Which is it?

Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
I don't get it. Either Djokovic has only been as dominant as he has in recent years, because we are indeed in the career inflation era. Or Djokovic is still so great that there's no shame losing to a 36 year old.
Which is it?

For context: Djokovic numbers in recent times:
  • Won 5 of his last 7 slams
  • Won 10 out of his last 16 slams (losses to Rafa (2), Medvedev (1), Thiem (1), Stan (retirement, 1) and PCC/lineswoman (1)
  • Won 19 out of his last 20 slam semis
  • Is 25-4 for the year
  • Is 50-5 since last years FO (not counting Laver Cup)
  • Is 5-0 in TB's at this years FO and yet to make an UE error in one of those
All these numbers point to a Djokovic close to the peak of his powers. At one point (2015-2016) he won 4 slams in a row (5 out of 6 and 6 out of 8 if we stretch it out). 5 out of 7 is damn close to that level of domination.

Yet the vast majority of posters seem to think that Alcaraz is a failure if he can't beat the current Djokovic, who's dominated the slams roughly as much as he did during his physical peak.
That Alcaraz, who's in his 2nd slam semi, and just turned 20 must win against the statistical GOAT in order to justify the hype.

To repeat:
I don't get it. Either Djokovic has only been as dominant as he has, because we are indeed in the career inflation era. Or Djokovic is still so great that there's no shame losing to a 36 year old.
Which is it? It can't be both as far as I can tell.

Disgust
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
It's both and more nuanced than that. Djokovic is still very good and no one has proven good enough to reach the level of a big three playing at a very good level (yet).

Alcaraz is a failure if he loses to Djokovic in the sense that the hype surrounding him, pushing him as a future big three-level ATG who is beyond any of the big three at the same age, will be proven laughably false.
 
D

Deleted member 629564

Guest
I believe we miss a certain word starting with "in-" letters and ending with "-bles". It matters the most.
 
NeutralFan

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
Chanwan said:
I don't get it. Either Djokovic has only been as dominant as he has in recent years, because we are indeed in the career inflation era. Or Djokovic is still so great that there's no shame losing to a 36 year old.
Which is it?

For context: Djokovic numbers in recent times:
  • Won 5 of his last 7 slams
  • Won 10 out of his last 16 slams (losses to Rafa (2), Medvedev (1), Thiem (1), Stan (retirement, 1) and PCC/lineswoman (1)
  • Won 19 out of his last 20 slam semis
  • Is 25-4 for the year
  • Is 50-5 since last years FO (not counting Laver Cup)
  • Is 5-0 in TB's at this years FO and yet to make an UE error in one of those
All these numbers point to a Djokovic close to the peak of his powers. At one point (2015-2016) he won 4 slams in a row (5 out of 6 and 6 out of 8 if we stretch it out). 5 out of 7 is damn close to that level of domination.

Yet the vast majority of posters seem to think that Alcaraz is a failure if he can't beat the current Djokovic, who's dominated the slams roughly as much as he did during his physical peak.
That Alcaraz, who's in his 2nd slam semi, and just turned 20 must win against the statistical GOAT in order to justify the hype.

To repeat:
I don't get it. Either Djokovic has only been as dominant as he has, because we are indeed in the career inflation era. Or Djokovic is still so great that there's no shame losing to a 36 year old.
Which is it? It can't be both as far as I can tell.

Disgust
Click to expand...

Stop making too much of sense. a 20 year old who is not even in his physical prime must beat a player who has won nearly ass slams with another tier 1 player in last 5 years. His legacy won't be saved even if he beats Djokovic at Wimbledon and AO, he should beat him at FO or his future success means nothing.
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
NeutralFan said:
Stop making too much of sense. a 20 year old who is not even in his physical prime must beat a player who has won nearly ass slams with another tier 1 player in last 5 years. His legacy won't be saved even if he beats Djokovic at Wimbledon and AO, he should beat him at FO or his future success means nothing.
Click to expand...

