[Poll] The reason why Alcaraz is ahead 3-0 this season with monster Sinner 2024?

[Winner Sinner]

The more I watch Sinner play in this 2024, the more I wonder why in one of the most dominant single seasons ever, where with all the rest of the circuit that is not called Alcaraz he rides a record of 69-3, with the Spaniard he was unable to impose his superiority.
Here we are at the level of Federer 2006 with Nadal, only that in that case obviously the main reason came from the surface, that is, even in the best season of Federer's career, the strongest player on clay was not him but Nadal and by a wide margin, this translated into a 90-1 record with all the rest of the circuit but a 2-4 with Nadal.

In this specific case, however, Sinner is 0-3 against Alcaraz in his best season when previously he was ahead 4-3 in h2h without there really being a very comfortable surface between the 2 in the matchup, in fact paradoxically Alcaraz leads the overall h2h on hard 5-2, while Sinner leads on natural surfaces 2-1.

We all know the immense talent of Alcaraz, but as demonstrated this season he is not consistent and can fall even in the face of much weaker opponents, or as demonstrated both with Zverev and Djokovic he can lose even when the challenge requires maximum application.

For Sinner it cannot be a matchup problem otherwise it is not clear how he was ahead in the head to head before this season when Alcaraz was a superior player to him.
Then I know very well that they were all very balanced matches, but the 0-3 remains.

 

[dking68]

Sinner definitely wasn't peaking in Beijing or IW

He was clearly injured/sick at IW after that dominant first set
He had the WADA re-appeal mentally in his head in Beijing

2025 should play an important chapter in their Rivalry.

 

[MeatTornado]

He had the WADA re-appeal mentally in his head in Beijing

Poor kid. Would hate for his breaking the rules to have any sort of negative effect on him.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Voted for Alcaraz at his best is simply stronger. Which is genuinely what I believe.

Sinner is more consistent as we’ve clearly seen this year. But when it comes to it, Alcaraz’s best is better than Sinner’s best. The Beijing final showed it. French Open showed it.

No excuses like oh he was tired oh he had a doping ban looming oh he had fake tonsillitis as some might suggest. Alcaraz’s peak is better than Sinner’s peak.

But and the good news for Sinner fans is, he can still walk away with more titles/slams/weeks at #1 if Alcaraz doesn’t work on the inconsistency.

 

[zakopinjo]

Lack of fuel at the end of a high-intensity match and mental unpreparedness for uncertain endings.

It seems to me that the only uncertain match this year he won in the semifinals of Cincinnati against Zverev, he lost all the others.

 

[Winner Sinner]

Voted for Alcaraz at his best is simply stronger. Which is genuinely what I believe.

Sinner is more consistent as we’ve clearly seen this year. But when it comes to it, Alcaraz’s best is better than Sinner’s best. The Beijing final showed it. French Open showed it.

No excuses like oh he was tired oh he had a doping ban looming oh he had fake tonsillitis as some might suggest. Alcaraz’s peak is better than Sinner’s peak.

But and the good news for Sinner fans is, he can still walk away with more titles/slams/weeks at #1 if Alcaraz doesn’t work on the inconsistency.

Respectable opinion, however I would not talk about excuses or anything else related to having to live with the burden of positivity, it is reality, then since you can't measure his anguish in those moments I would move on, but let's not pretend that playing while having to manage that type of situation is not something that can negatively affect you.
Instead, at least in the Roland Garros challenge, for me his preparation for the slam had an impact, where due to a hip problem he was unable to take care of the athletic part.

In general, for me perhaps only in Indian Wells did the two challenge each other at their best even if on a surface (slow hard) that exalts the Spaniard more.
At Roland Garros neither of the 2 was at 100% even if Sinner was even worse than Alcaraz (who at least was able to cure the athletic part).
In Beijing, as seen in the rounds prior to the challenge, Alcaraz was on fire while Sinner had already creaked against Jarry and Safiullin.

I simply say that I would have liked to see them also in the moments of maximum inspiration of the Italian, like in Melbourne, Miami, New York, or try to imagine tomorrow Alcaraz challenging the Sinner who we saw today sweep away Ruud. Maybe everything postponed to Malaga, it would be nice but since in the eventuality they can only challenge each other in the final, it will not be easy at all, even more so considering that fate does not depend only on them.

 

[Winner Sinner]

Lack of fuel at the end of a high-intensity match and mental unpreparedness for uncertain endings.

It seems to me that the only uncertain match this year he won in the semifinals of Cincinnati against Zverev, he lost all the others.

Well, among the uncertain matches we can also include the Australian Open final with Medvedev, and I would also include Berrettini's at Wimbledon, which lasted "only" 4 sets but all the ones he won he had to sweat for in the tiebreak. He also won in Halle in a photo finish with Struff. Then I would add the victory with Rune in Monte Carlo.

 

[GRASScaraz]

Because Sinner is a choker

 

[Sport]

Voted for Alcaraz at his best is simply stronger. Which is genuinely what I believe.

Sinner is more consistent as we’ve clearly seen this year. But when it comes to it, Alcaraz’s best is better than Sinner’s best. The Beijing final showed it. French Open showed it.

No excuses like oh he was tired oh he had a doping ban looming oh he had fake tonsillitis as some might suggest. Alcaraz’s peak is better than Sinner’s peak.

But and the good news for Sinner fans is, he can still walk away with more titles/slams/weeks at #1 if Alcaraz doesn’t work on the inconsistency.

I tend to agree with you here.

Sinner = regularity.
Alcaraz = peak.

