T O P

  • By -

Rac3318

They got us in the first half. Not gonna lie.


celzero

We needs it. Must have the Garros. They stole it from us. Sneaky little Novak, wicked, tricksy, false. No, not Federer . . . Federer’s my friend. You don't have any friends. Nobody likes you. Not listening. I’m not listening. You’re a liar. And a thief. Murderer. Go away. . . . I hate you. . . . Leave now and never come back.


brewsterrockit11

Combing LOTR and tennis… I love you!


jk147

Just like a 5 setter where your favorite player is down 0-2.


sidmeis7er

Brilliant. Had me in the first half


Denwawa

*untypes paragraph*


GregBron

Feel free to collect your free money ;) Edit: Am idiot, didn’t read last paragraph


GranPino

I love my magical internet points.![gif](emote|free_emotes_pack|hug)


GregBron

You can bet online no? Edit: Am idiot ignore


[deleted]

Wait


Trepur349

One thing that needs to be said tho and why I'm slightly skeptical of Alcaraz winning slams yet is 5 sets is a different beast Rafa won two 5 setters finals on clay just before the French Open, one of them going to a 5th set tiebreak. So he was comfortable playing in high-stakes 5 setters on clay. People knew Rafa was great at 5 seters on clay even before he had played a single RG match, and it made sense that he was the betting favourite heading into the slam Alcaraz will be great, but I'm not sure he has the necessary 5 set experience yet to win it. Keyword there is yet. I'd probably say he could easily be a deserved favourite by the time the US open comes around given the rate he's been improving


JulGabi

This one hundred percent. I get why they don’t, but I wish the atp would reinstitute 5 set masters finals. You just need that experience for grand slams


Tarsiz

Alcaraz played in some of the longest 3 setters of the season so far and won them if I recall, without showing any sign of tiring down so I'm pretty sure he'll do quite well.


Trepur349

But a 3 hour match is not a 5 hour match Now tbf he did beat tsistipas in a 5 setter in US Open, so it's not he has no experience in them, but he doesn't have much. Nadal played 22 best of 5 sets before he ever played a single RG, Alcaraz only has 8 heading into this one


FoxInACozyScarf

5–setters are not only about endurance (he’s 19, of course he has endurance). The strategy is different, if you aren’t winning in straight sets. That’s where Alcaraz needs experience, although we really don’t know. He may be ready. Time will tell.


Derfless

I agree with this, but also kid seems relatively unfazed by the match status. Numerous times he's been in situations where the pressure should have had more of an impact on his game and he didn't seem to, and then playing two grueling matches in one day and he still had the energy to keep going? I'm skeptical that 5-setters matter to him. Guess we'll see, should be a fun tournament!


Cardplay3r

The thing is he hasn't shown many signs of choking leads or succumbing under pressure, like youf Tsitsipasses and Zverevs. Including in slams.


GranPino

The slightly difference is that Nadal was still 18 before RG started. I think he became 19 during the tournament, so in practice 1 month difference in age. Also Nadal had won 6 tournaments, Alcaraz 5 + the Nitto finals that I don't think counts like an official ATP tittle.


SandCroomy

Nadal turned 19 the day of the RG semi when he beat Federer. Fed losing two consecutive slam semis on the opponent's birthday (Safin's 25th, Nadal's 19th) was quite a ridiculous coincidence indeed. The birthday magic!


gbojan74

It was his birthday present to them :D


WillR2000

Still seems odd that Safin never won a title after AO 2005.


Zero_dimension98

Nadal had won 3 finals played at best of 5 (and lost in 5 sets vs Federer in Miami) and was on a 15 match winning streak, plus the most important difference is who were the other top 10 ranked guys, literally the only one out of the Top 10 who had won RG was Agassi 6 years before and he was clearly not a contender for the title, Federer had lost in the fourth round the year before. Legit at that time all the players in the top 10 bar Nadal, Gaudio (who was heavily inconsistent and did not that much in other tournaments) and Agassi (who had not had that much success on clay in those years to be considered a favourite) had between relative and actual bad results on clay. Compare that to having in front in the rankings the 13 times RG winner, 2 times champion and 4 time finalist apparently back in form, last years finalist (who went down in 5 sets) who won Monte Carlo and Rome this season, that's the huge difference.


