Also, I'm hoping the Carlos and his team go into the lab now and prepare for Sinner in a new way. A loss like this, which was not dominant but very convincing, should motivate new thinking.
I don't think it's panic stations yet, but he certainly needs to develop that 3/4 second-serve slider that stays lower and stops the obvious "attack off the return" style that gives him so much trouble -- not just Sinner --, Struff/Tiafoe/Humbert/Goffin/Djokovic etc
Also feel the speed at which Sinner has closed the gap on Alcaraz should keep Carlos and team up at night. He's Rafa when Novak started to make gains on him on clay, except here Sinner has basically already come back eye to eye there too. In the span of a year. Fascinating to see how Alcaraz will answer. I was surprised at how he mentally abdicated in the middle of that final.
It's not unusual for Carlos to get verbally/emotionally frustrated and wear those emotions to his box. He was one point away from getting back to 4-4 in the fourth and taking the momentum, so as I said, I don't think it's panic stations yet.
Here's a take I haven't heard from anyone else: I think in this particular rivalry, Sinner will have the most success on grass, Carlos on clay, and the hard courts will be more even.
Grass blunts too many of Alcaraz's advantages against Sinner: the kick serve, the deep return position, the ability to move more aggressively on offense and defense, the possibility of his forehand getting higher and heavier. And all the things Alcaraz does do well on grass (volleys, slice) he doesn't really get a chance to do much of in this rivalry.
Sinner best chances in order: AO/Wimby/US/RG
The US Open is bouncier than AO, so he gets some of those kick/spin options back, and the truer bounce allows him to take bigger cuts/risk with his forehand, and the surer footing allows him to be very aggressive with his movements (sliding, returning from very deep, etc.).
Not the first time, but in a GS final? No bueno... Very fair point about Carlos/Jannik on grass, even though I was surprised because I thought Alcaraz with his touch, speed and variety could derail Sinner. But Sinner's power just took that all out. Yet, on a day Jannik's serve gets a hiccup... But yeah, very very interesting!
Oh and also, if Sinner ends up beating Alcaraz in a RG final, I wonder what it'd do to Carlos' brain. We'll never know what would have happened if Sinner had won one more point in Paris this year...
One of my favorite ocurrences in men's tennis is when Sinner gets vocal and animated like the start of the 2nd set in the Wimby final and when he defeated Zverev in Cincy. The fact that he's so rarely in that mode magnifies the scope of a match when he does it and indicates that the stakes have cut through his usual composure and tapped into something primal
yeah, I think even bounce level may be more important. Madrid is not slow but very bouncy. Monte Carlo is slow as mud but pretty bouncy. IW, Beijing. But then you start to look at the majority of outdoor hardcourt environments and there's been a real shift toward low-bounce courts. Not always super fast, but the ball isn't sitting up as much as it maybe did 10 years ago. My hope, as a Carlos fan and a fan of variety, is the USOpen distinguishes itself from the AO.
Agree, I think the bounce level was crucial for the second serves. Sinner was all over the Alcaraz second serve that wasn't bouncing as high as it was at Roland Garros. Better returns and a faster bounce speed means Sinner was able to rush Alcaraz off his serve much more effectively than he could during the French, and Sinner won a majority of the points on Alcaraz's second serve yesterday.
Grigor, Grigor, where art thou? Thine slice and net game… Carlos forgot the Sampras blueprint. He might have lost anyway but as Uncle Toni once noted “If you make him doubt…”
I think the sample size is not big enough to really have a strong understanding of the influence of surface on their match-up.
What I mostly see from the last 2 years dynamic is Sinner being the "point-per-point" better player underperforming on the decisive points and hence having a blurred H2H against Alcaraz.
It is clear to me that Sinner made strides on every aspects of his game in 2 years whereas Alcaraz, already an absolutely stunning athlete haven't improved as much, levelling their palmares and accomplishements (where Alcaraz still has an edge btw).
As they keep on repeating, margins are thin in tennis and extrapolating the least wise method of planning in the sport. But the king of the hill currently is Sinner and his excellence (overlooked) with the serve and around it an excellent life-savior. As Jeff Sackmann already posted a couple of times, Sinner is TOP 3 both in hold% and breaks% : that's rare and stunningly dominant.
Thank you Hugh as always for your analysis. Huge fan of your work. I've now also listened to Gill Gross, Andy Roddick, and Nik from Intuitive Tennis go into varying levels of detail about the tactical and technical differences in this match, all of which has been interesting.
