Nitto ATP Finals 2025, Turin, Italy

[MargaretMcAleer]

Not to be a bummer, but Alcaraz blew some chances. Terrible TB in the 1st set, and lost his early break in the 2nd set. Anyway, it keeps the rivalry interesting.

Well that's why Jannik is soo mentally tough to beat on an indoor hc he buckles down and ups his play
This was his 3rd straight indoor hc tournament
You are being a Bummer Okay! Geez!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Well, Alcaraz is YE #1 but like the first time, he's gotten help. In 2022 it was Novak being banned from the AO and not getting Wimbledon points, and Rafa getting hurt. In 2025 it is Sinner's ban. Not saying it wasn't an impressive year--by my accounting it is around the 20th best of the Open Era, or thereabouts, but it would be nice to see him win it entirely on his own power.

Fun fact about Sinner's season: It is his second year in a row above 90% win percentage. It is only the 26th such season in the Open Era. Number of seasons with 90 W%:

5 Lendl
4 Connors, Borg, Federer
2 Nadal, Djokovic, Sinner
1 Vilas, McEnroe, Murray

Note absence of a bunch of ATGs: Laver, Agassi, Sampras, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, and Alcaraz. Alcaraz was really close, and assuming he has another couple seasons at least this good, he'll get there.

Fun fact: Rafa's two seasons with 90% aren't 2008 or 2010. They're 2013 and 2019. I still think that the best version of Rafa was 2013. He missed the AO and it was the Year of Darcis, but his overall level--especially through the US Open--was the highest of his career, imo.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

The improvement from Jannik after his loss at the USO has been his serve which has really helped him in the indoor hc season today was his 3rd straight indoor win and of course the biggest

 

[Moxie]

Btw you being a Bummer okay!

Sorry to rain on your parade. I do think that Carlos squandered more than a few opportunities. So, shoot me.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Sorry to rain on your parade. I do think that Carlos squandered more than a few opportunities. So, shoot me.

Jesus why didnt he convert those chances, what about giving credit to Jannik for starters, he is soo tough on a indoor hc court
This was Janniks second ATP final with out being defeated
Give some credit to Jannik and stop being a sore loser.
I always try to give credit to players even ones I dont like
Your not going to rain on my parade BTW

 

[Moxie]

Well, Alcaraz is YE #1 but like the first time, he's gotten help. In 2022 it was Novak being banned from the AO and not getting Wimbledon points, and Rafa getting hurt. In 2025 it is Sinner's ban. Not saying it wasn't an impressive year--by my accounting it is around the 20th best of the Open Era, or thereabouts, but it would be nice to see him win it entirely on his own power.

Fun fact about Sinner's season: It is his second year in a row above 90% win percentage. It is only the 26th such season in the Open Era. Number of seasons with 90 W%:

5 Lendl
4 Connors, Borg, Federer
2 Nadal, Djokovic, Sinner
1 Vilas, McEnroe, Murray

Note absence of a bunch of ATGs: Laver, Agassi, Sampras, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, and Alcaraz. Alcaraz was really close, and assuming he has another couple seasons at least this good, he'll get there.

Fun fact: Rafa's two seasons with 90% aren't 2008 or 2010. They're 2013 and 2019. I still think that the best version of Rafa was 2013. He missed the AO and it was the Year of Darcis, but his overall level--especially through the US Open--was the highest of his career, imo.

Are you giving both of these YE#1's an asterisk?

 

[Moxie]

Jesus why didnt he convert those chances, what about giving credit to Jannik for starters, he is soo tough on a indoor hc court
This was Janniks second ATP final with out being defeated
Give some credit to Jannik and stop being a sore loser.
I always try to give credit to players even ones I dont like
Your not going to rain on my parade BTW

Just saying that there is commentary. Jannik was his usual solid self. Did you watch the match? Am I wrong to say what I did? Don't be a sore winner.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Just saying that there is commentary. Jannik was his usual solid self. Did you watch the match? Am I wrong to say what I did? Don't be a sore winner.

Of course I watched the match

FACT Carlos played a bad TB for starters, he broke Jannik early in the 2nd set and was broken back
if Carlos cannot go on with the opportunities he had in the match, That is on Him, noone else
Sore Winner, get over yourself, you a bad loser, and give credit to the winner, if you can!
I was quietly confident Jannick would win, lets fact it Carlos and his indoor record isnt a great one? though he has the game to improve on indoors.
Jannik has won 3 indoor hc tournaments in a row, so I think he is better than Carlos on an indoor HC.

 

[Moxie]

Of course I watched the match

FACT Carlos played a bad TB for starters, he broke Jannik early in the 2nd set and was broken back
if Carlos cannot go on with the opportunities he had in the match, That is on Him, noone else
Sore Winner, get over yourself, you a bad loser
I was quietly confident Jannick would win, lets fact it Carlos and his indoor record isnt a great one? though he has the game to improve on indoors.

