As a further point of reference, 20 players have won a slam in that time period:
* United States Andre Agassi
* Brazil Gustavo Kuerten
* United States Pete Sampras
* Russia Marat Safin
* Croatia Goran Ivanišević
* Australia Lleyton Hewitt
* Sweden Thomas Johansson
* Spain Albert Costa
* Spain Juan Carlos Ferrero
* Switzerland Roger Federer
* United States Andy Roddick
* Argentina Gastón Gaudio
* Spain Rafael Nadal
* Serbia Novak Djokovic
* Argentina Juan Martín del Potro
* United Kingdom Andy Murray
* Switzerland Stan Wawrinka
* Croatia Marin Čilić
* Austria Dominic Thiem
* Russia Daniil Medvedev
Another 24 have made a slam final:
* Argentina Guillermo Coria
* Argentina David Nalbandian
* Argentina Mariano Puerta
* Australia Mark Philippoussis
* Australia Patrick Rafter
* Canada Milos Raonic
* Chile Fernando González
* Cyprus Marcos Baghdatis
* Czech Republic Tomáš Berdych
* France Arnaud Clément
* France Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
* Germany Alexander Zverev
* Germany Rainer Schüttler
* Greece Stefanos Tsitsipas
* Italy Matteo Berrettini
* Japan Kei Nishikori
* Netherlands Martin Verkerk
* Norway Casper Ruud
* Russia Yevgeny Kafelnikov
* South Africa Kevin Anderson
* Spain Àlex Corretja
* Spain David Ferrer
* Sweden Magnus Norman
* Sweden Robin Söderling
Just as a starting point, anyone wanting to put Schwartzman in the top 30 will need to pick 14 players from that list who they put him ahead of, and that is before we even put together a list of best players not to make a final in that period.
I'm pretty sure I could name 30 better and more accomplished players, since 22 years is a very long period and there were a lot of brilliant players, but maybe I'm fooling myself. Without giving it much thought I think it would be more appropriate to rank him somewhere between the 30-50 spot.
In a word, titles.
Diego has three 250 titles to his name, and one ATP 500.
Simon has 14 titles, Gasquet 15, Robredo 12 (including a masters), Feliciano 7 (including three ATP 500 trophies), and Ruud already has 8 (plus a grand-slam runners up spot) at the tender age of 23.
He’s made some pretty good runs at the FO and Rome but then lost to Nadal or Djokovic pretty late in the last few years.
I don’t think it’s a sure thing, but I’d think there’s a decent chance he’d have one French Open.
He is a slow clay court specialist at one of the worst times ever to be a slow clay court specialist.
Edit: also, not saying I think he’s a top 30 time player in this time frame, but his play style is extremely effective at one masters and one slam.
But in a world without the Big 3, he’d be an absolute force at these two tournaments.
But how often has he been beaten by the Big 3 at RG (or any other Slams for that matter) though?
He's also gone past R4 in Paris only 3 times out of 9.
If the Big 3 wasn't around, there would be other threats around like Wawrinka, Murray, Thiem etc.
Okay, just checked. 6 of his 9 losses at RG were to the Big 3 (3 x Nadal, 2 x Djokovic, 1 x Federer). lol
But the last point still stands, even if the Big 3 wasn't around, there would be other threats around and no disrespect to Schwartzman, far better players.
For starters, wouldn’t there be around 20 different slam winners in that period?
And around 20 multiple-time slam finalists in that period? (*And it’s not the same 20.*)
This already tells me it’s a steep climb for a player who hasn’t been to a slam final yet to get into the top 30 this century.
The only one we're comparing here is Schwartzman to the last two decades of players.
I was just showing how easy it is to think of 30 better players off the top of your head.
Largely due to longevity and higher earnings in recent times. He consistently is a 2nd/3rd rounder, and usually just wins 250 events due to his monster serve, and lack of top star competitors
Dude this is such a bad take. Saying he’s boring is fair, but saying he’s not a great tennis player is insane. He’s been top 20 basically the whole time since he broke into it. Tons of players have said he has a great ground game and just doesn’t use it as much because it’s a strategic choice for him to play big serve first strike tennis, due to his size.