But the one thing I can't stop thinking about is what Alcaraz himself was yelling repeatedly at his team. The audio was quiet but he was very animated. The full quote is "He's much better than me. From the back of the court he's much better than me. Much better than me, much better. [Holding hands far apart] This, this — by far — this [far]. Much better than me. Much better than me."
I am a huge Alcaraz fan in part because of the chaotic jazz festival he's often able to throw at opponents. I don't mind the errors because of the excitement and frequent wins. But now that we're entering the hardcourt swing I find myself emotionally preparing for several months of devastating hope followed by almost inevitable despair when he faces powerful baseliners like Sinner.
My question is this: can Alcaraz, at this point in his career, do anything reasonably practicable to get his baseline game to Sinner's level of power and consistency?
He's been making small changes. His service motion is more fluid, and the serve's speed and placement seem to be improving. His backhand setup is more compact, which may potentially bolster it against fast attacks. And his footwork on the running forehand may be improving its reliability. (These are just observations -- if anyone's doing stats that confirm or contradict, please share.)
But Alcaraz nevertheless seems unlikely to beat an indomitable and impassive ball machine like Sinner on any of the three faster grand slam surfaces. What changes if any would make it possible for Alcaraz to develop a consistent and powerful baseline lockdown mode? Can he win without the low-percentage magic? Or am I doomed to receive a decade of high heart-rate notifications on my watch?
I actually think US Open is a good tournament for Alcaraz long-term. It's bouncier and slower than AO usually, and we've seen that on hard courts Alcaraz can attack second serves more easily and go nuclear on the forehand (Beijing). I would resist reading into the Alcaraz quotes too much; players get emotional when in the heat of the moment. I don't think Alcaraz needs to tweak all that much when they play from the back, but I do think he needs to develop a 3/4 more sliding/less kicking second serve
I get the impression right now that he's more comfortable hitting the slice cutter on the first serve, at first serve pace, than slowing down with that approach.
Brilliant article. Alcaraz was getting Sinner with that forehand inside in from his backhand corner in Paris. Somehow finding the slither of line and short angle most times.
Sinner's devastating backhand line avenged that today.
I would love to see what improvements carlos can make to get his level up , because all i can see is sinner being technically superior and when he plays his A game there is no one to match it .Hoping carlos can improve further so that sinner doesnt dominate everything
This is a funny comment because copy/paste this is what people were saying about Carlos a month ago (higher ceiling, better top A game at its best). Anyway, a great rivalry is arrived.
Sinner's top level isn't as high as Carlos'. But bc Sinner's game is more simple than Carlos', it may be easier for him to sustain a high level. Also, I think the almost 2:1 hardcourt to clay ratio is an inherent advantage.
Another little piece on the Tennis Abstract data and current season stats :
In 2025, Sinner has kept on improving while Alcaraz is plateauing and there is now an abyss in terms of their performance versus the field. Sinner wins 56,1% of points this season (55,3 in 2024, 53,9 in 2023). Alcaraz has 54,4/54,2/53,9.
One can see that in fact they were equally matched vs the field in 2023 behind Djokovic who did 54,9% that year.
Currently Sinner makes the difference behind his service with >70% points won, which is Karlovic level of performance and 3 pts above the already stellar Alcaraz's delivery while their return number are identical.
For the perpective, the current season of Sinner is on par with 2015 Djokovic on its play-by-play numbers and in the same realm as the most tyrannical Swiatek from 2023, better than the primest Federer. Only Serena posted better numbers in 2012/13 with over 58% points won !
If you want to be provocative, it becomes clear that up till now, Alcaraz is somehow an overachiever to the detriment of Sinner's in terms of accomplishments and his better Big title tally is misleading. Sinner doesn't reap that many fruits from his higher domination and 2025 FO loss reflects that. Normally, the gap shall reduce eventually due to Alcaraz losing a bit more sooner, letting Sinner be the "Alcarazsiegerbesieger".
First off, I don't think there is an abyss in terms of performance against the field. So far in 2025, their winrate is even (89/90), and Carlos' sample is smaller (I'd actually bet on Sinner's TPW going a bit down by year end and around 55.5).
But anyway, I think that TPW% is very useful, but needs to be taken with nuance because of its flaws.
