US Open 2023 [Men] - Grand Slam

[El Dude]

It's hard not to think that Charly has 6+ Slams in him, given his age and level, and all of his many positives. I hope so, and hope the best for him.

I also hope that you don't mind my bringing this back, but I was thinking of a comment you made during the Alcaraz d. Rune match at Wimbledon this year. I was talking to my friend when we were at the USO on Saturday, and discussing Alcaraz relative to his peers. It put me in mind of the Nadal/Gasquet comparison, when both were promising up-and-comers. Your recent comment during Alcaraz v Rune was that it reminded you of Nadal v Federer, and not in a good way. I thought that was a disproportionate comparison, but couldn't say exactly why. I think that Nadal/Gasquet is a much better comparison, in that moment, thinking of their match in the 2005 FO, when it was the battle of the 18-year-olds. They are also nearly exactly the same age, and came up through juniors together. What I'm hoping, however, is that Rune doesn't end up being the Gasquet in that equation. That he becomes the great rival, a la Federer or Djokovic. I think it's just hard to be a 20-year-old, or a 22-year-old, when there's a prodigy rising. Or, I suppose, to be a 36-year-old for the same reason. Djokovic must be so pissed. That's what my friend said, on Saturday.

Yeah, I'm hoping--and thinking--that Rune will be better than Gasquet. For one, Gasquet never played like Rune did at the end of last year, or for shorter periods of time this year. As far as I can tell and remember. I just think the upside and "fire in the belly" is stronger with Rune.

I also suggested last year that Rune's upside is (at least) as high as Alcaraz's. I'd probably take that back, but not because of Rune but because I think I underestimated how complete and varied Alcaraz's game is.

In other words, I still think that Rune could become a great player - someone who wins several Slams and a bunch of titles. But where last year I thought Alcaraz was more of Becker/Edberg type, now I think he's going to be better than that - maybe significantly so.

 

[El Dude]

Do you mean 5-10 years "younger" or 5-10 years "older?" Older, and wouldn't he be lost generation? If he were 5 years younger, he'd be 21, and totally in the game. If he were 10 years younger, he'd barely be starting on the ATP.

He didn't cake-walk his titles, which is why he's been disappointing. You must remember that AO 2017 when he took Nadal to 5. He seemed so on the cusp of greatness, but not so much really has come of it. Sure, some nice titles. But what's his best win? His signature win?

I meant older. Meaning, if he had the misfortune of peaking within the long primes of Fedalkovic, which was really late 2003 to the present - 20 years in which at least one of the three greatest players of all-time was playing at or near their best. I kind of see the Big Three Hegemony as a heat map, with 2003-23+ in pink, 2005-21 in lighter red, and 2008-15 or so in dark, burning, horribly painful red. So I think of the players whose best years were within those zones, and I feel sad for them - it was the hardest context to play in. Think of Kei Nishikori, for instance, whose traditional prime years of age 22-28ish were from 2012-18, when Novak was at his best, Rafa had arguably his best year, and Roger was still very good - not to mention Andy and Stan.

As for his signature win, I don't know. He did beat Roger and Novak to win the 2018 Tour Finals. Or maybe his first Masters title, beating Novak at 2017 Rome, or Roger at Canada later in the year. After 2018 was when his trajectory seemed the most optimistic. But even then, there were concerns: 2018 wasn't significantly better than 2017, more of a plateau (as usually a rising trajectory early on is an important marker of "greatness to come"); and his inability to go deep at Slams until 2020. But then he had his best year in 2021, with 6 titles and 4 big titles, his Elo peaking at 2303. I wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being his best overall year, even if he does an Ivanisevic and sneaks in a late, post-peak Slam title.

 

[Jelenafan]

,,,
He didn't cake-walk his titles, which is why he's been disappointing. You must remember that AO 2017 when he took Nadal to 5. He seemed so on the cusp of greatness, but not so much really has come of it. Sure, some nice titles. But what's his best win? His signature win?

While Felix AA really hasn't won much, he was touted early as a future star. Back in 2018/2019 who would have taken the bet ( even here in the TF) that by the end of 2023 neither Felix AA, Shapavolov, Zverev & Tsitsipas would have a Slam victory?
As in zero. : 0

 

[the AntiPusher]

While Felix AA really hasn't won much, he was touted early as a future star. Back in 2018/2019 who would have taken the bet ( even here in the TF) that by the end of 2023 neither Felix AA, Shapavolov, Zverev & Tsitsipas would have a Slam victory?
As in zero. : 0

I never considered Denis part of that group of should have been champion by now

 

[El Dude]

If I remember correctly, Zverev and Shapo were both notable for garnering attention at an early age unlike, say, Daniil Medvedev. I remember hearing about Zverev when he was still 16 or 17, so as early as 2014 - I think when he made it to the Hamburg SF. I think Shapo gained attention when he beat Rafa early on....researching...oh yeah, the 2017 Canada Masters, so it was a few years later. He was 18.

