ElDude, you know I understand you appreciate Alcaraz but this statement in particular caught my attention:
You are technically right, but I dunno , he’s a 22 year old who’s won 7 slams already & has made 4 straight Slam finals, winning 3 of them. He’s accomplished more at the ripe old age of 22 ( youngest winning all 4 slams, youngest to win the channel double, youngest atp # 1 ye in the open era, winning 500 atp finals on grass, clay, outdoor HC & indoor HC, etc, etc, etc). that to preface him with “hasn’t yet shown” is amusing to me considering he’s accomplished more overall by the age of 22 than any other male player, bar none in the entire history of the ATP open era.
Djokovic, Nadal, Fereder, McEnroes, Connor, and yes, even Borg pale in comparison with what Alcaraz has done by age 22.
Thus my humrous retort…
That’s all.
Well if we stick with me being technically right and then add in that I recognize everything you say, we're basically in agreement. I can see how any kind of hesitation to limit the upside of Carlos, given what he's shown, could be seen as off-putting. And understand that right now, I'd rank him ahead of everyone but the Big Three, Sampras, Mac, Lendl, and Borg in an Open Era only greatness list. Unless aliens attack, he's going to put guys like Connors, Agassi, Becker, etc far in the rear view over the next few seasons. And really he just needs three or four healthy years to surpass everyone but the Big Three.
So we've got a guy who, by the time he turns 28, will probably have the resume to be the fourth best player of the Open Era. Not bad. Not bad at all.
But...as I think you know, that isn't what I was putting into question. I wasn't talking about career accomplishments, but
specific seasons - and whether Carlos will ever put together a season not only better than 2025, but as good as the 5-10 best years of the Open Era. His best year so far is already about as good as the best years of Pete Sampras (1994, 1997) which I see as in the top 25ish seasons, but not the top 10. So my question is whether he can take what he did last year (top 20-25) and fill in the gaps to make it a top 10 season.
What separates Sampras' best years from the top 10 season? Well, basically Pete's weakness on clay. A player doesn't even need three Slams to reach the top 10; that helps, but really he needs to not have a major weak area, or prolonged dip in peak level. Pete's weakness on clay is pretty much what separates his peak from, say, Rafa's peak. Rafa, at his best, was great on every surface. Now Rafa's three best years are better than Pete's best, and his two best (2010, 2013) are both top 10 (but not top 5).
To have a top 10 season, basically a few things need to start with the following:
- Win at least two Slams and be in at least three finals. Check.
- Win at least thee other big titles. Check.
That's basically the baseline for a top 25 season. With only on or two exceptions, every top 25 season--by my accounting--fulfills those two criteria. But to get to a top 10 season, a player needs some of the following: win a third Slam, more big titles, a bunch of minor titles, go deep in more big tournaments, etc.
So really, to turn 2025 into a top 10 season, Carlos would need to add a third Slam and/or a couple more big titles. Both seem quite possible. And really, if he had won Wimbledon last year, his top 20-25 ranking would be in the top 15, at least. Winning Wimbledon
and a fourth big title, would have probably got him into the top 10. Meaning, he's very close already and I don't see why in the next few years--possibly this year--he can't break into the top 10.
Even if he doesn't, he's still going to have an amazing career, with a good chance of surpassing all but the Big Three - and maybe higher. If he has five more seasons like 2025, and adds five more in the 2022-24 range, he's going to be in the conversation with the Big Three.