Nadal after turning 20 vs Alcaraz after turning 20

[The Blond Blur]

Nadal lost to bunch of nobodies. Don't try to divert the subject. He also won against nobodies to reach Wimby finals.

Tiny Carl has lost to a bunch of nobodies too and has been less successful overall. He has fewer GS Fs, MS1000’s and overall titles. He’s even been worse in the indoor season. Tiny Carl also beat a weak draw to make his Wimby F.

Here’s the break down for the guys he faced this year:

06 RAFA was better on grass. He had to face Peakerer who’s light years ahead of Oldovic. And as far as Tiny Carl’s competition on grass supposedly being tougher let’s actually dissect his draw this year. I’ll start from the 4R onward since that’s when things should be ramping up for Tiny Carl.

In the 4R he beat a slumping Berry (lol Berrettini Open, no?) who’s been struggling with form and injuries for the better part of a year and a half now. And as of this post he currently has a tour level record of 11-10. So barely above .500 for the year.

He beat Rune in the QF playing in his 2nd Wimby ever who went out in the 1R the year before. He’s done nothing on grass so far and is incredibly inexperienced. He was also coming off tough 5 and 4 setters vs ADF and Dimi the previous 2 rounds.

The Mad Lad who made his 1st Wimby SF this year when his previous best outing was the 4R 2 years ago. All he had to do to make the SF this year was go through the absolute “gauntlet” that was: Fery (WC), an ancient Mannarino, Fucsovics, Lehecka who retired after 2 sets, and going 5 sets vs Eubanks playing in his first ever main draw appearance at Wimby after failing to qualify for the previous 4 editions he was eligible for. This doesn’t even take in to account the fact that the Mad Lad matches up terribly vs Tiny Carl since he stands even further back than Oldal does to return serve. The dude is just begging you to come to the net against him. To put it simply the guy’s a HC specialist only.

Lastly, Tiny Carl met Joker in the F. It sounds tough on paper, Joker hadn’t lost on CC since 2013 (ofc this ignores all his other losses at Wimby in that timeframe). Was the 4x defending champ. He had all that going for him and yet he laid a massive Egg (pun intended) when it mattered most. The easy balls dumped into the middle of the net in the 2nd set TB. He went full on Zombieovic mode in the 3rd set getting fed a breadstick. He served a whopping 2 aces in a 5 set match to 3 DFs. He also hit 32 winners to 40 UFEs. On a faster winner friendly surface like grass these are very damning stats as far as evaluating his F performance.

Now 06 RAFA didn’t have a tough route to the F either and I’m not disputing that. But there wasn’t this huge mountain of disparity between their opposition either. And if you’re asking me (or him) who he’d rather play between 06 peak Fed and 2023 Oldovic I think the answer is obvious.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Tiny Carl has lost to a bunch of nobodies too and has been less successful overall. He has fewer GS Fs, MS1000’s and overall titles. He’s even been worse in the indoor season. Tiny Carl also beat a weak draw to make his Wimby F.

Here’s the break down for the guys he faced this year:

Proving both did reach Wimby finals on back of weak draw. Carlos beat top seeded players. All the way to finals tbh.

And still that doesn't prove what is posted in OP. Carlos at his 20th year is better than Nadal at his 20th year till now. No need to ridicule him at all. Both better than Federer and Nole at same age.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Proving both did reach Wimby finals on back of weak draw. Carlos beat top seeded players. All the way to finals tbh.

And still that doesn't prove what is posted in OP. Carlos at his 20th year is better than Nadal at his 20th year till now. No need to ridicule him at all. Both better than Federer and Nole at same age.

I never said that RAFA’s draw wasn’t weak, but Carl’s was as weak if not weaker. Especially since 06 Fed is >>>> 2023 Joker.

He can’t be better if he’s been less successful. They both have 2 schlems, but RAFA has 1 more GS F, 2 more MS1000’s (back when they played BO5 Fs too), and 5 more titles. He also has 2 titles post USO to Carl’s 0. I’m not ridiculing him at all. He’s just not as good as RAFA at the same age.

