John McEnroe: Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz cannot dominate like ‘Big Three’ did

KingCarlitos said:
Why not, They’ve already dominated 2024 winning 2 slams apiece and when Djokovic goes nobody can really challenge both of them, While 1 may get dispatched in a slam the other will succeed.
Click to expand...

You're right , people don't understand how thin margin can lead to tremendous difference in results. They just need to be fit and better than field consistently for a decade and they will be sitting on 15 + slams easily
 
Nadal only dominated on clay.

So it is feasible for Sinner and Alcaraz to smash Nadal's performance off clay.

But to reach the level of 2006 Fed or NCYGS Djoko is another thing.
 
Mustard said:
I clearly remember thinking after Hewitt won Wimbledon in 2002 that it was the first of 3 or 4 Wimbledon titles for him. He had already won Queen's Club 3 years in a row.
Click to expand...

I thought maybe he could win one more.

Mustard said:
Regarding the quarter final against Schalken at 2002 Wimbledon, Hewitt was very fortunate to win that match in the end after being down a break in the fifth set on two different occasions, but he could have just as easily have won in straight sets without any bother at all. Hewitt won 6-2, 6-2, 6-7, 1-6, 7-5, and had something like 20 break points in sets 3 and 4 without taking a single one.
Click to expand...

Could have won in straights? But he didn't... point was, he almost blew it... and in many other majors... he did...
 
UnderArmServeOP said:
He's right. I truly believe that. we will never see dominance like he Big 3 again.
Click to expand...

I actually don’t think so. He reminds of people who laughed at Djokovic when he first showed up on tour. Little did they know that they were looking at the greatest player of all time.

So it’s completely possible for a new player to dominate and surpass the big 3 or even Djokovic.

Is it Alcaraz or Sinner? Who knows, could be. That’s why sports is interesting, the underdog has a chance to win, even if everything is stacked against him.
 
Silly Johnny Mac, Sinner and Alcaraz is one player short of the trio of Nole, Rafa and Roger. But yes, to be a dominant trio is that much harder than to be a dominant duo, even then, Sinner and Alcaraz won't be dominant for too long before another wave of young guns usurp the current status quo.
 
ND-13 said:
so, John McEnroe just said below but there is still so much text above ??

These guys can’t possibly – can they? – dominate like these last three guys have,” said McEnroe. “[Alexander] Zverev is currently No2 in the world after this tournament. Those guys who have been bypassed, you would think it would increase the hunger to finally get over the hump and win one.”
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree with John, who also was convinced many years ago, that Federer would be the GOAT for a long time.
 
The_Order said:
Tbh, I never had that impression about Hewitt...

He was too flaky at slam level, very prone to losses to players that he'd be expected to beat. The gap between his best and worst was evident and most of the talk about his dominance was off the back of him beating aging ATGs in Agassi and Sampras or a patch of form that he'd hit from time to time.

He basically won Wimbledon off the back of one of the easiest draws in history and he nearly fluffed that too...

At the same time, one could argue if not for Federer and Nadal, he would've won a few more slams, but that's not a great argument to support his supposed dominance.
Click to expand...
Also Hewitt didn’t have anything in his game that truly stood out, aside from he could run fast and return well. But his return is more suited to the serve and volley era.
 
Big 3 break-through: Murray & Wawrinka with 3 each, del Potro & Cilic with one each

There hasn't been any break-through in the Alcaraz & Sinner era.
 
Other players need to step up, and do something about it. I can't imagine the 1990s guys just allowing it to happen. Even Sampras didn't dominate beyond certain limits.
 
Mustard said:
Other players need to step up, and do something about it. I can't imagine the 1990s guys just allowing it to happen. Even Sampras didn't dominate beyond certain limits.
Click to expand...
Others are so bad, that Sinner & Alcaraz would just steamroll them. And Sinner is pretty consistently good.

The thing is the others are so gutless, that they can't do what Murray & Wawrinka did.
 
MeatTornado said:
Can't exactly declare victory after 2 years.
Click to expand...
True but they have embarked on the journey and 2 years is a good data sample plus i don’t see anyone good enough to challenge them for at least next 2 years.Z, Med are the best bet and new generation is either too young or not good enough l.
 
Lol they will (and are) dominate even more, at least until some other 00s players step up.

