On 11/06/2025 1:48 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 6/10/25 8:05 AM, Whisper wrote:
A bit harsh. I can't fault Sinner at all, he did nothing wrong. The
way he fought his way back into 5th set despite limping and missed
opportunities is just incredible. This match will be talked about
forever, but you can't have 2 winners in tennis no matter how high the
quality.
The thing is: right now, comparing the two, I don't see how Sinner can
beat Alcaraz based simply on elements of their respective games. Alcaraz would have to "help" Sinner. Contrary-wise, Alcaraz needs no help from Sinner; Alcaraz can beat Sinner's "A" game.
I agree Alcaraz's A game beats Sinner and everybody 99% of the time, but
he can't/won't play anywhere near his A game all the time. I think
we'll see his best game at Wimbledon and FO every year for the
foreseeable future, and he'll be working his way up for the other 2
slams. Aside from the slams we'll prob only see it at a couple other
big 1000 tune-ups. Sinner on the other hand will be seeking his own
level of perfection every time he steps out, like Federer and Novak
before him.
Now Alcaraz seems to have a sort of quirky relationship with tennis. He
can beat 95% of the players consistently without even going 100% on half
of the points, maybe more. In that sense, *no one* now can beat him
unless he "helps" them by simply losing concentration or feeling boredom
and lack of motivation.
Carlos needs to be inspired to consistently play the most optimum shots.
He likes to play up to the crowd and put on a show, that won't change.
His approach is pretty smart as it improves his odds of lasting 10
more years at the top. If he took Sinner's approach he'd burn out in a
couple years.
And I agree with those who say that Alcaraz seems to only really care
about the majors. It seems like he has a limited ability to motivate
himself to the highest levels of his game, and so you get these oddball defeats in matches that don't really matter much.
Very much like Sampras. Fans just have to accept players are different
and approach the game in a way that works best for them. There is no 1
right way to win a lot of slams.
In this regard he is the anti-Connors, who wanted to win all the time,
every single point.
Sinner is a really quite even and consistent player. He can assert *his*
game against just about everyone *except* Alcaraz. In this sense,
Alcaraz consistently takes Sinner out of his game. Alcaraz can change
his own game fluidly; Sinner cannot.
I think Sinner is very intelligent and his great instincts too, most
certainly can change his game up. However I agree it's not at Carlos'
level, which seems to be unique.
So far as a recent match where Alcaraz appeared worried at times, and
out of his game, it was against Sheldon in this year's French. Sheldon's power pushed Alcaraz all over the court, but he's also great
defensively, and Sheldon can only keep his A game going in spurts.
Shelton is like a more 1 dimensional version of Carlos. I like watching
him.
So what does all this tell us? Unless Alcaraz is sick/hurt/under-
motivated, no one can beat him. And if anyone does, it will be thru consistent and exceptional power.
Looks like Carlos needs Sinner around to make him play his best and stay motivated. He doesn't want to be anything less than the goat at least
of his own era. He can't be that if Sinner wins more slams.
It's interesting that as good as Carlos is his record in hardcourt slams
is relatively very poor. Yes he won that 1st USO, but was down match
point v Sinner in q/f, and played 3 5 set matches in a row, 20 hours all
up. He hasn't yet made another hardcourt slam final. He has much to
prove on that surface.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)