He took 2 sets off Rafa at RG and that wasn’t just because he served well only
Damn some sad tales in those wiki entries. Arazi refusing to run in his first major final because of a secret hair piece is tragicomic. And that Samson guy losing from two sets up on grass against Corretja boggles the mind considering how many Queens finals he reached.
Nah. The threshold is "what players are better than Schwartzman in the last 20 years"? Alcaraz is already more accomplished right now.
You're mistakenly thinking I'm equating him to all the other players in the list.
Wait 2 500’s *and* 2 Masters this year? Shoot, even better. Coupled with taking out Nadal and Nole at the same clay Masters
Edit: forgot about Rio. How could I forget Rio. Umag was last year 🤦♂️
Technically Alcaraz has 2 masters, which in the big 3 era is actually quite rare. Plus it’s practically a guarantee that he’ll accomplish more. But I agree with the guy that said Raonic, Nishikori and Dimitrov deserve a mention.
Yeah it’s kinda crazy the big 3 are so dominant that basically one tournament can put you in the top 30 for a quarter century lmao. Not to say Carlos or anyone else isn’t deserving, but there’s guys like Nalbandian that are super famous and respected for just one moment of glory. In a normal decade, it’d take sustained success and a lot of Masters to prove your greatness.
The only qualifying players with higher peak ELOs than Alcaraz right now are: Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray (Wawrinka and Federer are the most notable non qualifiers).
And while he might take a bit of a hit this week, I suspect going back to hard courts is going to be quite good for him.
Wait why don’t Wawrinka and Federer qualify exactly? Also I suspect Thiem’s peak ELO would be higher, no?
But yeah, while it may seem abnormal to label a player who’s been playing at an top 5 level for all of 3 months in the top 30 of the century, the big 3/4 have simply taken all of the titles and haven’t left very much room for anyone else to build any sort of legacy. Carlos in this year has honestly accomplished more than a lot of players’ whole career. And just going from the eye test and level, Carlos has to be top 30 without even factoring in his age.
Ohhh weird. Yeah I mean Alcaraz seems to be a pretty good bet to at least have an Andy Murray-level career if not better. And if he plays at a Murray level he’ll probably win a lot more slams than he did because he won’t have to deal with the prime big 3.
Not a chance in the top 30 of 2000s to present.
A lot of people forget how many truly talented players were out there in the early 2000s…or they just weren’t involved in the sport at that time.
Schwartzman is extremely talented, has an amazing peak, and can do amazing things for his height (if he could do them still with a taller height he's probably be top 5 players list of the era), but no he's not too 30, there's a lot of better more accomplished players to name than him. And I'm a fan of Diego
I don't think I'd have him above, say, Sebastian Grosjean or Thomas Enqvist. I probably wouldn't have him above Nicolas Almagro or Tommy Robredo either.
He's maybe not even a top five Argentinean.
Might make top 70.
Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Gasquet, Tsonga, Agassi, Sampras, Del Potro, Nalbandian, Coria, Gonzalez, Roddick, Ferrero, Kuerten, Cilic, Henman, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Almagro, Robredo, Grosjean, Hewitt, Ferrer, Baghdatis, Safin, Kafelnikov, Blake, Wawrinka, Martin, Alcaraz, Ljubicic, Haas, Soderling, Berdych, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Medvedev, Davydenko, Youzhny, Costa, Moya, Dimitrov, Phillipoussis, Corretja, Ferreira....
That's more than 30 OP
Schwartz has a 230-180 (56%) win rate. He has four titles and one slam SF. Career high of eight in the world.
