Why is Gasquet overhyped? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Why is Gasquet overhyped?

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 06:15 PM
So many people seem to be believe this guy will be a multiple GS champion.

How is that possible when he is one the most mentally incompetent players.
Do people beleive his talent is so great that his brain doesn't matter.

Baggy, Murray & Djoko will all be more successful than him in the future. Gasquet is all flash and no substance.

My logic is the light for MTF.

Action Jackson
09-19-2006, 06:16 PM
Cause he has a beautiful backhand, has an aesthetically pleasing game and beat Federer once.

atheneglaukopis
09-19-2006, 06:18 PM
Cause he has a beautiful backhand, has an aesthetically pleasing game and beat Federer once.And because Federer was once a headcase too.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 06:20 PM
Cause he has a beautiful backhand, has an aesthetically pleasing game and beat Federer once.

How does beauty = results.
Nalbandian has beaten Federer multiple times but he hasn't won a GS.

Action Jackson
09-19-2006, 06:23 PM
How does beauty = results.
Nalbandian has beaten Federer multiple times but he hasn't won a GS.

Ok, time out. I am far from a Gasquet fan, just answering your question.

I have been saying Gasquet has been overhyped for ages. In that Group A/B youngsters thread I have mentioned it there.

This Gasquet he has gone from 15 yr old whiz kid, hyped to the moon and back, then he got injured and was forgotten about, then he became a has been and then he beats Federer and the bandwagon gathered major steam.

Is that clear enough?

casillas_girl
09-19-2006, 06:23 PM
i don't think you should talk about richy like that, he'll win a grand slam once, i just know it and believe in him!!! :mad:

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 06:28 PM
Is that clear enough?

Oh you misunderstood.

I want someone to explain to me why he is so much more special than the other young guns. Why do more people expect him to suceed in comparison to the others.

Action Jackson
09-19-2006, 06:31 PM
Oh you misunderstood.

I want someone to explain to me why he is so much more special than the other young guns. Why do more people expect him to suceed in comparison to the others.

I think he is overhyped, but think about it the majority of people like the stylish type of players, which Nadal isn't, but he is effective. It goes back to the style or over substance school of thought, you should be able to see it.

preNadal care
09-19-2006, 06:33 PM
How many times have Jim Courier and PMac mentioned him on the cover of a french tennis mag at 9 y/o :help:

Action Jackson
09-19-2006, 06:34 PM
How many times has Jim Courier mentioned his pic in the french tennis mag at 9 y/o :help:

The child prodigy.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 06:38 PM
Gotta agree with the style over substance part Hitler. It makes sense. Many people love the aesthetics even if it isn't effective.

ezekiel
09-19-2006, 06:40 PM
He is talented will be close to an elite player but I doubt his mental toughness that all champions have. He is easilly rattled.

s.m.
09-19-2006, 06:43 PM
monfils is far more overhyped imo
gasquet has more class, more ability and will do better if he´s injury free in the future
but that is becoming a big problem for him
so young, and so injury prone
it´s affecting his mental state also
he was mentally pretty good until the elbow thing started

from mentioned group baggy is the best player
he´s top 5 material right now
djokovic and murray still have plenty to eat to come there
so is gasquet

prima donna
09-19-2006, 06:46 PM
Fedkilla,

For the love of God, your trolling is equivalent to the MTF version of Nadal's game.

Lacking variety. ( Lacking imagination or creativity )
Lacking style or finesse ( The manner in which you formulate your line of questioning )
Lacking versatility ( Lack of ability to adapt yourself to the situation after a sufficient rebuttal's been properly assessed )

You're basically a one dimensional troll, I hope that you're aware of the fact that something of the sort can only be effective for so long and like Nadal's, your career will be short lived.

All kidding aside, I don't do these type of posts ( because it's not my style ), but a little creativity, eh ?

Naranoc
09-19-2006, 06:46 PM
Gotta agree with the style over substance part Hitler. It makes sense.

