Who is the BEST TALENT in the top 100? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Who is the BEST TALENT in the top 100?

Ozone
08-18-2010, 03:56 PM
In response to Everko's worst talented top 100 player, let's discuss the best talents we have:)

NOT the most accomplished
NOT the most winningest
NOT the hardest working
NOT the most skilled player

Just the best talent

Please specify if there is another player that comes to mind. I took Malisse off and replaced him with Almagro/Youzhny. I probably should have taken Rafa off but their will be lots of people bitching if I did that

Sauletekis
08-18-2010, 03:58 PM
Olek Dologologolopolov:worship:

Everko
08-18-2010, 03:59 PM
Djokovic. He has tremendous flexibility, movement and his graoundstrokes are great. Both wings are elite. He is just above Nadal because he has more ability to serve great than Nadal does. Djokovic would do great great things if he didn't have his breathing issues.

HKz
08-18-2010, 04:00 PM
Djokovic. He has tremendous flexibility, movement and his graoundstrokes are great. Both wings are elite. He is just above Nadal because he has more ability to serve great than Nadal does. Djokovic would do great great things if he didn't have his breathing issues.

Absolute clown of an answer.

Forehander
08-18-2010, 04:01 PM
Anybody mentioning Clownfils receives a bad rep from me :)

Everko
08-18-2010, 04:02 PM
Absolute clown of an answer.

are you my personal devil on the shoulder? How about you answer the question yourself.

HKz
08-18-2010, 04:04 PM
are you my personal devil on the shoulder? How about you answer the question yourself.

Yeah because I make useless threads/posts like you do. Go learn to play tennis and stop drooling over Nadal.

samanosuke
08-18-2010, 04:07 PM
:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha: Djokovic talented :haha::haha::haha::haha: . Almost like author of that post

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:07 PM
Djokovic is very talented. Definitely a good candidate. I;ll probably vote for him or Gasquet

Filo V.
08-18-2010, 04:10 PM
RAW talent? I wouldn't say Nole, Roger, Rafa, because they have actually played up to their abilities. The player with the most talent overall to me is Roger. The most talented players who are still a bit raw, undeveloped would be Dolgopolov, Monfils and Chardy. Also, I hate to say it, but Brands has quite a lot of very raw talent.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:13 PM
RAW talent? I wouldn't say Nole, Roger, Rafa, because they have actually played up to their abilities. The player with the most talent overall to me is Roger. The most talented players who are still a bit raw, undeveloped would be Dolgopolov, Monfils and Chardy. Also, I hate to say it, but Brands has quite a lot of very raw talent.
:rolleyes: Dont overthink this

Filo V.
08-18-2010, 04:14 PM
:rolleyes: Dont overthink this

I'm not, you said the best raw talent. Roger, Rafa, they aren't raw.

Forehander
08-18-2010, 04:14 PM
RAW talent? I wouldn't say Nole, Roger, Rafa, because they have actually played up to their abilities. The player with the most talent overall to me is Roger. The most talented players who are still a bit raw, undeveloped would be Dolgopolov, Monfils and Chardy. Also, I hate to say it, but Brands has quite a lot of very raw talent.

Explain. How does Monfils (Clownfils) have the best raw talent in the top 100?

Magick
08-18-2010, 04:14 PM
nalbandian,tsonga,malisse,melzer,mathieu,tursunov, del potro

Everko
08-18-2010, 04:16 PM
Djokovic is very talented. Definitely a good candidate. I;ll probably vote for him or Gasquet

Gasquet isn't that talented he just has a flashy backhand. Rest of his game is mediocre.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:17 PM
I'm not, you said the best raw talent. Roger, Rafa, they aren't raw.
Everyone has "raw talent". You are born with it. :haha: You said Monfils. AND Chardy:rolls:

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:18 PM
Gasquet isn't that talented he just has a flashy backhand. Rest of his game is mediocre.
His strokes are:worship: And he never tries.

Forehander
08-18-2010, 04:19 PM
Everyone has "raw talent". You are born with it. :haha: You said Monfils. AND Chardy:rolls:

Chardy I can bear with. But he mentioned Monfils (Clownfils).

Everko
08-18-2010, 04:22 PM
Monfils should have been a sprinter

Filo V.
08-18-2010, 04:26 PM
Explain. How does Monfils (Clownfils) have the best raw talent in the top 100?

I didn't say he had the best raw talent, but his talent level in general is undeniable. Huge forehand, he shows a good backhand at times, big serve, extreme athlete, decent volleys, good consistency when he's right, but he has poor game strategies and tactics. To say he's not talented though is just based on hate of him.

HKz
08-18-2010, 04:28 PM
Gasquet isn't that talented he just has a flashy backhand. Rest of his game is mediocre.

How do you expect anyone to ever take your posts seriously when you make posts like these?

I believe that Federer will fall in 2010. Down the rankings. I think the game iscatching up to him, he is now vulnerable to players like Benneteau and Verdasco. Meanwhile Del Potro is now a force, Djokovic is coming back strongly and we all Nadal will vamos back next year after he is properly rested. I hate it but Murray will also be a factor. Plus players like Davydenko are suddenly playing better than before. Plus they might be a breakout player next year that we don't know yet.

Federer himslef. His game has gone down a bit, just enough for the younger generation to catapult over him. Federer has enough game to stay competitive in masters. He will focus on the Slams. He will go deep in a few. But I am confiendt he will fail to win one next year.

All this equals Federer falling down to 5 or 6 in the rankings at the conslusion of 2010. and then the question is, will he be ready to play as the 5 or 6 player for 2011.

Discuss:)


The Australian Open is so far away from any other slam its almost like its own season. 18 months away from RG and 20 from the US Open. All the other 3 are bunched into a 14 week window. The fall of Federer is happening this year like I said it was. His OZ open win was a carry over from his 2009 self. The 2010 self is falling and will continue to fall in the rankings.

And who will forget this fail?

http://i45.tinypic.com/2jcbqt1.jpg

Filo V.
08-18-2010, 04:30 PM
Everyone has "raw talent". You are born with it. :haha: You said Monfils. AND Chardy:rolls:
That's the point, everyone has raw talent. That's the question you asked, the players with raw talent. Then there are players with developed games, skills, and who aren't raw.

Chardy isn't talented to you? He is VERY talented. Huge power on his shots and serve, pretty good variety with his serve and slice backhand, he has net game, he's a good athlete. I don't know how anyone can deny he's got game.

