Toni Nadal: Sinner Alcaraz rivals have already whithdrawn.

Racquet_smash said:
Djokovic in 2007 with M1000 wins and a slam final wasn't credible? What?
Click to expand...

He wasn't .... because we did not notice him until he reached the US Open final.

You are forgetting that the masters tourney is only limited to its country's tennis and a small minority of real tennis fans Globally who might watch them. Djokovic did defeat Federer in the Canadian open but that was not telecasted in most countries, or maybe ESPN might have showed it or maybe not, I dont remember. At that time from the guys born after 1985, only Rafael Nadal was known to majority tennis fans for obvious reasons. Other than him, nobody was famous from that age group in early 07, so today whatever we talk of 06/07 with respect to Djoko/Murray is all in hindsight, not based on actual experience. 90% of the tennis fans outside se the 4 Slam host nations are like me, we follow the Slams with great interest but almost nothing outside it. Especially in that era it was like that, even Federer-Nadal Miami match of 2005 made headlines after that was held, certainly at that time we did not watch it live, we were mostly about Slams.

Djokovic really caught the headlines after his Aus Open win, I'll give you that. Murray not until his US open final, you should thank the British media for introducing Big 4 narrative to give coverage to Murray.... it helped. .
 
Uncle T is spot on here, the quality of tier 2 started to decay already in 2013/2014, when the failure of the 90s gen started to show. I hope uncle T doesnt mean Kevin Anderson was a strong USO finalist though. Nadal had some free lunches too, although Sincaraz is really having a party atm.
 
Last edited:
tennis_pro said:
Dude is almost 25 and he's had maybe 1 impressive win in his career (beating Alcaraz at Wimbledon) - he did nothing to Djokovic when Djokovic could still play at a very high level (2023), he's getting schooled by Alcaraz on a consistent basis (dude who is literally his only obstacle in this era) and he specializes in beating absolute nobodies. The current top 10 is a joke, Djokovic is almost 40 and 1/4 the player he used to be, Zverev is a shell of his former self and beat nobody of worth in 2025 and the rest of the tour is laughable to the point where players like Musetti and Aliassime need to be hyped even though anyone with half a brain knows they pose zero threat to Sinner and Alcaraz. Then you got guys like Shelton or de Minaur in the top 10, I think I have covered this enough in the past.

This ain't no propaganda, the tour is a complete farce. The lack of tier 2/3 players is unprecedented. Where's the new Tsonga? Del Po? Wawrinka? Murray? Even somoene like Roddick or Hewitt? Or freaking Berdych even? Someone who has genuine upset capabilities at least once every blue moon. You can pencil in Alcaraz and Sinner in 4 Slam finals next year and the odds of you being correct is very high before the season even started.
Click to expand...
100%
 
Jonas78 said:
Uncle T is spot on here, the quality of tier 2 started to decay already in 2013/2014, when the failure of the 90s gen started to show. I hope uncle T doesnt mean Kevin Anderson was a strong USO finalist though. Nadal had some free lunches too, although Sincaraz is really having a party atm.
Click to expand...

Decline of Tier 2 also meant Decline of Tier 1 after 2013-2014, obviously. The good thing is Sinner and Alcaraz are a great tier 1 and they are slowly resurrecting the level of the field, it will get stronger if younger champions arrive, then Alcaraz-Sinner will be judged on how they tackle them. If they can tackle them and still end up with 20 majors then we can say they are as good as Big 3, otherwise not.
 
Razer said:
Decline of Tier 2 also meant Decline of Tier 1 after 2013-2014, obviously. The good thing is Sinner and Alcaraz are a great tier 1 and they are slowly resurrecting the level of the field, it will get stronger if younger champions arrive, then Alcaraz-Sinner will be judged on how they tackle them. If they can tackle them and still end up with 20 majors then we can say they are as good as Big 3, otherwise not.
Click to expand...
Sure did, except Djokovic until 2016W.

