyone but it takes a pretty perfect performance for him to beat the top guys and they're few and far between. Gets ahead and loses massive leads all too often. I dunno which is worse though, Zverev or Federer with the match points

 

[Moxie]

Once in a blue moon he serves like a beast and then he can beat anyone but it takes a pretty perfect performance for him to beat the top guys and they're few and far between. Gets ahead and loses massive leads all too often. I dunno which is worse though, Zverev or Federer with the match points

Federer can be forgiven losing match points up, late-career, but not so much Zed. Zverev has WAY more issues than that. One of his bonuses is height and serve, and his 2nd serve is garbage. So is his head. I thought his ambition would get him far, but it's hard to see that so much. I thought @El Dude's measuring him against Berdych was interesting. No one ever, I don't think, thought of Berdych as a rising super-star, as we did of Zverev. But I do think there's a solid chance he'll have a Berdych-like career. I'm about to say that the ship has sailed on his winning a Major. So he'll wander around the Top 10 like the Ancient Mariner, most likely.

 

[Jelenafan]

Federer can be forgiven losing match points up, late-career, but not so much Zed. Zverev has WAY more issues than that. One of his bonuses is height and serve, and his 2nd serve is garbage. So is his head. I thought his ambition would get him far, but it's hard to see that so much. I thought @El Dude's measuring him against Berdych was interesting. No one ever, I don't think, thought of Berdych as a rising super-star, as we did of Zverev. But I do think there's a solid chance he'll have a Berdych-like career. I'm about to say that the ship has sailed on his winning a Major. So he'll wander around the Top 10 like the Ancient Mariner, most likely.

Believe me, Berdych was touted, he upset World #1 Roger Federer (in arguably Roger's best year ) at the 2004 Olympics at the age of 18. and at the age of 20 (younger than Zverev's first) snagged his first Masters Title at Bercy Paris in 2005. He took Nadal to 3 sets on red clay the first time they played in 05 and then beat Nadal 3 consecutive times (2005-06) In Berdych's salad days of 05-06 Many thought the sky was the limit with Berdych.

ETA:
By age 21 he had beaten most of the big guns (Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Ljubicic, Hewitt, etc) of the game.

 

[Moxie]

Believe me, Berdych was touted, he upset World #1 Roger Federer (in arguably Roger's best year ) at the 2004 Olympics at the age of 18. and at the age of 20 (younger than Zverev's first) snagged his first Masters Title at Bercy Paris in 2005. He took Nadal to 3 sets on red clay the first time they played in 05 and then beat Nadal 3 consecutive times (2005-06) In Berdych's salad days of 05-06 Many thought the sky was the limit with Berdych.

ETA:
By age 21 he had beaten most of the big guns (Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Ljubicic, Hewitt, etc) of the game.

Funny, so he was not so much the Zverev of his day but the Kyrgios. You never know who's going to manage the long term, though, do ya?

 

[El Dude]

I'm not fully writing Zverev off, but as of now I'd put him in a lower category than some of the other guys - more like Rublev, who as much as I like I don't see being a #1 player.

Tsitsipas is teetering, too. He hasn't yet taken that step forward to true elite status that he looked on the verge of a year or two ago. Maybe he (and everyone) deserves a pass due to the weird nature of last year, but he seems to have stalled out and made no real gains from where he was in 2019. Similarly with Sascha, although his stagnation goes back further to 2017.

Of course there's the mitigating factor of the Big Three. Roger and Rafa resurged in 2017, Novak in 2018. The poor Young Guns haven't been without at least two of the three playing really well, except for the odd tournament here and there.

After saying "this is the year that the young guys finally catch up" for several years now, I'm not making any more predictions. It almost seems that, for Novak and Rafa at least, they'll give up the crown only when they're good and ready. I mean, they turn 34 and 35 this year! (and Roger 40!).