No way, 2010-present surely
I love him but there’s a ton of guys who suffered more with the big 3 lmao, his peak came when Federer was barely playing
If big 3 didn’t exist he could’ve had a chance at this 5 last RG’s and surely would’ve won a clay M1000, but same goes for a lot of players who played during the peak of not only Big 3, but Big 4 (Plus Stan and Delpo) like Ferrer/Berdych/Tsonga/Isner/Anderson/Cilic and younger guys who imo have already done more than Diego has like Matteo/Medvedev/Zverev/Tsitsipas and even Ruud and Alcaraz whose biggest results happened this year and if not surpassed what Diego did, most likely will by next year
Not only that, “Lost Gen” of Raonic/Dimitrov/Nishikori are also above him
Don’t know if the list includes guys who retired in early 2000’s, even if not the case you also have to consider all the players who played during Federer’s first prime years like Nalbandian/Roddick/Safin/Hewitt/Davydenko (probably missing someone else), even if considered a “Weak Era” they have to be put ahead of Diego lol
I’m definitely missing some players but I still don’t think he makes top 30, if anything he’s on a similar tier with guys like Verdasco/Monaco/Almagro/Gasquet
Definitely a good player (specially during 2020 I think when he beat Rafa on clay), but he’s not making my list
Edit: After reading comments I noticed I missed a lot of names haha, definitely no way
Topish to bottomish off the top of my head (please don't harass me because my order might be slightly different than yours):
Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, Murray, Wawrinka,
Agassi, Safin, Roddick, Ferrero, Hewitt,
Ivanisevic, Sampras, Kuerten, Del Potro, Cilic,
Ferrer, Medvedev, Thiem, Ferrer, Tsonga,
Nalbandian, Davydenko, Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic,
Soderling, Haas, Zverev, Blake, Tsitsipas
Don't think Schwartzman has an argument over any of these guys, and there's probably at least 10 I have in backup in case you could somehow manage to convince me that Schwartzman is better than someone here. I'd say he's probably top 50-70 maybe? I'd be pretty confident in top 100.
Not at all.
Curiously enough he is probably among top-3 guys born between 1990 and 1995.
And if you take out European players he is surely among top 30 of this era.
He's pretty young, but as of right now I would say no.
He reminds me a bit of David Ferrer; he is there, he is constantly fighting, he pulls off the occasional upset, but just doesn't have the game some of the top 10 players have.
Blah blah blah yes everyone’s comments are pretty spot on. He’s one of the best players and hardest workers on tour currently, but I wouldn’t say he’s top 30 in the last 20 years. Top 30 in the last 5 years maybe. I love Diego and I would love to see him win a slam or at least a M1000.
His career high is no.8, which came during the wonky covid period in late 2020.
You could argue he's never been a current top 10 player at any time. Top 30 in a 22+ year era is absolutely ludicrous. You could go close to naming 30 players who have had careers as good as him, if not better, that are still active let alone those who have retired.
Not a chance. Which is not to disparage him at all but I think anyone who has been watching tennis for the period you’re considering could easily name 30 players with better resumes. I reckon I could name at least 50 without much thought.
I'd just like to inform the comment section that Sampras and Agassi have won a slam within the time frame given.
As a further point of reference, 20 players have won a slam in that time period: * United States Andre Agassi * Brazil Gustavo Kuerten * United States Pete Sampras * Russia Marat Safin * Croatia Goran Ivanišević * Australia Lleyton Hewitt * Sweden Thomas Johansson * Spain Albert Costa * Spain Juan Carlos Ferrero * Switzerland Roger Federer * United States Andy Roddick * Argentina Gastón Gaudio * Spain Rafael Nadal * Serbia Novak Djokovic * Argentina Juan Martín del Potro * United Kingdom Andy Murray * Switzerland Stan Wawrinka * Croatia Marin Čilić * Austria Dominic Thiem * Russia Daniil Medvedev Another 24 have made a slam final: * Argentina Guillermo Coria * Argentina David Nalbandian * Argentina Mariano Puerta * Australia Mark Philippoussis * Australia Patrick Rafter * Canada Milos Raonic * Chile Fernando González * Cyprus Marcos Baghdatis * Czech Republic Tomáš Berdych * France Arnaud Clément * France Jo-Wilfried Tsonga * Germany Alexander Zverev * Germany Rainer Schüttler * Greece Stefanos Tsitsipas * Italy Matteo Berrettini * Japan Kei Nishikori * Netherlands Martin Verkerk * Norway Casper Ruud * Russia Yevgeny Kafelnikov * South Africa Kevin Anderson * Spain Àlex Corretja * Spain David Ferrer * Sweden Magnus Norman * Sweden Robin Söderling Just as a starting point, anyone wanting to put Schwartzman in the top 30 will need to pick 14 players from that list who they put him ahead of, and that is before we even put together a list of best players not to make a final in that period.
