The Tennis Thread

And yet Alcaraz was outclassed by Sinner in the final. You don’t just not deserve to win it because you got a bit of luck in an earlier round.

Mental to say Alcaraz deserved the trophy more than Sinner for me. Sinner was better right through the tournament bar 1 round

 

Aye. The amount of times Djokovic and Nadal have done it is unreal.

Most of the time just needs the greats to pull a set back and the momentum totally swings their way. To say Sinner would’ve definitely lost to Dimitrov is going a touch OTT

 

Sinner fully deserved the win as Carlos himself freely acknowledged both on center court in the award presentation and in the post match press conference

Sinner was fantastic - what stood out for me was the pressure he applied with the service game. Both his own in terms of keeping Carlos from getting a break and in terms of Alcaraz when serving - Carlos was in a struggle to hold serve throughout. It didn’t help that his 1st serve percentage was so poor but it placed more pressure on his 2nd serve and allowed Jannik to get on his front foot much more comfortably. Even all that array of change up slices, drop shots and speed/spin was failing Carlitos

The Italian steamrolled the Spaniard in that regard

I also was really impressed with his ability to cover the court on grass which Carlos has predominantly done, Sinner was able to get to just about every ball. More remarkable when you consider the context of having lost the French Open in the manner he did, to not just come back but elevate his game - his service returns were fantastic and Alcaraz struggle to dictate points, Jannik was the protagonist

It’s going to mark a great era in tennis as they are head & shoulders above the rest of the field

 

Sinner also had elbow issues in that match. It was unlikely he was coming back then. He’s come back from two sets down twice in his career, at the AO, on his favourite surface. No matter how you slice it, he got some luck en route to the final.

 

Aye it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact he is one of the biggest names in tennis. The fact they were pushing for 2 years tells its own story. I’m sure it was all innocent though.

 

Why would they push for it in the first place then? That makes no sense.

 

Of course he had a slice of luck, but we will still never know how that match would have finished.

 

What the men's game really needs is several others to really rival the big 2, what is needed is a big 4 or 5.The way some of the commentators and fans talk it will be just these 2 for the next 10 years!! The last 7 Grand Slam singles have gone to two players, okay that can be seen as greatness but if that carried on for several more grand slam singles events not so good for the sport.

 

No it doesn’t. WADA proposed up to two years based on its strict liability principle under their code, because the player is ultimately responsible. WADA’s own council said a longer ban would have been “excessively severe” given the circumstances. They agreed on three months as a middle ground between upholding the code and the player having not cheated.

 

WADA initially appealed the decision that Sinner had no responsibility, but then backed down. It carried a ban of up to 2 years at the court of arbitration if they won the appeal. It stinks to be honest, because it seems they have backed down due to who it was and the length of the ban it would have meant if they won the appeal.

 

Aye problem is that the players just below them, whilst not chronic, are nowhere near the level of Sinner and Alcaraz.

I couldn't believe heading into this competition that Jack Draper was number 4 in the world. That's absolutely mental. Boy has yet to do anything of note outside of a few titles and he's occupying one of the top spots in the rankings.

The players that actually have talent but can't do it consistently enough like Medvedev, Tsitsipas, Rublev etc will always be pretenders too.

I mind just under the big 4 you would always have players such as Andy Roddick, Juan Martin Del Potro, Stan Wawrinka, David Ferrer, Jo Tsonga, Dvydenko etc. These guys would regularly push the big 4 to their limits and were always capable of putting on great matches with them. Even lower ranked players like Kevin Anderson, Thomas Berdych etc could make games against the better players interesting when on their game.

Now it's just the big 2 and nothing much below it.

 

Yes as it stands Draper is one of the poorest players ever to be world number 4. He has a bit of time to really improve, time will tell.

Imagine if the next US Open, Australian Open , French Open and Wimbledon had these 2 in the final , I wonder what the over the top commentators and fanboys would say then, would almost be funny. I of course hope that does not happen.

It is a bit of a worry though as you say the gulf between these 2 and the rest is frightening.

 

Draper has won a Masters 1000 this year in which he beat Alcaraz on the way to winning it, reached a slam semi final, and has been consistently one of the best performing players on tour. He’s number 4 because he deserves to be. He’s had a lot of injury issues too so he’s done well in his career so far, all things considered.

 

He’s a good player, but the fact is the standard of player that now sits 4th in the rankings compared to 10-15 years ago is pretty steep.

You don’t watch Draper regularly and think he should be one of the top players in the world. Still a young man with plenty of potential of course but to sit so high in the rankings having done not as much as a ranking like that suggests shows the lack of quality on the tour at the moment.

 

Today’s number 4 is far weaker than number 4s in many a past year.

 

Disagree.