 

[PURETENNISsense]

He has proven to have better 19 years age than fedkovic. Now he is proving to be better at 20 than Nadal.

You are right, this fact alone must stand to determine what someone's entire career could be like. I will conduct life decisions in such a manner moving forward (a 1-2 year set of results should predict the next decade and a half).

 

[Razer]

If Sinner hadn’t messed up MP at USO. Alcaraz would’ve had 1 slam and Sinner would be 5-2 in the head to head, yet people hype Alcaraz so much

Win by an inch or a mile, winning is winning.

Sports at the highest level is all about converting MPs, the difference between converting MP and not is the different between 2 players which will only widen if Alcaraz remains fit. Sinner has a narrow lead on the H2H which is good for him, but dont forget Alcaraz also might not be at his peak yet, we are assuming he doesn't have a lot of room to improve but only 3-4 years from now we will know if that is really true or not

Yeah but he isn’t big three material. Sinner isn’t big three material either but honestly he’s probably the biggest talent on HC I’ve seen since Nole

He is real hype but I think he’ll get between 8-12 majors. sinner will be the factor on hard court though

You’ll see if they play each other in Turin. The poor rat is going to be crushed in straights

I don’t really like comparisons but I’m not feeling a big 3 career for this guy. As much as he won Wimbledon, he’s been super unimpressive these days. Sinner moved him around like a hopeless rat 2 weeks ago, and Sinner is improving a lot. Alcaraz peaked early and is unlikely to improve much more. I think he gets around 8 slams or so

It doesn’t matter. I bet he will struggle to achieve double digits.

I think Sinner is the true heir to the throne and 2024 will be the year when we’ll see who is better, Sinner or Alcaraz

Interesting predictions, I hope you dont delete you id like Sampras-Burguera dude did if all these predictions go wrong next year. If you are right then good on you.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

ndal>tiny

 

[FeroBango]

Didn't you know that Youngdal was only ever defeated by peak Fedr (and that every other loss should be discounted because of stonk era?).

 

[FeroBango]

This isn't a thread about sinner at all. This is about Nadal and Alcaraz.

The jokes of the two Sinner fans shoehorning Sinner into threads completely unrelated to Sinner come alive every single day without fail.

 

[tennis_pro]

As much as he won Wimbledon, he’s been super unimpressive these days.

It feels unimpressive, because the hype on this guy is unreal. People are expecting a Fed type of career out of him already and he's barely 20. Where was Fed at 20? Even Djokovic and Nadal? They were both doing worse.

Djokovic had 1 Slam until early 2011. Nadal was pretty much a one surface pony for the first couple of years. Alcaraz is doing just fine, people just expect too much at such early stage of his career. For him to rack up even 10+ Slams a lot of things have to line up, but the one insane advantage he has over a big 3 member is that his competition will be very mediocre once Djokovic retires. If Alcaraz matures, cleans up his game he could be winning 2-3 Slams a year very soon, because Djokovic won't block for a long time.

 

[FeroBango]

It feels unimpressive, because the hype on this guy is unreal. People are expecting a Fed type of career out of him already and he's barely 20. Where was Fed at 20? Even Djokovic and Nadal? They were both doing worse.

Djokovic had 1 Slam until early 2011. Nadal was pretty much a one surface pony for the first couple of years. Alcaraz is doing just fine, people just expect too much at such early stage of his career. For him to rack up even 10+ Slams a lot of things have to line up, but the one insane advantage he has over a big 3 member is that his competition will be very mediocre once Djokovic retires. If Alcaraz matures, cleans up his game he could be winning 2-3 Slams a year very soon, because Djokovic won't block for a long time.

Well put. The expectations are not only unreal, they're also unfair even when compared to the Big-3.

There's this idea that the Big-3 were mythical beats who never lost (when we've seen even them at their primes being knocked out in early stages of slams).

What the three have done is distort our ideas about legendary careers. If Raz gets double-digit slams, then he's certainly retiring as a rarefied legend of the game.

No one knows for sure how things will turn out. For all we know Alcaraz could reach Mac-level of accomplishments (while I predict some of the highest peak seen in Tennis) and burnout/retire with injuries.