All I said was that Carlos had chances and blew them, which you confirmed above. It's not heresy to say so.

I knew that Yannik was favored today, by surface. I'm not shocked. But we can talk about the match, right?

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

All I said was that Carlos had chances and blew them, which you confirmed above. It's not heresy to say so.

Whatever Moxie, Sinner won the match because in the Big Moments and Points he was the better player.if you cant give the winner some credit, thats on you and your not going to rain on my parade.
I am proud of what Jannik has achieved today winning his 2nd ATP final back to back without dropping a set is just Champions stuff
BTW when Carlos beat Jannik at the USO I came on and congratulated him, he was the better player and deserved his win
I am trying to put together the DC finals on the other page

 

[Moxie]

Whatever Moxie, Sinner won the match because in the Big Moments and Points he was the better player.if you cant give the winner some credit, thats on you and your not going to rain on my parade.
I am proud of what Jannik has achieved today winning his 2nd ATP final back to back without dropping a set is just Champions stuff
BTW when Carlos beat Jannik at the USO I came on and congratulated him, he was the better player and deserved his win
I am trying to put together the DC finals on the other page

I absolutely give Sinner the credit for what he did today, and in the YEC all week. I also like him and root for him, in case you're forgotten. It's not out of order to discuss the match.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I absolutely give Sinner the credit for what he did today, and in the YEC all week. I also like him and root for him, in case you're forgotten. It's not out of order to discuss the match.

I thought we had discussed the match, Sinner deserved his win, his was the better player in the big points and big moments in the match, his improved serve which he has tweaked since the USO has helped him win 3 straight indoor hard court tournaments
Alcaraz has improved on indoor hard courts and has the game to do so going forward

 

[El Dude]

Are you giving both of these YE#1's an asterisk?

No, not at all, or at least not 2025. 2022? Sure - that is pretty asterisk-worthy.

But the good thing about YE #1 is that it doesn't lie. Or, at least, the winner always had a really good year and was inarguably among the best players on tour.

I haven't done the math, but I'm guessing 90% or so of #1s are pretty uncontroversial. Of the remaining 10%, it is a spectrum of a "bit to very" questionable. 2025 is only a bit, while 2022 is very.

Plus, there's the matter of why Alcaraz earned #1 this year. He played 4 more tournaments than Jannik, two of which were Masters and two were ATP 500s...that's 3000 possible points, and the gap was only 550. Meaning, just one extra Masters final (or a Masters SF and 500 final, etc) and Jannik would have been #1.

But whether that is irking or not depends upon how one views Jannik's ban. If one thinks it was deserved or too short, this isn't an issue. If not, then it puts the ranking into a question, at least a little bit.

Actually, the difference between the two is similar to Roger and Rafa in 2017. Rafa finished 1040 points ahead but played 6 more events, including a Slam and four more Masters. Roger could have played half of those and probably been #1 rather easily. But in that case, it was Roger's choice: he skipped clay season entirely, as well as Paris, though was hurt for Cincy, if I remember correctly. Meaning, it is a similar dynamic in terms of quantity winning out over quality, but Jannik was due to being banned, Roger by choice (mostly). Even as a Roger fan, I don't mind Rafa being #1 in 2017 because he earned it the hard way: by showing up and playing enough really good tennis to earn the points.

2022 was quite a bit worse, imo. Alcaraz was 2000 points ahead of Novak, who lost all 2000 Wimbledon points because of the ATP throwing a fit about Wimbledon allowing Russians and Belarusians--as if the players have anything to do with the Ukraine war. So dumb. To add to that, Novak didn't play AO or the USO due to stupid Covid policies. Nadal's injuries are also a factor, but not as egregious. The point being, Alcaraz was the third best player in 2022, yet was YE #1. In 2025, even if Sinner was slightly better "pound for pound," Carlos made up for it by beating him in two Slam finals.

 

[Moxie]

No, not at all, or at least not 2025. 2022? Sure - that is pretty asterisk-worthy.

But the good thing about YE #1 is that it doesn't lie. Or, at least, the winner always had a really good year and was inarguably among the best players on tour.

I haven't done the math, but I'm guessing 90% or so of #1s are pretty uncontroversial. Of the remaining 10%, it is a spectrum of a "bit to very" questionable. 2025 is only a bit, while 2022 is very.

Plus, there's the matter of why Alcaraz earned #1 this year. He played 4 more tournaments than Jannik, two of which were Masters and two were ATP 500s...that's 3000 possible points, and the gap was only 550. Meaning, just one extra Masters final (or a Masters SF and 500 final, etc) and Jannik would have been #1.