If Alcaraz loses to 36-year old Djokovic here it will be a permanent asterisk on his eventual legacy whether you like it or not.
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
NeutralFan said:
Stop making too much of sense. a 20 year old who is not even in his physical prime must beat a player who has won nearly ass slams with another tier 1 player in last 5 years. His legacy won't be saved even if he beats Djokovic at Wimbledon and AO, he should beat him at FO or his future success means nothing.
Click to expand...
If he is not in his physical prime when he is 20, when will his physical prime be then? If 19 years old Nadal beat prime Federer in his first RG appearance then there is no way there can be any excuses for Alcaraz not to beat a 36 years old. Young Nadal would be totally owning current Djokovic on clay.
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
weakera said:
It's both and more nuanced than that. Djokovic is still very good and no one has proven good enough to reach the level of a big three playing at a very good level (yet).

Alcaraz is a failure if he loses to Djokovic in the sense that the hype surrounding him, pushing him as a future big three-level ATG who is beyond any of the big three at the same age, will be proven laughably false.
Click to expand...
That's fair, but I think the vast majority here still regard Rafa at 19 >> over Carlos at 19. Carlos may have the better resume with the YE no. 1, but there are specific circumstances to explain that (Novak "chosing" not to play, Federer being peak Fed)

In other words - you're overstating the hype a bit imo. Most "sane" posters "just" pencil him in for an ATG career and say he has potential to reach their heights.

He is better than Djoko and Fed at the same age as far as I can tell.
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
Chanwan said:
That's fair, but I think the vast majority here still regard Rafa at 19 >> over Carlos at 19. Carlos may have the better resume with the YE no. 1, but there are specific circumstances to explain that (Novak "chosing" not to play, Federer being peak Fed)

In other words - you're overstating the hype a bit imo. Most "sane" posters "just" pencil him in for an ATG career and say he has potential to reach their heights.

He is better than Djoko and Fed at the same age as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure McEnroe and Roddick have both said he's the best 19-year old ever. Unfortunately the hyperbole extends well beyond the borders of TTW. Djokovic can pop it like a balloon on Friday.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Chanwan said:
just like 20 year old Djoko losing to a way past his prime Safin 6 months after winning his first is a permanent asterisk?
What if Carlos loses on Friday and beats Djoko in their next 3 slams meetings?
Click to expand...
Djokovic was 21 and Safin was 28 so not even 30 yet. A 7 year difference is much smaller than a 16 year one so it's really no comparison, plus Djokovic was 3 years away from becoming #1.
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
Chanwan said:
Roddick said most complete he'd ever seen. Which is different from best as we had a lengthy thread about. Didn't see the McEnroe quote
Click to expand...

"It makes it much more fun and much more interesting. People generally pay more attention. Look at Alcaraz, the guy’s the best 20-year-old I’ve ever seen and at this point, I’d put him above Nadal, Djokovic, Federer and [Pete] Sampras as the greatest player I’ve ever seen at 20.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
NoleFam said:
Djokovic was 21 and Safin was 28 so not even 30 yet. A 7 year difference is much smaller than a 16 year one so it's really no comparison, plus Djokovic was 3 years away from becoming #1.
Click to expand...
Djoko was 21 yes. Point is - Safin was washed up, a has-been. Going 24-24 for the year. Djoko is 50-5 for the past year. Really no comparison - except losing to Safin is clearly worse than losing to current Djoko.

FWIW, Djoko had many more points as the no. 3 player going into that Wimbledon than Alcaraz has at the current no. 1. Different era where it was much tougher to get to no. 1. as Fedal had a firm lock on that and actually played for the entire year
https://www.atptour.com/en/rankings/singles?rankRange=0-100&rankDate=2008-06-30 (need to multiply by 2)
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
@weakera - this was the thread I was referencing

Roddick calls Carlos "the most complete 19 year old tennis player I've ever seen"

High praise from former #1 Andy Roddick today, speaking on American TV: "You have to respect his feel, but then he kind of blows your head off with power, it's the perfect compliment. I'm not a victim of hyperbole, but I think he's the most complete 19 year old male tennis player that I've ever...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

He may have said something else since then
 
NAS

NAS

Hall of Fame
Chanwan said:
Djoko was 21 yes. Point is - Safin was washed up, a has-been. Going 24-24 for the year. Djoko is 50-5 for the past year. Really no comparison - except losing to Safin is clearly worse than losing to current Djoko.

