Does anyone still think that Murray and Gasquet are better than Nole? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Does anyone still think that Murray and Gasquet are better than Nole?

NikolaBGD
01-23-2008, 01:41 PM
I think no...

lisaplenske
01-23-2008, 01:43 PM
Why are you asking that question if you answer it yourself?:o

Manon
01-23-2008, 01:43 PM
I think no...

Gasquet is very near, Andy not jet, unfortunately.

my0118
01-23-2008, 01:46 PM
Why are you asking that question if you answer it yourself?:o

Because he's a clown.

NikolaBGD
01-23-2008, 01:49 PM
Maybe I am a clown, but you sounds like your compatriot Bolo Young(Chang Lee) in the final match;)

Rogiman
01-23-2008, 01:50 PM
Gasquet is so far behind he could not be spotted by the Abell telescope.

Murray will never reach these levels, but will probably have some nice career highlights.

adee-gee
01-23-2008, 01:50 PM
Gasquet is very near, Andy not jet, unfortunately.
Murray is a hell of a lot closer than Gasquet.

Exodus
01-23-2008, 01:50 PM
gasquet yes murray no way he sucks he is an overhyped british player like henman

scoobs
01-23-2008, 01:51 PM
Ask me in 15 years when they have all retired or just about.

kthxbai.

Jozie
01-23-2008, 01:57 PM
QUOTE=scoobs;6478674]Ask me in 15 years when they have all retired or just about.

kthxbai.[/QUOTE]

:haha:

Nole is better at impersonations ...

gjr
01-23-2008, 02:06 PM
I think Murray can get to Nole's level. He got the worst player in the first round that anyone could want to get. I'm not saying Andy would have got to the semi like Tsonga has but he would have put up a great show. Andy's a great player and will make the top 4 by the end of the year.

Love him or hate him he's still one of the beat 10 players on the planet. And he won't go away.

my0118
01-23-2008, 02:06 PM
Maybe I am a clown, but you sounds like your compatriot Bolo Young(Chang Lee) in the final match;)

Maybe? It's a fact according to your thread.
And coming up with someone (I don't even know) who has the same nationality to moke people proves your high quality of retard.

Dimonator133
01-23-2008, 02:12 PM
Why are you asking that question if you answer it yourself?:o

probably because he asked other people, he already knows what he himself thinks

Dimonator133
01-23-2008, 02:14 PM
gasquet yes murray no way he sucks he is an overhyped british player like henman

gasquet is light years behind and will never make it up. Murray might get close, but no, neither will make it to Toker level.

richie21
01-23-2008, 02:14 PM
Gasquet is so far behind he could not be spotted by the Abell telescope.

Murray will never reach these levels, but will probably have some nice career highlights.


Judging by the rankings ,he's only 4 places behind Djokovic if i'm not mistaken.

ReturnWinner
01-23-2008, 02:15 PM
no They are not ,THE Faker is way better.

richie21
01-23-2008, 02:15 PM
Murray is a hell of a lot closer than Gasquet.

Not in the rankings.....:rolleyes:

madmanfool
01-23-2008, 02:17 PM
it's not like Gasquet is close if that's what you think. Djokovic has more than double the amount of ranking points Gasquet has.

ReturnWinner
01-23-2008, 02:18 PM
no Murray is not much better than Gasquet, they are pretty similar.

scoobs
01-23-2008, 02:21 PM
Clearly Djokovic has had much better results than both Gasquet and Murray, and in the end that is how they will be measured and compared.

I have my own opinions on more nebulous questions such as talent, ball-striking ability, watchability, etc.

In the end, it's good for the game that all three of them are around - each brings something a little different.

my0118
01-23-2008, 02:22 PM
no Murray is not much better than Gasquet, they are pretty similar.

Yeah even as a fan of both, I know Nole is better than them at the moment. And I agree that they are pretty similar. But the thing is why he's making the stupid thread to stir this f***ing idiotic things up?