Only cause he (kinda) complimented Nadal :lol:

Castafiore
09-19-2006, 06:49 PM
:lol:

Talk about aesthetics and Nadal in one post and prima donna is there in a flash. :yeah:

Skyward
09-19-2006, 06:56 PM
. Gasquet is all flash and no substance.



You'll :worship: :worship: :worship: him, if he manages to beat Fed at Wimbledon one day.

NeverSayDie
09-19-2006, 06:57 PM
I dont think Gasquet is overhyped at all. His game is a thing of beauty :yeah:
and i do believe he will win a grandslam within the next few years

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 06:58 PM
Fedkilla,

For the love of God, your trolling is equivalent to the MTF version of Nadal's game.

Lacking variety. ( Lacking imagination or creativity )
Lacking style or finesse ( The manner in which you formulate your line of questioning )
Lacking versatility ( Lack of ability to adapt yourself to the situation after a sufficient rebuttal's been properly assessed )

You're basically a one dimensional troll, I hope that you're aware of the fact that something of the sort can only be effective for so long and like Nadal's, your career will be short lived.

All kidding aside, I don't do these type of posts ( because it's not my style ), but a little creativity, eh ?

Look who came out of his lair.
Enjoy being the supreme arse clown Prima.

I normally talk about Federer, this has got nothing to do with him. Therefore this is original. :D

prima donna
09-19-2006, 07:02 PM
Look who came out of his lair.
Enjoy being the supreme arse clown Prima.

I normally talk about Federer, this has got nothing to do with him. Therefore this is original. :D

Another thing that you should find rather interesting would be the fact that I don't even acknowledge the fact that such a contest even exists, aside from making a suggestion to GWH with regard to a potential contestant, it's not my cup of tea.

Anyone that reviews my thread history or my posts in general will notice that each post is relevant to tennis discussion, like my opinion or not. I resent that label. That being said, sure that I'm a pompous asshole, but the difference between you and I is plain as day.

You have no clue about tennis. None.

DrJules
09-19-2006, 07:46 PM
Gotta agree with the style over substance part Hitler. It makes sense. Many people love the aesthetics even if it isn't effective.

Of course, Roger Federer gives you both :lol: :lol: :lol:

DrJules
09-19-2006, 07:51 PM
If Gasquet ends the year in the top 20 for the 2nd year in a row at the age of 20, I suppose he has partially lived up to the hype. He has also reached 2 master series finals. Much of the hype is based on ability and potential.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 08:09 PM
You have no clue about tennis. None.

Your knowledge of tennis is flawed.
You don't understand the clay game and you have no concept of defensive tennis.
I doubt you even play the sport.

vincayou
09-19-2006, 08:34 PM
So many people seem to be believe this guy will be a multiple GS champion.

How is that possible when he is one the most mentally incompetent players.
Do people beleive his talent is so great that his brain doesn't matter.

Baggy, Murray & Djoko will all be more successful than him in the future. Gasquet is all flash and no substance.

My logic is the light for MTF.

Because he has a feel for the ball. Because he's good on both side, at the net, at dropshots, at overheads, has a decent serve, and can play on every surface.

In a word, because he's very talented.

Pfloyd
09-19-2006, 08:52 PM
Another thing that you should find rather interesting would be the fact that I don't even acknowledge the fact that such a contest even exists, aside from making a suggestion to GWH with regard to a potential contestant, it's not my cup of tea.

Anyone that reviews my thread history or my posts in general will notice that each post is relevant to tennis discussion, like my opinion or not. I resent that label. That being said, sure that I'm a pompous asshole, but the difference between you and I is plain as day.

You have no clue about tennis. None.

Hahaha, this guy is funny.

You really are :)

alelysafina
09-19-2006, 08:56 PM
I doubt you even play the sport.