Although some posters here think players peak in their 30s, Sincaraz domination over the 90s gen will only increase.

The longest stretch dominated by only two players is FO05 to USO07 where Fedal won all slams. Sincaraz now has 8 in a row.
 
Last edited:
Jonas78 said:
Lol they will (and are) dominate even more, at least until some other 00s players step up.

Although some posters here think players peak in their 30s, Sincaraz domination over the 90s gen will only increase.

The longest stretch dominated by only two players is FO05 to USO07 where Fedal won all slams. Sincaraz now has 8 in a row.
Click to expand...

People think everything from the past was just way better and past legends were Demi god and there’s no way they can reach their level or surpass them ( level wise) my question to naysayer is who will stop them?? Med?Z? stef?lol , Fonseca?Rune? Mensik? Draper?
 
TennisGrandpA said:
People think everything from the past was just way better and past legends were Demi god and there’s no way they can reach their level or surpass them ( level wise) my question to naysayer is who will stop them?? Med?Z? stef?lol , Fonseca?Rune? Mensik? Draper?
Click to expand...
If 90s gen continue to be their main opponents the domination will likely get really ugly. It must be somone from the 00 gen who steps up.
 
TennisGrandpA said:
True but they have embarked on the journey and 2 years is a good data sample plus i don’t see anyone good enough to challenge them for at least next 2 years.Z, Med are the best bet and new generation is either too young or not good enough l.
Click to expand...
Huge difference between them keeping it up for another 2 years vs another 10+

In 2 years they'll still be in the thick of their primes at 24 & 26. What made the Big 3 freaks was keeping it up deep into their 30s.
 
TennisGrandpA said:
Okay , tell me who are those prospect having chances against these two??
Click to expand...
Are you new to tennis? People pop up unpredictably all the time. Predicting years into the future is extremely difficult in this sport. Hyped juniors flop all the time, so you have no idea who is going to come through. There's a good chance some 16 year old no one knows right now is going to take a leap and become the next superstar. No one knows.

Sinner & Alcaraz staying healthy and dominant for 10+ years is not the most likely outcome just because the Big 3 did it.
 
UnderArmServeOP said:
That was me last year. I want someone to beat them both now. Sinncarez era needs to end ASAP!!!
Click to expand...
I hear you, two years of splitting GSs is enough. But I highly doubt they will be able to pull it off the third year. There are any number of players who can vulture a GS. I hope someone one new can beat them but anything can happen.
 
Seems at times only that one of the two new suffices - unless it doesn’t.

With one of them out the other chap needs to stay strong&healthy, which isn’t easy in the modern game.
 
MeatTornado said:
Are you new to tennis? People pop up unpredictably all the time. Predicting years into the future is extremely difficult in this sport. Hyped juniors flop all the time, so you have no idea who is going to come through. There's a good chance some 16 year old no one knows right now is going to take a leap and become the next superstar. No one knows.

Sinner & Alcaraz staying healthy and dominant for 10+ years is not the most likely outcome just because the Big 3 did it.
Click to expand...
We have different circumstances right now. There's never been a bigger void between 2 players and the rest of the field. Ljubicic had more belief against Fed in 2006 than Zverev has against Sinner now.

Both Sinner and Alcaraz have all the data available from the big 3, they know what worked, what didn't, extra 20 years of knowledge/training/dieting/physio etc.

With new superstars you just never know until they pretty much start winning Slams or at least causing major upsets fairly consistently. But there are still voids, look - Djokovic had no younger ATG until Alcaraz came along in 2022/2023ish when Djokovic was already 35/36 years old and at the tail end of his big title winning form (and no, I don't believe he prevented Medvedev and Zverev from becoming ATGs, they just don't feel ATGs even if Djokovic wasn't there in 2018-2023). Someone can pop up even this year or it might take another 3 years. Now imagine 3 years of this era - that's roughly 42 big titles to share, 90-95% goes to either Alcaraz or Sinner - that single void puts both a tier higher and they will still be in or close to their primes at 26/28 with maybe even a decade of tennis left in both. Let's just wait and see and enjoy (or rather not) the moment.
 
tennis_pro said:
We have different circumstances right now. There's never been a bigger void between 2 players and the rest of the field. Ljubicic had more belief against Fed in 2006 than Zverev has against Sinner now.

