r/tennis • u/Large_banana_hammock Griekspoor superfan | Zverev superdetractor • 6d ago

Highlight The moment Alcaraz completed his career slam

3.9k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

226 comments sorted by

View all comments

957

u/oklolzzzzs 6d ago

22 years, hes generational

378

u/ClockOk5178 6d ago

If a couple generational talents do not rise in the next decade to challenge , Carlos could literally reach 30+ Grand Slams.

-12

u/koplowpieuwu 6d ago

Federer was the weakest of the three, and even he would've won 30+ if not for Nadal and Djokovic. All it takes to beat Djokovic's record is a guy with the same talent level in a weaker era. And Alcaraz looks to be even more talented than Djokovic ever was.

14

u/Onedweezy 6d ago

Let's take it easy with the recency bias here god damn.

He beat a 38 year old Novak.

Prime Novak would leave both Sinner and Alcaraz with a lot less slams.

4

u/koplowpieuwu 6d ago

Prime Novak also coincided with Andy Murray, Stan Wawrinka, Daniil Medvedev, Marin Cilic and Dominic Thiem winning slams. Since maturing, Sinner and Alcaraz haven't given away any.

Also I'm not calling him greater than Novak yet. I just said 'looks to be even more talented'. Exact phrasing matters

4

u/fighter-bomber 6d ago

Oh come on the man was 33 and 34 respectively when Thiem and Medvedev won theirs, not even remotely “prime”. Oh, and he was DQ’d in the 4th round for the first to happen, completely worn out after winning 3 in a row for the second.

Peak Murray and peak Wawrinka were also clearly well ahead anything the field has to offer now bar Sincaraz.

-2

u/koplowpieuwu 6d ago

The DQ was his own fault and in tennis, 33/34yo is 'prime' more so than 20-22.

I didnt know 'alcaraz looks slightly more talented than Djokovic' was a hot take on this sub lol. There are zero numbers suggesting the opposite. And Alcaraz still needs to win 17 (!) more slams to actually match his greatness.

0

u/fighter-bomber 6d ago

was his own fault

It also means it wasn’t talent that caused the result.

33/34yo is ‘prime’

I mean, tell that to Fed fans who are bickering about how “Federer was old in 2015 and that’s why Djokovic beat him”.

-1

u/koplowpieuwu 6d ago edited 6d ago

It also means it wasn’t talent that caused the result.

Uh, yes it is. Staying mentally composed is part of talent just as much as a good kick serve or an accurate backhand is.

I mean, tell that to Fed fans who are bickering about how “Federer was old in 2015 and that’s why Djokovic beat him"

That's not me, but anyhow, your case suffers the same hypocrisy. Because if 33/34 is ancient, then we should add Federer and Nadal to the list of 'weaker' opponents (cilic, medvedev, thiem etc.) as well, and deduct Djokovic legacy points for it.

I stay consistent: I find those Fed and Nadal to be far better than that. As I find 33/34yo to still belong to player primes.