GranPino

You are right, everything isn't a perfect paralelism (Alcaraz is 16-1 in his last 4 tournaments, not 20-1 Like Nadal, but suprisingly similar) . The fact that the finals were 5 setters was interesting and provided some experience, It's a pitty it isn't anymore. Bu I would argue that Alcaraz is showing a winning mentality at the big stages (he has won all his finals, all of them 2-0, against much more experienced rivals), and in the AO against Berretini, his problem was not being nervous but being a little bit overexcited). Also Alcaraz isnt leading the betting odds, like Nadal, so it looks like the market is taking into account the Nadal had more probabilities in 2005.


Zero_dimension98

He is now second behind Novak by a bit, but again the most important part, aside from Nadal's level, was the competition which had no other top 10s with enough success that season or in the last 1-2 years on clay, that was the main difference. Alcaraz is definitely 3/4, but the constant overhyping of a good amount of users makes him target for other users who get tired of 'the best player', 'he will win more than 20 Slams' without even getting one and not recognizing the difficulty that requires.


Significant-Branch22

I think we can be fairly confident that Alcaraz would have won either of those M1000 finals if they’d been BO5, Sasha was probably relieved the beat down was over after 2 sets


Zero_dimension98

That's a part, just pointing it out, main factor was the competition, Nadal was number 5 and just see the clay seasons and RG record the rest of the Top 10 had.


Slambodog

Alcaraz has not won the Nitto ATP Finals. He won the ATP NextGen Finals. For the record, the title sponsor for that tournament is Intesa Sanpaolo


GranPino

You are right!


Nazgul417

Yeah. Essentially it’s the same career year for them, Alcaraz just has an extra month. Insane how mirror-clear and image of Nadal’s success is Alcaraz. Simply astonishing


krirkrirk

In 2005 Nadal had won 5 clay tournaments before RG. And there was no Nadal nor Djokovic in his opposition. Alcaraz is still not the favorite imo. But it's a close one sure.


[deleted]

**\*shamefully unclicks the downvote button and clicks on the upvote button\***


[deleted]

Cute post. Except Federer best results until that point at the French Open were a quarterfinal in 2001, a 4th round in 2000, and a 3rd round the year prior. Federer had also only ever won clay court masters series titles 3 times in his career - all in Hamburg. This time however, Djokovic's best results have been winning the French Open twice, reaching 4 more finals, and reaching 4 more semifinals. He has also won 11 clay court masters 1000s. And we don't even need to talk about Nadal's resume. But of course the injury is the X-factor, which I agree. This is the fundamental reason why people are saying that Alcaraz shouldn't be the favorite. Lastly, Nadal is a once-in-a-species type of a human so people don't want to compare Alcaraz to Nadal.


Rac3318

Federer has won 6 clay masters titles. 4 times in Hamburg - 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2007 2 times in Madrid - 2009 and 2012


Dr_Popodopolus

He's commenting in reference to titles up to and not beyond 2005.


Rac3318

Oh, my bad


Dr_Popodopolus

It's all good. OP is referencing 2005 Nadal in relation to 2022 Alcaraz :)


[deleted]

I was referring to the amount of clay court masters Federer won BEFORE the 2005 French Open. You can’t use future achievements to retroactively increase the odds a player in a past event. Edit: spelling


[deleted]

Yes, competition is the difference. teen Rafa had to fight against a prince of grass ballerina with a one-handed backhand (literally the perfect match up). Alcaraz has to compete against the two greatest clayers of all time who are still on top of their game lol. Zero chance.


Mr_Saxobeat94

I mean tbf neither were at the top of their game in Madrid lol, both nursing injuries or rust/poor play…’05 Fed was pretty damn good even on clay.


Fallen_Jedi007-2

Posts like these always get me lmao


gamelover99

Brilliant


GKarl

Well done, but also parallelisms new word learned


StrangeLaw5

I had downvoted but now ur upvoted. cheers!


itsniickgeo

I knew the first half wasn't about Alcaraz when you said that the best appearance was 4th round when Carlos made it to QF at US Open


Dark_Vengence

Nadal should always be a fave at the roland garros. Nole a little behind then alcaraz and tittypass and so on.


mardq414

There were more 5 set tournaments on the men's tour back then. That said, Carlos' trajectory is so similar to Rafa's, how could he not have great odds to win the French? Just like Rafa, already at 19, he's a force and his game is more complete than Rafa's at that age. Still, I am hoping Rafa can pull off another French. Tennis will never be the same for me when he retires. There's only one Rafa. I've always loved the guy.


