Was Tsitsipas the biggest disappointment at the French Open consdering his draw?

[BladeDaywalker]

So, at this year's French Open, Tsitsipas's draw if he had won each match would have been:

1R: Musetti
2R: Kolář
3R: Ymer
4R: Rune
QF: Ruud
SF: Cilic
F: Nadal

He had made it to the Final last year and blew a two Set lead against Novak.

The consensus when the draw came out was that Tsitsipas's had a great opporunity to make it back to the Final since all of the top ranked players were grouped together in the Top Half.

It feel like Tsitsipas squandered a legitimate opportunity to make a deep run.

 

[BVSlam]

Not at all. I was pleasantly surprised!

 

[mike danny]

I'd say he definitely was considering his draw.

Not like it would've mattered anyway as Nadal would have torn him apart.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Alcaraz would have that distinction. Before the tournament, you had people like Courier and Wilander saying he was co-favorite with Nadal. Nobody seriously thought Tsitsipas had a prayer at the title, even with his cushy draw.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I never had much faith in him to win a slam, so there was no disappointment.

Now I am absolutely 100% certain he will never win a slam, so he can never underachieve.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I'd say he definitely was considering his draw.

Not like it would've mattered anyway as Nadal would have torn him apart.

According to some users here, Citybus would have been better off with another defeat in a slam final than losing early.

I believe he's better off losing R4 than F.

Coz another loss at a slam final, and same slam, and just a year later, would have completely crushed him. The fact that it's Rafa would not have been a comfort at all.

 

[UnforcedTerror]

Alcaraz would have to have that distinction. Before the tournament, you had people like Courier and Wilander saying he was co-favorite with Nadal. Nobody seriously thought Tsitsipas had a prayer at the title, even with his cushy draw.

Alcaraz made the QF and only lost to Zed who dominated the Bull in the semis. I think I can agree with OP, Tsitsipas should have done better.

 

[Slicehand]

Alcaraz would have to have that distinction. Before the tournament, you had people like Courier and Wilander saying he was co-favorite with Nadal. Nobody seriously thought Tsitsipas had a prayer at the title, even with his cushy draw.

Tsisipas was getting consistent results but his game was nothin spectacular, he wasnt playing great at all, just winning matches in the ugly way, the moment he had a challenge like djokovic or alcaraz he had nothing to do, i always tought anyone could take him out of the tournament, that was the feeling, alcaraz was in great form and everything was posible, at the end he lacked a bit of experience and zverev was at a great level

 

[Deleted member 791948]

I've already seen Nadal play Tsitsipas many times, so I had no problem with Tsitsipas being eliminated. But I was disappointed that Cilic fell short of the Final, his unforced errors are wildly entertaining

 

[Sport]

A priori, Alcaraz was the biggest disappointment. Notwithstanding, if we ponder the situation a posteriori, our analysis must change. After witnessing how Zverev played quite well (it was about time), it becomes clear Stefanos was probably the biggest disappointment. Think about it, Alcaraz lost to a well-playing and surprisingly clutch Zverev. Tsitsipas lost to Rune... who then lost to Casper (yes, Casper, the one everyone mocks).

 

[mike danny]

Alcaraz made the QF and only lost to Zed who dominated the Bull in the semis. I think I can agree with OP, Tsitsipas should have done better.

Considering the fact that Z pulled off his old tricks against Nadal, that makes the Alcaraz loss look even worse.

 

[mike danny]

A priori, Alcaraz was the biggest dissapointment. Notwithstanding, if we podner the situation a posteriori, things change. After witnessing how Zverev played quite well (it was about time), it becomes clear Stefanos was probably the biggest dissapointment. Think about it, Alcaraz lost to a well-playing and surprisingly clutch Zverev. Tsitsipas lost to Rune... who then lost to Casper (yes, Casper, the one everyone mocks).

I don't think Zverev did anything out of the ordinary against Nadal. He pulled his usual tricks with wasting leads against the big boys. A more mature Alcaraz would have beaten him.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Alcaraz made the QF and only lost to Zed who dominated the Bull in the semis. I think I can agree with OP, Tsitsipas should have done better.

 

[Aabye5]

Alcaraz would have to have that distinction. Before the tournament, you had people like Courier and Wilander saying he was co-favorite with Nadal. Nobody seriously thought Tsitsipas had a prayer at the title, even with his cushy draw.

Don't blame the kid. He is only 19.