Sophocles
08-18-2010, 04:31 PM
"Sheer" might have been a better word than "raw", but the OP clearly meant who had the most talent when raw. Whatever the question, the answer is Federer.

BodyServe
08-18-2010, 04:32 PM
This forum is flooded by Gasquets fan that will vote for him, so this is an irrelevent poll.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:34 PM
Ouch:o Murray will surely win a slam sometime soon too.

Nadal voters:o

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:35 PM
Dammit fine Im getting the word "raw" out of my vocabulary. Fixing OP..

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 04:39 PM
Ha, nadal :(

For me, Federer. And its not even close.

habibko
08-18-2010, 04:41 PM
Federer, then Nalbandian.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:41 PM
Wow no votes for Fernancheat Goncheatzo so far

Jimnik
08-18-2010, 04:41 PM
Almagro/Youzhny make a great couple. :couple:

Haase :haha: :worship:

Awesome poll.

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 04:44 PM
Yeah, whats the deal with Hasse :p

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:50 PM
If you actually watch Haase play tennis you'd understand. The guy is 23, been injured. He's a phenominal player to watch and in a few years (if he stays healthy) I personally guaratee he will be a top 20 player and a threat in every GS. Also, in 5-6 years, he will be top 10 with possible GS titles to his name.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyRl4k5p2Gw&feature=related

Sophocles
08-18-2010, 04:51 PM
Almagro/Youzhny is a decidedly strange option, though. As is Hewitt.

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 04:53 PM
Pretty sure hes 23, and i guarantee he will never be top 20

Ozone
08-18-2010, 04:53 PM
The max poll options is 10. Almagro and Youzhny have a strikingly similar game and are incredibly talented players.

HKz
08-18-2010, 04:53 PM
If you actually watch Haase play tennis you'd understand. The guy is 21, been injured. He's a phenominal player to watch and in a few years (if he stays healthy) I personally guaratee he will be a top 20 player and a threat in every GS. Also, in 5-6 years, he will be top 10 with possible GS titles to his name.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyRl4k5p2Gw&feature=related

He does have good talent, but his footwork is a bit off compared to Murray/Monfils/etc who are of similar height yet with much better footwork.

Sapeod
08-18-2010, 04:59 PM
Why is Murray not on the poll?
One of the most talented players today.
Only Federer is more talented.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 05:02 PM
Why is Murray not on the poll?
One of the most talented players today.
Only Federer is more talented.
:angel:

Oh btw dude, you forgot to put "0 major titles" in your signature describing Murray. Just pointing that out

Nolby
08-18-2010, 05:02 PM
Almagro/Youzhny is a decidedly strange option, though. As is Hewitt.

It makes sense to me. :shrug: But if you add "Almagro/Youzhny" to this poll, you also have to add "Robredo/Andreev". :p

the graduate
08-18-2010, 05:05 PM
Dustin Brown and Donald Young

angry1
08-18-2010, 05:06 PM
:angel:

Oh btw dude, you forgot to put "0 major titles" in your signature describing Murray. Just pointing that out

He was assuming people could just about manage to work it out for themselves.

Mentioning MS titles but leaving off a major title would strike most as unlikely.

Haase being more talented than Murray is a completely bizarre opinion.

paseo
08-18-2010, 05:07 PM
Fed. Nalbandian. The rest.

BTW, where's Murray?

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 05:09 PM
Dustin Brown and Donald Young

Yes sir.

dweijnen
08-18-2010, 05:10 PM
X.Malisse.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 05:11 PM
X.Malisse.
I had him up there but took him off.

cutesteve22
08-18-2010, 05:24 PM
Roger

born_on_clay
08-18-2010, 05:28 PM
nadal, federer, djokovic, nalbandian in that order

Sapeod
08-18-2010, 05:34 PM
:angel:

Oh btw dude, you forgot to put "0 major titles" in your signature describing Murray. Just pointing that out
MS are major titles :retard:

Oh btw dude, not adding Murray to this poll, but adding Haase, Almagro, Youzhny and Nadal is incredible idiotic.

Sapeod
08-18-2010, 05:37 PM
nadal, federer, djokovic, nalbandian in that order
Federer, Nalbandian and Djokovic are all more talented than Nadal.
Murray, Kohlschreiber, Gulbis, Berdych, Del Potro and Soderling are as well.

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 05:39 PM
nadal, federer, djokovic, nalbandian in that order

:rolleyes:

madmax
08-18-2010, 05:58 PM
the player with the most raw undeveloped talent and skills? I'd say Olek Dolgopolov fits the description the best. As for the most talent, no one beats JesusFed in this category:banana:

born_on_clay
08-18-2010, 06:00 PM
Federer, Nalbandian and Djokovic are all more talented than Nadal.
Murray, Kohlschreiber, Gulbis, Berdych, Del Potro and Soderling are as well.

they are not
next

Ozone
08-18-2010, 06:01 PM
MS are major titles :retard:

Oh btw dude, not adding Murray to this poll, but adding Haase, Almagro, Youzhny and Nadal is incredible idiotic.
I honestly think it's real. Just based on pure talent. Not skill and hard work. Murray's game is based off of pushing

Blackbriar
08-18-2010, 06:08 PM
Murray is missing. But Gasquet anyway :) (fed is a bit better lets be honest)

r2473
08-18-2010, 06:08 PM
Talent:
~noun
1. A quality that allows a player to being better than the rest, despite the number of matches which that player doesn’t win. [i.e: “Pete Sampras won 14 slams but Jean Luc Rodriguez-Hillbilly (sorry, who?) had insane loads of talent”]

2. Ability of making smooth-motioned and good-looking shots, no matter if a high percentage of those shots happens to send the ball to the parking lot.

born_on_clay
08-18-2010, 06:12 PM
I honestly think it's real. Just based on pure talent. Not skill and hard work. Murray's game is based off of pushing

+1

Arkulari
08-18-2010, 06:15 PM
Murray has a great game once he stops pushing, that has been shown against Rafa and against Roger, but I would call him a tactician rather than a talent ;)

Roger, Nalbandian, Gulbis, Berdych are all huge talents

Serenidad
08-18-2010, 06:28 PM
Daniel Brands without question.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 06:30 PM
Daniel Brands is like the Gooch but with more hope

tennishero
08-18-2010, 06:41 PM
Federer/Nalbandian.