But whether that is irking or not depends upon how one views Jannik's ban. If one thinks it was deserved or too short, this isn't an issue. If not, then it puts the ranking into a question, at least a little bit.

You are making rather light of why Jannik didn't play for 3 months, though. Are you suggesting that some people think he shouldn't have been banned at all, and therefore the 3 months off are in question? (See bolded above.) I can't think of anyone that has posited that.

Actually, the difference between the two is similar to Roger and Rafa in 2017. Rafa finished 1040 points ahead but played 6 more events, including a Slam and four more Masters. Roger could have played half of those and probably been #1 rather easily. But in that case, it was Roger's choice: he skipped clay season entirely, as well as Paris, though was hurt for Cincy, if I remember correctly. Meaning, it is a similar dynamic in terms of quantity winning out over quality, but Jannik was due to being banned, Roger by choice (mostly). Even as a Roger fan, I don't mind Rafa being #1 in 2017 because he earned it the hard way: by showing up and playing enough really good tennis to earn the points.

I've never understood the argument for how and why Roger might have been YE#1 in 2017. He simply didn't earn the points. Don't tell me why he decided to skip the clay. And there's no pretending what he might have won, otherwise. To me, that's a ridiculous conversation. It's about the points.

As to the similarity with this year, at least Roger wasn't banned, and chose not to play certain tournaments, or skipped due to injury. I don't know what to say about your "what if" in terms of Sinner and the ban. He was banned. What would everyone else have done if he hadn't been? No one knows. That's a parallel universe.

2022 was quite a bit worse, imo. Alcaraz was 2000 points ahead of Novak, who lost all 2000 Wimbledon points because of the ATP throwing a fit about Wimbledon allowing Russians and Belarusians--as if the players have anything to do with the Ukraine war. So dumb.

Wait, but Novak won Wimbledon in 2022. Didn't he get those 2000 points? 2020 was the Wimbledon that wasn't played.

To add to that, Novak didn't play AO or the USO due to stupid Covid policies. Nadal's injuries are also a factor, but not as egregious. The point being, Alcaraz was the third best player in 2022, yet was YE #1. In 2025, even if Sinner was slightly better "pound for pound," Carlos made up for it by beating him in two Slam finals.

Novak didn't play the AO in 2022 due to refusing to conform to Australian Covid policies, whether you like them or not. And he had his day in court. As to the US Open, he knew what the price of entry was, and he refused to pay. His choice. If you want to give that year an asterisk, go ahead, but Alcaraz has also proven himself, subsequently. And is that year really all about Novak not playing? Then I will refer you to @Kieran's argument about times when Rafa didn't play or defend, due to injury. Isn't it the same? You're just imagining what would have happened if Novak had played, right? Who else would you say gives 2022 an asterisk for Alcaraz?

As for Sinner being "pound for pound" better this year, even if, as you say, slightly, I disagree. Carlos MORE than made up for it by beating him in two Major finals. He also has the H2H, even this year.

I really think you should be cautious about forgiving Sinner his ban. While I'm willing to believe his story, he was not available to play because of drug ban. And there is no telling how the year would have gone if he'd played.

 

[Fiero425]

No, not at all, or at least not 2025. 2022? Sure - that is pretty asterisk-worthy.

But the good thing about YE #1 is that it doesn't lie. Or, at least, the winner always had a really good year and was inarguably among the best players on tour.

I haven't done the math, but I'm guessing 90% or so of #1s are pretty uncontroversial. Of the remaining 10%, it is a spectrum of a "bit to very" questionable. 2025 is only a bit, while 2022 is very.

Plus, there's the matter of why Alcaraz earned #1 this year. He played 4 more tournaments than Jannik, two of which were Masters and two were ATP 500s...that's 3000 possible points, and the gap was only 550. Meaning, just one extra Masters final (or a Masters SF and 500 final, etc) and Jannik would have been #1.

But whether that is irking or not depends upon how one views Jannik's ban. If one thinks it was deserved or too short, this isn't an issue. If not, then it puts the ranking into a question, at least a little bit.

Actually, the difference between the two is similar to Roger and Rafa in 2017. Rafa finished 1040 points ahead but played 6 more events, including a Slam and four more Masters. Roger could have played half of those and probably been #1 rather easily. But in that case, it was Roger's choice: he skipped clay season entirely, as well as Paris, though was hurt for Cincy, if I remember correctly. Meaning, it is a similar dynamic in terms of quantity winning out over quality, but Jannik was due to being banned, Roger by choice (mostly). Even as a Roger fan, I don't mind Rafa being #1 in 2017 because he earned it the hard way: by showing up and playing enough really good tennis to earn the points.