Apemant
01-23-2008, 02:23 PM
I think Murray can get to Nole's level. He got the worst player in the first round that anyone could want to get. I'm not saying Andy would have got to the semi like Tsonga

I am. In fact, he got awfully close to forcing the 5th set, in which I would give him the upper hand. Also, he gave a BAGEL to Tsonga. Too bad he has so many ups and downs in a single match...

The bottom line is, who knows what would've happened if he got that W in the 1st round. I guess Warburg and GGL would be an easy prey, and then Gasquet... hmm, curiously enough, against him he also produced one bagel despite the loss. 3 times so far already, he has bageled someone and then lost the match. That's got to be really weird, come to think of it. How do you bagel someone and then lose? Nole is the other way around; he loses a set 0-6 and then wins the match anyway. Much wiser I'd say ... :devil:

But on the other hand, that's why I like Andy, since he's so f*ing wild. :silly:

richie21
01-23-2008, 02:23 PM
For now,Djokovic has clearly been better than those 2......but i have a feeling things will be different in 2 or 3 years when both Murray and Gasquet will have matured physically.

Dimonator133
01-23-2008, 02:25 PM
Not in the rankings.....:rolleyes:

the question was not where are they ranked. If that was his question I'm assuming he would have just gone to atptennis.com instead of asking in this forum.

the question is are they better than Nole or will they ever be better - like are they as talented or will they become as talented. No way in hell gasquet does. Other than a minor spurt in 2007, he hasn't improved since he was about 14. Murray will at least get close, think if he didn't get hurt last year.

my0118
01-23-2008, 02:29 PM
Please stop comparing between Murray and Gasquet. All he wants to get answers is they both are light years behind of Novak.

Stensland
01-23-2008, 02:31 PM
djokovic is by far the most mature player of the bunch as he doesn't have any weaknesses anymore. his backhand isn't as good as gasquet's, his tactics, acceleration and strategy isn't as good as murray's but because he gets a B in every department, he's overall easily outdistancing the two.

NinaNina19
01-23-2008, 02:31 PM
No, but they will be. At least Murray will.

anon57
01-23-2008, 02:45 PM
djokovic is by far the most mature player of the bunch as he doesn't have any weaknesses anymore. his backhand isn't as good as gasquet's, his tactics, acceleration and strategy isn't as good as murray's but because he gets a B in every department, he's overall easily outdistancing the two.

That's kind of how I feel about Djokovic, he may not have the best serve or groundstrokes or whatever, but there's nothing that's really a weakness and he's just so solid. Add to that the fact that he's miles ahead in the mental department compared to most of the other young guns, bar Nadal and it's easy to see how he's accomplished what he has already

Jimnik
01-23-2008, 02:47 PM
Not right now, obviously.

It's still very immature to make conclusions this early.

KitinovRules
01-23-2008, 03:05 PM
At the moment Faker is a better tenis player, no doubt about it. His ranking and points are clearly showing it.
He has come up very big early in his career (and this is also ? , since he plays proffesionaly since he was 16), much faster than anyone expected.
As someone said he is type of player which has not best weapons in the world to punish the opponent easily. Apart from his servise which is very good but not the best in world, he has very good other elements of the game.
His backhand however, is not as goos as Gasquest, nore his defence is as good as Murray's.

He is kind of player like Kafelnikov, who was very good at all the deptartments of the game. And got managed to win 2 GS!!!

Not to forget that Faker is also mentally very tough, which is one of the reasons why he is n.3 in the world!
But we could never know how the things are going to look at 2-3 years time. Some players come up later in their career. Pat Rafter is such a case.
And some have great early success and something badly can turn and finish very early retired- like Norman.

As far as Faker- I have written few times here, that he has reached his peak - he can not be better than this.

Komodo
01-23-2008, 03:41 PM
Of course he can be better. He can still work on lots of things, no doubt, and there is no way that he has already reached his peak.

The comparison with Kafelnikov is a pretty good one. I'd say there aren't a lot of things Djokovic does worse than Kafelnikov except maybe backhand power and touch at the net.
Otherwise, Djokovic is just as good or better at everything, which shows what a great player he is.