Gasquet is overrated, Nalbandian owns him 8-0.

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 06:42 PM
Nadal on 14% :( thats criminal

tennishero
08-18-2010, 06:44 PM
Why is Murray not on the poll?
One of the most talented players today.
Only Federer is more talented.

:haha:

superandy88
08-18-2010, 06:49 PM
Dolgopolov and Federer obv.
The other are far away.

straitup
08-18-2010, 06:51 PM
The Almagro/Youzhny pairing is interesting :lol: . I don't think they play that similarly, other than the fact that they both have 1 handed BH's. Almagro thumps the crap out of every ball, Youzhny will slice the ball a lot, come to net a lot more...probably why he's been way more successful on surfaces outside of clay. And of course the pairing is hilarious after that hilarious match they played in Miami a couple years ago.

Haase has talent, he just needs to stop getting hurt. And Djokovic is quite talented, I wouldn't say his groundstrokes are the most beautiful but he's got great timing, and fantastic movement.

Sri
08-18-2010, 06:51 PM
RAW talent? I wouldn't say Nole, Roger, Rafa, because they have actually played up to their abilities. The player with the most talent overall to me is Roger. The most talented players who are still a bit raw, undeveloped would be Dolgopolov, Monfils and Chardy. Also, I hate to say it, but Brands has quite a lot of very raw talent.
Brands FTW!

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 06:52 PM
The Almagro/Youzhny pairing is interesting :lol: . I don't think they play that similarly, other than the fact that they both have 1 handed BH's. Almagro thumps the crap out of every ball, Youzhny will slice the ball a lot, come to net a lot more...probably why he's been way more successful on surfaces outside of clay. And of course the pairing is hilarious after that hilarious match they played in Miami a couple years ago.

Haase has talent, he just needs to stop getting hurt. And Djokovic is quite talented, I wouldn't say his groundstrokes are the most beautiful but he's got great timing, and fantastic movement.

My first thought.

Elena.
08-18-2010, 07:32 PM
Nalbandian

Sophocles
08-18-2010, 07:53 PM
I honestly think it's real. Just based on pure talent. Not skill and hard work. Murray's game is based off of pushing

Murray has an excellent 1st serve, a great backhand, a magnificent return of serve, brilliant defence, superb touch, fine volleys, a knifing slice, & perhaps the 2nd best passing shots in the world. His forehand & 2nd serve may be relative weaknesses, but the same goes for Gasquet, who is inferior in pretty much every aspect of the game, yet he still appears in your poll.

ad-out
08-18-2010, 08:04 PM
I picked Nalby from this list but I think Gulbis should have been included. ;)

Ozone
08-18-2010, 08:07 PM
Murray has an excellent 1st serve, a great backhand, a magnificent return of serve, brilliant defence, superb touch, fine volleys, a knifing slice, & perhaps the 2nd best passing shots in the world. His forehand & 2nd serve may be relative weaknesses, but the same goes for Gasquet, who is inferior in pretty much every aspect of the game, yet he still appears in your poll.
This thread is about who's the most TALENTED. Not whose hard work at the academy has gotten them the furthest. If you really think Murray is more natural talent than Gasquet, you should stop watching tennis. Murray's game is based of pushing, and he's trained well enough over the years to execute his pushing to the best it can be.

angry1
08-18-2010, 08:20 PM
This thread is about who's the most TALENTED. Not whose hard work at the academy has gotten them the furthest. If you really think Murray is more natural talent than Gasquet, you should stop watching tennis. Murray's game is based of pushing, and he's trained well enough over the years to execute his pushing to the best it can be.

What has training got to do with him winning the Orange Bowl 3 years before he went to any academy or with his ability to return the biggest serves better than anyone else?

Watch Murray return Karlovic's serve without bias and deny that it's an exceptional display of talent and you're a hopeless cause.

Singularity
08-18-2010, 08:20 PM
This thread is about who's the most TALENTED. Not whose hard work at the academy has gotten them the furthest. If you really think Murray is more natural talent than Gasquet, you should stop watching tennis. Murray's game is based of pushing, and he's trained well enough over the years to execute his pushing to the best it can be.
I notice you didn't respond to Sophocles at all; just repeated your original post. Are you saying it doesn't take talent to put returns at your opponents feet and hit clean winners off their first serves? That it doesn't take talent to make awkward volleys look easy, to hit laser-like passing shots when way out of position, or to create incredible angles when on the run? These are all staples of Murray's game and reasons why he can win even when he isn't dominating opponents with his forehand (though, he did plenty of domination with his backhand in Toronto).

Murray didn't get to no.4 in the world just by putting balls back into play, and the weakness of his forehand just emphasis how strong the rest of his game must be.

Roddickominator
08-18-2010, 08:23 PM
Federer. Easiest decision ever.

borracho
08-18-2010, 08:54 PM
Federer, Tommy Haas, Nalbandian. Further I find De Bakker way more talented then Haase.

FormerRafaFan
08-18-2010, 08:57 PM
I voted for Federer. He makes it seem effortless. Also, he's said himself that he rarely practise, and he didn't even have a coach for a long time, but he still reached #1 and won 16 GS's. If that is not raw talent, I don't know what is..

vn01
08-18-2010, 09:00 PM
Nadal and Federer. Then Gasquet, Nalby...

Sophocles
08-18-2010, 09:02 PM
This thread is about who's the most TALENTED. Not whose hard work at the academy has gotten them the furthest. If you really think Murray is more natural talent than Gasquet, you should stop watching tennis. Murray's game is based of pushing, and he's trained well enough over the years to execute his pushing to the best it can be.

Most of the time, Gasquet stands miles behind the baseline, pushing with his forehand & attacking with his backhand when he can. Remind you of anybody? Richard doesn't usually play the way he played against Roddick at Wimbledon or against Federer at Monte Carlo. Be great if he did, but I doubt he can. Perhaps he just doesn't have the talent.

More generally, I don't see how you can possibly judge talent if you have to ignore how good it allows players to become. Some things take more work than others, of course, but on that scorre, Murray has great touch & reflexes - these are things you can't teach, & if they aren't indicative of talent, I don't know what is.

Other posters have already made a number of other points. You seem obsessed with the idea Murray is a "pusher" & "pushers" can't be talented. Forget the word "pusher" & try looking at things objectively.

