Alcaraz vs Big 3 at 21 years 70 days
- Thread starter RG GOD
- Start date
TheGoldenEra1990’s
Hall of Fame
Looks good. Now we will revisit when Carlos is 30-35 years old LOL
messiahrobins
Hall of Fame
Many will point to Nadal having peak Federer to deal with, which is true. Alcaraz doesnt have anyone remotely of that level to deal with.
However, when Rafa and Novak basically infer Alcaraz is the greatest ever at his age, i am likely to defer to their opinion really as i believe they know a thing or two about tennis as it happens.
However, when Rafa and Novak basically infer Alcaraz is the greatest ever at his age, i am likely to defer to their opinion really as i believe they know a thing or two about tennis as it happens.
TheGoldenEra1990’s
Hall of Fame
If Carlos had peak Fed like Nadal did from 18-21 , everyone knows he wouldn’t have a title to his name. Unless Fed felt like throwing him a bone because he felt bad. So it’s a stupid comparison anyways. One guy had great competition as a pup. The other guy doesn’t if Sinner isn’t around to stop him. Grandpa Nole doesn’t count since he’s starting to move like Joe Biden he has so much mileage now
Last edited:
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Who cares about when you do it.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
21 year old Rafa already outpacing his age with total titles is comical.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
No question now that at this age Alcaraz has blasted his way past the other three, only one who was really competing hard against him was Nadal, but that fourth slam has pushed him past Nadal now. That combined with all those weeks at number one and a year ending number one, plus a slam on all three surfaces, he is without a doubt the best youngster now since at least Borg IMO.
Slam will always trump everything, the moment he won Wimbledon for a second time, that sealed the debate with Nadal for me. Alcaraz first, Nadal second, Djokovic third and Federer fourth.
Slam will always trump everything, the moment he won Wimbledon for a second time, that sealed the debate with Nadal for me. Alcaraz first, Nadal second, Djokovic third and Federer fourth.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Fascinating.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
20 > 4 I believe.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Honestly that is great and all, and I do not argue it as it is obvious.
But we do not care what someone did at a certain age. We value them on what they did regardless of when. It is nice to say, but holds no water in a career debate.
He has a head start, but compare Djoker to Rafa, the early years played no role in the end.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
2 things this says to me.
1. Rafa kind of has him beat, I am sure most were on clay, but still looks better on paper.
2. Djoker was the slowest starter and ended on top, so the start is irrelevant
Disagree. We are TTW with our love for our beloved Djokodal themselves, know better than Djokodal.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
We value it in the sense when we compare younger ATGs against each other.
There is always a discussion about best youngsters this game has ever seen, we cite Borg, Wilander, Becker, Hewitt, Nadal are incredible players in their early years.
This doesn't mean he will be GOAT, or anything, it means among those elite young players his name right at the top, and only now rivalled by Borg if anything.
Additionally, "who cares what he did at that age" only truly makes sense once his career is over.
Here we discuss the possibility of what this great youngster could do if everything goes well. Some claim he could get 39 slams whilst others hound him for not getting said slams already.
Alcaraz cannot win at TTW. However, as fans of his game, we win by watching and seeing what this potentially legendary career looks like in real-time.
Last edited:
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Yes. I'm going to enjoy this ride, hopefully he can stay healthy and keep bringing us that brand of magic tennis.
mehdimike
Hall of Fame
Sealed the debate for what?
He could go slamless for a year and then Nadal would seal the debate again for you?
He has been the most successful at 21 and that's it. Note that Nadal won 9 slams, 19 M1000 before turning 25. At this rate, he is unlikely to win that many Masters so he needs to win at least 6 slams to cross Rafa at that age, and of course a career slam. Things can change quickly.
octobrina10
Talk Tennis Guru
Rafa is the best.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
If, if, if doesn't exist.
Also, let's not pretend Federer was an unbeatable force on clay. Even in his prime he lost to Kuerten, it's not like he could only lost to Nadal.
Alcaraz is gonna win 8 or more RG than Roger. It's obvious his game is more suited to the surface and no one from future generations will consider Federer a better clay player than Raz. Stop being so insecure. Fact is, Raz has the potential to surpass the Big 3 numbers, and no amount of "ifs" will change the mindset of future generations. At the end, people will only care about numbers, not the subjective Fed fans' eye test according to which Federer supposedly had the best level ever despite being 3rd in the Slam race and despite having a losing H2H with Nadal even in his prime when he was merely aged 22-26 and 22-28 in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 (Nadal even led Roger in outdoor hard those years). In sum, the person who gets the Slam record will be forever deemed the GOAT.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Alcaraz has picked up too many monumental achievements now.
He already has more slams than Nadal, and already won all three surfaces, while Nadal at same stage was only winning at RG. Plus being the only teenager to be ranked number one and year ending number one, records that may not be broken for a very very long time.
Once you get into 22-23 area, you are entering the peak phase of your career, you are longer the youngster. We saw Federer explode like crazy at 22 because he entered his peak years. Nadal sure has some great achievements early in his career, but by 22 he is full fledged peaking.
Alcaraz is only player to conquer all three surfaces by the age of 21, that is unheard of, his trail blazing puts him at the top. All those masters titles don't matter, when you got more slams, and that too on all surfaces.
mehdimike
Hall of Fame
I get your point but what if Carlos fails to deliver from now on? What if he fails in the next few slams, though that is highly unlikely. I just wanna say he is no lock to even be more successful than 22 year old Nadal. So it's better to wait and see he evolves in the next year or two. Definitely, at 21, in terms of achievement, he is in a better place than Rafa.
