Unlike his idol, Alcaraz at 22 has won Majors on grass, hard and clay. Nadal's first 4 Slam wins came in Paris There was talk from Day 1, but Sunday night was the perfect catalyst for the tennis world to go into a tizzy. At 22, Rafael Nadal had won five Grand Slam titles and when Carlos Alcaraz did the same by outlasting Jannik Sinner at Rafa's ‘home' Roland Garros, the comparison calls became louder.
Go Beyond The Boundary with our YouTube channel. SUBSCRIBE NOW!"It is a stat that I am going to keep for me forever, winning the fifth Grand Slam at the same time as Rafa – my idol, my inspiration. It's a huge honour," Alcaraz said after the five-and-a-half-hour epic.
Both are Spaniards, both share a never-say-die attitude, both are die-hard Real Madrid fans. The surface similarities between the two are many. So much so that the Rafa loyalist over a decade and a half feels Alcaraz is a natural heir to his throne of the heart.
But is it that simple? Are Nadal and Alcaraz cut out of the same cloth? The answer is probably ‘no'.
Nadal came at a time when the world was in awe of the jaw-dropping beauty of Roger Federer. The victories were becoming routine when this Spanish matador rocked the citadel of tennis with incredible ability to endure. Federer, who had grown up on Swiss clay and believed till 2005 that it was a matter of time before he won the French, suddenly didn't know how to get past his young nemesis on the red clay of Paris. It was a riddle that Federer never solved — he beat Rafa on other surfaces, but never at Roland Garros.
Who's that IPL player?Nadal won 14 French Open titles — a record that is unlikely to be broken — and it had a lot to do with the different facets of his game that he went on adding to his basic repertoire of being an unbelievable retriever. But to start off, the myth of Rafa began as a counterpoint to the elegance of Federer.
That's a fundamental difference between Alcaraz and Nadal. The Murica boy appeared on the big stage almost as a saviour in early 2022 when Federer was all but gone, Nadal was in a decline and Novak Djokovic was the untouchable master. Tennis was getting slightly unidimensional, and it needed the gold dust of artistry to keep it enticing for the consumer pampered by the Swiss-Spanish royalty for close to two decades.
"The basic difference between Nadal and Alcaraz is that the latter is as good on any surface as he is on clay. His first Slam came on the hard courts of the US Open. He conquered grass when nobody expected him to do so, and now he is a two-time French Open champion. On the other hand, Rafa's first four Grand Slam titles were all at Roland Garros, till the 2008 Wimbledon final happened," Indian legend Ramesh Krishnan told TOI.
While Nadal became an extremely reliable volleyer and kept on adding new shots and facets to his game, the 22-Slam winner's core strength was his ability to defend on slightly slower surfaces. Alcaraz, on the other hand, even as a teenager, was a combination of attack and defence – his ability to play outrageous winners has been the cornerstone of some of his best moments so far. Be it his drop shot down 0-30 serving for the match against Novak Djokovic in 2023 Wimbledon final or his ability to pull winners out of his bag in the final set tiebreak on Sunday, Alcaraz was more Federer than Nadal for the tennis tragic.
The biggest compliment for Alcaraz probably came from the other master Djokovic, who feels that he hasn't "played a player like him" after the 2023 Wimbledon final loss. "Roger and Rafa had their own strengths and weaknesses, but Carlos is an amazing player. I would say his game has the best of all three of us."
That probably sums up Alcaraz's game. And when John McEnroe said on Sunday that "these guys (Alcaraz and Sinner) would beat Roger and Rafa in their prime", you're left with the dilemma: "Who would you pay to watch? Nadal or Alcaraz?
Krishnan smiled at the query. "I will probably pay to watch both."
Start a Conversation
Post comment