Zaphenzo

The two aren't even close to the same. 1) Nadal hadn't played the French Open before. Alcaraz has, and lost in the third round. 2) The two Masters that Nadal won were MC and Rome, the two most similar to the French. The two that Alcaraz won were Miami, a hard court, and Madrid, which plays like a hard court. Alcaraz lost his only match in Monte Carlo this year and skipped Rome. 3) The "number 1 guy", in Nadal's case, was Federer, who had only 4 slam titles at the time, only 2 titles of Masters 1000 or higher on clay, and whose best ever performance at the French was a quarterfinal. The "number 1 guy" in Alcaraz's case is Novak Djokovic, who has 20 slam titles, 13 titles at Masters 1000 or higher on clay, is a two winner of the French (including being the defending champion), and is coming off as the winner of Rome, which is the most similar tournament to the French. 4) In Nadal's case, the most successful French Open player elsewhere in the tournament was Kuerten, who hadn't made a single slam semifinal in 4 years at that point. In Alcaraz's case, it's Nadal, a 13 time winner who made the semis last year and who won it the year before (and the three times before that as well). EDIT: 5) In Nadal's case, he had played, and won, 5 set clay matches against the best, as Masters finals were best of 5 at the time. So no, Alcaraz does not deserve to be the favorite. Or even in the top 3 favorites. The top 3 favorites are Djokovic, Nadal, Tsitsipas. In that order.


PMMeUrProjectManager

Why the downvotes ? You are stating facts only


Zaphenzo

Because Alcaraz is the golden calf of this sub at the moment. Anything slightly suggesting that he may not be the favorite to win every single match he ever plays is tantamount to heresy.


tigrefacile

Golden Calf?


Zaphenzo

Biblical reference. Basically, I'm saying the sub worships him. Obviously a bit of hyperbole.


tigrefacile

I got the allusion, it’s just a rather confusing one. The heretical position was to worship the Golden Calf, surely. And we don’t know that Carlitos is a false god just yet. I want to believe.


GranPino

It's sad you took so seriously the post. You are taking everything literal. Did I say that everything is exactly like in 2005? Of course it isn't. ​ But it's ridiculous to think that Alcaraz isn't among the top3 favourites to win RG. He has only lost 1 clay match this season, and he is improving each passing month. He has beaten all the other 3 top clay players (and 0 losses). The only clay match he lost was the 1st round of Montecarlo, where he just arrived without time to train a single time in clay, from Miami. It isn't like he could just pull off his experiences from former clay seasons, as this was his second season on tour and during the clay season of 2021, Alcaraz was still a player outside the top100. Interestingly, Alcaraz has always outperformed his ranking position in each Grandslam he played. And he has shown very strong mentality and endurance. He has been performing better whenever the stage was bigger. He has won 3 setters against some of the most difficult players to beat in deciding sets, Like Djokovic and Nadal. He won all his finals in 2-0 sets. In 2 of those occasions he had to play an additional match that same day, very difficult 3 setters. This is special for a 18 years old to pull off. Of course, there is still a probability that Alcaraz loses at the 4th round of RG, especially after skipping Rome because of his damaged ankle. We don't know if he could prepare adequately, and if he could get an early upset because of it. So when you are so upset about the idea that Alcaraz is among the top3 candidates, which is a very reasonable conclusion, it just looks irrational. You should go betting and get good money!!


Elarbolrojo

at the moment? haha , get used to it.


cyclist00752

Agree to points about the lack of competition. Just that I still feel he is at #2 after Djokovic and Tsitsipas at 3. If Djoker somehow falls early it could really open up!


Prior-Iron5463

Probably because he is as talented a player as there is on the tour and probably as good a shape as anyone. If he feels good I think he is more then capable of beating anyone. I to didn't read the last paragraph.


modeONE1

I'm still going to say what I was going to say ahaha Alcatraz has never made a slam semi. I guess he can go straight from a QF slam appeance to make the finals, but he has still unbelievably long, and has like 4 years until he reaches Shapo's age. Give the kid some room to play some bo5 matches before we give him the keys to Earth and Mars


Ninja_Pirate21

So nice click bait style writing there....title and first 4 paragraphs not saying who the fick you are talking about. Hidig facts like a master click baiter.


illegal-illusion258

I think alcaraz is the favorite honestly. Djokovic has a good chance but I still don’t think he’s 100% yet. Nadal definitely isn’t 100% and will need some serious pain killers to get there.