That said, we might at least be seeing the gap narrow. The last year that the Big Four won every big title (4 Slams, WTF, 9 Masters) was 2013. Of course only Cilic and Wawrinka broke into their domination for the next few years. But something began to shift in 2017, and so we have:

Non-Big Four Big Titles (# of Slams/WTF/Masters)
2021 (0/0/1): 1 Masters (Hurkacz)
2020 (1/1/1): 1 Slam (Thiem), WTF (Medvedev), 1 Masters (Medvedev)
2019 (0/1/4): WTF (Medvedev), 4 Masters (Thiem, Medvedev x2, Fognini)
2018 (0/1/4): WTF (Zverev), 4 Masters (Zverev, Khachanov, Isner, del Potro)
2017 (0/1/4): WTF (Dimitrov), 4 Masters (Zverev x2, Dimitrov, Sock)
2016 (1/0/1): 1 Slam (Wawrinka), 1 Masters (Cilic)

2017-19 saw the same results: no Slams, but the WTF each year, and almost half of the Masters. So 2020 actually saw a Slam go to someone else, and the WTF once more, but only 1 Masters (but of only three played). But it is hard to draw any conclusions from it.

So this should be an interesting year, in this regard.

 

[El Dude]

One more thought. It may be that we are in the early years of an era in which there are a bunch (a dozen or so) contenders, but no truly dominant players - something some of us have been speculating on for a few years. Sort of like a game of hot potato among declining greats, elite-but-not-quite-greats and second tier types like we saw in the late 90s, with a couple older greats still in the mix but no longer totally dominant (in this case, Rafa and Novak; back then, Sampras and Agassi).

Maybe no one becomes the player of the 2020s, but I suspect someone--or some two or three--will emerge. Right now the best--or at least most tempting--candidate seems to be Jannik Sinner, although I haven't given up on Felix Auger-Aliassime, and Medvedev seems to be the best of the already-established guys. Those are my top three top candidates for best player of the decade, when we look back in ten years. But someone new might emerge.

I think we're going to see a lot of different guys win at least a Masters - which I think is a good thing, and breaks the monotonous hegemony of the last 10-15 years, and harkens back to earlier decades when a wide number of players would win Masters.

Of "Lost Genners" (born 1989-93), we have only Dimitrov, Sock, and Thiem (who is borderline Next Gen, or 1994-98) - still no Raonic or Nishikori, and probably never for either. Among Next Genners (born 1994-98), we already have Khachanov, Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, and now Hurkacz. I suspect they'll be joined in short order by Rublev, and maybe some of Kyrgios, Berretini, Coric, Garin, Ruud, Fritz, etc. Of "Millenium Babies" (b. 1999-2003), I'd place my bets on Sinner and Auger-Aliassime, but probably also Shapovalov, and maybe de Minaur, Kecmanovic, Alcaraz Garfia, Musetti, Korda, etc.

 

[El Dude]

For reference, here is how the different generations--using my five-year system--have done re: big titles (Slams/Tour Finals/Masters) - Open Era only:

1994-98 (Next Gen): 0/3/6
1989-93 (Lost Gen): 1/1/3
1984-88 (Dynamic Duo Gen): 46/6/94 (+3 Oly)
1979-83 (Gen Federer): 27/10/54 (+1 Oly)
1974-78 (Guga & Friends): 9/3/33 (+1 Oly)
1969-73 (Last Great American Gen): 32/12/54 (+2 Oly)
1964-68 (Nordic Gen): 23/10/51 (+2 Oly)
1959-63 (McLendl Gen): 17/16/53
1954-58 (Borg & Some Guys): 16/4/23
1949-53 (Jimmy & Friends): 15/5/45
1944-48 (Open Era Boomers, aka Nastase Boys): 11/7/19
1939-43 (Ashe & Nobody): 4/1/4
1934-38 (Greatest Gen): 10/2/11

Plus one Masters from Pancho Gonzales, from the 1929-33 generation.

 

[El Dude]

A thread worth re-visiting, mostly from the end of 2020 into early 2021.

The main takeaway is that the two players who received the most mention were Tsitsipas and Thiem. Medvedev, Rublev, Sinner, Zverev, and Shapovalov were also mentioned a bunch - and other guys like FAA, Berrettini, and Musetti mentioned. I think I was the only one who mentioned Alcaraz, but this was still a year or so before he went full nova.

People seemed mixed on Rafa and Novak, with the general consensus being that they'd both still be around but not top 5. Obvious Rafa is gone before 2025 and Novak is out of the top 5 (for now).

It is also interesting to note that there were still high hopes for Shapovalov, who was frequently mentioned. People were already starting to sour a bit on Zverev and Tsitsipas, though - but this was before Zverev's best year in 2021.

I suppose the biggest tragedy is Thiem. He was the breakout young star in 2020, being the first guy born in the 90s to win a Slam.

 

[Moxie]

A thread worth re-visiting, mostly from the end of 2020 into early 2021.

