The one lopsided match-up I've never been able to really wrap my head around is Ferrer-Gasquet, which rests 8-1 in Ferrer's favor. What more is that most of their score-lines have consisted of Gasquet getting roughly 1 or 2 games per set. I just don't understand what it is that allows Ferrer to not only beat, but route Gasquet so routinely.
There's no complex there as far as I'm aware of, and Ferrer doesn't have a game that should inherently trouble Richard.
I do believe there is a complex... If you look at Richard's press conference before his latest match against Ferrer, he was talking as if he had lost already, and almost trying to make excuses for it, before even playing the match.
Then again, I may be wrong, but I've always thought Gasquet's problems were almost entirely mental (thus it's not necessarily linked to Ferrer).
Thank you guys for a very interesting thread.
However, I have to admit that I do agree with what Duong pointed out, that I find it difficult to really discuss match-ups in such a clear way, because it kind of ignores the fact that a same player doesn't always play the same.
I mean, for instance, since I watch Ferrer the most I always hear those comments about his "consistency", and what I notice is that people are so convinced he's the embodiement of consistency, that they will interepret everything he does in that light.
For instance, lately, he's been serving a lot of DFs, and every time, you had commentators marvelling at it and going: "that's very unusual he's normally so consistent and accurate blablabla".
Actually, it was not unusual at all, it had been like that for months, maybe because of tiredness, maybe because it's a tactic (trying to force on his serve and hoping the resulting higher number of DFs would be compensated by the gains this tactic would bring?)
So, sometimes, I find it difficult to generalize about a player's game, because so often, I can see that people are doing it with Ferrer, and since I watch him closely I know they're wrong. What they're doing is often placate what they think they know about him, instead of really commenting on what they see.
Still, I found it really interesting to read all this. Even notwithstanding the fact that I probably don't have the ability to do it, I don't have time to watch everyone play, let alone analyze everyone's game in detail, and it's great to see those strange phenomena explained.