Roddick calls Carlos "the most complete 19 year old tennis player I've ever seen"
- Thread starter BeatlesFan
- Start date
Clearly A-Rod is using the word "Complete" to mean how complete his game is, not his titles/resume.
Never has been a teenager have this many shots at his disposal basically mastered.
-Forehand
-Backhand
-Drop shot
-Lob
-Volleys
-Transition---and importantly, first player in history to play defence to offence in 2 balls. Never happened before on a consistent basis.
Edit: I'll add that his serve is pretty solid on clay as well. Technically quite sound. Wayyyy ahead of a teenage Nadal in that department
Doesn't mean he is "better" than a teenage Nadal on clay (he's not). But he has way more options than any other teenager in history.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
What do you mean by that? Like combining a deep loopy shot to extract a weaker reply followed by pouncing on it with an aggressive shot? That's nothing new, I've not noticed him doing that with some outstanding frequency... got the stats?
Alcaraz x Tsitsipas: Barcelona Final Analysis
Tsitsipas' backhand—north/south play—drop shots
hughclarke.substack.com
No. I mean going from playing a defensive sliding backhand, and then recognizing that you've hit it well and rushing the net.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
That's one ball? I get what you mean now, just could've picked a clearer naming. Yeah Karl knows when to come in, usually. Great to see versatile play after the ineptitude of sadgens.Alcaraz x Tsitsipas: Barcelona Final Analysis
Tsitsipas' backhand—north/south play—drop shots
No. I mean going from playing a defensive sliding backhand, and then recognizing that you've hit it well and rushing the net.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
It was regressing for many years, but Carlos has brought it back from the dead.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
I guess its all about era's and whos in front of you. Teenage Nadal couldve achieved even more than he did, if not for peak Federer playing. Carlos doesnt really have someone like that around, and with Djokovic only able to play a limited schedule, its been wide open for him.
I dont think he becomes world number 1 or YE#1 if either Novak or Rafa played a full season last year.
But it cant be taken away from him, either way.
Indigo
Professional
It's great to see that tennis again has a super player in form of Alcaraz. I wish him lot of success. Hopefully his game will push other young players to be better so we again have competition from the best years of Big 3 and of course lets not forget all great players before Big 3. Tennis as a sport has future and it always had it.
Angrybirdstar
Semi-Pro
i'd add that his return is already great and there's a lot of return stats i could point to but his ace rate against % is the most interesting imo, he generally camps the baseline but manages to wall about as well as prime Murray (though still has some way to go to reach Monfils level)
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Fed did keep the no 1 away from Rafa, but aside from W 06-07 (where Rafa had just turned 20/21), he didn't deny him a lot of big titles
Hitman
Bionic Poster
But we can make all kinds of hypotheticals, all day long. Remember what Nadal said? If doesn't exist....
It does not change what actually is. None of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have been able to do what Alcaraz has done. He is the youngest world number one and youngest year ending number one in history. That is fact at the end of the day.
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
In terms of the tools he has at his disposal, and how he has developed various facets of his game, that may be true. Alcaraz playing top level tennis is certainly incredible to watch
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
In terms of talent yea I don’t think he’s much better if at all than Sinner or Rune. He just keeps his head together better. Less choking as of now. He’s not necessarily a better talent. In fact I think sinner has way more upside than alcaraz just due to his length and power
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Tiny Carl has more variety (better volleyer uses drop shot more etc.), but Teendal was more accomplished. We can see that by the number of titles won and “big titles” won.
Also, I realize Rawduck is talking about players he has seen, but I’d peg guys like Borg and Becker as being more complete as well.
Also, I realize Rawduck is talking about players he has seen, but I’d peg guys like Borg and Becker as being more complete as well.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Rawduck will always crack me up
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
I agree, it's sad so many get their knickers in a twist over thinking Roddick was dissing Rafa. The thread was supposed to be about Carlos, but like most threads, it degenerates into Djoker/Nadal arguments.
I think it's obvious 19 year old Rafa was the superior player (physically and mentally) over Carlos. But he was *not* as complete of a player, that's all Roddick was claiming.
Carlos clearly is the better all court player right now than 19 year old Rafa. Carlos has the superior serve, superior volleys (and eagerness to move forward), better drop shot. He has more tools in his arsenal than baby Rafa, it doesn't suggest or indicate he is the better player. Also remember that 19 year old Rafa was nowhere near the player he was in 2010 when he was 24. The 2010 version of Nadal destroys current Carlos on any surface.
I mean at this point Alcaraz has shown a better talent than Sinner or Rune with huge differnece. The funny thing is your hatred towards Alc makes you blind and you don't appreciate his talent.
Every time Carlos wins you said it's because of a weak field.., because he use a lot of drop shots (lol), because his rival didn't serve well..... Anything but recognize his talent and how well he played.
I'm sure when Sinner wins a Slam / Master you will be praising his talents everyday. But not with Carlo... xD 0 Objectivy
Doesn't surprise me coming from a Djokovic fan... But your comments about Carlos are pathetic and ridiculous, What did that boy do to you to hate him that hard ???