And to the question asked in the thread: Of course Djokovic is on a totally different level than Gasquet and Murray.

Gasquet will never reach that level IMO while with Murray, you just can't tell. I think Murray has a lot of reserve and it is really hard to predict what might happen in his career.
Gasquet to me is just a solid top 10 without the game to really challenge for greater things nor to ever get in the top 2/3.

And why are you still talking about Gasquet maturing physically?
The guy is 21(born 86 - maybe 22, too lazy to check), and has trained absolutely proffessionally since he was a little kid - more so than most other ATP players. He was a revelation very early, was in the focus of the media very early and came to the ATP tour EXTREMELY early.
It's not like he's a late bloomer, on the contrary. He has done what is possible regarding fitness for a lot of years.
Why would he suddenly mature physically (in a very significant way)now?
Of course there is an increasing level of fitness with the years as a pro, just to make that clear, but it's not like we are talking about a 17 years old newcomer but about a guy that has been on the ATP tour for 6 years.

/komo

Exodus
01-23-2008, 03:46 PM
seriously murray is overrated he haven't done anything huge. Ali tsonga is better than him already

Apemant
01-23-2008, 03:47 PM
And why are you still talking about Gasquet maturing physically?


I don't think he has to mature physically - but I do believe both him and Murray are yet to mature mentally. Consistency is the keyword. Can't afford to lose focus every now and then.

Apemant
01-23-2008, 03:50 PM
seriously murray is overrated he haven't done anything huge. Ali tsonga is better than him already

1.1.2003. Federer was overrated as he hadn't done anything big yet. Hewitt was lightyears ahead with 2 GS and 2 TMC already.

sawan66278
01-23-2008, 05:53 PM
Both players are, in my opinion, much more talented. However, the Serbian players demonstrate something that is difficult to quantify: heart, desire, and courage.

richie21
01-23-2008, 05:57 PM
Gasquet to me is just a solid top 10 without the game to really challenge for greater things nor to ever get in the top 2/3.



Anyone who has seen him play in his best matches will obviously disagree with you.
And no,he has still yet to mature physically(by Gasquet 's and his coach's own admissions)........i mean,you just need to look at his last match against Tsonga: while Tsonga looked like a man playing tennis,Gasquet looked like a small boy playing tennis(he looked powerless,slow and as sharp as Karlovic)

Jaap
01-23-2008, 06:05 PM
seriously murray is overrated he haven't done anything huge. Ali tsonga is better than him already

The person in your avatar is the definition of overrated.

FedFan_2007
01-23-2008, 06:10 PM
In 1991 people thought that Courier was light years ahead of Sampras. Little did they know that they'd have to wait a whole 2 more years to find out otherwise.

KitinovRules
01-23-2008, 06:11 PM
Both players are, in my opinion, much more talented. However, the Serbian players demonstrate something that is difficult to quantify: heart, desire, and courage.
Very well written, and very true.

FedFan_2007
01-23-2008, 06:12 PM
1.1.2003. Federer was overrated as he hadn't done anything big yet. Hewitt was lightyears ahead with 2 GS and 2 TMC already.

Yeah good point, 5 years ago nobody was talking about a potential TMF.

Apemant
01-23-2008, 06:18 PM
Both players are, in my opinion, much more talented. However, the Serbian players demonstrate something that is difficult to quantify: heart, desire, and courage.

Yeah, extremely well said. I have yet to see a Serb with any kind of mental problems, insecurities, choking attitude or fear.

They are so friggin' confident and take no shit from anyone, whoever he is and stuff.

richie21
01-23-2008, 06:22 PM
Yeah, extremely well said. I have yet to see a Serb with any kind of mental problems, insecurities, choking attitude or fear.
They are so friggin' confident and take no shit from anyone, whoever he is and stuff.


What about what happened in the last TMC??:rolleyes:

Farenhajt
01-23-2008, 06:31 PM
So, it remains to be seen whether Murray is the next Federer/Sampras (late bloomer) and if Djokovic is the next Hewitt/Safin (bound to deteriorate after the initial flash). As for the former, it really doesn't look like it, but there are some chances. As for the latter, it simply won't happen.