Forehander
08-18-2010, 09:35 PM
Federer, Nalbandian and Djokovic are all more talented than Nadal.
Murray, Kohlschreiber, Gulbis, Berdych, Del Potro and Soderling are as well.

I know I'm a little blinded by hate when it comes to Monfils. But you're totally blinded when it comes to Nadal my friend.

Ozone
08-18-2010, 09:46 PM
Most of the time, Gasquet stands miles behind the baseline, pushing with his forehand & attacking with his backhand when he can. Remind you of anybody? Richard doesn't usually play the way he played against Roddick at Wimbledon or against Federer at Monte Carlo. Be great if he did, but I doubt he can. Perhaps he just doesn't have the talent.

More generally, I don't see how you can possibly judge talent if you have to ignore how good it allows players to become. Some things take more work than others, of course, but on that scorre, Murray has great touch & reflexes - these are things you can't teach, & if they aren't indicative of talent, I don't know what is.

Other posters have already made a number of other points. You seem obsessed with the idea Murray is a "pusher" & "pushers" can't be talented. Forget the word "pusher" & try looking at things objectively.
Pusher. Pushers. Pushing doesnt take that much talent. Murray's game is based of pushing. Sure he's talented, that's why he's top 10. But his game wouldn't be where it is if he was as talented as a Djokovic or Gasquet or Federer.

finn98
08-18-2010, 09:49 PM
Federer, Nalbandian and Djokovic are all more talented than Nadal.
Murray, Kohlschreiber, Gulbis, Berdych, Del Potro and Soderling are as well.

Still..... Nadal is the Greatest Claycourt Player ever... :wavey::retard:

emotion
08-18-2010, 09:51 PM
Gulbis, Monfils, Gasquet,Federer and Berdych

paseo
08-18-2010, 09:51 PM
Pusher. Pushers. Pushing doesnt take that much talent. Murray's game is based of pushing. Sure he's talented, that's why he's top 10. But his game wouldn't be where it is if he was as talented as a Djokovic or Gasquet or Federer.

According to Fed, arguably the most talented player that ever picked up a tennis racket :D, Murray is more talented than Djokovic.

Arkulari
08-18-2010, 09:53 PM
Gasquet has a nice BH and what else? his serve is not that good, his FH is not that good, his ROS is atrocious and a poor shot selection..

Murray has always had an excellent BH and ROS, the pushing was taught to him but the natural talent to read the game was not (you can accuse him of many things but not of being clueless when it comes to tactics)

Sophocles
08-18-2010, 09:55 PM
Pusher. Pushers. Pushing doesnt take that much talent. Murray's game is based of pushing. Sure he's talented, that's why he's top 10. But his game wouldn't be where it is if he was as talented as a Djokovic or Gasquet or Federer.

We're clearly going to have to agree to disagree.

CooCooCachoo
08-18-2010, 09:57 PM
I'll have to go with Roger on this one. Some choices in the poll seem a bit odd to me.

dombrfc
08-18-2010, 09:57 PM
Well at least 44% of MTF has brains

The Magician
08-18-2010, 10:09 PM
Feel like we've had this thread before :p I'll give the same answer I always give, Roger Federer and it's not even close.

Andre'sNo1Fan
08-18-2010, 10:09 PM
Federer, Nalbandian and Djokovic are all more talented than Nadal.
Murray, Kohlschreiber, Gulbis, Berdych, Del Potro and Soderling are as well.
LOL. I guess you are one of these people who define talent as being to hit the ball the hardest and who can hit more serves. Talent is a variety of things, including mental strength, speed and will to win. I'm afraid most of these other players (especially including your beloved Murray) just fall short compared to Nadal.

Andre'sNo1Fan
08-18-2010, 10:15 PM
:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha: Djokovic talented :haha::haha::haha::haha: . Almost like author of that post
Yes thats why he's ranked where he is :retard:

I guess thats something you will not understand.

Ps this is probably a thread of which player do you love/hate the most :lol:

Singularity
08-18-2010, 10:22 PM
Pusher. Pushers. Pushing doesnt take that much talent. Murray's game is based of pushing. Sure he's talented, that's why he's top 10. But his game wouldn't be where it is if he was as talented as a Djokovic or Gasquet or Federer.
I notice how you haven't responded to anything we've been saying. Playing defensively is a tactical choice. You can play defensively and have a great backhand (or forehand for that matter), great volleys, great touch, great return and great court positioning.

And what you're saying in effect is, despite playing defensively, Murray is no.3 in the race and no.4 in the ranking. Wonder how that happened, huh? I wonder how he's ahead of Djokovic in the race this year, and in the slams?

Give Murray a 'good' forehand, and the rest of the tour would be in a great deal of trouble, indeed.

The Magician
08-18-2010, 10:24 PM
Yes thats why he's ranked where he is :retard:

I guess thats something you will not understand.

Ps this is probably a thread of which player do you love/hate the most :lol:

Djokovic has good fundamentals (or he used to :o) and he maximizes the ranking system with MM events and end of the year masters when everyone is tired, but he is far from the talent level of the other top players :wavey:

Andre'sNo1Fan
08-18-2010, 10:28 PM
Djokovic has good fundamentals (or he used to :o) and he maximizes the ranking system with MM events and end of the year masters when everyone is tired, but he is far from the talent level of the other top players :wavey:
I disagree. Rankings don't lie. He is perfectly capable of beating anyone on his day and if his level of consistency is better than others who are supposedly "more talented" well thats too bad because being consistent and also fit is part of tennis, and is included in talent because being talent also = being smart.

Sophocles
08-18-2010, 10:30 PM
We have to be careful we don't define talent as "everything that makes you good", because then we lose the distinction between talent and achievement.

The Magician
08-18-2010, 10:43 PM
I disagree. Rankings don't lie. He is perfectly capable of beating anyone on his day and if his level of consistency is better than others who are supposedly "more talented" well thats too bad because being consistent and also fit is part of tennis, and is included in talent because being talent also = being smart.

Yeah what Sophocles said. You're getting too broad defining talent. Novak has done well to win a GS and hand with Fedal with his limited natural talent, but rankings can be deceptive. He's been in a slump over 2 years and it looks like it's here to stay for his entire career. At this point I think his current slump is his natural ability and his good end of 2007/beginning of 2008 was a flash in the pan.

guy in sf
08-18-2010, 10:45 PM
Am I the only one SHOCKED that Nalbandian only has 11 titles at the age of 28 with all his talents and skills?