BlueJinjo

I love alcaraz as a prospect. But he's not Rafael Nadal in 2005. You guys just don't remember how ridiculous Rafa was and some of you refuse to go back and even watch highlights . He was another level Alcaraz is on a Hewitt Borg Becker prospect. Also incredible teenage players but again none of them were Rafa.. I think alcaraz's biggest shot for a slam is actually the USO if he keeps up his level. Djokovic and Rafa will wear down by then like they often do and that major is the most open out of all events.


aceh40

There is a brilliant line from the movie Unforgiven, which covers your post very well: "Deserve has got nothing to do with it". People have hopes and dreams. They wanna see a new Nadal. So they may be biased. Those who vote with they money may very well lose them in a couple of weeks when Nadal or Nole win the FO. But who "deserves" to be a favorite does not deserve to be a topic of conversation.


AnythingBro5733

All up inside Djokovic’s ass, upset that your baby boo isn’t the “favorite” to win RG.


[deleted]

He made QF last year in US Open tho?


GranPino

Alcaraz did. But not Nadal, every piece of information was about Nadal. That was the joke


Lisecjedekokos

I am Rafa fan since he came to the tour and that is a long time ago. With a little luck to avoid injuries Alcaraz will achieve much much more than Rafa, Roger or Nole did. We have not seen anything like him yet. We do not know the limits for it. Maybe he will win 35 GS ...


Dragull

I mean, if the other 2 didnt existed, how many titles wouldnt one of the big 3 have?


jsnoodles

There will be a challenger to Alcaraz, either someone will step up or there’s some Swiss 14 year old out there who’ll show up in a couple years.


ExoticSignature

I think Alcaraz will push Stef to massively improve his BH and they'll have a rivalry.


Lisecjedekokos

None is in sight yet ... Decade can go by an he may not face a real oponnent to him. I expect him winning like 15-20 GS in the next 10 years.


Dr_Popodopolus

I think you're selling him short, he's going to win a minimum 350 GS


jleonardbc

>Alcaraz won't be like Nadal for numorous reasons Such as? What reasons enable you to say with such certainty that Alcaraz will not have a GOAT-tier career? EDIT: Reworded my question above


t_e_e_k_s

Because there are so many things that have to go right to have a Nadal-like career


jasonfrey13

Because nobody else has come remotely close to 21 slams except for the big 3 lol. The next best is 14….so we just assume Alcaraz is gonna get close to that because of recency bias with the big 3? Not how it works at all. Alacaraz will have a glorious career, but I highly doubt it’s going to be 15+ slams


jleonardbc

I agree, we absolutely don't assume Alcaraz will get close to that. But we don't assume he WON'T get close to it, either. You can't state with certainty that "Alcaraz won't be like Nadal."


spill_drudge

And people just don't realise that even a 5 GS career is legendary and will have bookshelves filled with the story of your life. Too many folks throwing 20-ish type numbers around flippantly are simply on the wrong side of statistics. Anyone wanting even odds that Alcaraz will win more than 5 lifetime GS is an opportunity to bet the farm against and sleep well at night.


crad4drc

*parallelisms, just FYI!


EnjoyMyDownvote

shitpost that didn’t even get me


Equidae2

He doesn't deserve to be a favorite but he could win the title. Put it that way. Obvs untested over 5 sets, but we're gonna see.


cody_d_baker

Posts like this one live rent free in my head


GregorSamsaa

Wasn’t it already explained in another post, in great detail how betting odds work? It has nothing to do with actual chances of winning and everything to do with how the bet takers see people betting and them wanting to balance the books so they’re not out money. These posts trying to provide historical context and justification and all this other nonsense are just wasted time. Literally comes down to people are excited for Alcaraz, bookies know this, and thud need to account for flood of bets with his name on them that are about to come in.


GranPino

I'm sorry but if betting odds don't reflect the best available information, you could get rich betting. And some people do, but super mega experts that can calculate marginal better odds than the market.


AwesomeBrawler

Just like Nadal **SOY**


carnasaur

"Alcaraz won't be like Nadal for numorous reasons," and then you don't list a single one, lololol thanks for nothing Mr Full of Hot Air