What appears to me as "opposing development tactics" with Novak and Andy is this: Novak has set a general framework (a functional system) of his game, which he now fills in/upgrades gradually with the necessary elements, whereas Andy has some brilliant elements, but no framework to connect them into a meaningful system. Therefore Novak is more prone to win even when he loses (he always has some spare options to try), while Andy is more prone to lose even if he wins (he has no answer if his brilliancies are well responded to and brought to a halt). And also keep in mind that good shots are much easier to acquire than winner's mentality (cf. Gasquet), and that's an area where Novak owns Andy big time.

anousleshommes@h
01-23-2008, 06:31 PM
THE REAL QUESTION IS: DO ANY OF THOSE PLAYERS HAVE THE TALENT TO BEAT TSONGA?

Tsonga has jst really come back on the professional circuit (dont forget that back in early 2007, he was still playing CHALLENGER circuits), and has imprinted himself on their mind. Now he's competing with the big boys. Can they really get on par with his current level?

JediFed
01-23-2008, 06:32 PM
0 GS and they all have beaten Roger. Sound about equal to me. :D

Why isn't Berdych under consideration? The Olympics is a higher level then any of the Super 9.

Apemant
01-23-2008, 06:46 PM
What about what happened in the last TMC??:rolleyes:

That was more physical than mental. It's not like he choked away a zillion breakpoints or anything. Just didn't have anything in the tank left.

Stensland
01-23-2008, 07:17 PM
So, it remains to be seen whether Murray is the next Federer/Sampras (late bloomer) and if Djokovic is the next Hewitt/Safin (bound to deteriorate after the initial flash). As for the former, it really doesn't look like it, but there are some chances. As for the latter, it simply won't happen.

What appears to me as "opposing development tactics" with Novak and Andy is this: Novak has set a general framework (a functional system) of his game, which he now fills in/upgrades gradually with the necessary elements, whereas Andy has some brilliant elements, but no framework to connect them into a meaningful system. Therefore Novak is more prone to win even when he loses (he always has some spare options to try), while Andy is more prone to lose even if he wins (he has no answer if his brilliancies are well responded to and brought to a halt). And also keep in mind that good shots are much easier to acquire than winner's mentality (cf. Gasquet), and that's an area where Novak owns Andy big time.

that's it, brilliant posting. :)

you may close the thread.

Sean
01-23-2008, 07:22 PM
Djoker is very good. Murray I think will get to the same/similar level as Nole but will not win as many titles.
Homeboy will not get much futher than he is now maybe top 5 if half the top ten gets hit with injuries or something.

maf
01-23-2008, 07:29 PM
I think Tsonga is better than Murray and Gasquet :rolleyes:

frenchie
01-23-2008, 09:15 PM
No way

It's like those people still saying that Vaidisova is better than Ivanovic...

Black Adam
01-23-2008, 09:26 PM
It goes in this order:
Djokovic- He talks the talk and backs it up :yeah: He is the real deal.
Gasquet-When there is no home pressure or Media pressure he can do amzing things. He is a late bloomer and will get better if he can develop consistency and a fighting spirit.
Murray-all hype which works to his disadvantage and is yet to make quarters in GS :rolleyes:

Corey Feldman
01-23-2008, 09:33 PM
Muzza is better than the both of them put together

so 'Ave it

NinaNina19
01-23-2008, 09:35 PM
Muzza is better than the both of them put together

so 'Ave it

:worship:

CyBorg
01-23-2008, 09:54 PM
I prefer Murray to Gasquet. Andy is too passive a player who is wonderfully long limbed, but just doesn't know how to use his body properly. Gasquet, however, has short stubby arms and legs and even though his backhand is wonderful it doesn't really do much for him when his opponent hits the ball flat and early on a fast surface. When Gasquet has no time his backhand doesn't have the same kind of bite. He just seems like a limited player to me. With Murray it's all about his head - otherwise he's the complete package.

