Gods amongst men

For the last two years, the grand slams have been equally divided between Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz. While their rivalry is as encapsulating as sport could possibly get, their dominance has begged the question: Is anyone else capable of winning a Grand Slam?

We’ve known for a while now that Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner were going to be the two best players in the world. The previous 2024 season had seen the pair split the Major trophies, but fans were still yet to see the pair lock horns in a Grand Slam final. Well, 2025 was the year that changed.

The pair once again split the Grand Slams two to two, but this time three of the four Grand Slam finals were graced by their presence. After waiting for the pair to meet in a Slam final for so long, once it arrived, they didn’t disappoint. All were spectacles of the highest order, with the Roland Garros final being particularly spellbinding, showcasing what tennis always longs for: the best fighting the best.

Grand Slam final meetings were the final piece of the Alcaraz-Sinner rivalry, something that fans have been restlessly awaiting since the two began their courtship. But now that it is here (and here to stay), it has raised some concerns.

Sinner and Alcaraz are not just the two best players in the world; they are playing another sport entirely. While they occupy the top two spots in the world rankings and can only meet in a final of a Slam, realistically you would have to beat not just one but two of them to claim a Grand Slam title.

Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Players had to do that when Nadal and Federer were at the top of their games.” Which is completely true, but looking back at it, there were players who could do that: not just Djokovic (of course), Murray, Del Potro, and Wawrinka, but other players like Ferrer, Tsonga, and Berdych, players who never even won a slam. You felt that there were players who had to game to challenge at least one of the top players. I’m not convinced I currently see that.

At the age of 38, Novak Djokovic is still comfortably the third-best player in the world, but even he seems incapable of beating one of these goliaths, let alone both of them in the same tournament.

Djokovic made the semi-finals of all four slams last year, losing to Sinner in two, Alcaraz in one and succumbing to injury against Zverev in the other. This is a remarkable feat for a man of Djokovic’s age, and while it should be celebrated as an achievement for Djokovic personally, I fear that it highlights a failure for the tour collectively.

Djokovic should not be third in the world. At his age, the rest of the tour should have surpassed him, but they fail to do so. His inability to defeat Alcaraz or Sinner highlights what we all know: that he is a long way past his best. But apparently this is still enough to be this in the world. I worry that outside of Sinner and Alcaraz, there is an immense lack of talent in the men’s game.

Of the players that I do believe could pose a threat to Sinner and Alcaraz, Joao Fonseca tops the list, but he is still early in his development. It will probably be two years before he is regularly competing with them, and in that time, I doubt anyone else will pose much of a threat.

The best chance that the rest have is an injury or an early-round shock exit. Despite having more Grand Slams (6 to 4) and a better head-to-head record (10-5), I do believe that of the two, Alcaraz is more likely to falter in the early stages of a Grand Slam. Alcaraz is a man who needs inspiration to perform at his best, and occasionally against lesser opposition he can become distracted and disinterested, as seen by his near disastrous first-round loss to Fabio Fognini at Wimbledon this year and his recent failings at the Australian Open (although this is not something that will last).

Sinner, on the other hand, tends to go about his work like the Terminator, not distracted or caring about who is on the other side of the net. I truly believe that at Grand Slams he is close to unbeatable against anybody, other than Alcaraz, who always seems to play his best tennis against his biggest rival.

Coming back to the US Open, the reason I highlight this Grand Slam ahead of the other three is because even during the primes of Nadal, Federer and Djokovic, the US Open always threw up some surprises. Since Federer last won at Flushing Meadows in 2008, the tournament has produced eleven different champions and not a single defence. In fact, Jannik Sinner reaching this year’s final was the first time since 2016 that a player had made consecutive finals at the US Open.

The US Open courts tend to neutralise the advantages that the top players have on the natural surfaces and at the lightning-fast courts in Australia. But this year it proved to be like any other slam, as the ‘big two’ once again dominated.

The current crop of players in and around the top 10 now face a mental block that hinders them from defeating even one of Sinner or Alcaraz, let alone two. The idea of running a marathon is off-putting enough, but when you tell the runner they’ll have to run another one straight after finishing the first, it becomes very difficult to gee yourself up for the challenge ahead.

When Sinner and Alcaraz meet, fireworks are a guarantee. Their scintillating rivalry is what tennis has yearned for, but are they too dominant? Hopefully two or three players can catch up, or tennis will become a two-man sport very quickly.