What does playing the sport have to do with anything?? I know people who have played the sport for years and can only identify Andy Roddick and Andre Agassi.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 09:08 PM
What does playing the sport have to do with anything?? I know people who have played the sport for years and can only identify Andy Roddick and Andre Agassi.

Well playing a sport gives you a feel for the sport. It helps you realize how tough some shots are even if they look easy on TV. It helps you realize how mentally tough and physically tough a person has to be to play a long and competitive match.

Pfloyd
09-19-2006, 09:14 PM
Thought this thread was about Gasquet.

About him, the only thing that can be said is that he has lots of potential, but still needs to improve his physique. On clay, and when he's on, he could even be better than Nadal, and that's saying alot about his talent. However, I havent seen him play at that Monte Carlo level of last year.

alelysafina
09-19-2006, 09:17 PM
Well playing a sport gives you a feel for the sport. It helps you realize how tough some shots are even if they look easy on TV. It helps you realize how mentally tough and physically tough a person has to be to play a long and competitive match.

But if you're a fan of the sport, a real fan, I think that you know that it's not as easy as it looks.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-19-2006, 09:21 PM
But if you're a fan of the sport, a real fan, I think that you know that it's not as easy as it looks.

You can learn more about a sport by playing it than watching it.
You can agree or disagree, its your opinion.

zesty_dorito
09-19-2006, 09:24 PM
Gasquet has one of the best backhands today. I have seen him attack the ball, and he turns to his backhand. I don't see a lot of people who "prefer" their backhand over forehands. This guy has a lot of potential, and his flaws can be fixed (hopefully).

gulzhan
09-19-2006, 10:30 PM
So many people seem to be believe this guy will be a multiple GS champion.

How is that possible when he is one the most mentally incompetent players.
Do people beleive his talent is so great that his brain doesn't matter.

Baggy, Murray & Djoko will all be more successful than him in the future. Gasquet is all flash and no substance.

My logic is the light for MTF.


Wow! Finally I see here a Gasquet thread! I was about to open a thread "Why is Gasquet underhyped here"?

People believe Richard will be a multiple GS champion because they see it :D

"Mentally incompetent" :haha: That's his brain that matters the most! He is not just smart, he is genius! :worship: And please give a break with all this "mental toughness" crap! He is tough enough to make it top 8 real soon.

~*BGT*~
09-20-2006, 01:25 AM
Oh you misunderstood.

I want someone to explain to me why he is so much more special than the other young guns. Why do more people expect him to suceed in comparison to the others.
Fed said that Richie reminds him of himself. No better role model than he, imo.

NYCtennisfan
09-20-2006, 02:15 AM
I have seen a lot of improvement in Gasquet's game this year as he has improved the service return, is more aggressive with the FH and has volleyed very well. He is still not what someone would call mentally tough and his fitness and shot selection is iffy at best. But the talent is there. It's hard not to be enthusiastic about a player who can at times put together stretches of breathtaking tennis, hitting one amazing shot after another. Whether he will ever put it all together to put together great results one day is another question.

Sjengster
09-20-2006, 02:46 AM
I don't see anything wrong with supporting someone who is aesthetically pleasing, just about all my favourite players I cheer for on that basis, and I don't see how Gasquet's aesthetics are "ineffective" considering they've got him back into the Top 30 with two titles on two different surfaces and a TMS final on a third, just months after he dropped to 66 in the world with the danger of slipping even further if he hadn't defended Nottingham. He certainly has suffered from overhyping in the past, how could he not when ridiculous comparisons are made between his tennis and Mozart at the age of 10, but his ability and potential shouldn't be undersold either. He's undoubtedly a Slam-winning prospect, I just hope he ignores the expectations of people who want him to be the Federer to Nadal's Hewitt (another rather shaky and over-optimistic analogy).

Leo
09-20-2006, 03:13 AM
I completely, completely disagree. Gasquet is exceptionally more talented than Murray and Djokovic, both of whom I do like. And more talented than Baghdatis and Berdych and Monfils too. He has more ingenuity and variety than all those youngsters combined. Richard has improved a ton in the second half of this season and is progressing nicely, I feel, into an eventual Top 5 player and perhaps GS champion.