The main takeaway is that the two players who received the most mention were Tsitsipas and Thiem. Medvedev, Rublev, Sinner, Zverev, and Shapovalov were also mentioned a bunch - and other guys like FAA, Berrettini, and Musetti mentioned. I think I was the only one who mentioned Alcaraz, but this was still a year or so before he went full nova.

People seemed mixed on Rafa and Novak, with the general consensus being that they'd both still be around but not top 5. Obvious Rafa is gone before 2025 and Novak is out of the top 5 (for now).

It is also interesting to note that there were still high hopes for Shapovalov, who was frequently mentioned. People were already starting to sour a bit on Zverev and Tsitsipas, though - but this was before Zverev's best year in 2021.

I suppose the biggest tragedy is Thiem. He was the breakout young star in 2020, being the first guy born in the 90s to win a Slam.

Thanks for bringing this one back! Very fun! I'd think you're being modest about your predictions, so I'll toot your horn for you. You seem to have gotten a lot more right than anyone else. You DID mention Alcaraz, and were the only one. You also called Rafa and Roger to be done, and Novak still in, most likely. Zverev came up a lot, but a lot of doubts. I have to say, his resurgence, particularly after the injury, which came after this thread, has been kind of surprising. i already had some doubts about Tsitsipas, I see, though that was when I still liked him, it seems.

It is sad to think what has become of Thiem, in the interim. Another del Potro. And speaking of, Wertheim mentioned him in his recent mailbag, (I posted on the Nadal fans thread,) but also mentioning a link to an article about how much he struggles with pain on a daily basis. It's worse than I thought. Maybe I'll find the link and post in the general news.

 

[mrzz]

Congratulations, @El Dude . 108% of the tennis pundits out there would not have done half of the good predictions you did.

 

[El Dude]

Thanks for bringing this one back! Very fun! I'd think you're being modest about your predictions, so I'll toot your horn for you. You seem to have gotten a lot more right than anyone else. You DID mention Alcaraz, and were the only one. You also called Rafa and Roger to be done, and Novak still in, most likely. Zverev came up a lot, but a lot of doubts. I have to say, his resurgence, particularly after the injury, which came after this thread, has been kind of surprising. i already had some doubts about Tsitsipas, I see, though that was when I still liked him, it seems.

It is sad to think what has become of Thiem, in the interim. Another del Potro. And speaking of, Wertheim mentioned him in his recent mailbag, (I posted on the Nadal fans thread,) but also mentioning a link to an article about how much he struggles with pain on a daily basis. It's worse than I thought. Maybe I'll find the link and post in the general news.

I really like (or dislike) the Thiem/Del Potro comp. So sad, both. Hey, at least they have the Slam trophy. I think someone posted Del Potro's tweet about his pain (I think it was a tweet, but am not sure).

But thanks. To be honest, I think no one mentioned Alcaraz because they were being cautious. I probably just lucked into it, because I keep track of rising youngsters.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

I started a new thread for 2029, if you want to continue the discussion: https://www.tennisfrontier.com/threads/top-5-in-2029.7972/#post-546782

 

[Moxie]

I really like (or dislike) the Thiem/Del Potro comp. So sad, both. Hey, at least they have the Slam trophy. I think someone posted Del Potro's tweet about his pain (I think it was a tweet, but am not sure).

They are both sad stories. I know Uncle Toni says you can't call sports injuries "tragic," but theirs border on it. I am glad they both got a Major before injury struck. Particularly del Potro, as he seems the big "what if?" in the era of the Big 3/4.

But thanks. To be honest, I think no one mentioned Alcaraz because they were being cautious. I probably just lucked into it, because I keep track of rising youngsters.

I think your scouting young talent served you in this one, meaning Alcaraz. I went back to look him up, in terms of the time line. He was only 16 at the time of your OP, so one really had to be paying attention. Interesting thing I learned when I looked him up today: he won his first Challenger match at 15, beating a 17-year old Jannik Sinner! Foreshadowing. (First player born in 2003 to win a Challenger match, btw.) Lost in the next round to Lukas Rosol...an anecdotal name from the past. And speaking of names from the past: You mentioned Davidovich Fokina in your OP. Whatever has become of him?

 

[El Dude]

They are both sad stories. I know Uncle Toni says you can't call sports injuries "tragic," but theirs border on it. I am glad they both got a Major before injury struck. Particularly del Potro, as he seems the big "what if?" in the era of the Big 3/4.

