2025 French Open Men's Final: Yannik Sinner vs. Carlos Alcaraz

[Fiero425]

This reminds me of what Nads went through w/ Djoke. There was a time during 2011 I think where he lost several in a row until he sometime later he was able to turn the H2H around. I don't remember what he did, maybe you do but it was probably something Suttle and maybe even mental.

Being the resident historian, 2011 was Novak's 1st of 4 ATG seasons! He not only dominated the tour winning 40+ from the end of 2010 Davis Cup win to 2011 FO Semi, he owned Fedal as well! As for Nadal, he played in 7 straight finals vs Novak, dropping each 1 from 2011 IW to 2012 AO! Not sure where Sinner can go, but maybe improve his net game! I can't see a significant elevation of his game above what it is now! Carlos can only get better; mainly by "reigning it in!"

 

[kskate2]

Being the resident historian, 2011 was Novak's 1st of 4 ATG seasons! He not only dominated the tour winning 40+ from the end of 2010 Davis Cup win to 2011 FO Semi, he owned Fedal as well! As for Nadal, he played in 7 straight finals vs Novak, dropping each 1 from 2011 IW to 2012 AO! Not sure where Sinner can go, but maybe improve his net game! I can't see a significant elevation of his game above what it is now! Carlos can only get better; mainly by "reigning it in!"

Yes, a good volley will be helpful, but a more consistent reliable serve would be better. Neither had a good serving day, but Yannik in particular had a really low first serve %. You can't present too many 2nd serves to someone of Chuck's caliber in a final. It's just asking for trouble. If your serve % is shaky from the jump, where do you go when the match gets close? You won't be able to defend that offering successfully all match and can't rely on errors from your opponent.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

Yeah, if Jannik has a really low first serve %, he's going to have a tough time winning on grass, much less at the pressure cooker of Wimbledon. You can get away with that on hard court and clay, but not on grass. As we know, Jannik's weakest surface is clearly grass.

 

[El Dude]

Good stuff! When we think of Novaks “peak” we’d have to accept he won as many slams after 2017 as he did before, that's a good example of what you’re saying, maybe?

Well, I don't think he was quite as good in 2018-23 as he was in 2011-16, if that's what you're asking. But even within that, there are rises and falls. And the main difference between those two spans--in terms of Novak's level--might be quantity of events played, and perhaps consistency. I mean, his two best later years (2021, 23) saw him play only 11 and 12 events, respectively, versus the 15-17 he played each year in 2011-16.

Despite its flaws/limitations as a stat, this is also where Elo has value. According to UTS's version, he reached his highest level at the end of 2015 to early 2016, after his best year in 2015 and then winning the Australian Open. See here:

As you can see, he fell off after Roland Garros in 2016, then plummeted in 2017 into the first half of 2018, when he started rising again in 2018. But he never reached the heights of 2011-16; by the end of 2023, his highest Elo was about the same as his lowest Elo in the 2011-16 span. I think part of that is that he played fewer tournaments, but maybe also because the competition wasn't quite as fierce. I mean, no Federer or elite Murray. So its hard to say whether that lower Elo is mostly due to those factors, or if his level was actually lower.

As you like to say, results have a lot to do with opportunity - especially when you're talking about career totals. With the Big Three, I think they're essentially equal players in terms of their best possible tennis - the margins are super thin - but most of the difference in their career results has to do with context (which includes opportunity). Novak is the best candidate for GOAT not as much because his peak level was higher (which is debatable) but because, in the end, he outlasted the other two and acquired more big trophies. But that's still good enough to consider him, at the very least, first among near equals.

 

[Kieran]

Well, I don't think he was quite as good in 2018-23 as he was in 2011-16, if that's what you're asking. But even within that, there are rises and falls. And the main difference between those two spans--in terms of Novak's level--might be quantity of events played, and perhaps consistency. I mean, his two best later years (2021, 23) saw him play only 11 and 12 events, respectively, versus the 15-17 he played each year in 2011-16.

Despite its flaws/limitations as a stat, this is also where Elo has value. According to UTS's version, he reached his highest level at the end of 2015 to early 2016, after his best year in 2015 and then winning the Australian Open. See here:

View attachment 10092As you can see, he fell off after Roland Garros in 2016, then plummeted in 2017 into the first half of 2018, when he started rising again in 2018. But he never reached the heights of 2011-16; by the end of 2023, his highest Elo was about the same as his lowest Elo in the 2011-16 span. I think part of that is that he played fewer tournaments, but maybe also because the competition wasn't quite as fierce. I mean, no Federer or elite Murray. So its hard to say whether that lower Elo is mostly due to those factors, or if his level was actually lower.