Singularity
08-18-2010, 10:53 PM
Yeah what Sophocles said. You're getting too broad defining talent. Novak has done well to win a GS and hand with Fedal with his limited natural talent, but rankings can be deceptive. He's been in a slump over 2 years and it looks like it's here to stay for his entire career. At this point I think his current slump is his natural ability and his good end of 2007/beginning of 2008 was a flash in the pan.
I'm not sure because all of 2007 was good for Djokovic. He made two slam semis and a final.

Sapeod
08-18-2010, 10:59 PM
they are not
next
Yes, they are.
I honestly think it's real. Just based on pure talent. Not skill and hard work. Murray's game is based off of pushing
If you think that, then you obviously have no clue.
Murray = variety, different uses of pace, topspin, flattening out his shots, slicing and changing things up depending on the opponent.
For example:
Nadal = Aggressive play throughout.
Chardy = Make him go for big winners, keep the ball deep.

Not pushing, you fool :retard:
+1
:retard:
I know I'm a little blinded by hate when it comes to Monfils. But you're totally blinded when it comes to Nadal my friend.
All of the players I listed are more talented than Nadal :wavey:
Still..... Nadal is the Greatest Claycourt Player ever... :wavey::retard:
That's relevent :retard:
And by using "still" you actually admit that Nadal isn't as talented as those guys.
Thank you for agreeing with me :wavey:
LOL. I guess you are one of these people who define talent as being to hit the ball the hardest and who can hit more serves. Talent is a variety of things, including mental strength, speed and will to win. I'm afraid most of these other players (especially including your beloved Murray) just fall short compared to Nadal.
No, I define talent by talent, meaning natural talent, good footwork, good shot selection, variety etc.
And Murray is better than everybody, except for Federer, and perhaps Nalbandian.

Nadal just randomly hits the ball with a lot of topspin from side to side.
Murray and all the players I listed >>>>>>>>>>>> Nadal in the talent department :bigwave:

angry1
08-18-2010, 11:05 PM
I refuse to vote for anybody,I'll either feel daft voting against Federer or severely narked at voting for him again.

Gasquet's performance here shows the help a single-handed backhand has in being overvalued,at least the others are sufficiently different from Fed that individual preference could explain preferring them to him.Gasquet is so inferior yet somewhat similar that voting for him is inexplicable to me.

Broad based well above average games are the greatest sign of exceptional talent to me,rather than generally good,or brilliant mixed with gaping holes.

Djokovic is 3rd at worst in the poll options IMO.Mental qualities excepted I'd even put him 2nd above Nadal,personal preferences be damned.

Surcouf
08-18-2010, 11:08 PM
I think that Nadal is the most talented player. He is able to reach the highest level of play and has proven that at his best he has superior abilities than Federer. Federer is just more consistent and can use his top level more often.

straitup
08-18-2010, 11:09 PM
I refuse to vote for anybody,I'll either feel daft voting against Federer or severely narked at voting for him again.

Gasquet's performance here shows the help a single-handed backhand has in being overvalued,at least the others are sufficiently different from Fed that individual preference could explain preferring them to him.Gasquet is so inferior yet somewhat similar that voting for him is inexplicable to me.

Broad based well above average games are the greatest sign of exceptional talent to me,rather than generally good,or brilliant mixed with gaping holes.

Djokovic is 3rd at worst in the poll options IMO.Mental qualities excepted I'd even put him 2nd above Nadal,personal preferences be damned.

I agree with that...that's why Gasquet certainly isn't, his forehand isn't a terrible shot but it looks flawed and it's not even close to good enough.

I think Fed's the obvious choice here

Surcouf
08-18-2010, 11:11 PM
I agree with that...that's why Gasquet certainly isn't, his forehand isn't a terrible shot but it looks flawed and it's not even close to good enough.

I think Fed's the obvious choice here

I don't think so. His backhand is mediocre and I never was a fan of him, I found him boring and he never impressed me the way Nadal has.

fran70
08-18-2010, 11:13 PM
Federer is the most talented player.

There are some players that are/were unable to get full profit of their talents as Melzer, Nalbandian, Gasquet, Monfils, Feliciano Lopez, Bellucci, Gulbis, Chardy, Brands, De Bakker and Haase.

Roamed
08-18-2010, 11:24 PM
I don't think so. His backhand is mediocre and I never was a fan of him, I found him boring and he never impressed me the way Nadal has.

His backhand isn't mediocre. Sure, it's usually the first thing to break down when he isn't playing well and he does use it quite a lot just to set up his forehand which is obviously stronger, but his slice, for example, is one of the best in the game for its variety. Fair enough about the rest. :)

nobama
08-18-2010, 11:24 PM
I would say Nalbandian is probably the most natural talent with few big titles to show for it. And I'm not a big fan of Murray, but not having him in this poll is :retard:

Andre'sNo1Fan
08-18-2010, 11:26 PM
Yes, they are.
Nadal just randomly hits the ball with a lot of topspin from side to side.
Murray and all the players I listed >>>>>>>>>>>> Nadal in the talent department :bigwave:
Players must be really crap if they cannot hit topspin balls really don't you think. If thats all he does after all and no other talent. Maybe you could go out there and be number 1.

straitup
08-18-2010, 11:28 PM
His backhand isn't mediocre. Sure, it's usually the first thing to break down when he isn't playing well and he does use it quite a lot just to set up his forehand which is obviously stronger, but his slice, for example, is one of the best in the game for its variety. Fair enough about the rest. :)

Yeah it's a good shot...that's more obviously seen in his prime years

Sapeod
08-19-2010, 12:06 AM
Players must be really crap if they cannot hit topspin balls really don't you think. If thats all he does after all and no other talent. Maybe you could go out there and be number 1.
Maybe I will.
We don't have many tennis courts, and I can't practice very much, but I'm going to try my hardest to become a pro on the tour.

leng jai
08-19-2010, 01:08 AM
Federer is clearly the most talented. Its not even debateable. Poll options are laughable.