GlennMirnyi
09-20-2006, 03:30 AM
Gasquet is much better than Nadal. He has all the shots, is a regular volleyer, better serve... what happens is that he isn't a moonballer, and that's just a prerequisite to win something these days.

The ability and technique he has is really rare, but winning a GS's still very far from him.


About the thread-poster-troll: what can you expect from someone that thinks tennis is running and screaming? That person just misses everything tennis is about. There can be no reasoning with someone like that.

silverwhite
09-20-2006, 04:41 AM
Just a few things. Firstly, style and substance don't have to be mutually exclusive. The world #1 is proof of that. :)

He certainly has suffered from overhyping in the past, how could he not when ridiculous comparisons are made between his tennis and Mozart at the age of 10, but his ability and potential shouldn't be undersold either. He's undoubtedly a Slam-winning prospect, I just hope he ignores the expectations of people who want him to be the Federer to Nadal's Hewitt (another rather shaky and over-optimistic analogy).

Precisely. I agree that he is overrated because while he has plenty of potential, there is no guarantee that he will win a single slam, let alone multiple ones. People complain that he has received too much hype but it's important to note that he has suffered from all the pressure put on him and it has hindered his progress (most notably in 2004) and may continue to do so.

Halba
09-20-2006, 04:52 AM
gasquet is probably the most entertaining player to watch apart from federer, and similar to blake in terms of entertainment value

he is talented, non-talented players do not make masters cup finals :rolleyes:

he has all court game. only young at 20 so once he gets older he'll get stronger, next year provided his fitness program kicks in, he should have better results in grand slams (more favourable draws as he is higher ranked, since he won't be meeting federer early on like 1st rounds!!), and i anticipate a top 5 ranking. The reason he lost to Hewitt was not due to ability, but fitness reasons.

despite the ugliness of his FH, its my preferred shot to watch. he generates some power on both wings. His serve can be solidly improved. Fed's serve wasn;t the best early on either, powder puff stuff

leng jai
09-20-2006, 05:20 AM
I'd put Safin and Haas to be more entertaining than Gasquet

acharlesmobile
09-20-2006, 05:53 AM
Gasquet is aesthetically pleasing, but when you have every shot, it depends on your brain to put everything together. Richie doesn't exactly have that yet. Nadal's game, although not really one-dimensional per se, always revovles aronud his go to shot: the topspin forehand. When he's having a brain fart and doesn't want to think too much, he can rely on that shot. It's less mentally taxing (not to say stress free though. Tennis is definately not a stress free sport). And yet it works for him.

That's the problem with extremely talented players, they don't really have any go-to game plan and win points with variety. Different approach to the game from Nadal's really. And Nadal's game does requrie a lot too. Hsi mental toughness is definately extremely high. But then, i think that must be seperated from tactics. They're too differnet areas of the mental game. But when the mental toughness goes, so do the tactics.

My equations (purely opinion)
Nadal = Simple but effective style + Fitness + Mental Toughness.
Richie = Multifaceted game style + Tactics.
Federer = Multifacted game style + Mental Toughness (usually) + Tactics + Fitness.
Safin = Multifacted Gamestyle ( x 0.75) + Power Game
Roddick = Power Game + Mental Toughness/2

Allure
09-20-2006, 06:33 AM
Gasquet vs. Hewitt @ US Open 06. Match point #2. Enough said. :)

Himura
09-20-2006, 10:46 AM
And more talented than Baghdatis and Berdych and Monfils too. He has more ingenuity and variety than all those youngsters combined

Dreamer....Baggy has more variety in his game than Gasquet

leng jai
09-20-2006, 10:56 AM
Baggy is a massive talent. He can generate enormous power and volleys suprisingly well. Some of the forehands he hit to stun Fedex in the Aus Open final were absolutely huge.

