Is Alexander Zverev The Greatest (Open Era) Player Without A Slam?

Is Alexander Zverev The Greatest (Open Era) Player Without A Slam?

  • Yes

    Votes: 72 42.6%
  • No

    Votes: 97 57.4%

  • Total voters
    169

Subway Tennis

G.O.A.T.
Zverev has some of the best achievements of the non-major winners, but I think he has limitations in his game that are exposed in majors and for that reason I don’t think he is the “best” of that group.

He has a game perfectly tooled for success in the shortened form of the modern game. He’s an incredible returner, amazing defence, very even sided, high power level and can be serve dominant when required.

The above are all important traits at majors too, but the longer Bo5 two week major format requires more. It exposes a player’s weaknesses and introduces an additional layer of complexity that Zverev can’t handle mentally or game-wise.

In most cases in order to win a major, a player will be forced to use the weakest parts of their game and still find a way to win in a tournament setting where opponents have more time to practice and tailor their games to their opponents weaknesses, and those weaknesses need to hold up for 4-5 hours at a time.

Zverev’s strengths are colossal, but his shortcomings are glaring. He is one of the worst volleyers in the top 100 even in an era where volleying is already de-prioritised. He also has a tendency to be overly defensive. This a particularly terminal trait in the Bo5 format where an opponent on the back foot has plenty of extra time to shift and break momentum and can rely on Zverev to retreat tactically. He also gets sucked into playing a lot of long grinding points that don’t suit his physical strengths. Big-bodied Zverev can break an opponent’s morale with his defence in Bo3, but in Bo5 over a long tournament that grinding also takes it toll on him. it makes getting through the draw brutally attritional and saps energy.
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Zverev has some of the best achievements of the non-major winners, but I think he has limitations in his game that are exposed in majors and for that reason I don’t think he is the “best” of that group.

He has a game perfectly tooled for success in the shortened form of the modern game. He’s an incredible returner, amazing defence, very even sided, high power level and can be serve dominant when required.

The above are all important traits at majors too, but the longer Bo5 two week major format requires more. It exposes a player’s weaknesses and introduces an additional layer of complexity that Zverev can’t handle mentally or game-wise.

In most cases in order to win a major, a player will be forced to use the weakest parts of their game and still find a way to win in a tournament setting where opponents have more time to practice and tailor their games to their opponents weaknesses, and those weaknesses need to hold up for 4-5 hours at a time.

Zverev’s strengths are colossal, but his shortcomings are glaring. He is one of the worst volleyers in the top 100 even in an era where volleying is already de-prioritised. He also has a tendency to be overly defensive. This a particularly terminal trait in the Bo5 format where an opponent on the back foot has plenty of extra time to shift and break momentum and can rely on Zverev to retreat tactically. He also gets sucked into playing a lot of long grinding points that don’t suit his physical strengths. Big-bodied Zverev can break an opponent’s morale with his defence in Bo3, but in Bo5 over a long tournament that grinding also takes it toll on him. it makes getting through the draw brutally attritional and saps energy.
Zverev + tsitsipas strengths will give you a legit RG contender.

Their weaknesses are glaring.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Legend
I always used to give Mecir the edge, but I might soon need to reconsider my stance. What still puts me choose Mecir is his Miami 1987 with seven rounds Bo5 and straight setting Lendl in the final. However, Zverev’s OG is more prestigious than Miloslav’s, his two YEC outweigh Mecir’s WCT finals, and he has 5 masters now. Mecir still has one more slam final but Zverev has 4 more semis. Give Zverev another slam final and I would definitely put him ahead of Mecir. It is moot anyways since I am certain that Zverev will win a slam soon.
 