Or he could achieve his explicitly stated dream of retiring as "one of the very best of the game" by maintaining his health and longevity as modern ATGs such as the Big-3 have shown to be possible. Who knows?

Unlike Sinner, for example,. Alcaraz already has a streak of legacy behind him. Youngest world no.1, a multi-surface slam champion and so on. His stated goals are totally viable if things fall in place, and he wises up, improves as one would expect him to in the coming years.

 

[mike danny]

It feels unimpressive, because the hype on this guy is unreal. People are expecting a Fed type of career out of him already and he's barely 20. Where was Fed at 20? Even Djokovic and Nadal? They were both doing worse.

Djokovic had 1 Slam until early 2011. Nadal was pretty much a one surface pony for the first couple of years. Alcaraz is doing just fine, people just expect too much at such early stage of his career. For him to rack up even 10+ Slams a lot of things have to line up, but the one insane advantage he has over a big 3 member is that his competition will be very mediocre once Djokovic retires. If Alcaraz matures, cleans up his game he could be winning 2-3 Slams a year very soon, because Djokovic won't block for a long time.

I'm not sure Nadal was doing worse. How was he if he had more slam finals, more big titles and more victories over the dominant guy?

As for Djokovic, the only thing that separates their age 20 seasons (2007 and 2023) is peak Fed.

 

[MichaelNadal]

You guys as in Nolefams who rely on stats.

Not you guys is Fedal fans who don't rely on stats.

No one wants to be a “nolefams”

 

[RF-18]

Usually it's the nostalgia guys on TTW who make problems. Everyone was just better before, Nadal never lost to someone he should have beaten on paper.

 

[tennis_pro]

I'm not sure Nadal was doing worse. How was he if he had more slam finals, more big titles and more victories over the dominant guy?

As for Djokovic, the only thing that separates their age 20 seasons (2007 and 2023) is peak Fed.

It was pretty much all clay, Alcaraz has big titles on all surfaces already. 2 different Slams on 2 different surfaces. Higher ranking. I mean it's debatable, I would give the nod to Alcaraz for variety overall.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

It was pretty much all clay, Alcaraz has big titles on all surfaces already. 2 different Slams on 2 different surfaces. Higher ranking. I mean it's debatable, I would give the nod to Alcaraz for variety overall.

only reason tiny has two slams on diff. surfaces is fed 06 on grass, put him in ndal' shoes and he has not more than one slam, hence ndal' 2 slams> tiny' 1, ndal is better

 

[tennis_pro]

only reason tiny has two slams on diff. surfaces is fed 06 on grass, put him in ndal' shoes and he has not more than one slam, hence ndal' 2 slams> tiny' 1, ndal is better

if if ifffff

Alcaraz was stopped by Djokovic too, would be sitting on 3 different Slams on 3 different surfaces right now which would be borderline insane. 1 AO away from completing the career Slam at barely 20.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

if if ifffff

Alcaraz was stopped by Djokovic too, would be sitting on 3 different Slams on 3 different surfaces right now which would be borderline insane. 1 AO away from completing the career Slam at barely 20.

lets be max honest here, how many slams do you see tiny in 05-06, i see zero, while i see ndal at least one slam at french open in 22-23

 

[FeroBango]

only reason tiny has two slams on diff. surfaces is fed 06 on grass, put him in ndal' shoes and he has not more than one slam, hence ndal' 2 slams> tiny' 1, ndal is better

If tiny doesn't exist at all then he'd have no slams at all. Hence Nadal would clearly be ahead with 2 more slam's than tiny who doesn't even exist in this intriguing little hypothetical.

 

[tennis_pro]

lets be max honest here, how many slams do you see tiny in 05-06, i see zero, while i see ndal at least one slam at french open in 22-23

But that's just because Nadal was a clay specialist and it was by far Fed's worst surface. Even before Nadal came along Fed did a 3 Slam year in 2004 and he still lost at the FO. Nobody was touching that Fed on grass and hard, you would literally need to look for the highest peaks in history, someone like a peak Djokovic to even make this a discussion.