Honourable mentions would be:

David Nalbandian
Tommy Haas
Tomas Berdych
Marcos Bagdhatis

Gasquet is clearly the most overrated player ever when it comes to "most talent" discussions. His serve is relatively week and his forehand is an abomination. Fanboys are just blinded by his class backhand and the fact that he occasionally produces miraculous winners.

paseo
08-19-2010, 01:25 AM
I think that Nadal is the most talented player. He is able to reach the highest level of play and has proven that at his best he has superior abilities than Federer. Federer is just more consistent and can use his top level more often.

I think it's the other way around.

FlameOn
08-19-2010, 01:27 AM
Nalby screams natural talent to me. :)

Sophocles
08-19-2010, 09:44 AM
Federer is clearly the most talented. Its not even debateable. Poll options are laughable.

Honourable mentions would be:

David Nalbandian
Tommy Haas
Tomas Berdych
Marcos Bagdhatis

Gasquet is clearly the most overrated player ever when it comes to "most talent" discussions. His serve is relatively week and his forehand is an abomination. Fanboys are just blinded by his class backhand and the fact that he occasionally produces miraculous winners.

It's remarkable Federer, though winning the poll by a mile, nonetheless has less than 50% of the vote. If I were trying to think of the most talented players in the history of the game, Federer is one of the first who would spring to mind, along with McEnroe, Nastase, Hoad, & Laver. Haas, Berdych, & Baghdatis are all better options than Almagro, Nadal, Youzhny, Davydenko, & Gasquet.

Blackbriar
08-19-2010, 10:16 AM
Federer is clearly the most talented. Its not even debateable. Poll options are laughable.

Honourable mentions would be:

David Nalbandian
Tommy Haas
Tomas Berdych
Marcos Bagdhatis

Gasquet is clearly the most overrated player ever when it comes to "most talent" discussions. His serve is relatively week and his forehand is an abomination. Fanboys are just blinded by his class backhand and the fact that he occasionally produces miraculous winners.

I really can't understand all this hatred toward Gasquet :confused: there is nothing like "miracles" in tennis, especially when these so-call miracles are repeated matchs after matchs.

sabina_RF_lee
08-19-2010, 10:30 AM
Federer

Helevorn
08-19-2010, 10:53 AM
dolgopolov, gasquet, federer, berdych, malisse

talking about TALENT

Nole fan
08-19-2010, 11:53 AM
Yeah what Sophocles said. You're getting too broad defining talent. Novak has done well to win a GS and hand with Fedal with his limited natural talent, but rankings can be deceptive. He's been in a slump over 2 years and it looks like it's here to stay for his entire career. At this point I think his current slump is his natural ability and his good end of 2007/beginning of 2008 was a flash in the pan.

Saying that Djokovic has limited natural talent shows why you know next to nothing about tennis and always write crap comments. I won't waste my time with you anymore, promise.

If we are talking about talent alone, Federer clearly is above the rest. Arguably his game is the most beautiful to watch, easy and elegant. Of the rest, I think Djokovic has the most natural beautiful ground strokes, all tennis experts praise his super clean shots, his felixbility and amazing movement, his all court prowess and perfect definition. His best game is precise, beautiful, powerful and clean. Novak is super talented and every expert knows that. That's why most people expected him to fare better and be nº1 sooner. Of course everyone in the Top 10 are super talented, that goes without saying. You cannot reach the top spot without being incredibly talented. Murray, Nadal, Nalby and Davydenko are probably the most talented behind Roger and Novak. Then you have headcases with a beautiful game like Gasquet or Gulbis, but that's another story.

Forehander
08-19-2010, 12:16 PM
Atleast we can all agree that Federer is the most talented by far. The way he jumped to the top rank and maintained dominant was never seen before

MacTheKnife
08-19-2010, 12:20 PM
It's remarkable Federer, though winning the poll by a mile, nonetheless has less than 50% of the vote. If I were trying to think of the most talented players in the history of the game, Federer is one of the first who would spring to mind, along with McEnroe, Nastase, Hoad, & Laver. Haas, Berdych, & Baghdatis are all better options than Almagro, Nadal, Youzhny, Davydenko, & Gasquet.

I agree with this. Actually have kept a mental list of the top naturally talented guys I have seen play. McEnroe, Federer, Nastase, & Laver. For me, no one else from this era belongs on this list. Honorable mention for nalbandian and safin, but they do not belong with the top 4 guys.

KeiNishikoriCro
08-19-2010, 12:33 PM
and where is Gael Monfils here?

freeandlonely
08-19-2010, 03:43 PM
Federer, then Nalbandian.

:hearts:

nevenez
08-19-2010, 05:21 PM
In order:
Berdych
Gulbis
Verdasco
Kohlschreiber
Dolgopolov

Ozone
08-19-2010, 06:02 PM
I will not listen to anybody that uses who has a better ranking and who's ahead of who in the race to argue that that player is more talented than the other. This has absolutely nothing to do with rankings at all. Read the OP first

gusavo
08-19-2010, 10:10 PM
I will not listen to anybody that uses who has a better ranking and who's ahead of who in the race to argue that that player is more talented than the other. This has absolutely nothing to do with rankings at all. Read the OP first
lol, the whole discussion that ensumes after such a question is a joke. I know that without even having read any posts (I skipped to the last page to see how the discussion has panned out). to think that you can spot talent levels by looking at the players play tennis is just soo rediculous. I dont even think most of you have a clear idea of the definition of the word

Ozone
08-19-2010, 10:18 PM
lol, the whole discussion that ensumes after such a question is a joke. I know that without even having read any posts (I skipped to the last page to see how the discussion has panned out). to think that you can spot talent levels by looking at the players play tennis is just soo rediculous. I dont even think most of you have a clear idea of the definition of the word
Doing things that cant be taught at the academy. And ball striking. Pretty easy to see

Everko
08-19-2010, 10:20 PM
Doing things that cant be taught at the academy. And ball striking. Pretty easy to see

so let's take everyone in the world who has never picked up a tennis racket and have them hit a ball. Whoever hits in the best on 1st try is the most talented?

gusavo
08-22-2010, 04:31 AM
Doing things that cant be taught at the academy. And ball striking. Pretty easy to see
what cant be taught. what about ballstriking. its easy to see huh, so how do you do it and wheres your proof?

maskedmuffin
08-22-2010, 05:55 AM
anyone who has nadul anywhere near the top 3 are tards of the highest order, like play da game and his associate claydeath.