Pheasant

Legend
I always used to give Mecir the edge, but I might soon need to reconsider my stance. What still puts me choose Mecir is his Miami 1987 with seven rounds Bo5 and straight setting Lendl in the final. However, Zverev’s OG is more prestigious than Miloslav’s, his two YEC outweigh Mecir’s WCT finals, and he has 5 masters now. Mecir still has one more slam final but Zverev has 4 more semis. Give Zverev another slam final and I would definitely put him ahead of Mecir. It is moot anyways since I am certain that Zverev will win a slam soon.
Mecir was very unfortunate to go against prime Lendl in 3 of the 4 times he was either in slam semis or slam finals. Edberg was the 4th. Mecir pushed Edberg to 5 in that 1988 Wimbledon semi; better than Becker did in that year’s final. But that wasn’t enough. Lendl was simply a bad matchup for Mecir. But to be fair, Lendl from 1985-87 went 34-7 vs the top-5 where 34 of those 41 opponents were 6+ slam legends. Nobody was beating Lendl then. It’s unimaginable to think that Mecir actually butchered the peakiest version of Lendl in a Masters final in 3 straight sets.

Nice pick with Mecir. And I also agree that Zverev’s accomplishments are starting to get to big to exclude him from this conversation.
 
Last edited:

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
I would absolutely love to see GOATsipas win RG. Unfortunately I just can’t trust him to win a major any more.

I understand your skepticism. But if alcaraz is not at his best, I will tell you I don't trust anyone else 100% to beat tsitsipas.

He has taken Djokovic to five 2 times
Beaten Zverev in rg
Beaten sinner this year on clay and in slams
Beaten Ruud in mc
Beaten Rublev in rg and many places outside.

I have more confidence on tsitsipas than say Zverev.
 

Zardoz7/12

Hall of Fame
Zverev does has legal issues coming up at the end of the month but again I go by the old "innocent before proven guilty" adage.

What annoys me is that twitter has already found him guilty and already created excuses if he's "let off". We don't know what happened in Zverev's personal life, we do know he has out anger outbursts in the past.
 

Krish872007

Talk Tennis Guru
He has to be the most accomplished player without a Slam surely. I don't know about "greatest", that can be interpreted in many ways

1 Slam Final & 7 Slam Semi-Finals
Olympic Singles Gold (defending champ)
6 Masters Titles (out of 11 Finals)
2 WTF/YEC Titles
22 overall tour-level titles (out of 33 finals)
50 wins over Top 10 players (as of 20 May, 2024)

These are numbers you would expect from someone who has won at least 1 Slam, in an era where anything in possible.
 

tennis3

Hall of Fame
If you just watched Zverev and Berdych hitting, you'd say they'd both win multiple majors. But when you see them play, you can see that they just don't have it mentally. Berdych never got over the hump. Hard to say if Zverev will (he doesn't have to contend with the Big 3 plus Murray).

It's not really a knock against these guys. Few people in any sport "have it". Those are the strange ones. Guys like Zverev and Berdych are far more normal.
 

BauerAlmeida

Hall of Fame
In terms of numbers right now it's impossible to argue against him.

Some had a higher peak level, better slam performances, etc. But whole career it's him.
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
What is his best career defining grand slam match.

Most likely vs a 19 year old Carlos Alcaraz at French open. That's his BEST grand slam match.

I have not seen anyone underachieve to this extent.

Tsitsipas beat fed in Australia. Fed was world number 3 that year. Beat world number 3 Nadal in Australia.

Medvedev beat Djokovic in grand slam final. Beat world number 1 Alcaraz who was in better form than 2022.

Thiem beat peak Novak in RG 2019.

Even Jannik Sinner has trounced Djokovic in AO semis. I think this Djokovic would have beaten zedrot.

For big performances in slams, Zverev has just 1 or 2 both including Alcaraz.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Legend
Mecir was very unfortunately to go against prime Lendl in 3 of the 4 times he was either in slam semis or slam finals. Edberg was the 4th. Mecir pushed Edberg to 5 in that 1988 Wimbledon semi; better than Becker did in that year’s final. But that wasn’t enough. Lendl was simply a bad matchup for Mecir. P But to be fair, Lendl from 1985-87 went 34-7 vs the top-5 where 34 of those 41 opponents were 6+ slam legends. Nobody was beating Lendl then. It’s unimaginable to think that Mecir actually butchered the peakiest version of Lendl in a Masters final in 3 straight sets.

Nice pick with Mecir. And I also Afro that Zverev’s accomplishments are starting to get to big to exclude him from this conversation.
Yes I mean solely going by accomplishments, it becomes incredibly tough to argue against Zed at this point. Mecir has the 87 Miami though which I value really highly. So can call it a wash at the moment. Zverev will either win a slam though or clearly will become the greatest player to never win one.
 

