Best Ever Tennis Player
Best Ever Tennis Player
Alcaraz and Sinner are clearly the best tennis players ever, as is generally acknowledged. Federer and Nadal wouldn’t stand much of a chance against them, even in their prime, and Djokovic is unable to best them now, or ever was. They are well ahead of their current rivals. They are the best by far (just look at the stats). But how do they compare to each other? I think yesterday’s US Open final established that Alcaraz is the better player right now and probably going into the future. He the better ball-striker, the better mover, the better server, the more creative and versatile. Sinner pretty much accepted it in his speech. But that doesn’t settle the hard question: is Alcaraz better by far? Now we are in contested territory: is Alcaraz better by far than a player who is better by far than anybody else, living or dead? For it is also clear that Sinner is better by far than anyone else who ever played the game, except for Alcaraz. That is certainly a strong claim, but I think it is supported by the facts. So, the claim about Alcaraz is doubly strong—that he is better by far than a man who is better by far than anyone else (except Alcaraz). I would not have thought this till yesterday—I didn’t know who would win before the match started. But as I watched the match it was borne in on me: Alcaraz is far better than Sinner shot by shot. He hits the ball better, he moves faster and more flexibly, he has more variety, and he serves better. That was the eye-opener: at least ten aces to one by Sinner. He simply looks like the more expert player. We are living in a new tennis age, considerably surpassing what we saw over the last twenty years during the domination by the Big Three (Roger, Rafa, and Novak). That is something remarkable.
But I want to say something even more surprising: Alcaraz is the first truly good player of tennis. No one else was really good at the game. He is the best, to be sure, but he has also mastered the game; he is actually good at tennis. What am I talking about? Tennis is a very difficult game for humans: the ball is constantly going out or into the net. There are many unforced errors, i.e., errors the player shouldn’t have made. Consider the serve: players need two tries to get it in; they miss all the time; they double fault regularly. These are professional players who can practice the serve, with the best coaching, all day and every day, from a standing position—and they still can’t get the ball in. Table tennis players have no trouble serving and experts never miss (they also have only one chance)—nobody double faults in table tennis. Obviously, the rules and dimensions of the game of tennis make it extremely hard to serve successfully (amateurs are absolutely useless at it). The service area is too small for human players, given their limitations. If an alien were to watch a tennis match for the first time, he would conclude that humans are crap at it—certainly not good. The same applies to the return of serve and to volleys and ground strokes generally. The game is too difficult to be really good at (except in some relative sense—some people are better than others at shot-putting to the moon). But with Alcaraz you get the sense that he finds it quite easy and natural; he is quite at home playing it. He isn’t frustrated as hell playing it, constantly berating himself for poor play, on the verge of smashing his racket or screaming at himself. Everyone else is actually quite bad at tennis, judged absolutely, but he is genuinely good at it. That’s why he is so happy when he plays. So, not only is he better by far than all past players, and better by far than Sinner (who is also better by far than all other players not identical to Alcaraz), he is actually a goodtennis player! I’m not saying he is really good, because he too makes mistakes (unforced errors), but he is a good player—about as good as I am at table tennis (there are very many good table tennis players).[1] Alcaraz is about as good at tennis as I am at table tennis—but he is also far better than even the player who is far better than anyone else but him. Congratulations, Carlos!
[1] I am absolutely terrible at tennis, not good at all, but far better than most people you see on the courts getting hammered by the game.
I quite agree that Alcaraz and Sinner are the best tennis players ever. But is it nature (more talent) or nurture (better rackets and training methods)?
Always hard to say. I rather think it’s more nature with Alcaraz and nurture with Sinner, but who knows?
Ok, Novak is 38, and has beaten Alcatraz 5 x v 4 losses.
That suggests that in his prime, eg 10 years ago, djocovic would have been even better.
In their peak, Bjorn Borg, McEnroe, Sampras may also have beaten alcaraz. But it’s similar to the Beatles, Steve McQueen, greatest philoaopher,
Etc. was Bruce Lee the best martial artist ever?
You really think Borg, McEnroe, and Sampras could have beaten Alcaraz? Have you seen him play compared to them? He has beaten Djokovic 4-1 in their last 5 matches.
It’s one of those time travel questions. Djocovic is a senior right now, he’s only in the game because of his brilliant skills when he was younger.
What would support your claim would be that alcaraz is still improving and not yet reached his peak. And that could be better than Borg in say 1976.
Maybe AI could simulate a game.
Also playing style changes with time.
Manchester city were playing peak football 4 years ago. Their style is the same. Players are not. But the style of football has moved on.
However, you do have a point. I’d not watched him play for a couple of years. He’s on fire now. Incredible
Ah, so you now see the point. Of course, the game has moved on a lot from the days of Borg et al.
Yea the game has developed. But when making the comparison to 50 years ago, there needs to be an even playing court. Would Borg have access to modern coaches and equipment? Would alcaraz be playing under the coaching and experience of 50 years ago?
There’s also the concept of “know your opponent” which is what a sharp coach would do in training. This is how Connors and McEnroe eventually succeeded to tire out and beat Borg. It’s still not conclusive, but these are additional factors. Alcaraz is still probably the best though, 🤭
The question was who is in fact the best player not who could be the best player. Sinner is more of a contender and might outclass Alcaraz in the future (though I very much doubt it).
There are many qualifications to your claim. That doesn’t necessarily mean I disagree with it.
Winning games means being better than the opposition. How do we know the opposition today is as good as it was in the Federer – Rafa -.novak era?
So games won and titles are the obvious measures
But there is also ability on the court to deal with a diverse group of challenges. So that’s a much more technical analysis. You probably have already done something like that, informally at least.
Yes, I have. If you look with informed eyes on the players concerned, the differences leap out. Speed, power, variety, consistency, etc. My opinion is shared by nearly all commentators.
Thank you, I will watch some more games, it’s very interesting.
He hits shots no one else could play. Notice the hand and foot speed.
Yes, he’s got incredible speed and skill. Has improved by leaps since 2 years ago. And he’s still on that trajectory..
Exactly.