Wielding a 100 square inch babolat and spinning the ball in over and over does not take any level of superhuman talent. It is bar none and by far the easiest most forgiving racquet to hit with and not the least bit "Reverse compatible".in fact of all the frames it may be the furthest from the old graphite and *dare i say..even though game is COMPLETELY different* wood

These nadul clowns who have him listed up there with shotmakers like federer or nalbandian, who take the ball supremely early, or gasquet (when he was in the top 100) dont know a clue about what the word talent really means

Murray has more feel and guile in his pinky than nadul has in his body as well.

rommel99
08-22-2010, 09:22 AM
X.Malisse.

This. Xavier Malisse

Speed of Light
08-22-2010, 09:54 AM
A question about Roger Federer: if this guy is such a natural raw talent as you all seem to think then why did he take such a long time on the atp tour before winning his first grand slam? Why was he intrinsically such a late bloomer?

leng jai
08-22-2010, 09:58 AM
A question about Roger Federer: if this guy is such a natural raw talent as you all seem to think then why did he take such a long time on the atp tour before winning his first grand slam? Why was he intrinsically such a late bloomer?

You've got things backwards. Its normal for talented players to "bloom" later than players whose strengths are heart/consistency.

Speed of Light
08-22-2010, 10:09 AM
You've got things backwards. Its normal for talented players to "bloom" later than players whose strengths are heart/consistency.

Or, it could also mean that he didn't have the weapons needed in the beginning to challenge at the highest level, but worked on his game a lot to finally succeed.

leng jai
08-22-2010, 10:34 AM
Or, it could also mean that he didn't have the weapons needed in the beginning to challenge at the highest level, but worked on his game a lot to finally succeed.

Not really, Federer always had a plethora of weapons at his disposal. The reason he didn't have success early was due to the fact that he was mentally poor, and hadn't figured out how to use his weapons efficiently.

BodyServe
08-22-2010, 11:26 AM
A question about Roger Federer: if this guy is such a natural raw talent as you all seem to think then why did he take such a long time on the atp tour before winning his first grand slam? Why was he intrinsically such a late bloomer?

Better players before.

Singularity
08-22-2010, 11:46 AM
I will not listen to anybody that uses who has a better ranking and who's ahead of who in the race to argue that that player is more talented than the other. This has absolutely nothing to do with rankings at all. Read the OP first
Rankings reflect a players relative level of ability at certain point in time. Natural talent is one componant of that ability, and so rankings can provide evidence of talent. One reason that players like Murray do well is their talent allows them to hit shots others aren't able to, when put in awkward positions on the court. Hence, not everyone who trains at the 'academy' is able to reach as high a ranking.

Forehander
08-22-2010, 01:31 PM
Or, it could also mean that he didn't have the weapons needed in the beginning to challenge at the highest level, but worked on his game a lot to finally succeed.

I will never forget what I said to one of my mate when we first saw Federer play on TV during year 2000 "There's something about this guy, he plays like a hovering tank. Can sense an aura around him". It was so obvious he had so much potential and talent, all it needed was a little polish. Just go back and watch some of his videos.

Ozone
08-22-2010, 02:53 PM
so let's take everyone in the world who has never picked up a tennis racket and have them hit a ball. Whoever hits in the best on 1st try is the most talented?
Apparently you all dont know what ball striking means. Im talking about clean, solid, effortless contact. Guys like Agassi, Safin, even Baghdatis are good examples. They just stike the ball so cleanly. It takes talent to have such pure striking of the ball with natural strokes. So take a kid who's never picked up a tennis racquet, and see how he strikes the ball. Even if it doesnt go in, you can tell how good the kid can be.

gusavo
08-24-2010, 08:37 AM
Apparently you all dont know what ball striking means. Im talking about clean, solid, effortless contact. Guys like Agassi, Safin, even Baghdatis are good examples. They just stike the ball so cleanly. It takes talent to have such pure striking of the ball with natural strokes. So take a kid who's never picked up a tennis racquet, and see how he strikes the ball. Even if it doesnt go in, you can tell how good the kid can be.
you got any proof at all?

dudesenior
08-24-2010, 09:09 AM
and Federer wins the poll...:D

latso
08-24-2010, 10:00 AM
this is a no-thread

Federer is neither the hardest working, nor the strongest, hence the most talented

bokehlicious
08-24-2010, 10:03 AM
Federer is neither the hardest working,

How do you know that?

Puschkin
08-24-2010, 10:53 AM
I think that Nadal is the most talented player. He is able to reach the highest level of play and has proven that at his best he has superior abilities than Federer. Federer is just more consistent and can use his top level more often.
And the sun turns around the earth.

latso
08-24-2010, 10:56 AM
How do you know that?
he's said it several times

he plays probably the least tournaments among the top 100 players (not only now but always)

any other brilliant questions?

leng jai
08-24-2010, 11:45 AM
How do you know that?

rofl

bokehlicious
08-24-2010, 12:17 PM
he's said it several times

he plays probably the least tournaments among the top 100 players (not only now but always)

any other brilliant questions?

I remember reading Paganini's interviews where he mentionned Roger being damn dedicated to hitting the gym and that being the most underrated aspect's of Roger's game...

But surely you know better...

bokehlicious
08-24-2010, 12:18 PM
rofl

Tommy Ass is the most talented, honey :kiss:

leng jai
08-24-2010, 12:21 PM
Tommy Ass is the most talented, honey :kiss:

Fo shiz bro :D

latso
08-24-2010, 12:50 PM
I remember reading Paganini's interviews where he mentionned Roger being damn dedicated to hitting the gym and that being the most underrated aspect's of Roger's game...

But surely you know better...
ask anyone's coach, he'd tell you the same....

lol, if i were the fitness coach of a guy, i'd obviously say he's busting his ass 24/7...

Roger's always said he dislikes running, he doesn't train everyday, he never does it more than once a day

Do u have any idea what others, who can't achieve the same results by doing 4 training sessions a week do?

They do 14..

Why? coz they're less talented ;)

bokehlicious
08-24-2010, 01:12 PM
Roger's always said he dislikes running, he doesn't train everyday, he never does it more than once a day


Federer has always been a talented kid. What turned him into a potential GOAT was undoubtly his dedication to fitness... Of course I'm not talking about today's Fed.

mistercrabs
08-24-2010, 01:29 PM
Is there a specific reason, other than malice and the fact that he's not good looking enough, that Murray isn't an option but the likes of Davydenko and Gasquet are?

latso
08-24-2010, 01:41 PM
Federer has always been a talented kid. What turned him into a potential GOAT was undoubtly his dedication to fitness... Of course I'm not talking about today's Fed.
mate, i respect your opinion. And i wouldn't call Roger lazy, no way.

