Novak Djokovic isn’t someone who throws around grand statements without a reason. Yet when the conversation turns to his opponents and each man’s place in the hierarchy of big-time tennis, the Serb chooses his words with precision. In a talk with reporters he unexpectedly brought Stan Wawrinka back to center stage — and at the same time explained why comparing the Big Three’s duels with today’s rivalry between Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz is a thankless exercise.
"If We Talk About the Underrated — It's Wawrinka"
Question. Novak, whom would you name as the most underrated opponent of your career?
Djokovic. Stan Wawrinka. His contribution is often underestimated, although he won Grand Slam tournaments three times. People sometimes forget the scale of that achievement. In my view, Stan has done more than nine out of ten players in the entire history of tennis — and that’s an objective benchmark, not a courtesy compliment.
Question. What is it about him that makes you speak so confidently?
Djokovic. Stan is the kind of player who, at his peak, could raise the bar with the unspoken things: discipline, shot power, and character in decisive moments. Opponents like that define the quality of an era.
Two Eras — Two Time Scales
Question. Can the Big Three’s rivalries be compared to the current Sinner vs. Alcaraz duel?
Djokovic. They are different in magnitude. With Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal I spent more than twenty years on court — virtually a separate era, woven from dozens of finals and countless chapters. With Jannik and Carlos I compete now, but our rivalry has lasted only about three years. Comparing such time spans is incorrect — the horizons are completely different.
Question. But the new duel is already visible to everyone?
Djokovic. Absolutely. Over the last year and a half Sinner and Alcaraz have played several breathtaking matches. It’s a living rivalry that energizes the tour and pushes everyone else to lift their level.
Why the Sinner–Alcaraz Rivalry Matters to the Whole Tour
Question. What is the value of their rivalry for tennis as a whole?
Djokovic. It’s the effect of scale. When two young leaders meet regularly in the late rounds, the sport gains a new dramatic narrative: storylines take shape, tactical answers emerge, and spectator interest grows. It’s precisely these duels that set the agenda and fill the stands.
What We Often Miss When We Talk About the Greats
Question. So why does Wawrinka’s name get lost in the lists so easily?
Djokovic. There are so many headline names and records at the summit that attention naturally shifts toward them. But the overall picture is incomplete without players who consistently won majors and broke the script. Stan is one of them. He should be remembered not “after” but “alongside” — as a necessary coordinate of the era.
A Mark in History That Needs No Signature
In Djokovic’s view, Wawrinka is that underrated marker of greatness which helps calibrate any conversation about the best. And the Sinner–Alcaraz duel isn’t an attempt to rewrite the past, but a chance to give the future its own pulse and new meanings. In the end, time will put everything in its place: eras don’t compete — they align into a single line in which everyone has an honestly earned line.
