Please, I think that distinction should go to either Eccleston or Tenant, not Smith. Have the hype-mongers already forgotten what both Eccleston and Tenant did with the role? Have they forgotten how high they both set the bar?
Like I said, Smith was good, but perhaps not great. Granted, he seemed sufficiently "Doctorish" to me, but he also seemed to be lacking that extra spark, that bit of panache, displayed by both his predecessors. In my opinion, he does not surpass Eccleston or Tenant in breadth, depth, or charisma. He may come close to matching them, at times, but, in my mind, Tenant and Eccleston remain top of the list of "Best new Doctors ever".
Maybe I'm just getting old. Maybe I have a problem with the Doctor getting younger, and younger, and younger. Or maybe I need to see more episodes to see what Matt Smith can really do.
Bookmarks