CyBorg
01-23-2008, 10:00 PM
Anyone who has seen him play in his best matches will obviously disagree with you.
And no,he has still yet to mature physically(by Gasquet 's and his coach's own admissions)........i mean,you just need to look at his last match against Tsonga: while Tsonga looked like a man playing tennis,Gasquet looked like a small boy playing tennis(he looked powerless,slow and as sharp as Karlovic)

Gasquet has his best matches when his opponents gives him short, floating balls that he can deposit with gusto. Gasquet gets destroyed by the better flat-hitting baseliners who can attack him from both wings with pace. Like his matches against Ferrer from last fall. It wasn't close.

Il Primo Uomo
01-23-2008, 10:04 PM
Not in the rankings.....:rolleyes:

Do you know the difference between being number one and being the best? Obviously not, and it's worrisome.

BTW, Gasquet is very, extremly far. Murray is close, I can't decide.

richie21
01-23-2008, 10:14 PM
Gasquet has his best matches when his opponents gives him short, floating balls that he can deposit with gusto. Gasquet gets destroyed by the better flat-hitting baseliners who can attack him from both wings with pace. Like his matches against Ferrer from last fall. It wasn't close.

There have so many counter-examples to what you say that i'm busy to name all of them.
If you're right then how do you explain that Gasquet is for example 4-0 against flat-hitting baseliners like Berdych and Blake ,without even losing a set???:rolleyes:

acionescu
01-23-2008, 10:16 PM
Yes, their relatives.

CyBorg
01-23-2008, 11:01 PM
There have so many counter-examples to what you say that i'm busy to name all of them.
If you're right then how do you explain that Gasquet is for example 4-0 against flat-hitting baseliners like Berdych and Blake ,without even losing a set???:rolleyes:

The point is not that Gasquet isn't capable of beating guys who play this kind of style, but that he's not capable of beating them consistently. Most players on the tour play an aggressive baseline game and they give Gasquet almost no time on the backhand side.

I think he has a backhand built for clay. If he can improve his fitness level he can do some damage in the spring.

adee-gee
01-23-2008, 11:57 PM
Not in the rankings.....:rolleyes:
We'll see at the end of this year if Muzza stays fit.

He didn't play 2 slams last year remember.

groundstroke
01-24-2008, 02:10 AM
Yes.

JeffCandoi
01-24-2008, 02:15 AM
both muzza and gasquet are betta than nole, nole is a lucky man ;)

Schu
01-24-2008, 03:04 AM
Both players are, in my opinion, much more talented. However, the Serbian players demonstrate something that is difficult to quantify: heart, desire, and courage.

You've hit the nail on the head. Both Gasquet and Murray (as much as I hate to admit) have a MUCH bigger arsenal of shots and are so much more exciting (and frustrating) to watch but all the Serbian players, both men and women, possess the qualities that trump raw talent.

Deivid23
01-24-2008, 03:05 AM
Murray has a chance to reach Djokovic´s level imo. Give him an injury free season at least to see how well he can do.

Gasquet, ermm, well, I´m sure there are still a lot of deluded fans of his who are still thinking it´s just a matter of his game being too sofisticated and therefore it will take longer to develop. Maybe when he´s 55 his game is finally completely developed by that time and he will stun the world by making a mouthwatering comeback to the tour :shrug:

@ To the thread starter: You will have fun searching for old threads when firstly Nole didn´t deserve to even being in the same sentece as mighty Gasquet, then that although Nole had better results, that didn´t mean he was the better player, as Gasquet´s peak was superior and loads of deluded bullshit like that ;)

Leo
01-24-2008, 06:32 AM
Ummm, this is Novak's 4th consecutive Grand Slam reaching at the least the SF. Neither one of them is remotely close.

Scotso
01-24-2008, 06:52 AM
Anyone with a brain wouldn't suggest that Nole isn't the best of the three by far right now.

But speaking purely of talent and how good they could be is entirely subjective.