A common mistake i see is comparing Roddick/Hewitt with Medvedev/Tsits.
It doesnt make sense at all, because Roddick/Hewitt were their generations tier 2, while Med/Tsits are their generations tier 1. I dont even know who the tier 2 of the 90s gen is lol.
 
Djokovic feasted slams and statpadded against the 90s bozo generations for years, give me a break
tennis_pro said:
Dude is almost 25 and he's had maybe 1 impressive win in his career (beating Alcaraz at Wimbledon) - he did nothing to Djokovic when Djokovic could still play at a very high level (2023), he's getting schooled by Alcaraz on a consistent basis (dude who is literally his only obstacle in this era) and he specializes in beating absolute nobodies. The current top 10 is a joke, Djokovic is almost 40 and 1/4 the player he used to be, Zverev is a shell of his former self and beat nobody of worth in 2025 and the rest of the tour is laughable to the point where players like Musetti and Aliassime need to be hyped even though anyone with half a brain knows they pose zero threat to Sinner and Alcaraz. Then you got guys like Shelton or de Minaur in the top 10, I think I have covered this enough in the past.

This ain't no propaganda, the tour is a complete farce. The lack of tier 2/3 players is unprecedented. Where's the new Tsonga? Del Po? Wawrinka? Murray? Even somoene like Roddick or Hewitt? Or freaking Berdych even? Someone who has genuine upset capabilities at least once every blue moon. You can pencil in Alcaraz and Sinner in 4 Slam finals next year and the odds of you being correct is very high before the season even started.
Click to expand...
 
Jonas78 said:
Uncle T is spot on here, the quality of tier 2 started to decay already in 2013/2014, when the failure of the 90s gen started to show. I hope uncle T doesnt mean Kevin Anderson was a strong USO finalist though. Nadal had some free lunches too, although Sincaraz is really having a party atm.
Click to expand...
Yeah and thats the only reason the big 3 have so many slams, that 90s was historic in how bad they are against ATG
 
Fabrivitx said:
Yeah and thats the only reason the big 3 have so many slams, that 90s was historic in how bad they are against ATG
Click to expand...
Problem with 90s gen is that they didnt really have a tier 1. Their best players were tier 2 players, one could also argue rather weak tier 2 players, compared to Stan, Murray, Safin, Delpo, Hewitt, Roddick.
 
Last edited:
Jonas78 said:
Problem with 90s gen is that they didnt really have a tier 1. Their best players were tier 2 players, one could also argue rather weak tier 2 players, compared to Stan, Murray, Safin, Delpo, Hewitt, Roddick.
Click to expand...
Ruud ****sipas legacy
 
Jonas78 said:
Sure did, except Djokovic until 2016W.

A common mistake i see is comparing Roddick/Hewitt with Medvedev/Tsits.
It doesnt make sense at all, because Roddick/Hewitt were their generations tier 2, while Med/Tsits are their generations tier 1. I dont even know who the tier 2 of the 90s gen is lol.
Click to expand...

Tier 2 of 1990s gen is Nicholas King Kyrgios
 
Jonas78 said:
And the tier 1 players? Thiem, Med, Zverev? You throw Tsits in there?
Click to expand...

Kyrgios was more talented than Medvedev/Tsistipas types clowns, too bad that his work ethic and focus is very poor. He lacks those abilities, and fitness too, he should have been a better athelete

A Fit + Motivated + Focussed Kyrgios should have been the Grass ATG which 1990s gen never had, he should have ensured Big 3 not winning wimbledon after 2016, he could have.
 
Razer said:
Kyrgios was more talented than Medvedev/Tsistipas types clowns, too bad that his work ethic and focus is very poor. He lacks those abilities, and fitness too, he should have been a better athelete

A Fit + Motivated + Focussed Kyrgios should have been the Grass ATG which 1990s gen never had, he should have ensured Big 3 not winning wimbledon after 2016, he could have.
Click to expand...
https://imgur.com/a/Ke7E6dL
 
Fabrivitx said:
Alcaraz is already here, and we havent seen yet hes peak.
Nadal physical peak prime lasted short.
Click to expand...