richie21
09-20-2006, 11:01 AM
I completely, completely disagree. Gasquet is exceptionally more talented than Murray and Djokovic, both of whom I do like. And more talented than Baghdatis and Berdych and Monfils too. He has more ingenuity and variety than all those youngsters combined. Richard has improved a ton in the second half of this season and is progressing nicely, I feel, into an eventual Top 5 player and perhaps GS champion.


that's not hard though! :o

Action Jackson
09-20-2006, 11:08 AM
Dreamer....Baggy has more variety in his game than Gasquet

Kom igen, didn't you know Gasquet is going to be winning 10 Slams, has the best forehand, backhand, volleys and stamina, it's just a question of time.

richie21
09-20-2006, 11:12 AM
My equations (purely opinion)
Nadal = Simple but effective style + Fitness + Mental Toughness.
Richie = Multifaceted game style + Tactics.
Federer = Multifacted game style + Mental Toughness (usually) + Tactics + Fitness.
Safin = Multifacted Gamestyle ( x 0.75) + Power Game
Roddick = Power Game + Mental Toughness/2


Federer was in my opinion(but that's only mine) weaker mentally than Gasquet when he had the same age as Gasquet.(remember by example how he completely lost the plot against Hewitt in Davis Cup when he was leading 2 sets to love)

its.like.that
09-20-2006, 11:13 AM
Because he's french.

Norrage
09-20-2006, 11:54 AM
Have people forgotten how weak Federer was mentally in the beginning of his career? It oh so reminds me of Gasquet now...So who is there to say that Gasquet is overhyped or won't achieve a thing? :/

yomike
09-20-2006, 11:56 AM
1 word --> style

Gasquet is like a million times better to watch than that ace demon Andy Roddick.

richie21
09-20-2006, 11:57 AM
if you want to see someone who is seriously overrating Gasquet ,look at that! :eek:
i'm often overrating Gasquet a little bit but that 's nothing comparing to this guy! :eek:

From Dave Henry of RST:

Hewitt d Gasquet 64 64 46 36 63

This is what a night match at the US Open is all about: Two marquee players,
five sets, a comeback from two sets down, cramps, a tension-filled fifth
set, a raucous crowd, and an ending past midnight.

The match began tepidly for this first-time encounter. Hewitt was the
typical opportunist we've all come to know, and Gasquet was brilliant at
times, except during the big points. After the first two sets, the match had
a feel of incompleteness. "We have Gasquet and Hewitt on the court, and this
is all we get?"

As Hewitt served for 5-all up 40-0, the match had a third-set tiebreak win
stamped on it. But Gasquet rallied and broke on the only break point of the
set to breathe life into the stadium and himself.

In the fourth set, Gasquet began to outrally Hewitt, as the Australian began
making frequet nervous errors, winning close to 50% of Hewitt's service
points. Gasquet closed out the set with some discomfort, as his left quad
began to cramp.

Finally, the match grew some teeth, as Gasquet forced a fifth set for the
first time, after being down two sets to love.

But Gasquet couldn't enjoy this new threshold, as he began hobbling to start
set five. He was broken and it was apparent he'd be running on fumes the
rest of the match. Matters got worse. His right leg also began to cramp. He
barely was able to walk, but could run in short spurts.

Hewitt, staving off spirited attempts to break his serve, raced to a 4-1
lead, then 5-2. And that's when the fireworks began.

Hewitt tried to close out the match efficiently, but Gasquet lifted his game
and began knocking off winners, mostly wild passing shots on the run from
the extremes of the court.

With Hewitt serving for the match at 5-3, the highlight reel began. Hewitt
had his first match point at 40-30, only to see Gasquet clock a jumping
backhand up the line for a cold winner. A service winner gave Hewitt his
next matchpoint. Hewitt had Gasquet on the run against the backstop only to
see Gasquet pull off an unbelievable, preternatural forehand winner up the
line, as Hewitt approached the net.