But he simply trains less than most of the others.

This doesn't mean it is wrong or right.

It might be the best thing he came up with to keep out of injuries f.e. and tiredness.

This is not the only thing proving he's the most talented player out there and it doesn't mean that with more training he would have achieved more (actually imo he would achieve less).

But it's one of the small details that come to my mind when i need to transcribe my view on the subject with 2-3 lines.

Otherwise - what is the measuring unit for talent? This is hyper subjective.

Though anyone could say that Roger, Nalbandian, Gulbis and Gasquet are pure talents. How to evaluate who's more than the other?

All the 4 of them aren't half hard working as Ferrer, Nadal, Monaco and similar guys who never apear in funny strip club shots, don't get a beer belly every 6 months, don't have a multimillionaire father, or do zillions advert shots/charity/holidays/numerous non tennis stuff but count on their fitness all the time.

The talented kids are generally more spoiled than the others, coz they realise that quite early and automatically they just can't put as much effort as the others, it's just human nature.

Which is normal and nothing to do against it. Coz also when u push them too much, you can get them bored/hating what they do.

Anyways, Roger isn't sitting on the couch all day and then come out smashing oponents for several consecutive years, that's clear.

But imo if he follows the pre-knees injury Rafa's trainings for a week, he won't be able to lift the twins in his arms.

Nothing wrong with that, i'm a Roger fan and i admire him for all he's done and all he is.

I rate him the most talented and best player every walked on a tennis court and there aren't many arguments to back this view up, when you can't bring the obvious as one - the tropheys :)

Cheers

bokehlicious
08-24-2010, 02:12 PM
But he simply trains less than most of the others.


Sorry, but can you back up such statement? I mean, back in the day Safin and Federer were considered the most talented players of their generation.

Safin was known to spend more time dating chicks than training, see where he's gone to, tennis-wise. On the other hand Federer really had to work hard to make most of his talent, so saying he trained less than most of the others is surely just plain wrong. Again, I'm not talking about daddy-already GOAT-Fed, but young talented Federer...

Chair Umpire
09-26-2010, 11:05 PM
Nalby and Feña shouldn't have been included.

I voted Federer.

The Magician
09-26-2010, 11:19 PM
Nalby and Feña shouldn't have been included.

I voted Federer.

Wow if even you voted for Federer who are the 18 megamugs who voted for Nadull :bolt:

Chair Umpire
09-26-2010, 11:27 PM
What makes you think that I know about it, argentinian-tard? :shrug:

emotion
09-26-2010, 11:58 PM
Is Hewitt a joke?

Topspindoctor
09-27-2010, 02:48 AM
Hewitt has been a joke since he picked up a racket. Disgrace to tennis he was able to win 2 slams and stay for 80 weeks at #1. He tainted the #1 spot of men's tennis like Safina and Jankovic did to WTA.

Orka_n
09-27-2010, 10:37 AM
Federer. :shrug:

Topspindoctor
09-27-2010, 10:41 AM
:spit: People voting Gasquet? I hear having WTA serve and forehand on ATP tour gets you "most talented" vote :o

oranges
09-27-2010, 11:03 AM
WTA serve? Please stop embarassing yourself.

Andre'sNo1Fan
09-27-2010, 12:30 PM
Is there a specific reason, other than malice and the fact that he's not good looking enough, that Murray isn't an option but the likes of Davydenko and Gasquet are?
He's not talented enough.

finishingmove
09-27-2010, 12:32 PM
Tommy Robredo.

Chair Umpire
09-27-2010, 12:36 PM
:spit: People voting Gasquet? I hear having WTA serve and forehand on ATP tour gets you "most talented" vote :o

People voting Nalbannadie is way more hilarious.

Nidhogg
09-27-2010, 07:32 PM
I would say Federer. Talent is all about making what's difficult seem simple. Time and time again he comes up with something laughably creative when put in very odd situations on the court, making it look like the easiest and most natural thing in the world.

emotion
09-27-2010, 09:29 PM
Hewitt has been a joke since he picked up a racket. Disgrace to tennis he was able to win 2 slams and stay for 80 weeks at #1. He tainted the #1 spot of men's tennis like Safina and Jankovic did to WTA.

Ummmm not what I meant

The Magician
09-27-2010, 09:35 PM
:spit: People voting Gasquet? I hear having WTA serve and forehand on ATP tour gets you "most talented" vote :o

So says the WTA fan :o:wavey:

Mjau!
09-28-2010, 01:18 AM
Top 5:

1. Federer
2. Söderling
3. Nalbandian
4. Gulbis
5. Murray

Brick Top
09-28-2010, 03:11 AM
Nalbandian

feliciano
10-07-2010, 11:50 AM
Gasquet

madmax
10-07-2010, 12:10 PM
Hajek

Florida
10-07-2010, 12:27 PM
Talent is a relevant thing! Talent requires hard work, something that Federer did as oppose to some other talented pupets!!!!!!! Ask him he will tell you!!!!!!!

.-Federers_Mate-.
10-07-2010, 12:39 PM
There shouldnt even be a thread on this, because the answer is obvious:Roger Federer. This is undebateble.

A couple of nitpicks here and there..

- Tsonga is more talented than his fellow frenchie Gasquet and atleast on par with most of the others. why isnt he there?

LOL @ Almagro and Youzhny. Could have had much better options i.e Murray. Can pull off any shot in the book, mostly with success. When hes not being a wimp his forehand is a scorcher - see His past two slams where he made the finals.

If your going to put Haase in their, atleast put either good friend Feli or Nando. Both Flashy shotmakers who have alot of natural talent and great ball striking skills, would be much better if they werent so brain dead on court (whose coaching them?..should be fined)

not going to comment on Rafa being there. whatever floats your boat. I dont associate amazing fitness and mental strength with raw talent. His game? Fuck off. he should be playing tennis how it was invented not this anti tennis stuff. Had i made the poll, he wouldnt have made it.

dont know why Berdych didnt make it either. One of the cleanest ball strikers on tour.

@ the arm chair critics whinging about Monfils, go watch him live ffs. The guy is just incredible. Not going to repeat what flyboy said.

Just my 2 cents