First, you haven't separated it for surfaces. Sinner is better on most HCs and Carlos is better on natural surfaces, though Jannik challenges that now with this title (but the TPW% gap is narrower there still, especially on grass where Carlos was ahead up until this year). Sinner definitely showed how agonizingly close he was in Paris, but still, he came up short so I'd still give Carlos the clay edge and put them even on grass with a matchup advantage to Sinner.
Second, I think this stat has an important bias towards high floor guys. Carlos can make any of his matches competitive, but it doesn't stress you out for when he's about to face top competition, especially on his favorite ground. However, this trait will skew down his percentages more than Sinner's comparitively lower ceiling will, because only a few (actually only Carlos I'd say) can maybe look to expose this ceiling.
If you look through 2025, Novak is only .1 percent off Carlos, and while I use it to say he ain't washed yet, it also shows it doesn't quite capture the Serbian's limitations as of now.
The gap between De Minaur, another high floor kind of guy (53.4) and Carlos (54.4) is also smaller than the one between Alcaraz and Sinner (56.1) and in no way is that true to the reality. Sinncaraz is close (and conditions dependent), Alcaraz/De Minaur isn't.
So all in all, I wouldn't say Alcaraz is an overachiever at all. You don't overachieve your way to a slam or to a 5 match win streak over your biggest rival. Even consistency wise, he's only inconsistent in comparison to Sinner, and only suffers bad losses on fast HCs
Edit : That subject really fascinates me so I'll add a final point.
One additionnal reason which to me explains why Sinner is so far ahead in TPW% but that doesn't make Alcaraz an overachiever is that Carlos' dips are often focus related (not always, he isn't some invicible guy, but still, it happens)
And when dips are related to focus, I tend to dismiss them easier when evaluating someone's potential than someone with technical or physical issues, because, while they all affect your floor, only the technical and physical problems can truly ceil you. And if you're able to lock in for a full match when it matters, which I believe is much easier than hiding a technical or physical flaw under huge pressure, your mean is much different. And I believe this match was the first GS final in his career where Carlos was partly affected focus wise, maybe due to fatigue. All the other times, he brought shades of "new normal" performance to the table (different from strictly peaking) (and at some point that new normal won't be enough because of a bad day or whatever, but still). In the end, it's a similar logic to someone playing through injury for half a season and then being fit again : his numbers look rough so far, but you know that you can expect better now.
Anyway, as expected I got too long but I think this bit regarding floor/ceiling/mean performance is interesting to dive into.
Thanks for your piece, it is always interesting to have an in-deep argumentation.
Sorry to disagree but it seems that there's some confusion there :
I wasn't discussing their match-up but their overall performance within the broader context of the ATP.
1) Sinner's sample is smaller, not Carlos (probaby typo) since he played half of Carlos's matchs. Furthermore, Sinner's sample is biaised to the natural surfaces that are his relatively weaker environment compared to hardcourt and indoor where he is a beast. Hence, unlike you, his TPW% is not bound to settle since the remainder of the season is taking place in his kingdom.
2) Using TPW% for a duel is a wrongful use of the metric. Krajicek upset Sampras many times but he was nonetheless the lesser player by a landslide !
1 pts TPW% difference is in fact huge vs a filel and an excellent proxy for achievements (look at all the pantheon TPW% since the 90's and you will see that the hierarchy of greatness follows TPW% exactly). To illustrate it, career TPW% of Big 3 from Djo/Nad/Fed are as follow : 54,5/54,4/54,1. Sampras' is 53,5 & Agassi 53,3.
Unlike match results, play-by-play stats do have a much better signification power (over 10 000 points played) and indeed, such strong correlation shows that winning more points days in, days out yield better achievements.
If you follow golf, the Stroke Gained metric brought a new paradigma to the analysis of the game, and since then, the level reached new heights (and there, margins are even thinner and competition much broader !), and TPW% is a kind of SG metric for tennis.
For info, career TPW Sinner/Alcaraz are 53,4/53,5 currently but they are likely to improve, and the last 3 year dynamic calls for SInner eventually outrunning Alcaraz.
As bad as it seems for the remainder of the circuit, current TPW% is congruent with its ELO and race ranking : even though the gap with the Lead 2 is obvious, he still hands comfortably beatdowns to almost everyone else on the circuit.
3) You do have all the splits possible at Tennis Abstract (Career and last 52 weeks) and over the last year, the comprehensiveness of Sinner's superiority vs the field is striking. And Sinner even won MORE points on clay than on HC !
