I think you mean YOU on TF. Look, even you posted recently that he's one of the most disliked of top players in a long time. Even Jason Goodall said today, that, without a Major win, he's not getting in the HOF, even with this record. Though one will do him, based on the rest. I don't think most of us deny the record. And you can't make people like a player they don't like. Which is not all about his off-court behavior. A lot of it is about his on-court behavior. But, more than that, it's about game style. Great serve, great BH, tendency to get tentative. Not everyone enjoys that.
BTW, want to retract any of your asterisks on Alcaraz's YE#1's, based on the above?
LOL, classic Moxie, always looking for a fight. Are you now Carlos's champion, now that Rafa's retired? I've said my piece about Alcaraz and his YE 1s (not sure what you mean about "the above"). As I said, I'm fine with this year - he won it fair and square, even if there is a small question due to Sinner's absence. 2022 is a different matter, and dubious for a variety of reasons.
But I take issue with your usage of "asterisks," because that's not really where I'm coming from. I don't want to take anything away from Carlos, who is an amazing player, had an incredible year, and I like a great deal. I just like looking at the deeper numbers and see what they reveal. I'm essentially comparing year-end ranking to how good a player was over the course of a year. The ranking is based on total ATP points, which don't tell the whole picture. The two tend to line up pretty well--as I said, I think 9 out of 10 times the year-end #1 is also the best player in terms of qualitative measurements. And it is certainly better than the old system, which had some doozies (e.g. 1982, when Mac was #1 but Lendl and Connors were both solidly better, imo). I think this year is pretty close because Alcaraz and Sinner basically had a similarly good season. I just think it is noteworthy that it was as close as it was in total points, even with Sinner missing as much time as he did, and Carlos playing 4 more events.
Or you can look at it this way. Here is the percentage of big title ATP points that each player won:
Sinner: Earned 10450 out of 13500 played (77.4%)
Alcaraz: Earned 10120 out of 15500 played (65.3%)
Let's add ATP 250s and 500s back in, for all ATP events they played in 2025:
Sinner: Earned 11500 out of 15000 played (76.7%)
Alcaraz: Earned 12050 out of 18000 played (66.9%)
So again, Alcaraz earned more points, but Jannik won a greater percentage of points in the tournaments he played.That implies that Jannik's overall performance was better "pound for pound." He won a greater percentage (+9.8%) of the points of the tournaments he played in.
As for Zverev, did you listen to the clip? They barely even touched upon his personality - it was all about game and record. I've often defended the view that Zverev is probably the best Slamless player in Open Era history. That has nothing to do with his personality. As I've said, I think Zverev is a bit of a prick, but that doesn't influence how I view him as a player. And as you know, I often tease Fiero, accusing him of saying that anyone who isn't peak Borg or Federer sucks.
In the big picture, Zverev is probably one of the top 30 players of the Open Era. His record is better than any other Slamless player by a good margin, and better than probably something like half the single Slam players and several of the 2-3 Slam players. He's got 24 titles (same as Jannik and Carlos, interestingly enough), which is borderline top 30. He's got 10 big titles, which is 20th most - more than guys like Kuerten, Ashe, Vilas, Hewitt, etc. Whether I like him as a human being or not has nothing to do with the facts on the ground of his actual record - which is really, really good.
