Is this Zverev's true level?

#57
no idea what's wrong with the guy

beats fedovic to win WTF, then crashes out several tournaments in a row

at what point does lendl transform him into a GS winning machine?
A long time. He's going to have Murray like career I think.
Maybe lendl has introduced changes and it is taking time. These changes are never easy and they take time.
 
#58
Losing to another promising young player looks better though
Felix has not shown anything yet. He lost the next match against Nishioka (?). Whether Felix is promising or not is yet to be seen. Remember everybody was impressed by Shapovalov or De Miñaur at the beginning and now it is clear none of them are truly promising.
 
#63
He has never got the potential to be an ATG. I have my own ATG touchstone for the young guns: winning a slam or beating an ATG convincingly in a slam before you are 21 years old.

Let's count:
Nadal won RG05
Djokovic won AO08
Federer beat Sampras in WC01
Del Potro won USO09 (unfortunately he has been crippled by injury)

Zverev will be 22 at the next slam and has failed my touchstone. He may win a couple slams in the future, but do not expect he to become an ATG.
1. There would hardly be another player as dominant as Nadal at RG/clay. That is not a fair comparison even for Federer and Djokovic
2. Djokovic won that Slam but didnt win another one till being late 23/24 years. Zverev is still 21.
3. So Federer beating Sampras is better than few Masters, two top 5 year endings + WTF title beating back to back Federer and Djokovic in straights?
4. Del Potro was great

Federer won his first in the year he turned 22 which is this season for Zverev. ATG's dont reach their status in the same manner - some do it earlier, some later. For example, what Wawrinka did post 28 is just out of this world and unseen. Zverev has his own path, like him or not, if healthy he would be in the bigger picture for a very long time.
 
#66
Felix has not shown anything yet. He lost the next match against Nishioka (?). Whether Felix is promising or not is yet to be seen. Remember everybody was impressed by Shapovalov or De Miñaur at the beginning and now it is clear none of them are truly promising.
Shapovalov and De Minaur are just 19 and 20, they have not even been 2 years on the Tour, what are you expecting ???
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#67
1. There would hardly be another player as dominant as Nadal at RG/clay. That is not a fair comparison even for Federer and Djokovic
2. Djokovic won that Slam but didnt win another one till being late 23/24 years. Zverev is still 21.
3. So Federer beating Sampras is better than few Masters, two top 5 year endings + WTF title beating back to back Federer and Djokovic in straights?
4. Del Potro was great

Federer won his first in the year he turned 22 which is this season for Zverev. ATG's dont reach their status in the same manner - some do it earlier, some later. For example, what Wawrinka did post 28 is just out of this world and unseen. Zverev has his own path, like him or not, if healthy he would be in the bigger picture for a very long time.
Djokovic won a slam, reached an additional slam final, reached 4 additional slam semis, won 4 masters titles and the WTF by the time he was Zverev's age.

It took a while for Djokovic to start dominating. But he was 10 times better than Zverev when he was his age. Zverev can't reach slam semis and apparently not even QF anymore.
 
#74
Guys Zverev is sick right now. Did you all watch the match with the sound turned down (the commies mentioned it several times).

If we to look for an explaination for his poor result, I think his current illness seems logical.
Didn’t know that, makes a bit more sense now.
 
#76
Djokovic won a slam, reached an additional slam final, reached 4 additional slam semis, won 4 masters titles and the WTF by the time he was Zverev's age.

It took a while for Djokovic to start dominating. But he was 10 times better than Zverev when he was his age. Zverev can't reach slam semis and apparently not even QF anymore.
Yeah, comparing Djoel to Zvrv is ripenisulous frankly. Zverev is 10 years younger; by the end of 2008, Djokovic had 1 Slam title, 1 final (Federer), 4 semis (Nadal x3, Federer), 1 YEC win (del Potro, Davydenko), 4 Masters wins that involved 3 straight-set beatings of Nadal and once beating the top 3 seeds in a row (Roddick, Nadal, Federer in Canada 07) + 2 finals losing to Nadal and Murray. He did regress in 09-10, but even then was significantly better than Zvaire, with 7/8 Slam QFs and making 8/9 Masters semis in 09, not quite consistent in 10 but beating Federer at the USO trumps Zverev's doings on its own.
 