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Is there much difference in big titles won at similar stages of their careers?
If I calculated correctly the equivalent point in time for Nadal would be right after the 2006 MC tourney. At that time Nadal had 1 slam win and 5 masters. If Charlie reaches and wins the final on Sunday he will have 1 slam and 4 masters. Not that big a difference. 2006 Nadal of course won his second slam but Carlos still has time to do that this year.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Technically, after Madrid Carlos will be at 1 slam and 4 masters, true, but Nadal will be at 1 slam and 6 masters. Back then Rome was played in Madrid's current slot so it was the second masters event on clay until the change in 2010.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
That’s not right because Rome was the 2nd CC MS1000 played until it was switched with Madrid in 2010. The tally for both guys at the same age currently stands as:
05 RAFA: 1 schlem (RG), 4 MS1000s (MC, Rome, Toronto, Madrid).
06 RAFA up until this point in the CC season: 2 MS 1000s (MC, Rome). For a grand total of: 1 schlem, 6 MS1000s.
2022 Tiny Carl: 1 schlem (2-1 Open), 2 MS1000s (Miami, Madrid).
2023 Tiny Carl so far: 1* MS1000 (IW, *could be 2 should he win Madrid). For a grand total of 1 schlem, 3 (possibly 4) MS1000s.
Just looking at the numbers RAFA’s 05 campaign alone is moar successful than Tiny Carl’s 2022-present 2023 haul.
Topspin_80
Hall of Fame
He's got every shot, FH, BH, Serve, Volley, Serve & volley, Lob, Passing shot, Half-volley.
His arsenal is ridiculous.
And on top of that, every single shot of his is a weapon.
Remains to be seen how he can handle extreme pressure, but so far not bad at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
The comment I was addressing claimed Nadal was more accomplished at the same point in their careers. I don't think a couple more masters is that big a difference (particularly given that Carlos reached YE1). But YMMV and all that.
Those who want the fast grass back, would soon complaining about boring severe and volley, no rallies tennis.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Just addressing the the correct title count for RAFA at the same stage. I mean it’s like I said, his 05 campaign is still better than Tiny Carl’s 2022-present 2023 campaign(s). Tiny is going to have to win another schlem and 2 more MS1000s just to equal the big title count. That and RAFA is ahead in the overall title count as a teenager 16-9.
Tiny Carl was YE#1 sure, but 2022 is by far a weaker year than 05. Flip the scenarios and 05 RAFA finishes YE#1, whereas 2022 Tiny Carl is all but guaranteed to go schlemless. Now I do think he has a more “complete” all around game. But the things that RAFA was better at outweighs Tiny’s advantages and I think the title disparity beats that out.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I'm not arguing that Alcaraz is better than 05 Nadal. But I don't think there is much difference in their accomplishments at a similar age. Personally I would say that Carlos reaching number 1 (and YE1) is at least equal to Nadal's greater tourney wins.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Alcaraz is 20 now. He did not reach Nadal's heights as a teenage tennis player. Nadal won 16 tournaments as a teenager, having only won 1 tournament at age 18 and 8 months. Show me the 2005 and 2006 Italian Open final equivalents? On Nadal's 20th birthday, he beat Mathieu 5-7, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4 in 4 hours and 53 minutes to win his 56th match in a row on clay.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
happy b day tiny, but ndal outplayed you unfortunately
Mustard
Bionic Poster
2005 Nadal won the Canadian Open and Madrid Indoor, was runner-up of Miami, and had a 36 match winning streak on clay by the year end, a year which was cut short by a foot injury. The 2005 Madrid Indoor final was Nadal beating Ljubicic 3-6, 2-6, 6-3, 6-4, 7-6 in the final, yet another epic.
I sometimes wonder if people here watched 2005. Nadal and Federer both won 4 masters that year. Nadal was 79-10 for the year, which was cut short for him. Federer was 81-4 for the year. Both Nadal and Federer won 11 tournaments each in 2005.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
It sure triggered some.
ghostofMecir
Legend
It is, but there were pretty much once in a lifetime circumstances involved, i.e., Covid restrictions and no points at Wimbledon. Additionally, Rafito (in 2005, 2006, and 2007) would have been number one in any other time, but he was up against peak Fedr gobbling up points
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
USOpen , IW, Miami, youngest ever Miami open winner at 18. Nadal was having nothing at 18. Carlito won a slam , and another hard court masters again in year 19. Second youngest ever IW champion, second youngest US Open winner. Do you realize how good this is.
If you think Alcaraz had weak competition, look at Nadal's draw at Rogers Cup. He had AS WEAK DRAWS AS Alcaraz. And Alcaraz won a slam on HC. Argument over.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Remember that match like it was yesterday.that 0/9 for marcos was very painful...