A young Nadal would pretty much do the same thing if you put him in any other era, makes no difference to him lol. Sweep clay, lose everywhere else.

To me Alcaraz is clearly better now on grass and hard than a young Nadal, but he can already play at a top 3 level on all surfaces. You couldn't say the same thing about Nadal who was all clay until 2007. Only started to challenge Fed on grass in 2007, but even on HC I didn't feel he played at the absolute top level until early 2009 when he was almost 23.

 

[Razer]

At 20 Alcaraz is a better tennis player than Nadal was at 20

But in terms of athleticism, no comparison, Nadal was a brute force of nature. His speed is unmatched

 

[nolefam_2024]

At 20 Alcaraz is a better tennis player than Nadal was at 20

But in terms of athleticism, no comparison, Nadal was a brute force of nature. His speed is unmatched

Nadal didn't get beaten by younger guys early on. When was he first beaten by someone younger than him?
Has Alcaraz been beaten by someone younger than him?

 

[Razer]

Nadal didn't get beaten by younger guys early on. When was he first beaten by someone younger than him?
Has Alcaraz been beaten by someone younger than him?

Alcaraz has not played anyone younger to him I guess. Nadal lost to Djokovic at miami 07, that was first. That having said, losing to ppl younger is not a criteria for anything. Federer was losing to nalbandian from teen years.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Alcaraz has not played anyone younger to him I guess. Nadal lost to Djokovic at miami 07, that was first. That having said, losing to ppl younger is not a criteria for anything. Federer was losing to nalbandian from teen years.

It sure will be going forward. The fact is ATGs should be dominating younger guys and maybe losing to older guys. Same happened with Nadal and Alcaraz till now.

 

[InsideOut900]

Carlos has a high floor, low skill cap, it's so easy to understand and it makes sense because he is very strong physically. but is not at the technical level of Big 3 even at 19-20. Nadal would lose where Carlos lost, but Carlos would not win where Nadal won at that age.

Big 3 eventually got the high floor Carlos has, but 1-2 years later (Fed at 22.5 in 2004, Djoko at 20.5 in 2008) because of physical development, but Carlos will never get their skill cap because of technical deficiencies compared to them.

 

[Razer]

It sure will be going forward. The fact is ATGs should be dominating younger guys and maybe losing to older guys. Same happened with Nadal and Alcaraz till now.

Ppl younger to Roger have constantly beaten him, Nalbandian, Ancic, Roddick all beat Roger before his prime began in late 2003, then Nadal-berdych-gasquet beat him in s in 04-05 period, then Murray, Volandri in 06-07 period. Odd defeats always do come to younger guys but as long as you can hold your own in best of 5 you are safe.

 

[FeroBango]

Carlos has a high floor, low skill cap, it's so easy to understand and it makes sense because he is very strong physically. but is not at the technical level of Big 3 even at 19-20. Nadal would lose where Carlos lost, but Carlos would not win where Nadal won at that age.

Big 3 eventually got the high floor Carlos has, but 1-2 years later (Fed at 22.5 in 2004, Djoko at 20.5 in 2008) because of physical development, but Carlos will never get their skill cap because of technical deficiencies compared to them.

In two years time, Alcaraz will reach some of the highest levels the sport has seen. I completely disagree hence, as he's a high-ceiling, high-floor talent. This should be clear if you watch enough of his matches.

I don't specifically need Jimmy Arias to back me up, but his assertion of Alcaraz having a higher peak than any version of Djoker (I disagree) wouldn't hurt my prediction of Carlos reaching some of the game's greatest peaks in some time.

Additionally as a Fed fan it pains me to say this, but Fed was a nobody (even in that joke of an era that was the early 00s) compared to Alcaraz at twenty in every measure. If Fed can "fix" things, Carlos will too.