2022 was quite a bit worse, imo. Alcaraz was 2000 points ahead of Novak, who lost all 2000 Wimbledon points because of the ATP throwing a fit about Wimbledon allowing Russians and Belarusians--as if the players have anything to do with the Ukraine war. So dumb. To add to that, Novak didn't play AO or the USO due to stupid Covid policies. Nadal's injuries are also a factor, but not as egregious. The point being, Alcaraz was the third best player in 2022, yet was YE #1. In 2025, even if Sinner was slightly better "pound for pound," Carlos made up for it by beating him in two Slam finals.

I won't get into obvious hypocrisies & double standards, but surprised it isn't brought up that even w/ Sinner's abbr.'d season, he still could have easily finished #1 if he had completed the deal in 1 of 4 other finals he had against Alcaraz! Carlos didn't take YE #1 honors thru some technicality of having more events played than Jannick! He owned the season by winning 4 of 6 finals vs Jannick! All Sinner really had to do was finish off Alcaraz in that FO final w/ 3 MP's! We can do all kinds of speculating w/ hindsight always being 20/20! It makes me think of Roger in those losses to Djokovic in which he had 2 MP's to win! It changed the course of history after all's said & done! Age, # of tournaments won or entered, & any host of other definers of END RESULTS can be argued "Until Kingdom Come!"

 

[kskate2]

Bean served well in the first set. But his numbers dropped significantly in the 2nd set and Chuck did not capitalize. He, better than anyone knows how small the margins are against Bean. High % tennis w/ controlled aggression is needed. There were some questionable shot selections, especially trying to go toe-to-toe from the baseline is a no-no against Red. If you look at the stats, he lost a majority of points over 9+ shots. He seemed a bit unsure of the game plan I know JCF must have given him. He lost his patience and forced the issue on some shots and returned poorly on others. Every time each one loses a real match (not an exho), the other one comes immediately back with some tweaks to take the next one. He'll have to study the tape, continue to incorporate his variety and get ready for Oz.

Jannik deserved his win today. He was the steadier player. First YEC final for Chuck on a surface that isn't his fave. I'm sure he'll learn and make the necessary adjustments.

 

[Moxie]

Bean served well in the first set. But his numbers dropped significantly in the 2nd set and Chuck did not capitalize. He, better than anyone knows how small the margins are against Bean. High % tennis w/ controlled aggression is needed. There were some questionable shot selections, especially trying to go toe-to-toe from the baseline is a no-no against Red. If you look at the stats, he lost a majority of points over 9+ shots. He seemed a bit unsure of the game plan I know JCF must have given him. He lost his patience and forced the issue on some shots and returned poorly on others. Every time each one loses a real match (not an exho), the other one comes immediately back with some tweaks to take the next one. He'll have to study the tape, continue to incorporate his variety and get ready for Oz.

Jannik deserved his win today. He was the steadier player. First YEC final for Chuck on a surface that isn't his fave. I'm sure he'll learn and make the necessary adjustments.

I thought a surprising thing was that Sinner was winning the longer rallies. I know he's the more patient, but Charlie has the more killer shots. On a fast surface, Alcaraz needed to win the long rallies.

 

[Fiero425]

I thought a surprising thing was that Sinner was winning the longer rallies. I know he's the more patient, but Charlie has the more killer shots. On a fast surface, Alcaraz needed to win the long rallies.

It's what I've been talking about for quite a while w/ Carlos! He's more vulnerble to a loss due to bad decision making w/ too many options that he gratuitously tries making all the highlight reels of sports shows! Alcaraz is obviously the most talented player today, but his hold on the top rank isn't as guaranteed as past champs due to something in his head! How does he ever lose to someone like Norrie? After all this time, he's still dropping matches to the guy! Sinner doesn't have these brain farts & locks it down vs other players! It's boring to me how relentless he is in not allowing any "gimmies" running down the best shots spitting them back w/ ease!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I thought a surprising thing was that Sinner was winning the longer rallies. I know he's the more patient, but Charlie has the more killer shots. On a fast surface, Alcaraz needed to win the long rallies.

Hey dont dismiss Jannik and his powerful shots his bhand is world class, and he showed that today, many times with his bhand down the line and he sliding bhand is one of the best in the ATP, I agree with Keli you cannot beat Jannik from the baseline, he produces laser shots off both wings to find the corners, you have to show more variety when playing him, use the slice for example.Carlos has to run around more on his bhand wing, he dosent have the time like on a slower surface, that is something he needs to improve on, on a fast indoor hard court

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I am certain both Carlos and Jannik will make adjustments for the AO in 2026, even little ones can make all the difference, I will have a 'birds eye view of both players as I have tickets for the mens SFs and the mens final, those 2 better be in it, or they will have a very cranky Italian women from Sicily which will give them Grief if they fail to make it