I have to admit, though, I don't really understand why people suggest that Murray especially and even Gasquet to a lesser degree are more talented. They've yet to do much to prove it. Consistancy and heart are a part of tennis as much as backhands and serves.

richie21
01-24-2008, 07:49 PM
The point is not that Gasquet isn't capable of beating guys who play this kind of style, but that he's not capable of beating them consistently. Most players on the tour play an aggressive baseline game and they give Gasquet almost no time on the backhand side.

I think he has a backhand built for clay. If he can improve his fitness level he can do some damage in the spring.

That's nevertheless wrong.

DrJules
01-24-2008, 07:52 PM
Tsonga still potentially could beat Murray, Gasquet and Djokovic all in the same event.

richie21
01-24-2008, 07:54 PM
Tsonga still potentially could beat Murray, Gasquet and Djokovic all in the same event.

Yeah and to the guy who started this thread, we'll see if Djokovic(if he makes the final) will be at least able to take a set to Tsonga like Murray and Gasquet did.:)

Puschkin
01-24-2008, 08:09 PM
Andy .... is wonderfully long limbed, ........... Gasquet, however, has short stubby arms and legs...

:rolleyes: I thought this was about tennis, not a beauty contest. Otherwise we could start debating Murray's teeth. :p

as for the question: of course Djokovic is better now. None of us knows the future, though, apart from some gurus over here, who form an opinion once and never change it.

Apemant
01-24-2008, 08:41 PM
I have to admit, though, I don't really understand why people suggest that Murray especially and even Gasquet to a lesser degree are more talented. They've yet to do much to prove it.

Because there's nothing as easy as praising someone's talent AFTER he proves it. Yet there were many extremely talented players who sadly didn't manage to prove it. However, that doesn't neccessarily mean they weren't talented in the first place.

Consistancy and heart are a part of tennis as much as backhands and serves.

Yes, consistency and heart are as much a part of tennis as raw talent, if not more. But my definition of talent has nothing to do with either consistency or heart. By the way, when I say 'talent' in this context I mean stellar talent, because all of them in the top 100 are pretty damn talented to begin with, otherwise they wouldn't come on top of so many other people who perhaps try as hard as them.

Consistency and heart is something that got guys like Robredo, Ferrer or Ljubo into top 10. But I don't think anyone right in their mind considers them extremely talented (nothing against those guys, I like them all). On the other hand, Fat Dave is extremely talented and I'm not retracting it even if he never wins another match. The same holds true for Murray. I don't care if he wins anything big or 'proves' himself (of course, I'd like it if he did, but if not, it won't change my mind). I have my own pair of (admittedly, not that healthy) eyes and mere success (or lack of it thereof) doesn't blind my judgement. :devil:

anousleshommes@h
01-24-2008, 08:49 PM
Tsonga still potentially could beat Murray, Gasquet and Djokovic all in the same event.

The real difference between Tsonga and the likes of Murray and Gasquet is, Tsonga actually believes he can topple the top players. From the very onset he's always said he belong to the top, and he sincerely believed in himself, because not only did he have the talent to make it far, he actually thought all that HE WILL make it far, and he's jst achieved this. If he gets crowned AO Champion, he would have demonstrated he's miles ahed of the young guns now (apart from Fed of course). Im not expecting him to win this, jst to be consistent over the years, and who knows, the unexpected might happen.

Vlad1980
01-24-2008, 10:19 PM
The point is not that Gasquet isn't capable of beating guys who play this kind of style, but that he's not capable of beating them consistently. Most players on the tour play an aggressive baseline game and they give Gasquet almost no time on the backhand side.

I think he has a backhand built for clay. If he can improve his fitness level he can do some damage in the spring.




If his backhand is built for clay, then how do you explain that his best results have come on grass?? :rolleyes:

Deivid23
01-24-2008, 10:24 PM
as for the question: of course Djokovic is better now. None of us knows the future, though, apart from some gurus over here, who form an opinion once and never change it.

Time can´t change class, Nole was, is and will be out of reach for Gasquet
:p

ChrisDoesDallas
01-24-2008, 10:55 PM
I do, yes. Moreso Gasquet though (obviously).

supertommyhaas
01-24-2008, 11:11 PM
weell, murray just hits moonballs so he is no where near the standard of djoko