"But the one thing missing—compared to 20 years ago" - The ultimate difference between the Sinner-Alcaraz and 'Big Three' rivalry

With the culmination of the recent ATP Finals, Andy Roddick discussed the ongoing rivalry between Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner. Alongside Jon Wertheim and Christopher Eubanks on the Served Podcast, they discussed what was missing from the rivalry and whether Alexander Zverev is underrated.

Another chapter was etched into what is becoming an iconic rivalry between Alcaraz and Sinner. The pair once again met up in a final at the ATP Finals where the Italian was too strong for his rival, winning in straight sets to defend his title. Despite this win, Alcaraz will finish the year as world number one.

"There just aren’t enough superlatives. We’re now at the point—like with Roger, Rafa, Novak—where if you say something nice about one of them, the other fanbase gets mad," Roddick said, reviewing the rivalry. "If you say, 'Maybe Carlos doesn’t do well indoors,' Sinner fans are like, 'Deal with it.' They’re both so good that everyone’s angry anytime you say something positive about either champion. Carlos is a well-deserved No. 1, winning Slams basically every year now. And Sinner almost snuck out the year-end No. 1 despite missing three months. These two have been phenomenal this year."

Eubanks was very much enjoying the matchups, looking forward to possibly another one in the Australian Open. "You can’t predict their next matchup. In Australia, people will wonder if we get a Carlos–Sinner final," he said. "Sinner’s record in Australia has been great, so people will pick him, but you can make just as strong a case for Carlos if he’s healthy and makes adjustments. They’re alternating wins, the level is insane, and the chess match—how they learn and adjust—is so much fun."

While Roddick and Eubanks were mesmerised, Wertheim believed that there was something missing from the rivalry. "But the one thing missing—compared to 20 years ago with Roger [Federer] and Rafa [Nadal] —is someone from the rest of the field stepping up the way Djokovic did. Back then, the rivalry elevated everyone. Now, the gap between No. 2 and No. 3 is enormous. Zverev has fewer than half as many points at No. 3 as Sinner does at No. 2. Even at peak Federer–Nadal, the gap was never this big. The rivalry effect between Alcaraz and Sinner is huge. The question is whether it eventually elevates others too."

It may feel like a while away, but the Australian Open is soon coming upon us. The best players in the world will once again challenge for glory, but in doing so they will quite possibly need to get past defending champion Sinner and Alcaraz.

"Jannik’s been dominant there. He always shows up ready," Roddick admitted. "Carlos kind of limped through the end of last year—he didn’t look like himself at the World Tour Finals. But this version is very different. The way he finished this year, winning four matches at the Finals—totally different.

There was another motivating factor for the young Spaniard: "And the career Grand Slam, potentially being the youngest to get it, that's going to be a huge motivator."

Earlier in the podcast, Eubanks confidently stated that they were likely to meet in Melbourne. He doubled-down on that statement. "No, I don’t think so. Like you said, we’re nitpicking with these guys. We’re looking for any reasonable scenario that would keep them from making the final based on what we’ve seen this year," Eubanks said. "I didn’t think of conditions, but the one thing about that is: Jannik and Carlos have elevated to the stature where they can show up in Australia and say, 'Hey, can we play this at night?' And the tournament is going to try to accommodate that."

Wertheim then produced a stunning stat. "If these guys do meet in the final - they would both go into that final with 1,651 career points won against the other," he stated. "That’s what I was going to bring up. The craziest part is the head-to-head. You’d think it must be even—but it’s 10–6, and somehow they’ve won the same number of points?" Roddick said in amazement.

Eubanks was firmly siding with Zverev. Despite the German not reaching the peaks he once was, he was still a force to be reckoned with. "To sit up here and just unequivocally say, 'He’s just not that good,' to me just doesn’t make logical tennis sense," Eubanks argued. "Now it feels like your feelings about him off the court are clouding what you see on the court. Because there’s no way you can watch him—on TV or in person—and go, “Yeah, this guy isn’t that. He’s just not that good.” His track record speaks for itself."

His argument was backed by the 2003 US Open champion. "He’s been there for a decade. To simply sit there and say, 'He’s not that good,' is offensive to every tennis player on the planet, in my opinion. Like, geez—what are the rest of us then?," Roddick said.

"Even the year he served for the US Open, he was dealing with the yips on his serve. He still made the final and put himself in position because he started serving practically two first serves. After that, his percentage went crazy high. To make a Grand Slam final, serve for it, while not having full confidence in your biggest weapon—and then say, 'Yeah, he’s just not it'? Come on, man. If we’re going to critique the athlete and their performance on court, let’s be real about critiquing what happens on the court."