 

[Aabye5]

A priori, Alcaraz was the biggest disappointment. Notwithstanding, if we ponder the situation a posteriori, our analysis must change. After witnessing how Zverev played quite well (it was about time), it becomes clear Stefanos was probably the biggest disappointment. Think about it, Alcaraz lost to a well-playing and surprisingly clutch Zverev. Tsitsipas lost to Rune... who then lost to Casper (yes, Casper, the one everyone mocks).

And rightly so.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Don't blame the kid. He is only 19.

So was RAFA when he won the 1st of his now 14 RGs

 

[mike danny]

Don't blame the kid. He is only 19.

The hype suggested otherwise.

 

[Aabye5]

Yes, Tsitsipas was the biggest disappointment.

 

[Aabye5]

So was RAFA when he won the 1st of his now 14 RGs

He is not Rafa. That doesn't mean he won't win a good number of Slams.

 

[Aabye5]

The hype suggested otherwise.

See? The hype is the problem...

 

[mike danny]

See? The hype is the problem...

Indeed.

On a serious note, I'll consider 2022 a disappointing season for him if he doesn't even reach a major SF.

 

[The Blond Blur]

He is not Rafa. That doesn't mean he won't win a good number of Slams.

Yet that didn’t stop a good number of people from saying that he is better than 2005 RAFA was and even the bookies gave him a better shot at winning this year.

Now I agree that he’ll win many schlems and be #1 at some point. But hopefully after becoming Zedrot’s 1st top 10 win it’ll end these hyperbolic comparisons with him and the guy who currently has the schlem record.

 

[Aabye5]

Yet that didn’t stop a good number of people from saying that he is better than 2005 RAFA was and even the bookies gave him a better shot at winning this year.

Now I agree that he’ll win many schlems and be #1 at some point. But hopefully after becoming Zedrot’s 1st top 10 win it’ll end these hyperbolic comparisons with him and the guy who currently has the schlem record.

Well, I've never been aboard the Alcaraz hype train, just saying the disappointment has everything to do with unrealistic expectations.

 

[mike danny]

Yet that didn’t stop a good number of people from saying that he is better than 2005 RAFA was and even the bookies gave him a better shot at winning this year.

Now I agree that he’ll win many schlems and be #1 at some point. But hopefully after becoming Zedrot’s 1st top 10 win it’ll end these hyperbolic comparisons with him and the guy who currently has the schlem record.

Yeah, the talks of Alcaraz being more complete than Youngdal were annoying

 

[duaneeo]

I think Alcaraz is the biggest disappointment. If he had beaten the player who had never beaten a top-10 in BO5 (and who he had smoked in the Madrid final), he would've faced a very beatable Nadal in the semi, and a very smokeable Ruud in the final.

 

[Aabye5]

I think Alcaraz is the biggest disappointment. If he had beaten the player who had never beaten a top-10 in BO5 (and who he had smoked in the Madrid final), he would've faced a very beatable Nadal in the semi, and a very smokeable Ruud in the final.

Your expectations were too high to begin with. Bo5 is a different story.

 

[duaneeo]

Your expectations were too high to begin with. Bo5 is a different story.

No they weren't, as Alcaraz was a match away facing Nadal. And, BO5 has only been a different story for players born in the 90s.

 

[The Fedfather]

Yet that didn’t stop a good number of people from saying that he is better than 2005 RAFA was and even the bookies gave him a better shot at winning this year.

Now I agree that he’ll win many schlems and be #1 at some point. But hopefully after becoming Zedrot’s 1st top 10 win it’ll end these hyperbolic comparisons with him and the guy who currently has the schlem record.

Doesn't Carlos still have 11 months of being 19 years old while a half of 2022 season is still ahead with two Slams to be played? Rafa was incredible on clay, Carlos might pull off something special on other surfaces. He was playing great tennis leading up to the French.

 

[Aabye5]

No they weren't, as Alcaraz was a match away facing Nadal. And, BO5 has only been a different story for players born in the 90s.

Yes, they were. The kid was a match away. That's a great run for a 19 year old.

 

[Rosstour]

Tsits or Shapo. Idiotic

 

[I Am Finnish]

Yes definitely

 

[T23]

Alcaraz made the QF and only lost to Zed who dominated the Bull in the semis. I think I can agree with OP, Tsitsipas should have done better.

Definition of ‘dominance’ can be so different to biased users … it’s downright funny, so losing first set and on his way to losing first point in second set tiebreak is ‘dominance’ to someone, also losing huge number of second serve points on own serve is called dominance now. Lol

 

[tennisjedi]

Yes, Tsitsipas f'ed up big time. He would've definitely given Rafa a more competitive final.

 

[Dominic & Andrey]

Absolutely. You sh*t the bed Stefanos