FWIW, Djoko had many more points as the no. 3 player going into that Wimbledon than Alcaraz has at the current no. 1. Different era where it was much tougher to get to no. 1.
https://www.atptour.com/en/rankings/singles?rankRange=0-100&rankDate=2008-06-30 (need to multiply by 2)
Click to expand...
That Safin win was big beyond any doubt, for a match he rolled back the clock.
Djokovic played bad but still huge win
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
Kralingen said:
Carlos isn’t losing this… at least, he shouldn’t.

This is Djoko’s worst clay season and worst clay level of his entire career going back to 2017/18, and really, 2006.

Let’s not forget that.
Click to expand...
Djoko has an uncanny ability to play exactly well enough to win. Let's also not forget that (I have Carlos in 4 fwiw though)
 
Kralingen

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
Chanwan said:
Djoko has an uncanny ability to play exactly well enough to win. Let's also not forget that (I have Carlos in 4 fwiw though)
Click to expand...
To your point, I think the reason is that we all know that someone has a clear form advantage and clear physical (power, speed, explosiveness) advantage.

That’s why it would be so disappointing if Carlos failed and lost. Not even because of numerical age but because of visible age. He will look like a different stratosphere of athleticism and power output next to Djokovic on Friday. If he loses I can only assume it will be by erroring himself out of the match, duffing a bunch of drop shots, allowing himself to be outsmarted and getting frustrated by the older player.

In short, it will be an avoidable loss. And it will appear very avoidable as if he’s playing well below par, to the watching eye, if he loses.

That’s why it would be embarrassing.
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
ND-13 said:
So much pressure on tiny Carlos.

Djokovic has the experience. Age is just a number. 16 year age gap ia an advantage and not liability
Click to expand...
Young Nadal would be owning current Djokovic on clay. Given the hype, we can surely expect Alcaraz to win this.
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
Kralingen said:
To your point, I think the reason is that we all know that someone has a clear form advantage and clear physical (power, speed, explosiveness) advantage.

That’s why it would be so disappointing if Carlos failed and lost. Not even because of numerical age but because of visible age. He will look like a different stratosphere of athleticism and power output next to Djokovic on Friday. If he loses I can only assume it will be by erroring himself out of the match, duffing a bunch of drop shots, allowing himself to be outsmarted and getting frustrated by the older player.

In short, it will be an avoidable loss. And it will appear very avoidable as if he’s playing well below par, to the watching eye, if he loses.

That’s why it would be embarrassing.
Click to expand...
Couldn't watch the last of the Djoko match, where he apparently found his grove from the TB and onwards. If he comes out as he did vs. KK, CA will murder him.

And yes, I do think CA has what it takes - both game and mental wise. And we've been waiting since forever for someone to actually beat these guys, so I too would be disappointed. Just pointing out it's still a Djokovic who very, very rarely loses in a GS, he's facing.
 
jl809

jl809

Hall of Fame
Kralingen said:
To your point, I think the reason is that we all know that someone has a clear form advantage and clear physical (power, speed, explosiveness) advantage.

That’s why it would be so disappointing if Carlos failed and lost. Not even because of numerical age but because of visible age. He will look like a different stratosphere of athleticism and power output next to Djokovic on Friday. If he loses I can only assume it will be by erroring himself out of the match, duffing a bunch of drop shots, allowing himself to be outsmarted and getting frustrated by the older player.

In short, it will be an avoidable loss. And it will appear very avoidable as if he’s playing well below par, to the watching eye, if he loses.

That’s why it would be embarrassing.
Click to expand...
I think this is a really good point. On the match thread, I said I couldn't call who would win the match, but most of that revolves around how I'm not sure whether Alcaraz will produce his best tennis.

But if you ask me who will win the match if Alcaraz DOES play his best tennis, I realise the answer is actually pretty obvious for me, as it is for quite a lot of people here it seems: Alcaraz.
 