Anyhow, it is hard to consider Zverev a disappointment, because he's been so good, despite not winning a Slam. So maybe a slight disappointment? But Shapo, certainly. To me he's sort of the Dolgopolov of the current generation: flashes of brilliance, but lacking the structure and discipline to maximize his potential.

 

[El Dude]

Speaking of young players, has anyone seen Alex Michelsen play? He's an American who just turned 19. He hasn't broken into the top 100 yet, but is on the cusp at #116 in the live rankings. Right now he's the third highest ranked teenager, after Fils and Van Assche. He defeated Albert Ramos in the 1R of the US Open, but then lost to Nicolas Jarry in the 2R.

Just curious if anyone has seen him play and what sort of game he has.

 

[Jelenafan]

If I remember correctly, Zverev and Shapo were both notable for garnering attention at an early age unlike, say, Daniil Medvedev. I remember hearing about Zverev when he was still 16 or 17, so as early as 2014 - I think when he made it to the Hamburg SF. I think Shapo gained attention when he beat Rafa early on....researching...oh yeah, the 2017 Canada Masters, so it was a few years later. He was 18.

Anyhow, it is hard to consider Zverev a disappointment, because he's been so good, despite not winning a Slam. So maybe a slight disappointment? But Shapo, certainly. To me he's sort of the Dolgopolov of the current generation: flashes of brilliance, but lacking the structure and discipline to maximize his potential.

Yes , while people either loved him or hated his style, Shapavolov did show promise. IIRC his 2017 4th round at the USO ( following his upset of # 1 Nadal at the Canadian Masters) was the youngest person (18 years old) in nearly 20 years to reach that stage. He was top 15 by age 20. Also reached 4 Masters SF’s and one Masters final by age 21. So for awhile people rationalized thar he would mature & iron out the inconsistencies of his game to achieve greatness.

El Dude, definitely Zverev has had a great career. However in the unfair upper stratosphere level of Slams, Zverev has underachieved.

Overall I’d say Tsitsipas is the biggest “relative” dissapointment

 

[tented]

 

[El Dude]

Yes , while people either loved him or hated his style, Shapavolov did show promise. IIRC his 2017 4th round at the USO ( following his upset of # 1 Nadal at the Canadian Masters) was the youngest person (18 years old) in nearly 20 years to reach that stage. He was top 15 by age 20. Also reached 4 Masters SF’s and one Masters final by age 21. So for awhile people rationalized thar he would mature & iron out the inconsistencies of his game to achieve greatness.

El Dude, definitely Zverev has had a great career. However in the unfair upper stratosphere level of Slams, Zverev has underachieved.

Overall I’d say Tsitsipas is the biggest “relative” dissapointment

Yes, agreed. If we think of the players born after the Novak/Rafa/Andy/Del Potro cohort but before Alcaraz, or those players born between 1989 and 2002, the three most accomplished players have been Thiem, Medvedev, and Zverev, with Tsitsipas a step behind the other three, then guys like Rublev etc. So being one of the three best players born within a 12-13 year span isn't half bad, but he's also the "beneficiary" of Big Three inflated expectations, although perhaps less so than Dimitrov/Raonic etc.

 

[tented]

 

[tented]

 

[El Dude]

ALCARAZ: "I'm just better than the girly man from Deutschland."

ZVEREV: "My feelings were hurt by a person in the audience."

 

[Kieran]

There’s a thing I always complained about when generation after generation passed away without achievement against the Big 3 is that in nature and sports, the young devour the old - except for in tennis. Carlos is showing himself to be a good example of this principle, despite his relative youth. He’s challenging and beating everyone who thought they might be ahead of him in the queue.

He’s beaten Novak in the Wimbledon final.

There has to be a part of Medvedev that’s aware that he hammered Novak in the final two years ago, but Rafa avenged that for the oldies, coming from two sets down and a near-hopeless position in the third - and since then Medvedev has fallen off the map of challengers. And now he’s facing yet again a young cocky guy who’s showing him how it should be done.

Has to affect him tomorrow…

 

[El Dude]

There’s a thing I always complained about when generation after generation passed away without achievement against the Big 3 is that in nature and sports, the young devour the old - except for in tennis. Carlos is showing himself to be a good example of this principle, despite his relative youth. He’s challenging and beating everyone who thought they might be ahead of him in the queue.