Jonesy

Legend
Zod is top 6 earner by prize money winnings of all time. That is a lot of gold chains.

images
I
 

DSH

Talk Tennis Guru
Zverev has some of the best achievements of the non-major winners, but I think he has limitations in his game that are exposed in majors and for that reason I don’t think he is the “best” of that group.

He has a game perfectly tooled for success in the shortened form of the modern game. He’s an incredible returner, amazing defence, very even sided, high power level and can be serve dominant when required.

The above are all important traits at majors too, but the longer Bo5 two week major format requires more. It exposes a player’s weaknesses and introduces an additional layer of complexity that Zverev can’t handle mentally or game-wise.

In most cases in order to win a major, a player will be forced to use the weakest parts of their game and still find a way to win in a tournament setting where opponents have more time to practice and tailor their games to their opponents weaknesses, and those weaknesses need to hold up for 4-5 hours at a time.

Zverev’s strengths are colossal, but his shortcomings are glaring. He is one of the worst volleyers in the top 100 even in an era where volleying is already de-prioritised. He also has a tendency to be overly defensive. This a particularly terminal trait in the Bo5 format where an opponent on the back foot has plenty of extra time to shift and break momentum and can rely on Zverev to retreat tactically. He also gets sucked into playing a lot of long grinding points that don’t suit his physical strengths. Big-bodied Zverev can break an opponent’s morale with his defence in Bo3, but in Bo5 over a long tournament that grinding also takes it toll on him. it makes getting through the draw brutally attritional and saps energy.
Zverev's volley makes a retired player like Roddick look like he was a good volleyer.
:laughing:
 

Subway Tennis

G.O.A.T.
Zverev's volley makes a retired player like Roddick look like he was a good volleyer.
:laughing:
He is horrible at net. It’s genuinely shocking how many absolute duck volleys he dumps into the net. Andy could at least volley but for some reason he often approached the net after hitting a soft powerpuff approach shot to Nadal or Fedr forehand o_O
 

BorgTheGOAT

Legend
He is horrible at net. It’s genuinely shocking how many absolute duck volleys he dumps into the net. Andy could at least volley but for some reason he often approached the net after hitting a soft powerpuff approach shot to Nadal or Fedr forehand o_O
Zed’s volleys are abysmal. Take the 2022 semi vs Nadal as one example. I have seen him dumping routine volleys into the net from what looked like 10cm in front of the net and even missing to touch the ball at all with one volley. Rod was quite bad at the beginning but he improved his volleys over time. They were never elite but way better than Zed’s. His problem, as you say were his “dumbest ever” approaching shots as well as volleying into stupid directions (ie Fed’s forehand, even though the backhand side was wide open).
 

McGradey

Hall of Fame
If you just watched Zverev and Berdych hitting, you'd say they'd both win multiple majors. But when you see them play, you can see that they just don't have it mentally. Berdych never got over the hump. Hard to say if Zverev will (he doesn't have to contend with the Big 3 plus Murray).

It's not really a knock against these guys. Few people in any sport "have it". Those are the strange ones. Guys like Zverev and Berdych are far more normal.
Berdych was not an elite mover like Zverev is, especially defensive movement, but his forehand was a lot more authoritative and steady from day to day. They are similar in that they’re big guys who can blow anyone off the court, but they also have quite different weaknesses.

I watched Berdych live at Wimbledon way back when, and there was a noticeable lack of dynamism in the way he moved compared to his opponent (who was a smaller guy, cannot remember who) even in a match he ended up winning. But if he got a clean look at a forehand with his feet set, the point was basically done.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Over 3 hours to get to 7-6, 6-6. The point where Zverev injured his ankle was Nadal winning the point to get it to the start of the tiebreak.

16 years earlier, Mathieu led Nadal 7-5, 1-1 after just over 2 hours of play. Nadal won 5-7, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4, after 4 hours and 53 minutes.
 

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
At the highest level there will come times where you are reliant on it. When Zedbot has needed the net to come through he has screwed it up big time for sure.