I think your scouting young talent served you in this one, meaning Alcaraz. I went back to look him up, in terms of the time line. He was only 16 at the time of your OP, so one really had to be paying attention. Interesting thing I learned when I looked him up today: he won his first Challenger match at 15, beating a 17-year old Jannik Sinner! Foreshadowing. (First player born in 2003 to win a Challenger match, btw.) Lost in the next round to Lukas Rosol...an anecdotal name from the past. And speaking of names from the past: You mentioned Davidovich Fokina in your OP. Whatever has become of him?

Davidovich Fokina has been a bit disappointing. He just never seemed to get past the "solid journeyman" threshold...guys ranked in the 21-60ish range. His best result at a Slam was the QF at the 2021 Roland Garros, losing to "peak Zverev" in straight sets...but defeating Casper Ruud in an epic five-setter in the R32. Anyhow, 2024 is his sixth year in a row finishing in the top 100 (he finished #61), but he's still never reached the top 20 or won a title.

Anyhow, he's a good example of why we need to be cautious with projecting young guys. He was one to watch when he broken into the top 100 at 20 years old in 2019 and the top 50 at 21 years old -- not quite an elite trajectory, but still promising. But he stalled out there for over a year, then only crept up a bit, peaking at #21 in August of last year.

There really seem to be tiers with thresholds to pass: getting into the top 100 is the first big benchmark (Slam main draw), but then there's another jump into the top 40 or so (roughly Slam seeding), then another to the top 20, top 10, top 5, #1. Each is like a whole octave up in ability, and players "settle" at a threshold. Fokina seems to have settled in that top 40ish threshold and, at 25, I don't foresee him getting significantly better (Stan is a huge outlier, in this regard, and means there's always hope, but that sort of trajectory is pretty unique).

 

[Moxie]

Davidovich Fokina has been a bit disappointing. He just never seemed to get past the "solid journeyman" threshold...guys ranked in the 21-60ish range. His best result at a Slam was the QF at the 2021 Roland Garros, losing to "peak Zverev" in straight sets...but defeating Casper Ruud in an epic five-setter in the R32. Anyhow, 2024 is his sixth year in a row finishing in the top 100 (he finished #61), but he's still never reached the top 20 or won a title.

Anyhow, he's a good example of why we need to be cautious with projecting young guys. He was one to watch when he broken into the top 100 at 20 years old in 2019 and the top 50 at 21 years old -- not quite an elite trajectory, but still promising. But he stalled out there for over a year, then only crept up a bit, peaking at #21 in August of last year.

There really seem to be tiers with thresholds to pass: getting into the top 100 is the first big benchmark (Slam main draw), but then there's another jump into the top 40 or so (roughly Slam seeding), then another to the top 20, top 10, top 5, #1. Each is like a whole octave up in ability, and players "settle" at a threshold. Fokina seems to have settled in that top 40ish threshold and, at 25, I don't foresee him getting significantly better (Stan is a huge outlier, in this regard, and means there's always hope, but that sort of trajectory is pretty unique).

Honestly, I don't know how we predict young talent, with any confidence, which is why you get so much credit for your predictions. (You also mentioned Musetti, who was barely radar at that point. He's not Alcaraz, but still up there in terms of potential. But you did express a lot of confidence in Sinner, and I don't remember where he was then.) But there's so much early talent that comes to not so much. You're good at identifying benchmarks.

But still, look at FAA, who has lots of talent. I know you've had your hopes for him. And it's a decent career, but middling, compared to his talent. Thiem was pegged early by our old friend, John Steinbeck, in Austria, who was right, but who was to predict we'd lose him early to injury?

One of the reasons Alcaraz is so thrilling, aside from his tennis, is that he's basically come satisfyingly good on predictions. And even he has had wobbles.

Even if most aren't super-novas, I feel like we kiss a lot of frogs. It's hard to rise to the cream in tennis.

 

[El Dude]

Honestly, I don't know how we predict young talent, with any confidence, which is why you get so much credit for your predictions. (You also mentioned Musetti, who was barely radar at that point. He's not Alcaraz, but still up there in terms of potential. But you did express a lot of confidence in Sinner, and I don't remember where he was then.) But there's so much early talent that comes to not so much. You're good at identifying benchmarks.

