Chris Evert draws Seles-Graf parallel as Sinner’s dominance raises “what if” question about Alcaraz

The 18-time Grand Slam champion Chris Evert, while analysing the current Sinner–Alcaraz dynamic, made an immediate and explicit comparison to the Monica Seles–Steffi Graf rivalry, framing Jannik Sinner’s recent dominance as partly influenced by Carlos Alcaraz’s absence.

The American former World No. 1 used the Seles case as a reference point while discussing Sinner’s 30-match winning streak and his sustained control of the ATP Tour up to Roland Garros. In her view, the absence of a fully available rival must be considered when evaluating the broader context of dominance.

Evert did not question Sinner’s level, but she suggested that the narrative around his superiority cannot be fully separated from Alcaraz’s periods away from competition.

For the American, Sinner’s extended run of dominance is partly shaped by the prolonged absence of the Spaniard, similar to how the years following Seles’ stabbing altered the competitive landscape of women’s tennis and allowed Steffi Graf to dominate in the absence of her main rival.

Evert’s central argument focused on how tennis history often reflects not only performance peaks, but also timing and availability of key rivals. She pointed directly to Monica Seles’ situation in the early 1990s as a structural turning point in the women’s game, using it to contextualise modern ATP dynamics in an interview with Corriere della Sera.

“I would like to point out one detail. Monica Seles was No. 1 in 1993 when she was stabbed: from then on, in her absence, Steffi’s dominance began. Something similar happened to Jannik: he dominated without his main rival, Carlos Alcaraz, who was sidelined through injury.”

The comparison places Sinner’s dominance within a framework where rival absence becomes a key analytical variable. Rather than diminishing his results, Evert’s view reframes them as part of a broader competitive ecosystem shaped by availability at the top of the game.

“What would have happened with Monica and Carlos in the competition, we will never know. Tennis certainly missed them.”

Beyond historical comparisons, Evert also addressed the current performance level of Sinner and the broader ATP hierarchy. She described the Italian as a player without clear technical weaknesses in competitive conditions, particularly during his sustained run of Masters 1000 titles.

According to Evert, the defining feature of Sinner’s current phase is not only execution, but also the psychological pressure imposed on opponents before and during matches. “It is clear that Sinner has no weak points in his tennis: I mean competitive tennis.”

She added that Sinner’s consistency across major events has made him extremely difficult to challenge when operating at full capacity, with opponents often entering matches already under significant psychological strain.

“Up to Roland Garros, he was unreachable, and I expect him to be the same on the grass at Wimbledon. In the five Masters 1000 tournaments he has won consecutively, I have seen his opponents intimidated, without enough confidence to challenge him.”

Evert also acknowledged Novak Djokovic as a persistent reference point in any discussion about Sinner’s title chances, particularly given the Serbian’s proven ability to elevate his level in Grand Slam contexts.

“The concern of the others, of everyone, when they face Jannik, is having to play better than their best level. Personally, I would never rule out Novak. But he must have been very good at planning to reach his peak level for those two weeks. For me, if Sinner plays as he knows how, the title will not escape him.”