Alcaraz is inferior to Nadal, footspeed is lower and he does not have as much topspin as Nadal.

Nadal was 1 of the kind, the All Time Greatest Athlete of Tennis.
 
Razer said:
Murray's win at Cinci was a farce, Fed had tanked the match.

How many times do we have to say this? Mary Carillo herself blamed Fed for tanking the match for the US Open.

In 2006 Djokovic and Murray were nothing, they were not people known to most tennis fans. Even in 2007 they weren't that noticeable, they grew prominent from 2008 onwards.
Click to expand...
Djokovic was already a big deal in 2007. The problem is that Federer and Nadal were so far ahead that it was difficult to talk about anything/anyone else, because they were eating 95%+ of the cake. Not the same with Alcaraz-Sinner, because we need new blood so bad. There's literally nobody stopping an Alcaraz-Sinner final anywhere if they're playing at their C+/B- level at least. I agree tho - 2008 AO was huge for Djokovic, that really put him in the conversation with Fed and Nadal as equals and the second Fed lost there were several articles asking if his domination was over.

Funny enough I was actually in Scotland during 2006 Wimbledon and I remember Murray's win over Roddick making headline after headline for my entire 2 week stay. I remember the Fed-Nadal final replays being shown a million times on TV too.
 
Last edited:
Razer said:
Murray's win at Cinci was a farce, Fed had tanked the match.

How many times do we have to say this? Mary Carillo herself blamed Fed for tanking the match for the US Open.

In 2006 Djokovic and Murray were nothing, they were not people known to most tennis fans. Even in 2007 they weren't that noticeable, they grew prominent from 2008 onwards.
Click to expand...
7934df85fe27c6008f9adab85b78291e.jpg
 
MeatTornado said:
These are things we say in hindsight. When a lower ranked player beats Carlos today we just call him a fraud for losing to a weak era bum. Draper beat him and won Indian Wells, but no one talks about him as a rival willing to stand up to them. But if Jack does take the next step to bigger success in 2026+ then we'll all pretend like the signs were obviously there.
Click to expand...
The biggest difference is that Murray/Djokovic were 19/20 in 2006/2007 and already making inroads. Draper is 24, so this is basically his prime.

That's why there's so much hype on Fonseca, he's already ranked high (top 25) and he's barely 19 (plus he's fun to watch too). Mensik and Tien get some hype too, cause they're also in the top 30 but slightly older. The difference between ages 20 and 24 is huge imo.
 
Alcaraz and Sinner are only 22/24 years old, so it's too early to write off their equally-young contemporaries. There was nothing about 2009/2010 Djokovic that suggested 2011 Djokovic would win 3 slams and start beating Nadal in finals.

But perhaps Alcaraz/Sinner are simply the elites of their generation and breaking thru their stronghold will remain a nearly impossible task. That doesn't necessarily mean their rivals have withdrawn.
 
langley said:
7934df85fe27c6008f9adab85b78291e.jpg
Click to expand...

Roddick won that tournament though, if Fed wanted he would have won Cinci by playing till the final and taking it but it would have affected his US Open as he was already playing back to back matches for many days before it without gap. That was the idea behind it. Murray's win is worthless, he did not win the title.

CARILLO: ROGER TANKED MATCH

Mary Carillo, CBS’ tennis commentator, said that the world’s No. 1 player, Roger Federer, was not trying to win his match last week against young Brit Andy Murray in an ATP event in Cin…
nypost.com nypost.com
 
tennis_pro said:
Djokovic was already a big deal in 2007. The problem is that Federer and Nadal were so far ahead that it was difficult to talk about anything/anyone else, because they were eating 95%+ of the cake. Not the same with Alcaraz-Sinner, because we need new blood so bad. There's literally nobody stopping an Alcaraz-Sinner final anywhere if they're playing at their C+/B- level at least. I agree tho - 2008 AO was huge for Djokovic, that really put him in the conversation with Fed and Nadal as equals and the second Fed lost there were several articles asking if his domination was over.