4) All in all, what happened prevail and you cannot overachieve your deeds per definition obviously. Yet, variance still has been in Carlos's favor until now and it might be thanks to his superior talent, the focus and the fact that tennis puts a premium on clutchness (not all points being created equal). But I do find the power of TPW% big : no matter what clutchness you have, eventually to achieve, it is not because you win the points that matters, it is because you JUST win more points. You see, in the Sampras/Agassi debate, pro-Agassi were always saying that Sampras was clutch and not such a good player besides that (infering that Agassi was winning more points overall), yet his TPW% is still better than Agassi's and the best of his hera.
5) Your argument about focus is another avatar of the speech about "talent". As the good old Jim Courier was arguing : "Talent beats hard work if itself works hard". The cruelty of tennis is that missing and blundering cost more than traits of genius. True, Alcaraz steals points from low winning% positions with an amazing rate and he prevails in rallyes when both parties don't miss, yet he also has too many sloppy sequences where he misses or is to tamed.
Focus is in performance, no different from technical, tactical or physical in nature to its contribution. In it is a department where Alcaraz has much upside but he hasn't really improved. Sadly, this is probably where lies the magic of tennis and its worth as a sport.
6) Likewise, the paradigma of floor/ceilling appears to me as losing pertinence over the years as I am becoming more pragmatic and "reality-check" oriented (I won't write a piece about the issues of the French culture on that topic) : in the end, it is what you do and what happens that matters, not what you say, proclaim and want. When tennis player are on the stage, they are at their best, period.
Sorry for mine being too long as well and not as sharp as in my native language.
I know you were talking about broader performance and not their match up specifically, I was just trying to mention all the bias I find regarding TPW% that can make Alcaraz look like an overachiever when to me he isn’t, especially at slams. Wawrinka is another example of a guy who achieved slam success despite underwhelming TPW numbers and to me that doesn’t mean he is an overachiever or just peaked at the right time. It just means he found extra gears at slams (fitness and mental consistency wise) that he didn’t find elsewhere that allowed him to get over the line without actually redlining. It’s sort of two definitions of consistency : week in week out and point in point out inside a given match.
Some additional thoughts regarding some of your points
2) You can’t possibly compare Sampras/Krajicek and Sinncaraz. In fact, I’d say Sinner is a bad matchup for Carlos, he is the perfect player in the very mold that he hates, yet he finds way to win when conditions suit him. That shows overall quality
As for match results, at the end of the day they’re all that matters. Sinner is undoubtedly more dominant within matches but in 2025 so far they win the same amount. Last 52 weeks, 7 percentages points difference in match win %. So advantage sinner, but huge is to much to warrant any kind of Krajiceck / sampras comparison. Carlos won 5 of the last 6 for a reason and while I believe he had clutch and variance somewhat on his side, you don’t achieve that if there is gulf in overall quality even in his favorite conditions.
5) Agree focus matters and is part of performance. I just think that when it comes to the tail end of slams, Carlos practically never shown this to be a problem, so you have to take this into account before suggesting he overachieves. On the other hand, take Zverev : what hinders his percentages / TPW% overall (FH) has always shown up when it mattered. So you have to make a distinction.
6) I think discussing floors and ceilings really matters especially if it results in TPW% bias. De Minaur really is the perfect example of high floor/low ceiling guy and I think it sort of inflates his TPW% compared to guys he frequently loses to because if you just compare their TPW%, you can be left wondering why he just never beats them
All in all this a very deep conversation for one single stat
I feel the gap between the two VS the field is significant on most HC, not so much on clay, grass and slow HC. When it comes to their match-up, it’s also very much speed dependent
I've noticed recently that Sinner tends to miss his forehands into the net, while Alcaraz tends to miss forehands by hitting them out of the court. Is this attributable to technique, intentionality, or both?
Jannik had someone from Formula Medicine in his box in the early rounds. Clearly he worked on his mental side extra hard these past weeks.
I also noticed the service performance - it's almost like the two switched their service tactics b/w the two matches...and in both matches, the relatively conservative server won. It's such a delicate balance.
The best part of their match up is that both are rapidly improving. Carlos improved his serves so much in the past 8 months or so. Jannik is a late boomer and he is still growing and improving. Hope they both take good care of their bodies so we can enjoy many more thrillers to come!
Also, I'm hoping the Carlos and his team go into the lab now and prepare for Sinner in a new way. A loss like this, which was not dominant but very convincing, should motivate new thinking.