(and he didn't serve well that day)
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
Miami 2005 was the only time Federer beat teenage Nadal. 05/06 Nadal was unstoppable on clay, but anyone could beat him off of it back then. Federer wasn't holding him back.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
That's why I only compare accomplishments. Once we go down the "who was playing better" route we all have different opinions.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Dispel the myths of Nadal's superiority. I see you have Djokovic photo but you are by fair the fairer poster here, taking sides of retired pros, Nadal, young gens as well as Djokovic.
Nadal fans are thinking he was so strong as teenager and he dominated Federer utterly, and Federer played in weak era. All these things combined is not possible as Nadal won 1 slam out of clay till 2009. Just disprove the myth of teenage nadal. GREATEST on clay , not outside.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
I thought it was obvious when I first read it, but apparently a lot of people simply aren't grasping what he said.
sportsfan1
Legend
We can all be in agreement that it isn't hyperbole once alcaraz beats Djokovic and nadal at slams. Their experience and skill has so far trumped talent and youth. While he does have a pleasing all court game, let's not forget that alcaraz can throw in loose games, has recent losses to rune/sinner and zverev thumped him last rg.
Ps: he's 20 tomorrow, as Medvedev said in a recent interview.
Ps: he's 20 tomorrow, as Medvedev said in a recent interview.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Zverev at RG was a beast. He might have won RG last year. That was not a bad loss.
Federev
G.O.A.T.
That’s a high class response from a Novak fan. Par for the course for you, Hitman.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal at age 18 won the Davis Cup with Spain in 2004, beating Roddick in the final against the USA. You mention a major, well Nadal won a major too, 2005 French Open at age 19 and a few days, won 4 masters events that year also, 2 of them on hardcourt.
Nadal beat Agassi in the 2005 Canadian Open final. Agassi went on to reach the 2005 US Open final. Nadal on his 20th birthday won his 56th match in a row on clay and had won 16 tournaments already. Do you realize how good this is?
Last edited:
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal was good enough in 2005 to win the Canadian Open and Madrid Indoor, 2 hardcourt masters events. He never got a shot at the Paris Indoor or the YEC because of the foot injury. This was all on top of winning 8 events on clay in 2005, which included the French Open (beat Federer in the semi final), Monte Carlo, Rome, Stuttgart Outdoor, and also won on hardcourt in Beijing as well. All of this at age 18-19. Into 2006, while still 19, beat Federer in the 2006 Dubai final, beat Federer again in the finals of Monte Carlo and Rome.
And then there's legendary matches already like the 2005 Rome final (beat Coria 6-4, 3-6, 6-3, 4-6, 7-6), 2005 Madrid Indoor final (beat Ljubicic 3-6, 2-6, 6-3, 6-4, 7-6), 2006 Rome final (beat Federer 6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 2-6, 7-6, from 1-4 down in fifth set, 2 CPs down at 5-6 and trailing 3-5 in fifth set tiebreak)
Last edited:
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
No I don't. The draws at both Madrid and Rogers cup were as weak as draws at USO IW and Miami. Maybe even worse.
Nadal is amazing and greatest on clay and that counts towards completeness for sure. Alcaraz is very very good and his day to day game at 19 outside clay is much better than Nadal at 19.
He won 2 at 19 and then nothing again at 20. Admit it. He got two easy draws at Rogers cup and Madrid. That was the only indoors title he ever won in his career.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm not sure what your point is. I'm not arguing against the quality of 2005 Nadal. I'm just saying he wouldn't have accomplished any more in a tour without Federer. When he was already beating Fed practically every time they met, how would removing Federer from the equation improve his success? He wouldn't suddenly win Wimbledon or the US Open in 2005 if Federer wasn't there.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Ljubicic in late 2005 is not a weak draw. The results are there for all to see, and I remember watching tennis in 2005. Nadal won 11 tournaments in 2005 and was 79-10 for the year, at age 18-19, including a clay winning streak of 36 by the end of 2005, and was 55 (breaking Vilas' record of 53) by the end of his days as a teenager.
This absurd logic of the market people who try to make the present always better than the past is ridiculous.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Maybe not, but Federer did beat Nadal in the 2005 Miami final. Nadal was achieving a phenomenal amount while still a teenager. The only odd losses in this whole period once he surged up the rankings were on grass (to Waske and Muller at Halle and Wimbledon), to Berdych in Cincinnati after having multiple match points, and to Blake at the US Open. The rest of his days as a teenager, he came back from the foot injury to beat Federer in the finals of Dubai, Monte Carlo and Rome.
At the end of his time as a teenager, Nadal had won 16 tournaments, which included 1 French Open, 2 Monte Carlos, 2 Italian Opens, 1 Canadian Open, 1 Madrid Indoor, and had also won 1 Davis Cup. I mentioned the 79-10 win-loss record for 2005, and the clay court winning streak that stood at 55 wins in a row (an all-time record that eventually reached 81) at the end of his days as a teenager.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
What constitute as weak draw for you? Alcaraz humiliated Medvedev who is actual good hard court player with all the big titles except AO and IW on hard courts. He has been number 1 in the world. Made many slam finals. How do you compare that to Ljubicic?
Similar threads
