Alexander Zverev became the 30th world No. 1 in ATP history on Monday 2 November, after a season in which he won Roland-Garros and the US Open, his first two Grand Slam titles. Since then the debate has not stopped, and the strongest voices on each side are worth setting next to each other. The sources here are dated, because this round-up covers the past week rather than a single moment.
The doubt
The case against came first. On the opening day of the Paris Masters, French journalist Frédéric Verdier said on Eurosport that Zverev had beaten only three top-10 players this season and was benefiting from the absences of Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz, according to Tennis Majors. Sinner is out for the rest of the season.
Zverev leads the ATP Tour with 65 match wins this year, according to the same report, but the argument is about who he has beaten rather than how often. It is a fair question for any No. 1 who arrives in a quiet stretch of the calendar, and it is the one the ranking system cannot answer by itself. We explained how the year-end race is decided in our guide to the ATP year-end No. 1.
Connors: a standard, not a verdict
Jimmy Connors, on his podcast, framed it as an obligation. “As happy as I am for Zverev and the way he has played, he has an obligation now to the game and to himself to play like a two-time Grand Slam champion, every time,” the former world No. 1 said. That is a kind approval with a condition attached, because it implies the ranking is earned only if the form is consistent.
Federer: the titles were overdue
Roger Federer came at it from the other direction, in an interview with Sports Illustrated Germany reported on 7 November by Tennis365. “Zverev dared, playing courageously even in important matches,” he said. “Many others, myself included, had advised him for years to be more aggressive from the baseline and dictate the pace of the game more.”
Federer added that “in the moments that mattered, he often tended to become too passive”, and concluded that “given his ability, these two Slam titles were long overdue”. He said he was “incredibly happy” for him. It is a verdict on the Slams more than on the ranking, but it answers the obvious follow-up: whether the two big wins were luck or a change of approach. Federer’s view is that the approach changed. We covered his comments in full in our earlier piece on Federer and Zverev.
Pioline, Sampras and the player himself
Others defended him before the tournament. Paris Masters director Cédric Pioline said there is no such thing as a No. 1 by default, and Pete Sampras, in a video message published by the ATP, said the ranking was well deserved; both views are paraphrased from the Tennis Majors report.
Zverev’s own answer, in his first press conference as No. 1, was blunt: “You have to play the best season for an entire year.” He added: “I’m looking forward to the top two guys [Alcaraz and Sinner] being healthy again, playing fully and competing with them. I look forward to that challenge, as well.”
Where it leaves the argument
The pundits are not really disagreeing about the ranking. Verdier questions the quality of the opposition, Connors asks for consistency, Federer credits a change in how Zverev plays, and Zverev says the ranking measures a full year. All four can be right at once.
The test comes in Turin. The ATP Finals start on 15 November, and Zverev will face the best of the rest in a round-robin, with Alcaraz in the field and Sinner absent. Whether the result vindicates Federer or Connors will be clearer after the group stage than after any press conference.
Subscribe to Punditfeed on Google News for all the latest updates from the world of sports!