#77
Struff is 28 and has possibly already peaked. He is even more inconsistent than Zverev! (I saw him in person 2 years ago, his serve is a cannon!)
yes but he caught fire during the whole match, just watch some highlights

can happen to anyone even big 3 to lose against a top 100 playing out of his mind
 
#80
So, for you, Del Potro is an ATG?
He is not. But my touchstone is a necessary, not sufficient condition. It is not easy to cash the talent to be an ATG, but one young gun must show he owns such talent before turning 21 years old. Del Potro showed that in USO09 but got crippled by the injury in his career. For Zverev, I am confident to write him off right now.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#81
He is not. But my touchstone is a necessary, not sufficient condition. It is not easy to cash the talent to be an ATG, but one young gun must show he owns such talent before turning 21 years old. Del Potro showed that in USO09 but got crippled by the injury in his career. For Zverev, I am confident to write him off right now.
He may not become an ATG, but he could still finish with a Murray-like career in a much weaker era. I won't put him in Murray's league, though.
 
#82
He was sick. So let's give him the benefit of doubt. He made it to the finals of acapulco.

He could withdrawn from the match. That would have done him good physically.
 
#83
1. There would hardly be another player as dominant as Nadal at RG/clay. That is not a fair comparison even for Federer and Djokovic
2. Djokovic won that Slam but didnt win another one till being late 23/24 years. Zverev is still 21.
3. So Federer beating Sampras is better than few Masters, two top 5 year endings + WTF title beating back to back Federer and Djokovic in straights?
4. Del Potro was great

Federer won his first in the year he turned 22 which is this season for Zverev. ATG's dont reach their status in the same manner - some do it earlier, some later. For example, what Wawrinka did post 28 is just out of this world and unseen. Zverev has his own path, like him or not, if healthy he would be in the bigger picture for a very long time.
It's true that all ATG players have different career path, but one thing is in common: they all won a slam or had a convincing win against an ATG in slam before turning 21. Young guns are generally not stable, but as a future ATG, the young gun must show that he has high ceiling in the slam for one time, that's enough. If the player fails to show that before turning 21 years old, I must say his ceiling may not be high enough to be a future ATG.

Come back to your points:
1. Nadal won RG05 and reached WC06 final also.
2. Djokovic had a long slam drought after AO08, but we knew he could break out (or not) after AO08. No one would expect Dimitrov/Nishikori/Cilic to break out and dominate the field when they were 23 years old.
3. Victory in slam is more impressive than that in masters/WTF for young guns in my opinion.
4. My touchstone is a necessary condition, not sufficient one. Del Potro failed to cash his ATG talent due to the injury.

Zverev will be 22 years old in the next slam and he has failed my touchstone. Also, by no means is Wawrinka an ATG player. 3 slams and one extra final are not enough to pass the qualification.
 
#85
He is not. But my touchstone is a necessary, not sufficient condition. It is not easy to cash the talent to be an ATG, but one young gun must show he owns such talent before turning 21 years old. Del Potro showed that in USO09 but got crippled by the injury in his career. For Zverev, I am confident to write him off right now.
Its quite easy to speak with big confidence when nobody would ever held you responsible for what you said ... If you had to back it up somehow, the story would be quite different. If you are ready to write off a 21 years kid whom two years in a row finishes inside the top 4 then you have zero credibility.
 
#86
Its quite easy to speak with big confidence when nobody would ever held you responsible for what you said ... If you had to back it up somehow, the story would be quite different. If you are ready to write off a 21 years kid whom two years in a row finishes inside the top 4 then you have zero credibility.
I am writing off Zverv's possibility to be an ATG only and I believe he could win a couple of slams in the future. But if he becomes an ATG that will be be unprecedented.
 
#87
Young guns are generally not stable, but as a future ATG, the young gun must show that he has high ceiling in the slam for one time, that's enough. If the player fails to show that before turning 21 years old, I must say his ceiling may not be high enough to be a future ATG.
So according to you its better to have one great tournament rather than a great overal year? Find me a non-ATG who finished as top 4 back to back seasons at 20 and 21.
If you think that players like Murray and Wawrinka are not ATG than there is something wrong with you criteria. In terms of success they are probably top 20-25 in the Open era which dates back 50 years.....
 
#88
I am writing off Zverv's possibility to be an ATG only and I believe he could win a couple of slams in the future. But if he becomes an ATG that will be be unprecedented.
Federer won his first Slam two months before his 22nd birtday, according to you he was 50 days away from being just an ordinary top player. Lendl won his first Slam at 24, is he not an ATG?
 
