Despite the Australian Open having concluded, and the tennis having slowed down, there is still plenty for fans and pundits to talk about as we await the next Grand Slam event.
After all, this sport never stops, and already we have new tournaments from Abu Dhabi to Romania and all across France.
This has afforded a great opportunity for those desperate for more minutes on court, with stars like Emma Raducanu, Felix Auger-Aliassime and Alexandra Eala all featuring after disappointing runs in Melbourne.
However, Stan Wawrinka is one player who thrived at the Australian Open, yet wasted no time in getting back to action in Montpellier.
Would Carlos Alcaraz beat a prime Rafael Nadal?
And, ironically, it’s the 40-year-old who has been the topic of discussion once again.
Prime Stan Wawrinka compared to Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner
Following on from Patrick Mouratoglou’s claims that Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner are both better than the Big Three were, the tennis world has rallied against the famous coach.
Even Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray have offered their reactions in the form of laughing emojis.
Why do you think Stan Wawrinka was never considered to be on the same level as Andy Murray?
However, it’s Mark Petchey who has taken the opposition stance to another level, using Stan Wawrinka as his reference point.
He wrote on X: “To say that Prime Big 4 wasn’t as good as Alcaraz/Sinner, is like saying Prime Mike Tyson would have lost to Anthony Joshua.
“It’s pure conjecture but essentially clickbait because trust me, Prime Stan wins vs Alcaraz/Sinner.
“No one peaked like Stan.
“Everyone is entitled to an opinion but that doesn’t mean the opinion is correct.”
Carlos Alcaraz and Stan Wawrinka should not be compared
Whilst Mouratoglou and Petchey will both argue their respective stances, realistically, they are both wrong.
After all, it’s impossible to judge players from completely different eras.
Whether it be Jimmy Connors, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer or Carlos Alcaraz today, each player comes with their own crucial context regarding the techniques of the times, equipment on offer and the strength of their rivals.
Wawrinka is a perfect case study, who will likely retire with just three Grand Slam titles. However, the fact that he existed in an era where Federer, Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal reigned supreme is important to note, and makes it difficult to compare him to someone like Alcaraz.
Perhaps, instead of arguing hypotheticals, it would be better to just appreciate the greatness currently on display without comparing them to those that came before.
Receive exclusive tennis news and updates twice a week to your mailbox