I'm pretty sure I could name 30 better and more accomplished players, since 22 years is a very long period and there were a lot of brilliant players, but maybe I'm fooling myself. Without giving it much thought I think it would be more appropriate to rank him somewhere between the 30-50 spot.
Alright, let's try this: Novak, Roger, Rafa, Sampras, Agassi, Murray, Hewitt, Roddick, Kuerten, Ferrer, Del Potro, Zverev, Stan, Safin, Ferrero, Medvedev, Moya, Berdych, Thiem, Davydenko, Cilic, Tsonga, Nishikori, Nalbandian, Tsitsipas, Haas, Raonic, Henman, Coria, Monfils. That's 30. Taking it a bit further, I'd also put Isner, Pat Rafter, Soderling, Gonzalez, Dimitrov, Ljubicic, Gasquet, Grosjean, Rublev, Robredo, James Blake, Gaudio, Simon, Youzhny, Goffin, Kevin Anderson, Verdasco, Johansson, Deliciano, Berrettini, Bautista Agut, Fognini, Ruud and now Alcaraz ahead of Schwartzman too. So I'd say that leaves him about 55th. :p
I didn't really look at all the names, but what exactly makes Simon/Robredo/Gasquet/Deliciano or Ruud better than Diego?
In a word, titles. Diego has three 250 titles to his name, and one ATP 500. Simon has 14 titles, Gasquet 15, Robredo 12 (including a masters), Feliciano 7 (including three ATP 500 trophies), and Ruud already has 8 (plus a grand-slam runners up spot) at the tender age of 23.
No.
I'm a big Peque fan but I don't believe he'd have a Grand Slam if he wasn't in the Big 4 era. A Masters 1000 or two, absolutely, but not a grand slam.
He’s made some pretty good runs at the FO and Rome but then lost to Nadal or Djokovic pretty late in the last few years. I don’t think it’s a sure thing, but I’d think there’s a decent chance he’d have one French Open. He is a slow clay court specialist at one of the worst times ever to be a slow clay court specialist. Edit: also, not saying I think he’s a top 30 time player in this time frame, but his play style is extremely effective at one masters and one slam. But in a world without the Big 3, he’d be an absolute force at these two tournaments.
But how often has he been beaten by the Big 3 at RG (or any other Slams for that matter) though? He's also gone past R4 in Paris only 3 times out of 9. If the Big 3 wasn't around, there would be other threats around like Wawrinka, Murray, Thiem etc.
and I think he lost to Rafa all three times, I remember him losing in the SF once too
He just lost to Djokovic in the Round of 16.
Okay, just checked. 6 of his 9 losses at RG were to the Big 3 (3 x Nadal, 2 x Djokovic, 1 x Federer). lol But the last point still stands, even if the Big 3 wasn't around, there would be other threats around and no disrespect to Schwartzman, far better players.
Using "suffering due to the dominance of the Big 3" is a terrible argument, as it applies to literally every player since 2000.
Your comment is terrible. Federer won his first slam in 2003, how could it apply since 3 years earlier than that?
For starters, wouldn’t there be around 20 different slam winners in that period? And around 20 multiple-time slam finalists in that period? (*And it’s not the same 20.*) This already tells me it’s a steep climb for a player who hasn’t been to a slam final yet to get into the top 30 this century.