NeutralFan

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
StrongRule said:
If he is not in his physical prime when he is 20, when will his physical prime be then? If 19 years old Nadal beat prime Federer in his first RG appearance then there is no way there can be any excuses for Alcaraz not to beat a 36 years old. Young Nadal would be totally owning current Djokovic on clay.
Click to expand...

Son,How many ATG hit the prime at 20 ? Fed? Djokovic?even Nadal became all surface player after 22. 20 year Nadal would own anyone in history doesn't mean every other ATG should do that. Also, Alcaraz is not worth the hype if he beats Djokovic at Wimbledon and AO but fails at RG ? You're beyond blind and becoming delusional day by day.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Chanwan said:
Djoko was 21 yes. Point is - Safin was washed up, a has-been. Going 24-24 for the year. Djoko is 50-5 for the past year. Really no comparison - except losing to Safin is clearly worse than losing to current Djoko.

FWIW, Djoko had many more points as the no. 3 player going into that Wimbledon than Alcaraz has at the current no. 1. Different era where it was much tougher to get to no. 1. as Fedal had a firm lock on that and actually played for the entire year
https://www.atptour.com/en/rankings/singles?rankRange=0-100&rankDate=2008-06-30 (need to multiply by 2)
Click to expand...
Safin was pretty much done but he actually played well in that tournament also beating Wawrinka and Lopez after beating Djokovic. Djokovic was a Slam champ but it's not like he had really proved himself on grass yet except for the run in 2007, but he did have an off day and didn't play well. On the flip side, it's not like Alcaraz already winning 7 clay titles and winning back to back Barcelona and Madrid titles.

Plus the age difference is massive for Djokovic/Alcaraz compared to Safin/Djokovic. It's not even remotely close.

We would actually have to break it down tournament by tournament since multiplying it by 2 wouldn't be accurate.
 
Last edited:
T

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
There’s certainly no shame in losing to Djokovic, who’s in one of the most dominant phases of his career. But I think Carlos is good enough to beat this still-basically-peaking Novak.
 
RS

RS

Bionic Poster
Chanwan said:
I don't get it. Either Djokovic has only been as dominant as he has in recent years, because we are indeed in the career inflation era. Or Djokovic is still so great that there's no shame losing to a 36 year old.
Which is it?

For context: Djokovic numbers in recent times:
  • Won 5 of his last 7 slams
  • Won 10 out of his last 16 slams (losses to Rafa (2), Medvedev (1), Thiem (1), Stan (retirement, 1) and PCC/lineswoman (1)
  • Won 19 out of his last 20 slam semis
  • Is 25-4 for the year
  • Is 50-5 since last years FO (not counting Laver Cup)
  • Is 5-0 in TB's at this years FO and yet to make an UE error in one of those
All these numbers point to a Djokovic close to the peak of his powers. At one point (2015-2016) he won 4 slams in a row (5 out of 6 and 6 out of 8 if we stretch it out). 5 out of 7 is damn close to that level of domination.

Yet the vast majority of posters seem to think that Alcaraz is a failure if he can't beat the current Djokovic, who's dominated the slams roughly as much as he did during his physical peak.
That Alcaraz, who's in his 2nd slam semi, and just turned 20 must win against the statistical GOAT in order to justify the hype.

To repeat:
I don't get it. Either Djokovic has only been as dominant as he has, because we are indeed in the career inflation era. Or Djokovic is still so great that there's no shame losing to a 36 year old.
Which is it? It can't be both as far as I can tell.

Disgust
Click to expand...
Well I would assume Djokovic fans rate 2011-2013 the best period ever. At least from what I see. They are not likely to subscribe to a inflation era though.
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
NeutralFan said:
Son,How many ATG hit the prime at 20 ? Fed? Djokovic?even Nadal became all surface player after 22. 20 year Nadal would own anyone in history doesn't mean every other ATG should do that. Also, Alcaraz is not worth the hype if he beats Djokovic at Wimbledon and AO but fails at RG ? You're beyond blind and becoming delusional day by day.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't expect a potential ATG to beat a prime ATG at age 20, like Nadal was able to do. I do expect him to be able to beat a 36 years old Djokovic in a slam where a 36 years old Nadal managed to beat him last year. Given all this hype, I don't think that is asking for too much.

