Carlos Alcaraz has entered territory that even eluded the ‘Big Three'

Telegraph

a day ago

Alcaraz has entered territory that eluded even Nadal, Djokovic and Roger Federer. At just 22, he is a back-to-back champion at both Roland Garros and Wimbledon, a double distinction that those three titans could not complete across their entire careers. While it is always tempting to find parallels, to equate Alcaraz's obduracy with Nadal's or his status as the crowd favourite with Federer's, the joy is that he is so defiantly his own man. Where Nadal won 14 of his 22 titles on the crushed brick, Alcaraz's great virtue is his versatility, with his five titles spread across clay, grass and hard courts. Melbourne Park, where he has curiously not advanced beyond the quarter-finals in four attempts, is the one stage he has left to conquer.
The beau monde assembled on Court Philippe Chatrier cheered for Alcaraz as unashamedly as Centre Court, otherwise known as Basel-on-Thames, did for Federer. But their personalities could hardly be more different. Where Federer's emotions would be carefully modulated, Alcaraz's body language in this final was an open book: one moment he was chuntering at coach Juan Carlos Ferraro about how difficult Sinner was to break down, the next he was whipping up his audience to inspire him to one of sport's finest comebacks. The figure he most closely resembled was Djokovic. Just as the Serb saved two championship points against Federer to win Wimbledon in 2019, Alcaraz had to save three before finally seeing off Sinner.
There were other reasons why he monopolised affections in Paris. As much as there was to admire in Sinner's play, it was also difficult to look beyond the issue of whether the Italian should have been in this tournament at all, with his three-month ban for two failed drug tests conveniently timed so that he did not miss a single major. Where every Alcaraz winner was wildly cheered by A-listers from Dustin Hoffman to Natalie Portman, Sinner drew little more than polite ripples for his own prodigious efforts. It appeared unfairly partisan at times, but it accurately reflected the two players' standings in the court of public opinion.
Only Alcaraz can explain how, at 3-5, 0-40 in a match he trailed by two sets to one, he contrived a way to win one hour and 45 minutes later. He possesses that rarest of gifts, the capacity always to save his most stirring of feats for the grandest occasions. Five wins in his first five Grand Slam finals? That is the mark of a champion destined to become an immortal. Better yet, he wears that aura with uncommon poise. After the court had emptied, one of his first gestures, having strained every sinew for this achievement, was to celebrate with the ball boys and girls.
Sinner exuded similar grace in the harshest circumstances. He was generous to Alcaraz in the aftermath, just as he had been sportsmanlike during the match over marginal line calls. While they might be polar opposites as characters, with Alcaraz's flamboyance the antithesis to Sinner's froideur, both carry themselves impeccably. Theirs, truly, is a tug-of-war to cherish.