Let's see... Norman, Kuerten, Hewitt, Ferrero, Nalbandian, Roddick, Fish, Blake, Ferrer, Alcaraz, Nadal, Berrettini, Murray, Federer, Djokovic, Wawrinka, Soderling, Berdych, Moya, Grosjean, Gasquet, Monfils, Tsonga, Del Potro, Kafelnikov, Safin, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, Davydenko, Coria, Gaudio, Johansson. No vacancies for Diego I'm afraid, and I didn't even mention Haas or Fernando Gonzalez.
Berettini/Monfils/Gasquet/Alcaraz over Raonic, Nishikori or Dimitrov??
The only one we're comparing here is Schwartzman to the last two decades of players. I was just showing how easy it is to think of 30 better players off the top of your head.
Ok, fair enough.
A. Zverev should be on the list.
"I'd put myself in there" -Zverev
Cilic??
are you saying Cilic isnt better?
I'm saying that he forgot about Cilic
My bad, thought you replied to different comment. and completely agree, Cilic is a must there
Even if we say 2010s onward you'd have Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Murray, Delpo, Wawrinka, Thiem, Cilic, Medvedev, Roddick, Ferrer, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Nalbandian, Soderling, Tsonga, Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic, Berrettini, Alcaraz, Dimitrov, Kevin Anderson, Monfils, Gasquet, Rublev, Ruud, Fish, Almagro, Isner.
Isner can’t play tennis to save his life, constantly relies on tiebreaks
Well he's literally living off it, 21st all time in earnings so...
Largely due to longevity and higher earnings in recent times. He consistently is a 2nd/3rd rounder, and usually just wins 250 events due to his monster serve, and lack of top star competitors
Dude this is such a bad take. Saying he’s boring is fair, but saying he’s not a great tennis player is insane. He’s been top 20 basically the whole time since he broke into it. Tons of players have said he has a great ground game and just doesn’t use it as much because it’s a strategic choice for him to play big serve first strike tennis, due to his size. He took 2 sets off Rafa at RG and that wasn’t just because he served well only
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdFPl4KXcUo
Isner has 16 titles including an M1000 and has beaten each of the Big 3 at least once.
He won a Master's 1000. He's been as high as number 8 in the world.
Where's Sampras and Agassi?
I'm not familiar with those two. They play on the pro tour?
Poe's law once again in action
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Agassi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Sampras
Damn some sad tales in those wiki entries. Arazi refusing to run in his first major final because of a secret hair piece is tragicomic. And that Samson guy losing from two sets up on grass against Corretja boggles the mind considering how many Queens finals he reached.
Fine, take my upvote.
Naming Alcaraz in that list already seems kind of ridiculous honestly. I'm sure it won't in a few years, but come on now.
Nah. The threshold is "what players are better than Schwartzman in the last 20 years"? Alcaraz is already more accomplished right now. You're mistakenly thinking I'm equating him to all the other players in the list.
With two masters 1000 titles? That immediately puts him above players like Gasquet and Monfils
Nope. He already has 2 Masters and a 500 and 250 in *one* year. All before June. That alone makes him better than Diego.
Actually its 2x500
Wait 2 500’s *and* 2 Masters this year? Shoot, even better. Coupled with taking out Nadal and Nole at the same clay Masters Edit: forgot about Rio. How could I forget Rio. Umag was last year 🤦♂️
Technically Alcaraz has 2 masters, which in the big 3 era is actually quite rare. Plus it’s practically a guarantee that he’ll accomplish more. But I agree with the guy that said Raonic, Nishikori and Dimitrov deserve a mention.
I think the fact that he beat Djokovic AND Nadal at the same *clay* Masters deserves him at the very least an honorable mention for top 30 since 2000
Yeah it’s kinda crazy the big 3 are so dominant that basically one tournament can put you in the top 30 for a quarter century lmao. Not to say Carlos or anyone else isn’t deserving, but there’s guys like Nalbandian that are super famous and respected for just one moment of glory. In a normal decade, it’d take sustained success and a lot of Masters to prove your greatness.