And if Alcaraz fails here, how can he possibly beat Djokovic in AO or Wimbledon? No, if he can't do it here, he is not beating Djokovic in BO5 at all.
 
Kralingen

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
StrongRule said:
I wouldn't expect a potential ATG to beat a prime ATG at age 20, like Nadal was able to do. I do expect him to be able to beat a 36 years old Djokovic in a slam where a 36 years old Nadal managed to beat him last year. Given all this hype, I don't think that is asking for too much.

And if Alcaraz fails here, how can he possibly beat Djokovic in AO or Wimbledon? No, if he can't do it here, he is not beating Djokovic in BO5 at all.
Click to expand...
This is beyond stupid. Djokovic is only going one direction and Carlos is going the opposite.

Even if he loses here you really think 37/38 year old Djokovic will continue to beat him in 2025?

Be serious.
 
Spin Diesel

Spin Diesel

Hall of Fame
I think Djokovic is still close enough to his peak. What he maybe lost in athleticism or speed or whatever, he gained in experience - which imo improved his tactical approaches, shot selection and also his clutchness. Apart from that, his serving is probably better than in his peak years. So regarding that, for me there is definitely no shame in loosing to him.
But I do agree that I would be disappointed if he lost, because of pretty much what Kralingen said in his second previous post.
From their previous matches you feel like Alcaraz is playing on another level and that he needs to somehow bungle it, in order to loose this match and that would be really unsatisfactory. A big part of it to me personally would actually be all those ignorant people saying "he couldn't even beat old Djokovic at his worst slam"

However, I'm pretty optimistic that Carlos wins in 4, so let's see.
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
Kralingen said:
This is beyond stupid. Djokovic is only going one direction and Carlos is going the opposite.

Even if he loses here you really think 37/38 year old Djokovic will continue to beat him in 2025?

Be serious.
Click to expand...
The young players are so bad that Djokovic is dominating the slams like he never did before. This year it was arguably the easiest AO title of his whole career. If they let him do that for a few years now, why won't they let him vulture slams in 2025 as well?
 
Kralingen

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
StrongRule said:
The young players are so bad that Djokovic is dominating the slams like he never did before. This year it was arguably the easiest AO title of his whole career. If they let him do that for a few years now, why won't they let him vulture slams in 2025 as well?
Click to expand...
Carlos is a mutant and not like anyone we’ve seen.

After 10 years of hyping all the wrong young players I get the caution. But this is the right young player.

You will understand in due time.
 
NeutralFan

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
StrongRule said:
I wouldn't expect a potential ATG to beat a prime ATG at age 20, like Nadal was able to do. I do expect him to be able to beat a 36 years old Djokovic in a slam where a 36 years old Nadal managed to beat him last year. Given all this hype, I don't think that is asking for too much.

And if Alcaraz fails here, how can he possibly beat Djokovic in AO or Wimbledon? No, if he can't do it here, he is not beating Djokovic in BO5 at all.
Click to expand...

Same 36 year old Who has won nearly all slams he has competed in last few years? Also, anything can happen in a single match , so basing your opinion based on one match is ridiculous. Alcaraz's best surface is not clay so comparison with Nadal is absurd. What did Fed do at 20, Nadal do at 20 at non cly slam? What did Djokovic do at non AO slams at 20? As for the second part if he loses to Djokovic at rest of the slams as well then i agree his greatness should be questioned but if he beats him consistently at slams then he deserves all the credit.
 
D

Deleted member 629564

Guest
ND-13 said:
You are trying way too hard to be funny.. LOL

It is a joke when you tell once or twice. If you keep repeating every other post, people are going to give a pass to anything you post.. Pretty tangible stuff
Click to expand...
It depends on a context.
 