But still, look at FAA, who has lots of talent. I know you've had your hopes for him. And it's a decent career, but middling, compared to his talent. Thiem was pegged early by our old friend, John Steinbeck, in Austria, who was right, but who was to predict we'd lose him early to injury?

One of the reasons Alcaraz is so thrilling, aside from his tennis, is that he's basically come satisfyingly good on predictions. And even he has had wobbles.

Even if most aren't super-novas, I feel like we kiss a lot of frogs. It's hard to rise to the cream in tennis.

Yeah, I hear you, though I think the frog thing is a bit of "Fiero-itis": bagging on anyone who isn't Borg-level. I'm exaggerating a bit, but you get the drift. And I think the Big Three have exacerbated this. If Alcaraz ends up being another Becker - who reached his best level at 21 or so and never got better - we will consider him a disappointment. But how many Open Era players have had better careers than Boris Becker? Ten? Alcaraz is so good that if he isn't any better than the 10th or so best player of the Open Era, he'll be seen as disappointing.

Anyhow, my "secret" is paying close attention to trends like how players do at different ages compared to historical precedents, with a bit of gut feeling and a dash of scouting. But when it comes to the eye-level scouting, I rely on others with much more experience - which includes most regulars here. But I also trust my gut, which told me that Alcaraz and Sinner were going to be really good. But it also told me the same about FAA, who is now looking like the modern day Richard Gasquet. Gasquet was actually a really good player, but just not a great one. So that is considered disappointing, because our attention is so fixed on the greats. Just the nature of the sport, I guess.

As for Thiem, I remember noticing him in 2013, when he and Jiri Vesely were the youngest guys in the top 150 or so; both were 19-20 in 2013, in the darkest portion of the "Lost Gen." For a couple years, Vesely was ahead of him, but then by 2015 Thiem started to separate. Check out their rankings:

I bring this up because in 2013-14, I saw them paired and didn't know who would be better. But obviously Thiem became much better, and Vesely sort of flatlined in the lower half of the top 100 for the rest of his career.

It was similar with Medvedev and Khachanov, two big Russians born in 1996 who entered the top 100 in 2016 at 20 years old, near the end of the worst of that "Lost Era." Their rise was similar to Thiem/Vesely, with a similar separation:

To be fair, while Medvedev has been a much better player than Khachanov, the gap is closer than Thiem and Vesely.

My point in bringing up these two pairs is that both share a similarity: Similar age players that emerge around the same time, rise similarly at first, but then one becomes much better than the other. But that isn't immediately evident. In both cases, the worse player was the leader (if by a small amount) in the early, development years, but then fell far behind.

Interestingly enough, the most recent similar pair that I noticed a couple years ago were Arthur Fils and Luca van Assche. Van Assche led the way in 2022, but Fils surged ahead in 2023 and improved in 2024, while Van Assche has fallen back out of the top 100. He's young enough to turn things around, but it seems very likely that Fils will be the much better player.

As for Sinner, he was easy to spot because he entered the top 100 at age 18 - which usually is a very positive sign. But his rise was more steady, and he stagnated in 2022, even falling back from #10 to #15 (though did better in Slams). Most of 2023 looked like getting back on course with steady progression, but something seemed to start shifting late last year as his first Masters led to a higher octave of play. It was around that time that I noticed that his Elo rating trajectory was very similar to Roger Federer's at the same age. I was a bit hesitant to share that at first, because while everyone thought he would be good, comparing him to Roger was a bit silly. But it turns out his 2024 season was Roger-esque -- not as good as peak Roger, but probably better than all but Roger's four or five best seasons. Both were slow but steady risers, but then supernovaed in the season they turned 23 in (2004 for Roger, 2024 for Sinner).

Anyhow, with all that in mind, the two very young guys I'll be watching most closely next year are Jakob Mensik and Joao Fonseca. Tien and Shang too, but Mensik and Fonzie especially catch my eye. If you want to go really young, remember the names Justin Engel and Diego Deduro-Palomero, age 17 and 16, respectively. Both are way down in the rankings, but might be worth coming back to in a year or two.

 

[Jelenafan]

I still think it’s too soon to give up on little Holger Rune.

 

[Fiero425]

I still think it’s too soon to give up on little Holger Rune.

Ditto! We were still hopeful about Dimitrov for yrs.! I was hopeful about Karen Khachanov & Denis Shapovalov! Hope springs eternal!