I don't think it's panic stations yet, but he certainly needs to develop that 3/4 second-serve slider that stays lower and stops the obvious "attack off the return" style that gives him so much trouble -- not just Sinner --, Struff/Tiafoe/Humbert/Goffin/Djokovic etc
Also feel the speed at which Sinner has closed the gap on Alcaraz should keep Carlos and team up at night. He's Rafa when Novak started to make gains on him on clay, except here Sinner has basically already come back eye to eye there too. In the span of a year. Fascinating to see how Alcaraz will answer. I was surprised at how he mentally abdicated in the middle of that final.
It's not unusual for Carlos to get verbally/emotionally frustrated and wear those emotions to his box. He was one point away from getting back to 4-4 in the fourth and taking the momentum, so as I said, I don't think it's panic stations yet.
Here's a take I haven't heard from anyone else: I think in this particular rivalry, Sinner will have the most success on grass, Carlos on clay, and the hard courts will be more even.
Grass blunts too many of Alcaraz's advantages against Sinner: the kick serve, the deep return position, the ability to move more aggressively on offense and defense, the possibility of his forehand getting higher and heavier. And all the things Alcaraz does do well on grass (volleys, slice) he doesn't really get a chance to do much of in this rivalry.
Sinner best chances in order: AO/Wimby/US/RG
The US Open is bouncier than AO, so he gets some of those kick/spin options back, and the truer bounce allows him to take bigger cuts/risk with his forehand, and the surer footing allows him to be very aggressive with his movements (sliding, returning from very deep, etc.).
Not the first time, but in a GS final? No bueno... Very fair point about Carlos/Jannik on grass, even though I was surprised because I thought Alcaraz with his touch, speed and variety could derail Sinner. But Sinner's power just took that all out. Yet, on a day Jannik's serve gets a hiccup... But yeah, very very interesting!
Oh and also, if Sinner ends up beating Alcaraz in a RG final, I wonder what it'd do to Carlos' brain. We'll never know what would have happened if Sinner had won one more point in Paris this year...
Agree. That and the fh return on deuce seem to be the obvious pain points.
One of my favorite ocurrences in men's tennis is when Sinner gets vocal and animated like the start of the 2nd set in the Wimby final and when he defeated Zverev in Cincy. The fact that he's so rarely in that mode magnifies the scope of a match when he does it and indicates that the stakes have cut through his usual composure and tapped into something primal
yeah, I think even bounce level may be more important. Madrid is not slow but very bouncy. Monte Carlo is slow as mud but pretty bouncy. IW, Beijing. But then you start to look at the majority of outdoor hardcourt environments and there's been a real shift toward low-bounce courts. Not always super fast, but the ball isn't sitting up as much as it maybe did 10 years ago. My hope, as a Carlos fan and a fan of variety, is the USOpen distinguishes itself from the AO.
Agree, I think the bounce level was crucial for the second serves. Sinner was all over the Alcaraz second serve that wasn't bouncing as high as it was at Roland Garros. Better returns and a faster bounce speed means Sinner was able to rush Alcaraz off his serve much more effectively than he could during the French, and Sinner won a majority of the points on Alcaraz's second serve yesterday.
Grigor, Grigor, where art thou? Thine slice and net game… Carlos forgot the Sampras blueprint. He might have lost anyway but as Uncle Toni once noted “If you make him doubt…”
I think the sample size is not big enough to really have a strong understanding of the influence of surface on their match-up.
What I mostly see from the last 2 years dynamic is Sinner being the "point-per-point" better player underperforming on the decisive points and hence having a blurred H2H against Alcaraz.
It is clear to me that Sinner made strides on every aspects of his game in 2 years whereas Alcaraz, already an absolutely stunning athlete haven't improved as much, levelling their palmares and accomplishements (where Alcaraz still has an edge btw).
As they keep on repeating, margins are thin in tennis and extrapolating the least wise method of planning in the sport. But the king of the hill currently is Sinner and his excellence (overlooked) with the serve and around it an excellent life-savior. As Jeff Sackmann already posted a couple of times, Sinner is TOP 3 both in hold% and breaks% : that's rare and stunningly dominant.
As always, great stuff Hugh! BH line was money. Intrigued to see how the match-up plays out if we get another in New York
Thank you Hugh as always for your analysis. Huge fan of your work. I've now also listened to Gill Gross, Andy Roddick, and Nik from Intuitive Tennis go into varying levels of detail about the tactical and technical differences in this match, all of which has been interesting.
