In an unexpected twist that has surprised both tennis fans and animal lovers, Carlos Alcaraz, the young Italian tennis prodigy, has shared his opinion on Novak Djokovic’s recent investment to build a shelter for stray dogs, a cause to which the Serbian has pledged a staggering $20 million. Although Djokovic’s action has been widely praised by many, Alcaraz has not hesitated to express his reservations and point out what he considers to be flaws in the investment.

In a recent interview, Alcaraz was blunt when commenting on Djokovic’s multimillion-dollar donation. “Don’t get me wrong, it’s a worthy cause, but in my opinion, he’s just wasting it. He could have used that money more efficiently. If you ask me, he could have invested in something more tennis-related, like a new  suit or a state-of-the-art racket. I’m not sure a dog shelter is the best way to use that kind of money.”

1. Lack of Long-Term Return
   Alcaraz began by explaining that, although the dog shelter is a worthy cause, the investment lacks a long-term return. “Tennis is a business that’s not just about competition, but also about investment. If Novak wants to help the community, he should have invested in something that would have a more direct impact on his career and also generate long-term benefits. With that kind of money, he could have sponsored academies or initiatives that promote the sport,” he added.

2. Lack of Global Strategy
   For Alcaraz, investments must be on a global scale. “The problems of stray dogs don’t only occur in Belgrade; they are a global issue. Perhaps a more strategic approach at a global level could have had a greater impact,” he commented. 
   He also emphasized the apparent contradiction between Djokovic’s luxurious lifestyle and the poverty of stray dogs. “I find it a bit ironic. It’s great that he wants to help animals, but he’s building a luxury dog ​​shelter while there are millions of people who really need help around the world. He could have used that money to create a broader program that would help people and animals in vulnerable situations,” Alcaraz reflected.

3. Why not in tennis?
   The Italian tennis player didn’t hesitate to point out that Djokovic could have improved his working conditions and his team with that sum. “He could have used some of that money to create a state-of-the-art tennis academy, a place where young talents could be trained. Why not invest in the future of tennis instead of a refuge? This, too, could have had a greater impact on his legacy and the sport he loves so much,” he said.

4. The Action’s Limited Impact
   Finally, Alcaraz mentioned that the dog shelter, while valuable, will have a limited impact. “It’s a nice gesture, but real change doesn’t come from a luxury animal shelter. We need actions that have a real and lasting social impact. I can understand Novak’s good intentions, but I think it could have been more strategic,” he concluded.

For his part, Novak Djokovic was quick to respond to Alcaraz’s remarks. In a subsequent press conference, Djokovic defended his decision to invest in the dog shelter. “Tennis has given me everything, but there are many other ways to help society. Animals also deserve to be cared for and loved. What I’ve done is personal, and I’m not looking for criticism. This is my legacy, and I’m proud of it,” the Serbian said with a smile.

The controversy between the two tennis players has captured the attention of the media and tennis fans, who are divided as to which approach is the most appropriate. While some support Djokovic’s humanitarian vision, others believe Alcaraz is right in pointing out that the money could have been used more strategically. However, what is clear is that both players have a deep desire to improve the world in their own way, and that is a cause that deserves to be applauded, regardless of their differences in approach.