For the (more or less) young generation, there is enough to be dizzy, even to be won over by a hint of depression. While Rafael Nadal (21), Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic (20 each) now have between them more than 60 Grand Slam titles, including 85% of those at stake over the past fifteen years, some are still waiting their turn. A single “small” crown would suffice for their happiness. The Grand Slam is their childhood dream, their reason for being, on the court at least. They have almost everything to get there, but it still gets stuck. And the more time passes, the more the dream threatens to turn into a ball and chain.
The case of Alexander Zverev is undoubtedly the most symptomatic. The German was world number 3 at 20. At the same age, he had already joined the category of winners in Masters 1000. While he has just passed the milestone of a quarter of a century, he is at a crossroads. He won absolutely everything. Masters 1000. Masters. Olympic Games. Everything, except a Grand Slam. He was only a handful of points short at the US Open in 2020. Failing to seize that solid golden opportunity against Dominic Thiem in a final scarred by a scare meter at a level rarely seen on both sides of the net in a major final, he is still stuck at zero.
Victory and tears: Zverev very moved after his victory over Djokovic in the semi-finals
Roland-Garros
Center court honors for Alcaraz and FAA: Sunday’s schedule
–
2 HOURS AGO
–
He admits it without difficulty and without veiling his face, the psychological dimension constitutes the most problematic element in this quest. “The dream of winning a Grand Slam, that’s what changes everything, he explained again on Friday. That’s the big difference with other tournaments, I think. Each of us started tennis with the desire to win the biggest titles in the world. Winning a Grand Slam is the ultimate goal. With the Olympic Games. But it’s very different.” And he knows what he’s talking about.
Virtues and disadvantages of precocity
Why does a Zverev, capable of flying over the Masters at the end of the season or the Games in Tokyo, struggle so much to do the same for a fortnight? Of course, the format differs. Two weeks. Seven matches to win in three winning sets. But the difficulty is not at the physical level. The Olympic champion is convinced: “We’re all super well prepared, it’s not about that. I didn’t lose some Grand Slam matches because of my physical appearance, but because I put too much pressure on myself to get that first Major. That’s why I still haven’t won.”
Only two players born after 1990 have won the timpani: Dominic Thiem and Daniil Medvedev. The only two new winners in the recent past, at the last two editions of the US Open. Their common point? They were no longer partridges of the year. 27 and 25 years old, respectively. Their luck may also be to have emerged a little later than a Zverev or a Tsitsipas. At 22, Medvedev was not considered a future great. Thiem, he waited to be almost 23 years old to integrate the Top 10. It’s not late, but much more than the German or the Greek.
Not having raised high expectations right out of adolescence was lucky for them, according to Sascha Zverev. “Medvedev really broke through later than us for example, and I think maybe it was easier for him because he was already more mature.Precocity, even ultra-precocity, therefore has its virtues but also its disadvantages. One, above all: if, at 24, 25, you still have not opened your prize list in Grand Chelem, the thing is perceived as an anomaly, coupled with a reasoning in the form of a final judgment: if he has not arrived there now, it is too late, he will never arrive there.
It will be interesting to see Alcaraz in the situation that was mine or that of Tsitsipas
—
The problem is undoubtedly all the more significant for this generation, forced to succeed that of the “Big Three”, which has made a standard of absolute abnormality. Grand Slam victory, for Nadal, Djokovic or Federer, has almost become commonplace. “We have two players in the draw here who have won the tournament. I don’t know how many times one of them won, but the other must have lifted the trophy at least 28 times“, sourit Stefanos Tsitsipas.”For Novak, Roger or Rafa, it comes naturally“, adds Zverev, as if to explain that, in their case, the dream, satisfied very early in their career, quickly ceased to be a burden.
In this equation, the unknown Carlos Alcaraz is not the least interesting. From one Grand Slam to the next, the young Spaniard has made a spectacular leap up the hierarchy, to the point of finding himself among the three main favorites for the title at Roland-Garros, light years from his status at the last Australian Open. He himself claims his ambition, beyond the dream, to win a major title this year.
“It will be interesting to see him in the situation that was mine or that of Tsitsipas a few years ago, to see how he manages to manage it“, notes Zverev. Double finalist of Roland-Garros, Alex Corretja believes his young compatriot capable of absorbing such pressure. “Emotionally, he’s so mature that I don’t think he’ll take the pressure, decides the Eurosport consultant. He is not afraid of the unknown. He already has the mindset of a veteran even if he has not lived it.” For now, Alcaraz is at the age of recklessness, not yet at the age of asking too many questions. The dream, without the burden. Perhaps the ideal time to settle this question, to never have to ask again.
Alcaraz, the X factor: “He arrives by assuming his favorite status like Nadal in 2005”
Roland-Garros
French tennis in crisis: “The generational hole is worse than in the 1970s”
–
16 HOURS AGO
–
Roland-Garros
Distant cousins more than twins: Alcaraz – Nadal, the limits of a comparison
–
16 HOURS AGO
—