Funny enough I was actually in Scotland during 2006 Wimbledon and I remember Murray's win over Roddick making headline after headline for my entire 2 week stay. I remember the Fed-Nadal final replays being shown a million times on TV too.
Click to expand...

You are from the UK, I live in Asia. Since UK, USA are slam playing nations, Tennis makes the news ...I mean it is imperative for you guys to follow the masters but we in Asian continent don't follow anything outside the slams.

Yes Federer and Nadal were all over the TV here too, tennis is not popular in my country and so it was not possible to know of Djokovic/Murray in 2006/07, but yes in UK/Scotland you might have heard of them as rising youngsters.
 
Razer said:
You are from the UK, I live in Asia. Since UK, USA are slam playing nations, Tennis makes the news ...I mean it is imperative for you guys to follow the masters but we in Asian continent don't follow anything outside the slams.

Yes Federer and Nadal were all over the TV here too, tennis is not popular in my country and so it was not possible to know of Djokovic/Murray in 2006/07, but yes in UK/Scotland you might have heard of them as rising youngsters.
Click to expand...
I'm not from the UK, but I still find it funny how literally every country in the world with very few exceptions is just so hungry for success (UK is the leading example of that) that they wouldn't even care if someone won a Slam through 7 walkovers. Personally I genuinely enjoyed watching tennis even when we had nobody in the top 100 even on either the men's or women's side (we've had some superstars since, but it never changed my view).

I don't think there are any specifically tennis oriented countries anymore btw (like f.e. Australia 50-60 years ago), it's more of a "we got a superstar now, so let's build our tennis infrastructure around that" kind of thing. I've been to Zurich several times and they have such nice tennis courts, I'm guessing it was all build around Fed (and Hingis to a degree). Wonder if tennis is as big as it's ever been in Italy right now thanks to Sinner, probably is.

Of course the hype is at its highest when it comes out of nowhere. Wawrinka was an insane player at his peak, but already with Fed around I doubt his success helped build the tennis infrastructure even more in Switzerland. If he was from Japan f.e. he'd probably be 10x bigger than Nishikori was in Asia back in the day making insane deals.

Anyway, 2007-2008 were such fun times. So many new players emerged people low key forget Nadal was 21-22 at the time himself lol. Djokovic established himself firmly in the top 3 by early 2008, Tsonga played out of his mind at the AO and became a fun top tenner for years. Murray and Del Potro kind of joined the scene at the same time (post Wimbledon), suddenly a 27-year old Fed or 26-year old Roddick started to look like oldies. Wonder if we'll see something like that ever again, 2007-2009 there was so much going on in the sport.
 
Last edited:
langley said:
tbf, Sinner only started consistently winning after Djoker lost a step. And after the puke/clostebol incident…
Click to expand...

Nobody goes from winning 3 majors in a year to losing 0-7 just like that. And mind you, without Sinner, Novak was winning 2 majors. So, nothing wrong with Djokovic. Just that Sinner is a different beast altogether the likes of which Djokovic did not face since the days of Federer, Nadal and Stan.
 
Fabrivitx said:
Toni Nadal: "Alcaraz and Sinner have slightly weaker opponents than the Big Three."
"On the current tour, it seems like the direct rivals have withdrawn," emphasized Nadal's former coach and mentor.

"I remember perfectly that in Rafael's era, in addition to Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer, there were other great players like Andy Murray, Juan Martin del Potro, David Ferrer, and Stan Wawrinka, to name a few. These players were always there. On the current tour, it seems like the direct rivals have withdrawn." "There is no believe they can beat them"
"Alcaraz biggest weapon are hes legs and speed, hes the best athlete on tour"

Source: Ubitennis.
Click to expand...
Read closer and this is a very subtle dig at Djokovic lol. Classless comment though whichever way one looks at it.
 