Both Sinner and Alcaraz have all the data available from the big 3, they know what worked, what didn't, extra 20 years of knowledge/training/dieting/physio etc.

With new superstars you just never know until they pretty much start winning Slams or at least causing major upsets fairly consistently. But there are still voids, look - Djokovic had no younger ATG until Alcaraz came along in 2022/2023ish when Djokovic was already 35/36 years old and at the tail end of his big title winning form (and no, I don't believe he prevented Medvedev and Zverev from becoming ATGs, they just don't feel ATGs even if Djokovic wasn't there in 2018-2023). Someone can pop up even this year or it might take another 3 years. Now imagine 3 years of this era - that's roughly 42 big titles to share, 90-95% goes to either Alcaraz or Sinner - that single void puts both a tier higher and they will still be in or close to their primes at 26/28 with maybe even a decade of tennis left in both. Let's just wait and see and enjoy (or rather not) the moment.
Click to expand...
Looks like 2004-07 again
 
That wasn't always Johnny's opinion. Maybe he changed it since 39-year-old dumped on 14-year-younger Sinner.

I always said Alcaraz is the best I've ever seen, but Sinner is about Federer's level, third among Big 3.
 
tennis_pro said:
As evidenced by the GOAT Djokovic winning 0 Slams at the time despite already being good enough to be in the top 3.
Click to expand...
Nole was prime only since 2008/2011 when he won Slams.

Slams won in the period Big3 won at least 1 Slam each (AO 2008 to AO 2018):

Nadal 13
Djokovic 12
Federer 8

Slams won in the period Big3 won at least 2 Slams each (AO 2011 to WI 2017):

Djokovic 11
Nadal 6
Federer 3

Slams won in the period Big3 won at least 3 Slams each (WI 2011 to AO 2017):

Djokovic 10
Nadal 4
Federer 2
 
junkieballer said:
Nole was prime only since 2008/2011 when he won Slams.

Slams won in the period Big3 won at least 1 Slam each (AO 2008 to AO 2018):

Nadal 13
Djokovic 12
Federer 8

Slams won in the period Big3 won at least 2 Slams each (AO 2011 to WI 2017):

Djokovic 11
Nadal 6
Federer 3

Slams won in the period Big3 won at least 3 Slams each (WI 2011 to AO 2017):

Djokovic 10
Nadal 4
Federer 2
Click to expand...
Why did Djokovic only manage to win 1 Slam in 2007-2010? And against mono Fed too? He was already firmly in the top 3?

Cool that Djokovic managed to win many Slams when Fed was old. Very nice.
 
Does anyone even care what Johnny Mac has to say?

He's annoying as hell. Go play your acoustic guitar in Malibu around a natural gas fireplace next to a bunch of old rick pricks, dude.
 
tennis_pro said:
Why did Djokovic only manage to win 1 Slam in 2007-2010? And against mono Fed too? He was already firmly in the top 3?

Cool that Djokovic managed to win many Slams when Fed was old. Very nice.
Click to expand...
Until Federer was young enough to win 3 Slams Djokovic won 12 Slams.

Since Djokovic was mature enough to win 3 Slams Federer won only 4 Slams.
 
junkieballer said:
Until Federer was young enough to win 3 Slams Djokovic won 12 Slams.

Since Djokovic was mature enough to win 3 Slams Federer won only 4 Slams.
Click to expand...
Well you have to make a decision if context matters or not.

If it matters, then you have to see the position Federer was in, facing 2 of the 5 best players in the history of tennis, in their best age, when he was in his 30s.

If context doesnt matter then it doesnt matter for Sinner now either, and it didnt matter for Federer 2004-2010.

You cant just pick and choose as you like here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Carlostrophobia
Replies
44
Views
2K
langley
langley
Gastino
Who's excited for Doha ?
Replies
13
Views
461
Jav
Jav
edberg volleys
Alexander Zverev picks Jannik Sinner as the ‘Best Player in the World’ ahead of Carlos Alcaraz
Replies
14
Views
1K
anarosevoli
anarosevoli
FernandoBiH
Mats Wilander says Carlos Alcaraz is a stronger player than Jannik Sinner, ‘Sinner is #1 only for the computer’
2 3
Replies
100
Views
7K
KingCarlitos
KingCarlitos
ForehandCross
Carlos is finally getting called Jannik
Replies
16
Views
816
FeroBango
F
Back
Top