Alexander Zverev shows the difference between a good player and a champion


by   |  VIEW 6556
Alexander Zverev shows the difference between a good player and a champion

The happy ending will come, sooner or later, but for Alexander Zverev, from the bottom of the well, the light cannot be seen. At least for now. The defeat at Wimbledon has put another important exclamation point on the career of the German, who travels parallel on two very different tracks.

The first track is all the tournaments except for the Slams. In these tournaments, Zverev has proven to be a top-level player, winning 3 ATP Masters 1000s, the 2018 ATP Finals and a total of 11 tournaments. This year something has changed; after the victory in London, he entered a psycho-physical crisis that is characterizing his 2019.

The second track is the four Grand Slam tournaments. His best result was the quarter-finals achieved at the French Open in 2018 and 2019. Too little for a tennis player who is considered the future leader of the ATP Tour. Whenever he plays a Slam tournament Zverev enters into a serious psycho-physical crisis: he plays badly, he is eliminated even worse, often by outsiders.

There is no denying it: the difference between a good player and a champion is marked by a victory in a Grand Slam event. Only by winning a Slam he can take the role of top-player. For now, Zverev's career is unfinished.

He was perhaps too much acclaimed at the beginning of his career, and this must have put a great deal of pressure on the shoulders of the twenty-two-year-old, which threatens to crush him in the most important events. His technical skills will improve, as will pressure management.

It seems that even some factors outside the court have helped to destabilize the German before Wimbledon. Surely once he has won the first Major (if he will do it) it could be much easier for him to play the future Slams with renewed serenity. For now, however, Zverev is at the bottom of the well, and from the bottom of the well, the light cannot be seen.