Another short point gave Hewitt a third matchpoint, which Hewitt saw into
the open court with an off forehand winner.

The two met at night and had an extended, friendly exchange. Seems like both
players just made a new friend.

***

Hewitt increases his five-set match record to 21-8, winning his last 10
five-set matches.

Hewitt has now reached the US Open quarterfinals or better seven straight
times (5-1).

Though he lost, this is definitely a coming-of-age match for Richard
Gasquet. It was all Lionheart out there in the closing stages of the match.
Gasquet gritted his teeth -- sometimes with grit, other times with pain --
and showed why *he* could be the heir apparent to Federer's throne. No other
player has his shotmaking ability. Not Baghdatis. Not Federer.

The percussion of Gasquet's shots is an absolute thump of the ball. No other
player has it -- not even Federer or Nadal. Gasquet's potential to hit
winners from every part of the court is actually better than Federer,
because he hits flatter and with more racquet speed. His forehand crosscourt
passing shots on the dead run were remniscent of Sampras (not a bad thing). (nothing less! :eek: :lol: )

Hewitt's knee problem:
What problem? Hewitt was as fast as ever tracking drop shots and wide balls
from the extremes of the court, and he slid more times than Kim Clijsters
ever did in a match -- all without any ill effects that I (or Jim Courier)
could tell. That's a good thing.

Reports say Hewitt applied for a wild card at New Haven, but his doctor
advised against it.

Next up: Andy Roddick. Hewitt won't have to face the ridiculous pace of shot
and cold winners from beyond the baseline that he faced in Gasquet, but he
likely won't have as many opportunities to break serve, either.

Though Hewitt hit 17 aces, he certainly needed every last one. He doesn't
look as secure on serve to me as Roddick. Which is why I'm picking Roddick
to get his first win against Hewitt at a slam Wednesday night in a dogfight
of a match to set up a semifinal clash with Rafael Nadal.

Dave

silverwhite
09-20-2006, 12:31 PM
Kom igen, didn't you know Gasquet is going to be winning 10 Slams, has the best forehand, backhand, volleys and stamina, it's just a question of time.

TEN??? Not nearly enough!!!

Action Jackson
09-20-2006, 12:34 PM
TEN??? Not nearly enough!!!

Yes, I should have quanitified that 15 at least.

Monteque
09-20-2006, 12:51 PM
1 word --> style

Gasquet is like a million times better to watch than that ace demon Andy Roddick.

I like both players and support for them. But with all those antics on the court, i prefer to watch Andy than Richard. Richard is such a beauty BH and variations of the game but Roddick has character and behaviour that interesting to watch. It's just like comparing Lewis and Tyson.

vincayou
09-20-2006, 03:53 PM
Gasquet will be a contender for most slams in the coming years. Will he win one, many, none, that's impossible to know because
1) sport is unpredictable
2) in the latter stage, mental is even more important.
3) he's not the only very talented player

But I'm sure he will be a challenger.

njorker
09-20-2006, 04:02 PM
Are you f***ing kidding me w/ your question?!

guille&tati4life
09-20-2006, 04:04 PM
He's not really, he has the potential to win slams

njorker
09-20-2006, 04:11 PM
1 word --> style

Gasquet is like a million times better to watch than that ace demon Andy Roddick.

And once again, not surprisingly, this is another one of your many posts that usually ends (or starts) with bashing Roddick. So tell me, if you hate him so much, why do you NEVER FAIL TO MENTION HIS NAME EACH TIME YOU POST?

casillas_girl
09-20-2006, 04:24 PM
And once again, not surprisingly, this is another one of your many posts that usually ends (or starts) with bashing Roddick. So tell me, if you hate him so much, why do you NEVER FAIL TO MENTION HIS NAME EACH TIME YOU POST?
a secret love maybe :p :devil:

gulzhan
09-20-2006, 06:54 PM
Oh you misunderstood.