HOWEVER, the gap in regularity is substantially larger than the one regarding peak level. Sinner is a monster in terms of regularity, rarely does he loses befoer the SF of a big tournament, and this season he has won almost everything outside RG, W and the Olympics. Alcaraz constantly loses to lesser players in Masters 1000. I'd still favor Raz when it comes to peaking in Slam matches, but the difference is not particularly big. In fact, most of their matches are super close and Alcaraz needs to suffer a lot to beat the Italian (in their last match, which was an exhibition but highly intense as they both fought to get those 6 million dollars, Sinner won).

To sum it up, because the gap in regularity is more significant than the peak gap, I'd Sinner is, as of today, a superior tennis player than Alcaraz. Alcaraz is so young and can mature and improve his regularity. If he doesn't, Sinner has a chance to overcome his Slam tally.

 

[Winner Sinner]

Some scattered considerations;

1) In the Riyadh match mentioned by others, obviously not being an official match it is not counted in the statistics, but if we analyze it in the same way as the other 3 seasonal challenges it was indisputably the match where the greatest superiority of one over the other was seen.
I had actually counted the basic statistics by reviewing the match on YouTube.
Although I do not remember the precise data, I am going from memory, Alcaraz got 2 break points both converted, while Sinner got something like 13 or 14 converting 5.
While on the total score the differential in favor of Sinner was +18 (like 102-84), that is, greater than the differential that Alcaraz had adding all 3 of his victories (+14).

2) In the Indian Wells match I read that someone said that Sinner after dominating the first set had problems that affected the next 2. That's not the case, Sinner had a wrist problem right after the point that gave Alcaraz the break advantage in the third set, a problem caused by the fall while trying to save the point.
But the match had already completely turned in favor of Alcaraz. If anything, Sinner that day has to complain about the not very cynical approach he had at the beginning of the second set where with a totally confused Alcaraz he could have definitely killed the match in his favor.

3) Many continue to say that Sinner will have to prove that he is competitive even off hard surfaces. In this regard, I wonder, like on clay, what he has to prove that he hasn't already proven to be considered a serious contender. Let's also try to ignore his condition during the RG between the psychological situation due to the case of the positivity and the non-ideal approach due to the hip.
However, he took Alcaraz, the future winner of the tournament and not just any one, to the fifth set after being ahead 2-1 in a match that was tight and uncertain until the end.
Instead of his prospects on clay in terms of being a serious contender, he is spoken of with the uncertainty of someone who seems to have clearly lost to the Spaniard in 3 sets that day. Instead, on grass, it is a surface too suited to his characteristics not to be tamed by him.
Then, it is clearly obvious that today, hard is his ideal surface, but that on natural surfaces he still does not guarantee competitiveness is a historical falsehood.

 

[JMR]

My choice was not listed: "The actual record for purposes of player comparisons is 3-1; 3-0 is the record for ATP rankings and head-to-head stats."

 

[Aabye5]

The more I watch Sinner play in this 2024, the more I wonder why in one of the most dominant single seasons ever, where with all the rest of the circuit that is not called Alcaraz he rides a record of 69-3, with the Spaniard he was unable to impose his superiority.
Here we are at the level of Federer 2006 with Nadal, only that in that case obviously the main reason came from the surface, that is, even in the best season of Federer's career, the strongest player on clay was not him but Nadal and by a wide margin, this translated into a 90-1 record with all the rest of the circuit but a 2-4 with Nadal.

In this specific case, however, Sinner is 0-3 against Alcaraz in his best season when previously he was ahead 4-3 in h2h without there really being a very comfortable surface between the 2 in the matchup, in fact paradoxically Alcaraz leads the overall h2h on hard 5-2, while Sinner leads on natural surfaces 2-1.

We all know the immense talent of Alcaraz, but as demonstrated this season he is not consistent and can fall even in the face of much weaker opponents, or as demonstrated both with Zverev and Djokovic he can lose even when the challenge requires maximum application.

For Sinner it cannot be a matchup problem otherwise it is not clear how he was ahead in the head to head before this season when Alcaraz was a superior player to him.
Then I know very well that they were all very balanced matches, but the 0-3 remains.

There is a matchup problem, but it is fairly slight. Even the matches Sinner has lost this year have been fairly close.

 

[Aabye5]

My choice was not listed: "The actual record for purposes of player comparisons is 3-1; 3-0 is the record for ATP rankings and head-to-head stats."

Money covers a multitude of sins, but it can't change h2h.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

My choice was not listed: "The actual record for purposes of player comparisons is 3-1; 3-0 is the record for ATP rankings and head-to-head stats."

Blood money exhibition matches don't count in H2H's.

 

[JMR]

Money covers a multitude of sins, but it can't change h2h.

Money is obviously irrelevant. If you want to ignore data, fine. You can grapple with the poll as it is. Enjoy the blinders. But if the objective is to undertake an honest, thorough analysis of the Alcaraz-Sinner matchup -- who has the upper hand, and why, and what are the various strengths and weaknesses of each player -- then the Six Kings Slam should be included. I saw the final, and it was a real, hard-fought tennis match. It wasn't two guys knocking a ball around on a yacht to raise money for some charity. Who cares whether the tournament in which the match took place was ATP-sanctioned or not, if the goal is simply to understand how the two players stack up, not to argue about ATP points or rankings?

However, if the rationale here is more like, "We are only interested in ATP matches because ATP matches are the only ones in which we're interested," then carry on, of course.

 

[Cheese&IPA]

I would like to see them play a slam match on a hardcourt next season , that would tell us a lot more .