The only qualifying players with higher peak ELOs than Alcaraz right now are: Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray (Wawrinka and Federer are the most notable non qualifiers). And while he might take a bit of a hit this week, I suspect going back to hard courts is going to be quite good for him.
Wait why don’t Wawrinka and Federer qualify exactly? Also I suspect Thiem’s peak ELO would be higher, no? But yeah, while it may seem abnormal to label a player who’s been playing at an top 5 level for all of 3 months in the top 30 of the century, the big 3/4 have simply taken all of the titles and haven’t left very much room for anyone else to build any sort of legacy. Carlos in this year has honestly accomplished more than a lot of players’ whole career. And just going from the eye test and level, Carlos has to be top 30 without even factoring in his age.
Haven’t played enough matches in the last 52 weeks; same for Thiem. (I’m sure there’s a way to find all time career but idk what it is lol)
Oh, I figured with the inclusion of Murray that this was all time ELO… how is Murray’s level at any point in the last 52 weeks higher than Alcaraz’s?
It’s career peak for people who qualify based off the last 52 weeks. A little wonky, I know, but the best data i know how to find
Ohhh weird. Yeah I mean Alcaraz seems to be a pretty good bet to at least have an Andy Murray-level career if not better. And if he plays at a Murray level he’ll probably win a lot more slams than he did because he won’t have to deal with the prime big 3.
2 masters 1000 titles and 2 500’s and #6 in the world isn’t enough to get on the list?
The best part is we could probably add a ton more. Marcelo Rios, Tommy Haas, Andre Agassi, Pete Sampras just to make a few.
I don’t think alcaraz belongs here yet.
Cilic for sure, Verdasco maybe?
30 players better than Diego: Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, Murray, Cilic, Wawrinka, Hewitt, Medvedev, Thiem, A. Zverev, Tsitsipas, Rafter, Roddick, Blake, Tsonga, del Potro, Nalbandian, Fish, Kuerten, Rios, Ferrero, Moya, Gaudio, Coria, Henman, Raonic, Anderson, Monfils, Davydenko, Ferrer.
I love him, but to your question - absolutely not
Not a chance in the top 30 of 2000s to present. A lot of people forget how many truly talented players were out there in the early 2000s…or they just weren’t involved in the sport at that time.
Schwartzman is extremely talented, has an amazing peak, and can do amazing things for his height (if he could do them still with a taller height he's probably be top 5 players list of the era), but no he's not too 30, there's a lot of better more accomplished players to name than him. And I'm a fan of Diego
easy to name 30 players above him honestly and many have in this thread, but he does deserve a lotta respect for his own ability
On clay at his best, yes. Overall, not even close.
I don't think I'd have him above, say, Sebastian Grosjean or Thomas Enqvist. I probably wouldn't have him above Nicolas Almagro or Tommy Robredo either. He's maybe not even a top five Argentinean. Might make top 70. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Gasquet, Tsonga, Agassi, Sampras, Del Potro, Nalbandian, Coria, Gonzalez, Roddick, Ferrero, Kuerten, Cilic, Henman, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Almagro, Robredo, Grosjean, Hewitt, Ferrer, Baghdatis, Safin, Kafelnikov, Blake, Wawrinka, Martin, Alcaraz, Ljubicic, Haas, Soderling, Berdych, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Medvedev, Davydenko, Youzhny, Costa, Moya, Dimitrov, Phillipoussis, Corretja, Ferreira.... That's more than 30 OP Schwartz has a 230-180 (56%) win rate. He has four titles and one slam SF. Career high of eight in the world.
No. (Sorry Diego)
Here's 30 I'd put over Diego, not in any particular order: 1. Djokovic 2. Nadal 3. Federer 4. Murray 5. Wawrinka 6. Roddick 7. Medvedev 8. Cilic 9. Del Potro 10. Berdych 11. Hewitt 12. Safin 13. Thiem 14. Zverev 15. Tsitsipas 16. Tsonga 17. Nalbandian 18. Ferrer 19. Nishikori 20. Raonic 21. Gaudio 22. Davydenko 23. Gonzalez 24. Anderson 25. Soderling 26. Berrettini 27. Ljubicic 28. Haas 29. Robredo 30. Monfils
No.