But the one thing I can't stop thinking about is what Alcaraz himself was yelling repeatedly at his team. The audio was quiet but he was very animated. The full quote is "He's much better than me. From the back of the court he's much better than me. Much better than me, much better. [Holding hands far apart] This, this — by far — this [far]. Much better than me. Much better than me."
I am a huge Alcaraz fan in part because of the chaotic jazz festival he's often able to throw at opponents. I don't mind the errors because of the excitement and frequent wins. But now that we're entering the hardcourt swing I find myself emotionally preparing for several months of devastating hope followed by almost inevitable despair when he faces powerful baseliners like Sinner.
My question is this: can Alcaraz, at this point in his career, do anything reasonably practicable to get his baseline game to Sinner's level of power and consistency?
He's been making small changes. His service motion is more fluid, and the serve's speed and placement seem to be improving. His backhand setup is more compact, which may potentially bolster it against fast attacks. And his footwork on the running forehand may be improving its reliability. (These are just observations -- if anyone's doing stats that confirm or contradict, please share.)
But Alcaraz nevertheless seems unlikely to beat an indomitable and impassive ball machine like Sinner on any of the three faster grand slam surfaces. What changes if any would make it possible for Alcaraz to develop a consistent and powerful baseline lockdown mode? Can he win without the low-percentage magic? Or am I doomed to receive a decade of high heart-rate notifications on my watch?
I actually think US Open is a good tournament for Alcaraz long-term. It's bouncier and slower than AO usually, and we've seen that on hard courts Alcaraz can attack second serves more easily and go nuclear on the forehand (Beijing). I would resist reading into the Alcaraz quotes too much; players get emotional when in the heat of the moment. I don't think Alcaraz needs to tweak all that much when they play from the back, but I do think he needs to develop a 3/4 more sliding/less kicking second serve
I get the impression right now that he's more comfortable hitting the slice cutter on the first serve, at first serve pace, than slowing down with that approach.
Brilliant article. Alcaraz was getting Sinner with that forehand inside in from his backhand corner in Paris. Somehow finding the slither of line and short angle most times.
Sinner's devastating backhand line avenged that today.
I would love to see what improvements carlos can make to get his level up , because all i can see is sinner being technically superior and when he plays his A game there is no one to match it .Hoping carlos can improve further so that sinner doesnt dominate everything
This is a funny comment because copy/paste this is what people were saying about Carlos a month ago (higher ceiling, better top A game at its best). Anyway, a great rivalry is arrived.
Sinner's top level isn't as high as Carlos'. But bc Sinner's game is more simple than Carlos', it may be easier for him to sustain a high level. Also, I think the almost 2:1 hardcourt to clay ratio is an inherent advantage.
Another little piece on the Tennis Abstract data and current season stats :
In 2025, Sinner has kept on improving while Alcaraz is plateauing and there is now an abyss in terms of their performance versus the field. Sinner wins 56,1% of points this season (55,3 in 2024, 53,9 in 2023). Alcaraz has 54,4/54,2/53,9.
One can see that in fact they were equally matched vs the field in 2023 behind Djokovic who did 54,9% that year.
Currently Sinner makes the difference behind his service with >70% points won, which is Karlovic level of performance and 3 pts above the already stellar Alcaraz's delivery while their return number are identical.
For the perpective, the current season of Sinner is on par with 2015 Djokovic on its play-by-play numbers and in the same realm as the most tyrannical Swiatek from 2023, better than the primest Federer. Only Serena posted better numbers in 2012/13 with over 58% points won !
If you want to be provocative, it becomes clear that up till now, Alcaraz is somehow an overachiever to the detriment of Sinner's in terms of accomplishments and his better Big title tally is misleading. Sinner doesn't reap that many fruits from his higher domination and 2025 FO loss reflects that. Normally, the gap shall reduce eventually due to Alcaraz losing a bit more sooner, letting Sinner be the "Alcarazsiegerbesieger".
Regarding total points won
First off, I don't think there is an abyss in terms of performance against the field. So far in 2025, their winrate is even (89/90), and Carlos' sample is smaller (I'd actually bet on Sinner's TPW going a bit down by year end and around 55.5).
But anyway, I think that TPW% is very useful, but needs to be taken with nuance because of its flaws.
First, you haven't separated it for surfaces. Sinner is better on most HCs and Carlos is better on natural surfaces, though Jannik challenges that now with this title (but the TPW% gap is narrower there still, especially on grass where Carlos was ahead up until this year). Sinner definitely showed how agonizingly close he was in Paris, but still, he came up short so I'd still give Carlos the clay edge and put them even on grass with a matchup advantage to Sinner.