WeekendTennisHack

WeekendTennisHack

Hall of Fame
It is clearly a career inflation era. But Alcaraz is a failure if he loses because he represents all wannabe ATGs that came after Djokodal that failed time and time again. As time passes each successive generation should be having a greater chance of success because of age difference. But they don't seem to. Their collective failure makes it appear that time stands still for Djokovic. But we all know that isn't true. Hence Alcaraz is a failure if he cannot win with such a huge age gap.

This is why Federer clearly had it the toughest with not 1 ATG appearing, but two! And not 3 generations or 2 generations after him, but only one generation.
 
NeutralFan

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
We have some usual suspects who whines all the time about weak era , Djokovic open , Djokovic winning all the time but when a new ATG has arrived in picture they're still not happy.
 
The Fedfather

The Fedfather

Legend
No, because I swear the popular narrative among those saying this match is irrelevant to Djokovic's status and is everything for Alacaraz's standing in the game, was that Djokovic is sweeping all these titles and is having in some way the best stretch of his career past his 30s because he is THAT GOOD. Because he left the plane of normal with his superior fitness, experiece, talent, mental strength, so at this respectable age he reaching heights that nobody ever reached before.

Introducing a potential match-up with a player of Alcaraz's quality, and suddenly it's all about the age difference, Djokovic at 36 has nothing to prove, it's his weakest surface, and this, and that. Where are the familiar talking points about just how great older Djokovic is, that he can be winning CYGS out there at 34, winning more Slams than he did in his 20s, and it's not at all because the competition is severely lacking? Yeah, all the praise gone with the wind at the sign of real threat.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Chanwan said:
just like 21 years old Djoko losing to a way past his prime Safin 6 months after winning his first is a permanent asterisk?
What if Carlos loses on Friday and beats Djoko in their next 3 slams meetings?
Click to expand...
This is not exactly comparable. Not when Djokovic had already proven himself by beating an ATG in dominant fashion to win his first slam. Carlos hasn't proven himself against such players yet.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Chanwan said:
That's fair, but I think the vast majority here still regard Rafa at 19 >> over Carlos at 19. Carlos may have the better resume with the YE no. 1, but there are specific circumstances to explain that (Novak "chosing" not to play, Federer being peak Fed)

In other words - you're overstating the hype a bit imo. Most "sane" posters "just" pencil him in for an ATG career and say he has potential to reach their heights.

He is better than Djoko and Fed at the same age as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
Well, then he should have no trouble beating old Djokovic since Fed did beat Sampras at Alcaraz's age and 20 year old Djokovic only lost to peak Fed.
 
RS

RS

Bionic Poster
A way to solve this would be how does 2011-2016 Djokovic do in 2017-2022 or how does mid 2018-mid 2023 Djokovic do in 2011-2016. To see what people think.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
Djokovic was 21 and Safin was 28 so not even 30 yet. A 7 year difference is much smaller than a 16 year one so it's really no comparison, plus Djokovic was 3 years away from becoming #1.
Click to expand...
And it should be about absolute level more than the age difference itself. Surely an inexperience 20 year old should be easily to handle than an ATG in his prime, right? ;)
 
Chanwan

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
mike danny said:
Well, then he should have no trouble beating old Djokovic since Fed did beat Sampras at Alcaraz's age and 20 year old Djokovic only lost to peak Fed.
Click to expand...
Fed had one massive win and then did "nothing" for two more years. And I do expect Alcaraz to win, but Djoko's numbers are very peak like is all I am saying
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jl809
The % of Djokovic’s titles (since 2022) which he won when Alcaraz was in the draw is:
Replies
15
Views
734
duaneeo
duaneeo
Spencer Gore
Will Alcaraz push Federer out of the Top 5 Open Era slam % winners?
Replies
2
Views
213
Razer
Razer
DjokoGOAT
Federer the GOAT vs weak opponents
Replies
28
Views
1K
Azure
Azure
H
Federer still needs to do two things to be considered the best player
4 5 6
Replies
285
Views
23K
Deleted member 771911
D
Kralingen
  • Poll
Is the ATP officially a 2-player Tour?
Replies
47
Views
707
TearTheRoofOff
TearTheRoofOff
Top