ND-13 said:
Nobody goes from winning 3 majors in a year to losing 0-7 just like that. And mind you, without Sinner, Novak was winning 2 majors. So, nothing wrong with Djokovic. Just that Sinner is a different beast altogether the likes of which Djokovic did not face since the days of Federer, Nadal and Stan.
Click to expand...
I think we will have to disagree, unfortunately. Djokovic in most’s eyes has certainly lost a step.
 
Razer said:
You are from the UK, I live in Asia. Since UK, USA are slam playing nations, Tennis makes the news ...I mean it is imperative for you guys to follow the masters but we in Asian continent don't follow anything outside the slams.

Yes Federer and Nadal were all over the TV here too, tennis is not popular in my country and so it was not possible to know of Djokovic/Murray in 2006/07, but yes in UK/Scotland you might have heard of them as rising youngsters.
Click to expand...
who won the match
 
lurker2025 said:
I am a Ruud fan but De Minaur is easily better in terms of raw ability than Ruud who has been ranked as high as no 2 in the world. Granted Ruud is a bit of an unusual case where ranking does not fully reflect a player's ability but still.
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that in a world where strength and hitting bombs was less of a focus in tennis, DeMinaur would be an ATG.
 
4UTRMoutet said:
I have a feeling that in a world where strength and hitting bombs was less of a focus in tennis, DeMinaur would be an ATG.
Click to expand...
WITHOUT winning any major title your feel De minaur has shown any sign of being an ATG.
MANY still feel Fedrer was better player than Nadal and Novak when results says otherwise.
 
4UTRMoutet said:
I have a feeling that in a world where strength and hitting bombs was less of a focus in tennis, DeMinaur would be an ATG.
Click to expand...
I mean ifs and buts are ifs and buts. But It is impressive how he has gotten a lot out of his talent. I do believe Ruud is arguably more naturally talented, after all he reached the top ten earlier than De Minaur but he has not developed his game as much despite his results being better on paper so far. De Minaur is surely more skillful and/or has a better career than many players who are more talented.
 
They haven’t withdrawn, that’s completely incorrect. They’re just simply unable to keep up with their incredible play and it will only grow.
 
messiahrobins said:
Read closer and this is a very subtle dig at Djokovic lol. Classless comment though whichever way one looks at it.
Click to expand...
It certainly is, still, he isnt wrong. Rafa also got some 90s gen slams though, not as many as Nole ofc. Sincaraz might end of the biggest profiteers of the 90s gen, but they have to share the meal. Funny some were talking about Med, Zed, Tsits becoming the new Big3 back in the days. Its good we have Sincaraz, they shut down any debate if the 90s boys were a weak crop or not.
 
Razer said:
Nadal was a genetic freak.

It will take a few more decades until someone like Nadal is born.
Click to expand...
Athleticism runs in his family. His uncle, a pro footballer, was nicknamed the ‘Beast of Barcelona’ because of his athletic physique.
The uncle at the age of 53 (6 years ago):
valencia-cf-legends-v-spain-legends.jpg
 
I think #20-100 are better now but #1-10 were better then.

Big3 > Sincaraz even only for the simple fact that 3 > 2
Murray, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic, Tsonga, Ferrer, Berdych, Raonic, Nishikori > current top10s
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Alcaraz leads Sinner on HC 5-2
2
Replies
71
Views
3K
roysid
roysid
P
Is Alcaraz disproportionately benefiting from coaching?
2 3
Replies
112
Views
8K
FeroBango
F
Aabye5
Alcaraz more majors, Sinner more weeks at #1?
2
Replies
71
Views
4K
Winner Sinner
Winner Sinner
Hitman
Zverev is clearly better than Djokovic and would have beat him in the AO final - Toni Nadal
2
Replies
94
Views
1K
Vincent-C
Vincent-C
B
Alcaraz Rune Sinner won’t have name popularity
2 3
Replies
146
Views
9K
mental midget
M
Back
Top