Second, I think this stat has an important bias towards high floor guys. Carlos can make any of his matches competitive, but it doesn't stress you out for when he's about to face top competition, especially on his favorite ground. However, this trait will skew down his percentages more than Sinner's comparitively lower ceiling will, because only a few (actually only Carlos I'd say) can maybe look to expose this ceiling.
If you look through 2025, Novak is only .1 percent off Carlos, and while I use it to say he ain't washed yet, it also shows it doesn't quite capture the Serbian's limitations as of now.
The gap between De Minaur, another high floor kind of guy (53.4) and Carlos (54.4) is also smaller than the one between Alcaraz and Sinner (56.1) and in no way is that true to the reality. Sinncaraz is close (and conditions dependent), Alcaraz/De Minaur isn't.
So all in all, I wouldn't say Alcaraz is an overachiever at all. You don't overachieve your way to a slam or to a 5 match win streak over your biggest rival. Even consistency wise, he's only inconsistent in comparison to Sinner, and only suffers bad losses on fast HCs
Edit : That subject really fascinates me so I'll add a final point.
One additionnal reason which to me explains why Sinner is so far ahead in TPW% but that doesn't make Alcaraz an overachiever is that Carlos' dips are often focus related (not always, he isn't some invicible guy, but still, it happens)
And when dips are related to focus, I tend to dismiss them easier when evaluating someone's potential than someone with technical or physical issues, because, while they all affect your floor, only the technical and physical problems can truly ceil you. And if you're able to lock in for a full match when it matters, which I believe is much easier than hiding a technical or physical flaw under huge pressure, your mean is much different. And I believe this match was the first GS final in his career where Carlos was partly affected focus wise, maybe due to fatigue. All the other times, he brought shades of "new normal" performance to the table (different from strictly peaking) (and at some point that new normal won't be enough because of a bad day or whatever, but still). In the end, it's a similar logic to someone playing through injury for half a season and then being fit again : his numbers look rough so far, but you know that you can expect better now.
Anyway, as expected I got too long but I think this bit regarding floor/ceiling/mean performance is interesting to dive into.
Thanks for your piece, it is always interesting to have an in-deep argumentation.
Sorry to disagree but it seems that there's some confusion there :
I wasn't discussing their match-up but their overall performance within the broader context of the ATP.
1) Sinner's sample is smaller, not Carlos (probaby typo) since he played half of Carlos's matchs. Furthermore, Sinner's sample is biaised to the natural surfaces that are his relatively weaker environment compared to hardcourt and indoor where he is a beast. Hence, unlike you, his TPW% is not bound to settle since the remainder of the season is taking place in his kingdom.
2) Using TPW% for a duel is a wrongful use of the metric. Krajicek upset Sampras many times but he was nonetheless the lesser player by a landslide !
1 pts TPW% difference is in fact huge vs a filel and an excellent proxy for achievements (look at all the pantheon TPW% since the 90's and you will see that the hierarchy of greatness follows TPW% exactly). To illustrate it, career TPW% of Big 3 from Djo/Nad/Fed are as follow : 54,5/54,4/54,1. Sampras' is 53,5 & Agassi 53,3.
Unlike match results, play-by-play stats do have a much better signification power (over 10 000 points played) and indeed, such strong correlation shows that winning more points days in, days out yield better achievements.
If you follow golf, the Stroke Gained metric brought a new paradigma to the analysis of the game, and since then, the level reached new heights (and there, margins are even thinner and competition much broader !), and TPW% is a kind of SG metric for tennis.
For info, career TPW Sinner/Alcaraz are 53,4/53,5 currently but they are likely to improve, and the last 3 year dynamic calls for SInner eventually outrunning Alcaraz.
As bad as it seems for the remainder of the circuit, current TPW% is congruent with its ELO and race ranking : even though the gap with the Lead 2 is obvious, he still hands comfortably beatdowns to almost everyone else on the circuit.
3) You do have all the splits possible at Tennis Abstract (Career and last 52 weeks) and over the last year, the comprehensiveness of Sinner's superiority vs the field is striking. And Sinner even won MORE points on clay than on HC !
