- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 10,586
- Reactions
- 6,429
- Points
- 113
There's been discussion that Zverev will never win Slams, that he just isn't cut out for them - both in terms of his game, stamina, and mental fortitude. I'm not really much of a fan, but I've defended him because, quite frankly, he's just too good not to win a Slam or three, maybe more. And there's another reason: just how close his record at age 22 is to another guy at the same age, who happened to win a few Slams: none other than Roger Federer.
Hear me out. I am not saying that they are similar players or that I think Zverev will win double-digit Slams, let alone 20. But let's dial back to their respective 22nd birthdays (April 2019 for Zverev, August 2003 for Federer) and take a look.
Zverev: 10 titles, 4 big titles (3 Masters, one ATP Final), highest ranking #3.
Federer: 9 titles, 2 big titles (1 Grand Slam, 1 Masters), highest ranking #3.
Obviously the big difference is that one GS, which Roger won less than a month before his 22nd birthday. Otherwise Zverev has twice as many big titles, one more title, and the same highest rank (Roger would reach #2 a few days after turning 22).
Roger would go on to win two more titles in 2003, including the ATP Tour Final, and finish the year #2. Then in 2004, of course, he had his first dominant year, won three more Slams, and finished an easy #1.
Again, I am not expecting Zverev's 2020 to echo or even come close to Roger's 2004. Not at all. But it is interesting to me just how similar their results were at 22.
And here's another interesting point of similarity, and perhaps the most important one of all: before winning Wimbledon, Roger had only reached a Slam QF twice - both in 2001, two years previously. Zverev has also only reached a Slam QF twice. Considering that Roger had only the one Masters, and Masters were five-setters at that point, it may be that he had a similar issue with the longer matches.
Or let's look at it another way:
Roger's path at Slams
First QF: 8th qualifying Slam.
First title: 17th qualifying Slam.
Zverev's path at Slams (so far)
First QF: 12th qualifying Slam.
Wimbledon will be Zverev's 17th qualifying Slam.
Now again, this is not to say that Zverev is a talent on the level of Federer--he isn't--but to point out that his pace isn't that far behind the current Slam title leader, and if we're going to speculate that he'll never excel in a best-of-five format, we have only to look at Roger Federer to find a great with similar struggles at the same age.
Now Zverev is about a year behind on QFs, but considering the seeming fact that players are reaching (and extending) their primes a bit later than years past, maybe that's about the same. Adjusting for era, I would think that he has through the end of 2020 to keep pace with Roger, which is six more Slams. In other words, if Roger reached "Slam-winning form" just before his 22nd birthday, maybe we should at least give Zverev until his 23rd or even 24th birthday before assuming he'll never get there?
Again, I don't think Zverev will be anything close to Roger, but I do maintain that he'll at least win a few Slams, and maybe even in the "lesser great" 5-8ish range. If I were to guess who will win the most Slams in the next decade, I would put money on either Tsitsipas or Auger-Aliassime, but Zverev would be my third choice.
One more thing. Another point of similarity is that Roger also had a bit of a youthful attitude problem, which he ironed out and today is one of the most stoic, composed men on court. Maybe this will be the best indicator to watch: to what degree Zverev gets a hold of his on-court emotions.
Hear me out. I am not saying that they are similar players or that I think Zverev will win double-digit Slams, let alone 20. But let's dial back to their respective 22nd birthdays (April 2019 for Zverev, August 2003 for Federer) and take a look.
Zverev: 10 titles, 4 big titles (3 Masters, one ATP Final), highest ranking #3.
Federer: 9 titles, 2 big titles (1 Grand Slam, 1 Masters), highest ranking #3.
Obviously the big difference is that one GS, which Roger won less than a month before his 22nd birthday. Otherwise Zverev has twice as many big titles, one more title, and the same highest rank (Roger would reach #2 a few days after turning 22).
Roger would go on to win two more titles in 2003, including the ATP Tour Final, and finish the year #2. Then in 2004, of course, he had his first dominant year, won three more Slams, and finished an easy #1.
Again, I am not expecting Zverev's 2020 to echo or even come close to Roger's 2004. Not at all. But it is interesting to me just how similar their results were at 22.
And here's another interesting point of similarity, and perhaps the most important one of all: before winning Wimbledon, Roger had only reached a Slam QF twice - both in 2001, two years previously. Zverev has also only reached a Slam QF twice. Considering that Roger had only the one Masters, and Masters were five-setters at that point, it may be that he had a similar issue with the longer matches.
Or let's look at it another way:
Roger's path at Slams
First QF: 8th qualifying Slam.
First title: 17th qualifying Slam.
Zverev's path at Slams (so far)
First QF: 12th qualifying Slam.
Wimbledon will be Zverev's 17th qualifying Slam.
Now again, this is not to say that Zverev is a talent on the level of Federer--he isn't--but to point out that his pace isn't that far behind the current Slam title leader, and if we're going to speculate that he'll never excel in a best-of-five format, we have only to look at Roger Federer to find a great with similar struggles at the same age.
Now Zverev is about a year behind on QFs, but considering the seeming fact that players are reaching (and extending) their primes a bit later than years past, maybe that's about the same. Adjusting for era, I would think that he has through the end of 2020 to keep pace with Roger, which is six more Slams. In other words, if Roger reached "Slam-winning form" just before his 22nd birthday, maybe we should at least give Zverev until his 23rd or even 24th birthday before assuming he'll never get there?
Again, I don't think Zverev will be anything close to Roger, but I do maintain that he'll at least win a few Slams, and maybe even in the "lesser great" 5-8ish range. If I were to guess who will win the most Slams in the next decade, I would put money on either Tsitsipas or Auger-Aliassime, but Zverev would be my third choice.
One more thing. Another point of similarity is that Roger also had a bit of a youthful attitude problem, which he ironed out and today is one of the most stoic, composed men on court. Maybe this will be the best indicator to watch: to what degree Zverev gets a hold of his on-court emotions.
