I had to laugh out loud with Patrick Mouratoglou comments on social media today,
"My feeling is that Alcaraz is bored.I feel like playing Masters 1000s, he won so many he's not that interested"
That is rather annoying, in the distinct way that Mouratoglou can be annoying. But let's consider the possibility that it is true; if so, it should worry us. Probably the biggest thing that determines reaching different levels of greatness is motivation - and maintaining it through thick and thin, ups and down - and especially when the endless pounding of the body (and soul) starts wearing you down. It is why Mats Wilander was essentially done at 24, Borg at 25. Borg was probably as talented as the Big Three, but where he burnt out at a young age, the Big Three could never get enough of winning. All three of them, in different ways, carried on into their late 30s. McEnroe was also of GOAT talent, but his decline is a different story, and I don't worry about Alcaraz following his path. It had more to do with off-court distractions and inability/unwillingness to evolve with the game.
This is not to say that there isn't a time when a player might want to start focusing on Slams and de-emphasize the rest of the tour - even Masters. But it isn't at 22 years old. If that's the case, then Carlos is going to be another Borg, not another Rafa or Roger. No shame in that, but it is a sizable difference that has more to do with longevity than talent, and longevity requires that deep desire to keep going (and not get bored). He has the talent to join the latter (and again, so did Borg and McEnroe).
If he remains pretty healthy and continues to stoke the fire...but the fire is important, and part of what got the Big Three through their various ailments and/or set-backs.
I mean, if you look at their careers through 28 years old, there isn't as much separating Pete Sampras from the Big Three as there is looking at their entire careers. The difference is that whereas Pete saw the writing on the wall---and winded down over a few years then called it quits when he both won one more and also probably realized he wasn't going to return to the top and/or didn't want to put the work in or was burnt out--the Big Three all remade/revived themselves multiple times. I mean, imagine being Rafa in late 2016. You came back from serious injury in 2015, but as a lesser, if healthier, version of yourself. You've had your second down year in a row and just turned 30. Mere mortals would call it quits (and maybe, if Rafa had another such year in 2017, he would have). But he found a way to revive himself, evolve his game, and ended up being #1 again and winning another 8 Slams. Roger and Novak have their own versions - and all of them have multiple such periods of transition and revival.
My point being, it remains to be seen how Carlos will handle his first big set-back, and then his second and third - be it injury, the wear and tear of aging, mental burn out, being surpassed by younger players, etc.
All that said, to some extent I think Mouratoglou is talking out of his ass, at least partially so. I mean, maybe Carlos is a bit bored at non-Slam events, and one could argue that his happy-go-lucky attitude isn't conducive to long-term cutthroat-ness. But he's also young enough that elements of his game are still evolving - including his mentality. I just hope that he can find the balance between maintaining his lovely happy-go-lucky nature, while becoming more laser-focused on court, with fewer lapses in interest/focus/what-have-you. If he wants to take it up another level, he's going to need to harness his focus. If he does, we're going to see some crazy years and a GOAT caliber career. If not, we'll probably get more of the same for a few years, then a gradual wind-down and retirement in his early 30s. No shame in that, but while in the former scenario he could challenge the Big Three, in the latter he's going to be cozying up with Borg and Sampras...hardly bad company, when all is said and done, but not in the GOAT conversation.
I do think it unlikely that he plays as long as the Big Three, because of his general mentality. But I don't think he has to, to at least approach their level. But he needs to tighten up his mental game just a bit, and as I said, harness is focus and desire. There is something about him that makes me think he doesn't care about winning as much as the Big Three did, that he is a tad less competitive. On a human level, this is quite appealing and, along with his amazing skills, what I like most about him. He really looks like he's having fun, that he's
playing more than he's
sporting. It is a breath of fresh air, really: he seems to play for love of playing before love of winning. He can run on that for probably several more years, but at some point--usually in the late 20s, maybe 30ish if you're lucky--the body starts wearing down, and you have to work harder and harder--and be more and more focused--to maintain your competitive edge.
So really, I don't think we'll have a sense of whether he's another Borg, another Sampras, or if he is a challenger of the Big Three. I think we'll have a better sense in a few years. But before last year, I think there was still a question if he might be more of a Becker - early to bloom, but never really got much better. His level rose substantially last year. Next up is Borg/Wilander- can he maintain focus and interest? And then there's Sampras: When the wear and tear starts, and he slips from the very top, can he remake and/or revive himself?