4) All in all, what happened prevail and you cannot overachieve your deeds per definition obviously. Yet, variance still has been in Carlos's favor until now and it might be thanks to his superior talent, the focus and the fact that tennis puts a premium on clutchness (not all points being created equal). But I do find the power of TPW% big : no matter what clutchness you have, eventually to achieve, it is not because you win the points that matters, it is because you JUST win more points. You see, in the Sampras/Agassi debate, pro-Agassi were always saying that Sampras was clutch and not such a good player besides that (infering that Agassi was winning more points overall), yet his TPW% is still better than Agassi's and the best of his hera.
5) Your argument about focus is another avatar of the speech about "talent". As the good old Jim Courier was arguing : "Talent beats hard work if itself works hard". The cruelty of tennis is that missing and blundering cost more than traits of genius. True, Alcaraz steals points from low winning% positions with an amazing rate and he prevails in rallyes when both parties don't miss, yet he also has too many sloppy sequences where he misses or is to tamed.
Focus is in performance, no different from technical, tactical or physical in nature to its contribution. In it is a department where Alcaraz has much upside but he hasn't really improved. Sadly, this is probably where lies the magic of tennis and its worth as a sport.
6) Likewise, the paradigma of floor/ceilling appears to me as losing pertinence over the years as I am becoming more pragmatic and "reality-check" oriented (I won't write a piece about the issues of the French culture on that topic) : in the end, it is what you do and what happens that matters, not what you say, proclaim and want. When tennis player are on the stage, they are at their best, period.
Sorry for mine being too long as well and not as sharp as in my native language.
Thanks for your response,
I know you were talking about broader performance and not their match up specifically, I was just trying to mention all the bias I find regarding TPW% that can make Alcaraz look like an overachiever when to me he isn’t, especially at slams. Wawrinka is another example of a guy who achieved slam success despite underwhelming TPW numbers and to me that doesn’t mean he is an overachiever or just peaked at the right time. It just means he found extra gears at slams (fitness and mental consistency wise) that he didn’t find elsewhere that allowed him to get over the line without actually redlining. It’s sort of two definitions of consistency : week in week out and point in point out inside a given match.
Some additional thoughts regarding some of your points
2) You can’t possibly compare Sampras/Krajicek and Sinncaraz. In fact, I’d say Sinner is a bad matchup for Carlos, he is the perfect player in the very mold that he hates, yet he finds way to win when conditions suit him. That shows overall quality
As for match results, at the end of the day they’re all that matters. Sinner is undoubtedly more dominant within matches but in 2025 so far they win the same amount. Last 52 weeks, 7 percentages points difference in match win %. So advantage sinner, but huge is to much to warrant any kind of Krajiceck / sampras comparison. Carlos won 5 of the last 6 for a reason and while I believe he had clutch and variance somewhat on his side, you don’t achieve that if there is gulf in overall quality even in his favorite conditions.
5) Agree focus matters and is part of performance. I just think that when it comes to the tail end of slams, Carlos practically never shown this to be a problem, so you have to take this into account before suggesting he overachieves. On the other hand, take Zverev : what hinders his percentages / TPW% overall (FH) has always shown up when it mattered. So you have to make a distinction.
6) I think discussing floors and ceilings really matters especially if it results in TPW% bias. De Minaur really is the perfect example of high floor/low ceiling guy and I think it sort of inflates his TPW% compared to guys he frequently loses to because if you just compare their TPW%, you can be left wondering why he just never beats them
All in all this a very deep conversation for one single stat
I feel the gap between the two VS the field is significant on most HC, not so much on clay, grass and slow HC. When it comes to their match-up, it’s also very much speed dependent
Hi, thank you for answer.
Good points about Wawrinka & De Minaur. In fine, we do agree that TPW% needs a lot of context to mean really anything.
nice hob, thank you--
sorry for the typo, job obviously--and it was very good Sinner play, he had it together for the win.
I've noticed recently that Sinner tends to miss his forehands into the net, while Alcaraz tends to miss forehands by hitting them out of the court. Is this attributable to technique, intentionality, or both?
I think Sinner hits a little flatter and lower over the net in general, so makes sense.
Jannik had someone from Formula Medicine in his box in the early rounds. Clearly he worked on his mental side extra hard these past weeks.
I also noticed the service performance - it's almost like the two switched their service tactics b/w the two matches...and in both matches, the relatively conservative server won. It's such a delicate balance.
The best part of their match up is that both are rapidly improving. Carlos improved his serves so much in the past 8 months or so. Jannik is a late boomer and he is still growing and improving. Hope they both take good care of their bodies so we can enjoy many more thrillers to come!