Sinner or Alcaraz

It’s the end of the year and Carlos Alcaraz is the yearend #1.  It’s not very surprising – he won two slams this year and a total of eight tournaments. And right next to him is Jannik Sinner who also won two slams this year.  Sinner was #1 last year and won eight tournaments.  This year he’s a little behind Alcaraz in the tournament and points count, but part of that has to do with missing three prime months of the year while he was serving a doping suspension that he probably didn’t deserve.

On the surface, it looks like Alcaraz and Sinner have formed a duopoly.  Each has won four slams in the last two years, each was #1 for one of those years, and their tournament victory count is about the same.  The two are rapidly distancing themselves from the field – no one else seems remotely in their category or able to really challenge them. They could easily dominate the next five, seven, or even ten years.

So who is better?  Who will have a better career?  It’s a popular topic among tennis pundits these days and fans are lining up behind one or the other, and sometimes both of these young stars.  The common consensus is that Sinner is more consistent and has a higher floor, while Alcaraz can reach greater heights. 

That narrative has been challenged somewhat this year by Alcaraz’s incredibly consistent last three-quarters of the year.  He made nine consecutive finals after Miami in March.  Assuming Sinner can play a full schedule, we are all looking forward to next year’s clashes – who will win the slams and who will emerge at the top between these two titans, the new Big Two?

Obviously, I don’t have the answer.  But in the long term, it looks like Alcaraz is trending toward a much more dominant career than Sinner is.  Part of that is because he is 1.7 years younger than Sinner, and part of that is in the detail of what he has already accomplished (and Sinner has not).

So 1.7 years does not sound like much.  Since these two have been basically equal for the last two years, does a difference of less than two years actually predict a significant difference in career outcomes?

And the answer is, yes.

 

Why Alcaraz is Greater

As you may or may not want to know, I’ve been tracking career accomplishments of tennis greats for years.  Looking back across the entire canon of great players, some trends emerge, that are particularly tied to age.

Two of these trends are slam titles and yearend rankings.  Now yearend rankings are a bit contentious before the computer rankings began (and even after, in some cases), but there is a kind of general consensus among tennis historians and avid tennis internetters as to the yearend #1 list.  So the figures I post are more or less defensible, and I would be happy to discuss in nauseating detail the nuances, with anyone interested.  There are variations to be sure, from other sources, but they won’t be large.

 

Yearend Rankings

Alcaraz first achieved yearend #1 at age 19.  This is a feat matched by only one other man in history, Wilfred Baddeley, who played his best tennis in the 1890’s.  Before going further, I’m going to caveat and say that all of these statistics apply only to men’s tennis.  In women’s tennis, this accomplishment (#1 by age 19) is not as unusual, although still rare. But the reality is that men and women mature, on average, at different rates.  To measure greatness among female players requires statistics focused on them.

By finishing #1 this year, Alcaraz has two yearend #1s by the age of 22. A feat matched only by Lleyton Hewitt, Bjorn Borg, Baddeley, and William Renshaw.  Baddeley and Renshaw played in the 1800’s so let’s set them aside for now.  That leaves Hewitt and Borg, who, while great (especially Borg – 11 slams, four yearend #1s), neither of them accomplished much after age 25.  Could Alcaraz be on a similar trajectory?

Meanwhile, Sinner had his first yearend #1 at the age of 23.  This is still impressive and on par with greats like Roger Federer and Bobby Riggs, ahead of greats Djokovic, Agassi, Edberg, Lendl, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzalez, Kramer, Cochet, and Tilden; but behind Nadal, Sampras, McEnroe, Borg, Connors, Budge, Vines, and LaCoste.  That’s an ecosystem of true greats from the past 100 years.

Sinner is mid-pack in this exalted class of 20, while Alcaraz is head of the pack with Borg.  Just to be in this company is significant, of course.  Alcaraz, with two yearend #1s is firmly in the conversation, while Sinner with just one, is on less stable footing.  Could Sinner yet turn out to have a career more along the lines of Courier, Kuerten, Nastase, or Crawford – worthy former #1s who aren’t the greatest of the great? Yes, but I don’t expect it.  I think he will have multiple yearends at #1, although I concede it is possible Alcaraz won’t let him – we will see.

Looking at weekly computer rankings, by the end of this year Alcaraz will have 193 weeks in the Top Ten, and 52 weeks at #1. Meanwhile Sinner will have 166 weeks in the Top Ten and 66 weeks at #1.  Again, Alcaraz is nearly two years younger, so his about equal accomplishments in the present are set to lead to greater career accomplishments.  Alcaraz is more than 100 top-ten-weeks ahead of Sinner at the same age.

 

Titles

Turning to titles and major titles in particular, Alcaraz has 6 slam titles at the age of 22.  This is a feat matched only by Nadal and Borg, and Alcaraz could bump this to an unmatched 7 slams if he wins the next one in Australia.  Meanwhile Sinner’s one slam title at age 22 has been matched by dozens. 

Sinner is clearly peaking a little later than Alcaraz, and he does now have 4 majors which he had at age 23.  This is a bit more reputable (than his 1 at age 22), and has been accomplished by (beside Nadal, Borg, and Alcaraz): Federer, Courier, Sampras, Becker, Wilander, McEnroe, Laver, Cooper, Hoad, Rosewall, Gonzales, Budge, Vines, LaCoste, Wrenn, Sears, and Renshaw.  Very respectable company, including 11 of our 20. (I’ll add for transparency that my definition of majors includes open, amateur, and professional majors, and ILTF “World” titles from 1912-24.) Behind Sinner in this metric are: Djokovic, Agassi, Edberg, Lendl, Connors, Kramer, Riggs, Cochet, and Tilden – which is an incredible group to be ahead of.  Once again, Sinner is mid-pack among the greats, while Alcaraz leads.

Looking at ‘tour-level’ titles by yearend age of 22, Alcaraz is 7^th on the all time list with 24, behind Nadal, Lendl, McEnroe, Borg, Connors, and Riggs.  For his part, Sinner is just 14^th on the open era list with 24 titles by yearend age 24, and no more than 25^th all time.

Turning to Masters 1000 titles, Sinner has 5 titles while Alcaraz has 8 and is almost two years younger.  In “Big Titles” as the ATP defines them, Alcaraz has 14 and Sinner has 11.  Alcaraz is ahead on both counts and is younger. 

 

Final argument

In the end, careers have a life span.  Sinner has less time ahead and is already behind Alcaraz in all counts.  It looks more likely that Alcaraz could break the Big Three’s records than that Sinner will.  Add to this Alcaraz’s higher top-end playing level (according to most pundits), and it’s hard not to predict a better career for Alcaraz.  Of course, either of these players could end up as all-time greats – but the road ahead is uncertain. Let’s hope they both get the chance to prove themselves.