Noooo. Big noooo. It's nice to have a good addition but Z's lack of slam is not due to his net play lol , it has more to do with his forehand and Second serve coupled with his mentality. In AO 2012 final Djokovic even joked about not coming to net ( to Laver) after passing shots, change in string net play became redundant. Why do you think Fed who would SNV a lot in 2003 reduced the frequency of net play against Djokodal later post2007-2008?
 
Last edited:

buscemi

Legend
Noooo. Big noooo. It's nics to have a good editing but Z's lack of slam is not due to his net play lol , it has more to do with his forehand and Second serve coupled with his mentality. In AO 2012 final Djokovic even joked about not coming to net ( to Laver) after passing shots, change in string net play became redundant. Why do you think Fed who would SNV a lot in 2003 reduced the frequency of net play against Djokodal later post2007-2008?
I don't know. That final against Thiem at the U.S. Open was on a knife's edge and was literally decided by a point or two. Zverev came to the net a decent amount in that match and did okay, but he's just not a great or even good volleyer. If he were even a good volleyer, he probably wins that match.
 

Subway Tennis

G.O.A.T.
Noooo. Big noooo. It's nics to have a good editing but Z's lack of slam is not due to his net play lol , it has more to do with his forehand and Second serve coupled with his mentality. In AO 2012 final Djokovic even joked about not coming to net ( to Laver) after passing shots, change in string net play became redundant. Why do you think Fed who would SNV a lot in 2003 reduced the frequency of net play against Djokodal later post2007-2008?
I think it’s a mixture of contributing things with Zverev not achieving at majors. You’ve summarised most of them very well in your post. His horrible volleying is one example of his weaknesses being VERY weak, but you’re right there are others. When he is good he is very good, and when he is bad he really stinks it up. To win a major you have to be able to win and get in and out of matches quickly in the early rounds even when you’re playing like poop and playing out of your comfort zone. Zedbot struggles to do that.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
That final against Thiem at the U.S. Open was on a knife's edge and was literally decided by a point or two. Zverev came to the net a decent amount in that match and did okay, but he's just not a great or even good volleyer.
Zedrot was 43/66 at net in that USO final, Thiem was 23/31. Considering Abuserev is God awful at net, this stat is surprisingly (shockingly) good for him. Thank God the tool spectacularly choked while trying to serve for the championship.
 

No_Kwan_Do

Semi-Pro
Statistically, it's hard to argue with. 6 MS titles, 2 YECs, an OG, world #2 and a slam F.

There are lot of good players that have reached multiple slam finals and done very little else (like Ruud or Anderson) or players that have a single slam final but have won a few MS titles or a YEC like Rios and Nalbandian.

Then you have Berdych, Ferrer and Tsonga who didn't win many big titles but reached the business end of slams quite a lot, but unfortunately peaked at the wrong time.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
I think it’s a mixture of contributing things with Zverev not achieving at majors. You’ve summarised most of them very well in your post. His horrible volleying is one example of his weaknesses being VERY weak, but you’re right there are others. When he is good he is very good, and when he is bad he really stinks it up. To win a major you have to be able to win and get in and out of matches quickly in the early rounds even when you’re playing like poop and playing out of your comfort zone. Zedbot struggles to do that.
Champions find a way to win when they are NOT playing well.
 

urban

Legend
I think, it will remain so. Zverev always will find a reason to lose, despite having great chances and a fine talent. And he always will find a reason to complain and never will blame only himself..
 

Lozo1016

Hall of Fame
Might be able to put this thread to bed in a few hours. This AO run will either strengthen his case or end his case.
 

thrust

Legend
Statistically, it's hard to argue with. 6 MS titles, 2 YECs, an OG, world #2 and a slam F.

There are lot of good players that have reached multiple slam finals and done very little else (like Ruud or Anderson) or players that have a single slam final but have won a few MS titles or a YEC like Rios and Nalbandian.

Then you have Berdych, Ferrer and Tsonga who didn't win many big titles but reached theO business end of slams quite a lot, but unfortunately peaked at the wrong time.
Overall, Zverev has much better results than the other players in your post. I think his poor slam final performances are primarily due to nerves, which cause him to choke or be inconsistent. I was never a fan, but am beginning to feel sorry for him, especially seeing him in tears after this and the USO finals.
 
Top