Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick on grass?

Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick on grass?

  • Tied. 2 titles in ROFL era is about equal to 3 Feddy finals. Level about same too.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Inferior and inferior. 2 ROFL titles<3 Feddy finals. Rofl level too.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    19

Holmes

Legend
As we know, Roddick is one of the least credited Wimbledon greats in history. A multiple time finalist, semi-finalist, quarter-finalist, and near-champion to boot. Over 6', served over 140mph, and net passed at approximately the same speed. On the other hand, we have Carlitos "the Little Man" Alcaraz who is a measly multiple-time champion with a massive-to-a-mouse forehand. Alcaraz defeated Djokovic twice in the finals, the first time being during a 3-slam dominant Djokovic season. Roddick lost to Federer in all 3 of his, and so of course, gets credit for that.

Now obviously, Carlitos has the whole "2 Wimbledon titles to none" thing in his favor, but is that truly enough to settle this debate?
 
Last edited:
Do you realize that in his life, Roddick hasn't won a single Wimbledon!

The only person I can compare Alcaraz to was Tom Brady. Tom was famous because mentally, he was ahead of everyone else. In addition, Tom was exceptionally good at throwing the football. So Carl is like Tom, but he runs faster than anyone else, like running back Saqoun Barkley.

There's a reason he is justably 8-1 vs Jannik Sinner! Poor Jannik, he might very well be at the top rank of tennis players! By top rank, I mean Borg, Sampras, Federer and Djokovic.
 
Last edited:
Greater but not better yet. 2004 Peak level has only been reached by a handful of men’s players.
Great post. I would amend from "players" to "player". Roger is the only player to have rivaled this level, in 2004 ironically. I say rivalled rather than reached because he was crushed in the first set by said level, and it was only due to a delay that he outlasted it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top