'Alcaraz at his best is better than anyone, even Djokovic can’t get to that level'

More than a fortnight after that incredible win in London, former world No 5 Jimmy Arias has made a bombastic remark comparing Alcaraz with Djokovic and rest of the players on tour, saying that the Spaniard, at his best, can outlast everyone, including the 23-time Grand Slam winner.

www.tbsnews.net

 

[TheNachoMan]

Nostalgia merchants can’t look at the facts

 

[FeroBango]

Nostalgia merchants can’t look at the facts

Baggy and Thomas Johannson would mop the floor with Alcaraz hehe

 

[TheNachoMan]

Baggy and Thompson would mop the floor with Alcaraz hehe

How would Alcaraz deal with Tommy Robredo and Mikhail Youzhny?

 

[FeroBango]

How would Alcaraz deal with Tommy Robredo and Mikhail Youzhny?

I can't see Carlos qualifying for main draws tbh. Anyone who doesn't agree with me obviously doesn't know Tennis.

Edit: tiny*

 

[Azure]

This is just saber rattling. There is nothing vastly superior in Federer at Wimbledon vs Nole. He has 8 slams and Nole has 7.

You are seriously comparing a 23-24 year old Federer to a 35-36 year old Djokovic and saying they are the same?

 

[nolefam_2024]

You are seriously comparing a 23-24 year old Federer to a 35-36 year old Djokovic and saying they are the same?

Pretty much at Wimbledon.

 

[Azure]

Pretty much at Wimbledon.

Actually not at all. However I cannot prove it to you so you are welcome to have your wrong opinions as much as I have a right to have my correct opinion

 

[nolefam_2024]

Actually not at all. However I cannot prove it to you so you are welcome to have your wrong opinions as much as I have a right to have my correct opinion

No. Just because you can't prove anything doesn't mean you can create excuses.

But to your point the hypothetical matchups on UTS gives Nadal 2006 slight edge over Djokovic 2023 in Wimbledon final. But also gives Nadal no edge vs Alcaraz in Wimbledon final.

Djokovic does not need to be greater in 2023 than Federer in 2006 for Rafa and Raz to be equal. Because Raz won his final and Nadal lost his.

Everything post Wimbledon is open. Nadal was losing to out of top 10s for almost 9 months. But still won 20 slams more.

 

[Azure]

No. Just because you can't prove anything doesn't mean you can create excuses.

But to your point the hypothetical matchups on UTS gives Nadal 2006 slight edge over Djokovic 2023 in Wimbledon final. But also gives Nadal no edge vs Alcaraz in Wimbledon final.

Djokovic does not need to be greater in 2023 than Federer in 2006 for Rafa and Raz to be equal. Because Raz won his final and Nadal lost his.

Everything post Wimbledon is open. Nadal was losing to out of top 10s for almost 9 months. But still won 20 slams more.

I am not talking about Nadal vs Alcaraz here. You are conflating things. If you genuinely think a 36 year old Djokovic on grass is better than a 24 year old Federer, I cannot help you.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I am not talking about Nadal vs Alcaraz here. You are conflating things. If you genuinely think a 36 year old Djokovic on grass is better than a 24 year old Federer, I cannot help you.

You are diverting the readers from the thread. Nadal failed everywhere lost Wimbledon. 9 monthsm and he is still world number 2. Nothing is different right now with Alcaraz. In fact Raz hasn't lost so badly.

 

[Azure]

You are diverting the readers from the thread. Nadal failed everywhere lost Wimbledon. 9 monthsm and he is still world number 2. Nothing is different right now with Alcaraz. In fact Raz hasn't lost so badly.

I just quoted your post. Here let me put it out here:

This is just saber rattling. There is nothing vastly superior in Federer at Wimbledon vs Nole. He has 8 slams and Nole has 7.

 

[mike danny]

It was pretty much all clay, Alcaraz has big titles on all surfaces already. 2 different Slams on 2 different surfaces. Higher ranking. I mean it's debatable, I would give the nod to Alcaraz for variety overall.

Nadal didn't win Wimb because of Federer.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I just quoted your post. Here let me put it out here:

Ofcourse Nole is in same ballpark like Roger at his peak. Even today.

 

[Azure]

Ofcourse Nole is in same ballpark like Roger at his peak. Even today.

no the comparison was between a 24 year old Federer in wimbledon vs a 36 year old Djokovic in Wimbledon. As far as their overall records go, they are definitely in the same ballpark but if you compare specifically at these ages, I don't see any comparison.