As you like to say, results have a lot to do with opportunity - especially when you're talking about career totals. With the Big Three, I think they're essentially equal players in terms of their best possible tennis - the margins are super thin - but most of the difference in their career results has to do with context (which includes opportunity). Novak is the best candidate for GOAT not as much because his peak level was higher (which is debatable) but because, in the end, he outlasted the other two and acquired more big trophies. But that's still good enough to consider him, at the very least, first among near equals.

Great post brother, I would slightly amend that he “outlasted them” to “he started later and finished later”, thereby gaining more opportunities for himself..

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Yeah, if Jannik has a really low first serve %, he's going to have a tough time winning on grass, much less at the pressure cooker of Wimbledon. You can get away with that on hard court and clay, but not on grass. As we know, Jannik's weakest surface is clearly grass.

As we know Janniks weakest surface is grass? really Phil?
Again you say IF regarding his serve, if it remains low 1st percentage, again your speaking in hypotheticals?

Jannik has won a tournament on grass in Halle in 2024
Reached the SF at Wimbledon in 2023
In 2024 in a QF he struggled with illness in a 5 set loss to Medvedev
I feel and other tennis commentators grass could be one of his best surface due to his strength and ability to maintain speed
Jannik has always said his weakest surface is Clay BTW.

 

[Jelenafan]

An interesting stat I read is that Sinner is now 0-6 in matches lasting more than 4 hours, so the key to beating Sinner is soo easy, just keep him out there forever. ; )

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

An interesting stat I read is that Sinner is now 0-6 in matches lasting more than 4 hours, so the key to beating Sinner is soo easy, just keep him out there forever. ; )

Well the RG final went over 5 hours and Jannik was there competing to the end? any other interesting fact you have on Jannik I would be soo interested?

 

[El Dude]

I don't think we can definitively say how good peak Sinner is on grass. If we define peak Sinner as beginning of 2024 to now, that's 1.5 years and only one grass season during which he wasn't 100%. This year should give us a better sense of how good he is on grass.

Similarly with long matches. He is 0-6, but he was a hair's breadth away from beating Alcaraz, despite being basically the underdog (on clay/at RG). I didn't watch much of the 5th set, but from what I gather he wasn't overly exhausted - no more than is normal. And let's be honest: Jannik beats anyone else on tour in that match.

Just as we don't yet know if Carlos has another octave in him and/or can bring his best level more consistently.

And let's not even get started with longevity...

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I don't think we can definitively say how good peak Sinner is on grass. If we define peak Sinner as beginning of 2024 to now, that's 1.5 years and only one grass season during which he wasn't 100%. This year should give us a better sense of how good he is on grass.

Similarly with long matches. He is 0-6, but he was a hair's breadth away from beating Alcaraz, despite being basically the underdog (on clay/at RG). I didn't watch much of the 5th set, but from what I gather he wasn't overly exhausted - no more than is normal. And let's be honest: Jannik beats anyone else on tour in that match.

Just as we don't yet know if Carlos has another octave in him and/or can bring his best level more consistently.

And let's not even get started with longevity...

Thank you for your sensible post regarding Jannik on grass,
No he wasnt exhausted in the RG final in the 5th set, one pleasing aspect is that Jannik getting to the final he didnt lose at set, on clay especially that is an added bonus, because you have energy reserves, if a match does go 5 sets
Yes he was a hair breadth away from beating Carlos, Carlos showed he went up a level as he has done in the past,. or Turbo Charge as you like to describe it and he deserved his win.

 

[Fiero425]

An interesting stat I read is that Sinner is now 0-6 in matches lasting more than 4 hours, so the key to beating Sinner is soo easy, just keep him out there forever. ; )

They used to say the same about Andre Agassi! B/c of his bad training & finding out later how much he hated tennis, if you could keep him on the court over 3 hours, he'd go down to just about anyone! One particular match I can recall was back a 1989 Final at the Italian Open! Agassi was still making the news, but it was more about his hair, clothes, image, & sponsors! He hadn't won much of anything, but you'd think he was the next king of tennis! ESPN actually made a huge deal out of Agassi being up 2 sets to 1 over an Italian player no one can remember but me, Alberto Mancini! A stop watch clock was superimposed on the screen to be seen showing 2 hrs. 50 min. on court going into the latter stages of set 4! Andre couldn't hold on, lost a TB, then wilted off the court 6-1 to this nobody! It kept happening until he finally overcame Ivanisovic at Wimbledon in 1992 winning a 5 set thriller!