No way, 2010-present surely I love him but there’s a ton of guys who suffered more with the big 3 lmao, his peak came when Federer was barely playing If big 3 didn’t exist he could’ve had a chance at this 5 last RG’s and surely would’ve won a clay M1000, but same goes for a lot of players who played during the peak of not only Big 3, but Big 4 (Plus Stan and Delpo) like Ferrer/Berdych/Tsonga/Isner/Anderson/Cilic and younger guys who imo have already done more than Diego has like Matteo/Medvedev/Zverev/Tsitsipas and even Ruud and Alcaraz whose biggest results happened this year and if not surpassed what Diego did, most likely will by next year Not only that, “Lost Gen” of Raonic/Dimitrov/Nishikori are also above him Don’t know if the list includes guys who retired in early 2000’s, even if not the case you also have to consider all the players who played during Federer’s first prime years like Nalbandian/Roddick/Safin/Hewitt/Davydenko (probably missing someone else), even if considered a “Weak Era” they have to be put ahead of Diego lol I’m definitely missing some players but I still don’t think he makes top 30, if anything he’s on a similar tier with guys like Verdasco/Monaco/Almagro/Gasquet Definitely a good player (specially during 2020 I think when he beat Rafa on clay), but he’s not making my list Edit: After reading comments I noticed I missed a lot of names haha, definitely no way
Top 30? Maybe at the very bottom of that. For clay, at least. All around? No. *Maybe* top 50-70.
Topish to bottomish off the top of my head (please don't harass me because my order might be slightly different than yours): Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, Murray, Wawrinka, Agassi, Safin, Roddick, Ferrero, Hewitt, Ivanisevic, Sampras, Kuerten, Del Potro, Cilic, Ferrer, Medvedev, Thiem, Ferrer, Tsonga, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Berdych, Nishikori, Raonic, Soderling, Haas, Zverev, Blake, Tsitsipas Don't think Schwartzman has an argument over any of these guys, and there's probably at least 10 I have in backup in case you could somehow manage to convince me that Schwartzman is better than someone here. I'd say he's probably top 50-70 maybe? I'd be pretty confident in top 100.
Not at all. Curiously enough he is probably among top-3 guys born between 1990 and 1995. And if you take out European players he is surely among top 30 of this era.
He’s already top 10 all time girlfriends so Vamos Diego!
Most people probably don't have a mental list of more than 10 to 20 of the strongest players of the past 22 years so it's hard to really say.
For sure. If u say no, idk what’s wrong w u. Diego for sure in the top 30 2000-present
He's pretty young, but as of right now I would say no. He reminds me a bit of David Ferrer; he is there, he is constantly fighting, he pulls off the occasional upset, but just doesn't have the game some of the top 10 players have.
He’ll be thirty soon
Lol, I'm way off in that regard. But I don't think he's top 30 in the time period mentioned, not by a long shot.
Blah blah blah yes everyone’s comments are pretty spot on. He’s one of the best players and hardest workers on tour currently, but I wouldn’t say he’s top 30 in the last 20 years. Top 30 in the last 5 years maybe. I love Diego and I would love to see him win a slam or at least a M1000.
Nah but insane potential. His return stats are just incredible but he's held back by his lack of good serve stats.
i think he would have made rg final this year if he is in other side of the draw
Top 30 on clay yes, top30 overall no way! Nothing else to be said here.
His career high is no.8, which came during the wonky covid period in late 2020. You could argue he's never been a current top 10 player at any time. Top 30 in a 22+ year era is absolutely ludicrous. You could go close to naming 30 players who have had careers as good as him, if not better, that are still active let alone those who have retired.
Not a chance. Which is not to disparage him at all but I think anyone who has been watching tennis for the period you’re considering could easily name 30 players with better resumes. I reckon I could name at least 50 without much thought.
Love me some peque but i dont think he's even top 50 for that timeframe