 

[Razer]

no the comparison was between a 24 year old Federer in wimbledon vs a 36 year old Djokovic in Wimbledon. As far as their overall records go, they are definitely in the same ballpark but if you compare specifically at these ages, I don't see any comparison.

That is what he is saying, 24 yr old Fed and 36 yr old Nole are in same ballpark. as per Nachiket

 

[Azure]

That is what he is saying, 24 yr old Fed and 36 yr old Nole are in same ballpark. as per Nachiket

That is why this statement -

you are welcome to have your wrong opinions as much as I have a right to have my correct opinion

 

[RoddickAce]

Rafa was ridiculed back then, just in a different way. He was called a variety of derogatory terms that pigeon-holed him as a clay specialist. So his losses outside of clay are excused just as his achievements are downplayed (to this day) "because they were on clay". You also had people predicting his retirement by age 25 due to his physical game.

Unfortunately for Alcaraz, he is commonly touted as a successor to the big 3. This is what gives him the fame/hype which also comes with expectations. 20 yr old Rafa did not have a "big 3" to compare to. Young Rafa's main "role" was to stop Fed from winning everything and he served his role quite well.

 

[Third Serve]

2006 Fed probably straight-sets Alcaraz at Wimbledon.

 

[mike danny]

if if ifffff

Alcaraz was stopped by Djokovic too, would be sitting on 3 different Slams on 3 different surfaces right now which would be borderline insane. 1 AO away from completing the career Slam at barely 20.

Yeah, 36 year old Djokovic.

 

[InsideOut900]

Additionally as a Fed fan it pains me to say this, but Fed was a nobody (even in that joke of an era that was the early 00s) compared to Alcaraz at twenty in every measure. If Fed can "fix" things, Carlos will too.

Carlos is already as jacked, fast and fit as he will ever be.

Realistically he has no margin to go up the same way Novak went from 2007 to 2011 or Nadal from 2005 to 2008 or Fed from 2001 to 2004.

For Nadal, most of his improvements were on serve and consistency, he was already very capable on all surfaces by 2005-2006, just not consistent and also very poor in BO5 on HCs. Carlos definitely looks more of the same material, will get better on serve and perhaps half a notch from the baseline like say 2008-2010 Murray compared to 2012-2013 Murray and also potentially fitter and more consistent in BO5, but I don't see where the "new level" lies to honestly.

 

[FeroBango]

Carlos is already as jacked, fast and fit as he will ever be.

Realistically he has no margin to go up the same way Novak went from 2007 to 2011 or Nadal from 2005 to 2008 or Fed from 2001 to 2004.

For Nadal, most of his improvements were on serve and consistency, he was already very capable on all surfaces by 2005-2006, just not consistent and also very poor in BO5 on HCs. Carlos definitely looks more of the same material, will get better on serve and perhaps half a notch from the baseline like say 2008-2010 Murray compared to 2012-2013 Murray and also potentially fitter and more consistent in BO5, but I don't see where the "new level" lies to honestly.

He's jacked, yeah, and is like Rafa in precociousness. Rafa at 22-24 for all his capabilities, was a lot more professional at getting things done. Alcaraz has a similar curve ahead of him from what I've seen of him.

He's very capable of playing percentage Tennis (did that better than Novak himself in the W finals). But he prefers to be extravagant and this I believe will be toned down moving forward. It's an experience thing.

I hope for an injury-free off-season as he had in 2021. This would mean a slightly better serve and baseline consistency (which is still elite make no mistake).

As he's already won 2 of the last 4 slams he's played in, an Alcaraz who becomes more consistent in BO5 is the player I predict to reach some of the greatest peaks the game would have seen when he does.

 

[tennis_pro]

Nadal didn't win Wimb because of Federer.

Alcaraz didnt win the FO because of Djokovic. We have to judge based of what we got.

 

[Aestheticsaboveallelse]

Twenty all around

 

[The Blond Blur]

The fact that even some Fed fans are comparing 36 year old Joker to 25 year old Fed to excuse some of Tiny Carl’s losses is a real head scratcher tbh.