#89
Find me a non-ATG who finished as top 4 back to back seasons at 20 and 21.
Hewitt finished as world No.1 back to back seasons at 20 and 21.
Federer won his first Slam two months before his 22nd birtday, according to you he was 50 days away from being just an ordinary top player. Lendl won his first Slam at 24, is he not an ATG?
You can read my touchstone again. What I say is that a future ATG must 1) win a slam 2) or have a convincing win against an ATG in slam before turning 21. I could loose it to "having an exciting run in a slam before 22 years old" but Zverev still fails
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#93
So according to you its better to have one great tournament rather than a great overal year? Find me a non-ATG who finished as top 4 back to back seasons at 20 and 21.
If you think that players like Murray and Wawrinka are not ATG than there is something wrong with you criteria. In terms of success they are probably top 20-25 in the Open era which dates back 50 years.....
Hewitt.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#94
Federer won his first Slam two months before his 22nd birtday, according to you he was 50 days away from being just an ordinary top player. Lendl won his first Slam at 24, is he not an ATG?
Lendl was pushing peak Borg to 5 sets in a RG final at 21.

At 21, Zverev needed 5 sets to beat 2 mugs and Khachanov at RG.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
#95
Federer won his first Slam two months before his 22nd birtday, according to you he was 50 days away from being just an ordinary top player. Lendl won his first Slam at 24, is he not an ATG?
Federer was already more successful than Zverev in BO5 before he won his first slam.
 
#96
Zverev has nothing special in his game.

He doesn’t have the blistering groundstrokes of FAA, the insane speed of De Minaur, or even Tsitsipas’ variety. Much less Shapo’s power.

He has a grinding style but no real variety or mix up in his game. He’s good for matches againt Djokovic and Nadal and in a way Fed. He can grind them out. But against those big hitters who select when they attack more accurately (Raonic), he crumbles. He waits for his opponent to make a mistake when he should be the one to go on the offensive. His serve is good for his height (can be improved) and his groundstrokes are good enough to hit winners. He needs work on his volleys, something Lendl needs to do. He needs to be more aggressive and stop defending all the time. Djokovic and Nadal are some of the best defenders in history but also have great offensive options, Zverev needs to develop those offensive skills, and quickly. This should be his real breakout year.
 
#97
Federer won his first Slam two months before his 22nd birtday, according to you he was 50 days away from being just an ordinary top player. Lendl won his first Slam at 24, is he not an ATG?
For me the difference is that Zverev seems incapable of putting up a good performance against top players at majors. It's a huge obstacle to overcome and he already has a massive advantage being ranked so high. From memory he has only ever beaten 1 seeded player at a grand slam and that was beating dzumhur in 5 at French open seeded 26. When he plays other top players (if he gets there) it isn't even close. If he can sort out his mental game at majors he will do well, but it doesn't look good.

Federer was a turd early on tour, but the death of a good friend when he was 21 or so completely changed his attitude and approach to the game. Imo that's what makes this a bad comparison. Zverevs attitude is like that of a young Federer but what is going to create a massive change in his mental game? That is why the Sampras match is still important to consider, Federer could fight through a lot of pressure against a tournament favourite already. He just had to sort out getting to that position consistently. Zverev is missing in all gland slams to date.
 
#98
For me the difference is that Zverev seems incapable of putting up a good performance against top players at majors.
Zverev did put good perfomance against Nadal at AO and against Raonic at Wimbledon. He didnt met many top players because he underachieved before them and people put way too much weight on it. He is entered like 8 Grand Slam tournaments as the favorite and this is a small sample size. He lost to Verdasco, Raonic, Coric, Chung, Thiem, Gulbis, Kohschreiber - are people really arguing that he cant beat those guys? We know he can! Are people arguing that he wont beat the top guys when he is already beaten Djokovic in two big finals and Federer in another one, all of them in straight sets. He would have also probably beaten Nadal on clay in Rome if not for the rain delay. So there is that, he can hang with the big guys! Are we arguing that Zverev somehow is not good enough in 3/5? There is no logic in that and Nadal said it best "Slam matches give advantage to the overal better player".

Zverev lack of success at Slams its mostly ... life. Things happen, often without a major reason. This is what makes it interesting, imagine if everything went the way we predicted it.
 
#99
They’re in very different places in their development. Zverev really should be establishing himself this year. It’s not gone well so far.
Lol no. Both are in the same situation. Both Zverev and Tsitsipas will have to wait until Nadal and Djokovic retire/decline to start winning Majors.
 
Lol no. Both are in the same situation. Both Zverev and Tsitsipas will have to wait until Nadal and Djokovic retire/decline to start winning Majors.
I’m not even talking about winning slams. They need to start by making consistent runs across multiple surfaces. Zverev had a head start but he’s not capitalised yet.
I’d understand more if it was just Djokovic/Nadal beating Zverev. But you still kind of feel he can lose to almost anyone and that isn’t good enough.
 
Top