 

[Kieran]

ESPN actually made a huge deal out of Agassi being up 2 sets to 1 over an Italian player no one can remember but me, Alberto Mancini

[cough] He’s Argentinian, and he coached Coria. He was a classic boring dirtballer, and I think that prolly bored ‘Dre senseless..

 

[Kieran]

Yeah, if Jannik has a really low first serve %, he's going to have a tough time winning on grass, much less at the pressure cooker of Wimbledon. You can get away with that on hard court and clay, but not on grass. As we know, Jannik's weakest surface is clearly grass.

I think with the serve though, grass is better surface for hiding a weaker serve. It used to be even more effective until they slowed it down, but it’s still better than clay or hards for a weak serve..

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Seeing I am a little 'jet lagged'
I will leave you all with a Tsitipas Tweet!
" Comparison delays destiny. Stay in your lane. Build at your speed".
Have fun making sense out of his latest tweet.I will be interested to see how he fares on the grass with his new coach. Goran I wish you all the best in the world in the world.God knows you will need it!

 

[Jelenafan]

I don't think we can definitively say how good peak Sinner is on grass. If we define peak Sinner as beginning of 2024 to now, that's 1.5 years and only one grass season during which he wasn't 100%. This year should give us a better sense of how good he is on grass.

Similarly with long matches. He is 0-6, but he was a hair's breadth away from beating Alcaraz, despite being basically the underdog (on clay/at RG). I didn't watch much of the 5th set, but from what I gather he wasn't overly exhausted - no more than is normal. And let's be honest: Jannik beats anyone else on tour in that match.

Just as we don't yet know if Carlos has another octave in him and/or can bring his best level more consistently.

And let's not even get started with longevity...

Well Sinner and Alcaraz can’t meet at Wimbledon until the finals.

I think it’s fair to say that if they both get that far Alcaraz would be the favorite going in, despite having lost to Sinner there in R16 back in 2022.

It’s weird , while I do think Alcaraz’s best surface is red clay and the one he’s most comfortable on, overall I think grass is his most effective surface vis - a-vis the competition. His strengths are highlighted on grass, such as his mobility & instincts at net, as well as his quick hands.

 

[Kieran]

Seeing I am a little 'jet lagged'
I will leave you all with a Tsitipas Tweet!
" Comparison delays destiny. Stay in your lane. Build at your speed".
Have fun making sense out of his latest tweet.I will be interested to see how he fares on the grass with his new coach. Goran I wish you all the best in the world in the world.God knows you will need it!

Goran and the Sissy, the nutjob crossover we didn’t know we deserved.

I’ll give them till Wimbledon..

 

[Moxie]

24-25 are the most common ages for players to have their best years, or at least the average, with 21-28 being the broader range of common peak years. But really, every player is different. Some players had their best seasons as early as age 20 (Safin in 2000), while others as late as 31-32 (Ashe in 1975).

And of course "best year" isn't necessarily the same as "peak." This gets particularly tricky with Slams. For example, Goran Ivanisevic's lone Slam was in 2001 at age 29, but his peak level was 5+ years earlier. Michael Chang is the opposite: he won his lone Slam at 17, but improved as a player later on, in his early to mid 20s.

So I'd be leery of being too formulaic about age and look at the individual player. My sense is that Jannik Sinner is very close to his absolute peak...I'm not sure he can get much better, though he might still have better years ahead. He had an extended down period last year when he struggled with some injuries...if he were to play at the same level for an entire year, he could have an even better season.

I have this feeling that Sinner is a bit of a late-bloomer, in the way that tall, skinny guys can be. I think he can get stronger. I also think he can add some more variety to his game, though not a lot.

Alcaraz is still young, but he's already got all the shots. I think we all believe that what he most needs it a bit more judiciousness in his game, and the serve could get better, which they have been working on. Seems scary, but I think they both have some room for growth, and that they will.