He’s beaten Novak in the Wimbledon final.

There has to be a part of Medvedev that’s aware that he hammered Novak in the final two years ago, but Rafa avenged that for the oldies, coming from two sets down and a near-hopeless position in the third - and since then Medvedev has fallen off the map of challengers. And now he’s facing yet again a young cocky guy who’s showing him how it should be done.

Has to affect him tomorrow…

I don't know. Medvedev struggled for a bit after that heartbreaking loss to Rafa, but then he eventually found his game again and seems as good as ever now. He's just not as good as Novak or Carlos, but he's the next best player, imo, and by a good margin (not including Rafa). So it is an A game vs. B game type thing...meaning, to beat either of the "Big Two," Daniil is going to both have to be at his best. There's no margin for error when playing better players, and both Novak and Carlos are better.

That said, if he can beat either of the two, it is on hards. He's good enough that a Novak or Carlos victory over him is not a foregone conclusion.

A side note on Chuck (Carlos = Charles = Chuck). I suppose we can always wonder about how he'd have fared against younger and better versions of the Big Three. He's played and beaten very good versions of Novak and Rafa, but certainly not their best versions. On the other hand, we probably haven't seen the best of Carlos, and for all we know his recent matches vs. Rafa and Novak could be akin to Roger vs. Pete back in 2001...but more accurately, its probably like the 2003 version of near-peak-Roger playing the 1998-2000 version of just-post-peak-Pete (try saying that three times really fast, lol).

That said, Alcaraz is the first player since perhaps a young Del Potro extrapolated to a higher peak, or Stanimal at his best, that I feel might have been able to go toe-to-toe with peak Big Three. Del Potro showed that potential, and if not for injury I think would have been a multi-Slam winner, something akin to a more consistent Stanimal or non-libertine version of Safin. And of course Stanimal did beat Rafa and Novak in their peak years, and Safin beat peak Roger.

 

[Jelenafan]

...That said, Alcaraz is the first player since perhaps a young Del Potro extrapolated to a higher peak, or Stanimal at his best, that I feel might have been able to go toe-to-toe with peak Big Three. Del Potro showed that potential, and if not for injury I think would have been a multi-Slam winner, something akin to a more consistent Stanimal or non-libertine version of Safin. And of course Stanimal did beat Rafa and Novak in their peak years, and Safin beat peak Roger.

Just say it, El Dude, a non slut version of Safin. ; )

 

[El Dude]

Just say it, El Dude, a non slut version of Safin. ; )

Haha, no doubt. I can't say that I'm not a wee bit jealous of Marat's "peak":

 

[Moxie]

I meant older. Meaning, if he had the misfortune of peaking within the long primes of Fedalkovic, which was really late 2003 to the present - 20 years in which at least one of the three greatest players of all-time was playing at or near their best. I kind of see the Big Three Hegemony as a heat map, with 2003-23+ in pink, 2005-21 in lighter red, and 2008-15 or so in dark, burning, horribly painful red. So I think of the players whose best years were within those zones, and I feel sad for them - it was the hardest context to play in. Think of Kei Nishikori, for instance, whose traditional prime years of age 22-28ish were from 2012-18, when Novak was at his best, Rafa had arguably his best year, and Roger was still very good - not to mention Andy and Stan.

As for his signature win, I don't know. He did beat Roger and Novak to win the 2018 Tour Finals. Or maybe his first Masters title, beating Novak at 2017 Rome, or Roger at Canada later in the year. After 2018 was when his trajectory seemed the most optimistic. But even then, there were concerns: 2018 wasn't significantly better than 2017, more of a plateau (as usually a rising trajectory early on is an important marker of "greatness to come"); and his inability to go deep at Slams until 2020. But then he had his best year in 2021, with 6 titles and 4 big titles, his Elo peaking at 2303. I wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being his best overall year, even if he does an Ivanisevic and sneaks in a late, post-peak Slam title.

I misread your previous completely. I missed that you said he'd have "fewer" big titles had he been older. So we completely agree. Sorry for the confusion.

Maybe the 2018 YEC would be the most impressive...so far. I know I give him a hard time around here, (and I'm far from alone,) but I think he needs an attitude adjustment, at the very least, if he's to make the most of his talent.

 

[tented]

 

[tented]

For those with ESPN - the men’s doubles final will air on ESPN2 at noon (eastern).

 

[tented]

After watching the video above, watch this one, especially the beginning of Ram’s speech.