I want someone to explain to me why he is so much more special than the other young guns. Why do more people expect him to suceed in comparison to the others.

Did you watch him playing vs Murray and Berdych at Toronto? :confused: I don't think he'd have had problems with Djoko in 1/8th of USO should he beat Hewitt... Bagda? Have not met him yet-- hopefully he will at indoor tournaments. So, as Richie says-- we will see tomorrow! :devil:

After his come back this year, he lost only to Nalba at RG, Fed at Halle, Wimble and Toronto, Robredo at Cynci and Hewitt at USO (we won't count Stuttgart! ;) ). Pretty impressive!

ezekiel
09-20-2006, 07:05 PM
he will be like poor man's safin, oft injured and quiet streaky . There are worse things than that

ezekiel
09-20-2006, 07:08 PM
Federer was in my opinion(but that's only mine) weaker mentally than Gasquet when he had the same age as Gasquet.(remember by example how he completely lost the plot against Hewitt in Davis Cup when he was leading 2 sets to love)

enough with this :mad:
Federer never quit and was never bageled the way Gayqet did against Nalbandian at RG . He disgraced himself. He needs to prove he is no quitter

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-20-2006, 07:14 PM
Baggy is the only one who has a chance to join Federer and Nadal at the top and stop being a clown.

Richie is too inconsistent to ever be top 3 or win a GS. He is mentally incompetant.

Good looking game, but a loser.

gulzhan
09-20-2006, 07:29 PM
enough with this :mad:
Federer never quit and was never bageled the way Gayqet did against Nalbandian at RG . He disgraced himself. He needs to prove he is no quitter

He did at USO against Hewitt! :mad: Have you seen it?

Fed never quit! :haha: As Tolstoy said-- every player wins differently, but loses exactly the same way! :devil: (well, slightly changed the language... ;) ) Fed's defeat to Nadal at the same RG was no prettier :p Ugly, actually!

trulliscorpion
09-20-2006, 07:30 PM
Gasquet showed signs of mental improvement by coming back from 2-sets-0 against Hewitt on USO, and Hewitt didn't decrease his performance level. Gasquet improved his. And still, Gasquet lost due to his lack of physical endurance (that he -needs- to improve) and still he made Hewitt really work hard while cramping.

gulzhan
09-20-2006, 08:08 PM
Gasquet has great legs. :drool:

:D

He's got amazing foot work! ;)

~*BGT*~
09-20-2006, 08:09 PM
Gasquet has great legs. :drool:
:lol: Now you're talking! I like his butt too. I call him "The Cutie with the Booty" :lick:

neenah
09-20-2006, 10:41 PM
Gasquet showed signs of mental improvement by coming back from 2-sets-0 against Hewitt on USO, and Hewitt didn't decrease his performance level. Gasquet improved his. And still, Gasquet lost due to his lack of physical endurance (that he -needs- to improve) and still he made Hewitt really work hard while cramping.

Exactly. I think the Hewitt match was a sign enough that he's not a quitter :D

Bagelicious
09-21-2006, 02:09 AM
______________________________
~♠ Gasquetaires ♠~
un pour tous, tous pour un
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾

Himura
09-21-2006, 02:24 AM
Kom igen, didn't you know Gasquet is going to be winning 10 Slams, has the best forehand, backhand, volleys and stamina, it's just a question of time.

Hahahaha sorry....your absolutely right

Puschkin
09-21-2006, 09:17 AM
Gasquet is all flash and no substance.


Let's come back to that in 2008. :p

vincayou
09-21-2006, 10:02 AM
he will be like poor man's safin, oft injured and quiet streaky . There are worse things than that

:lol: There is not even a hint of ressemblance between Safin and Gasquet.

alfonsojose
09-21-2006, 05:51 PM
Backhand + butt combo :drool:

alfonsojose
09-21-2006, 05:53 PM
Gasquet has great legs. :drool:
His shoulders are still teenager's shoulder. The rest is ...... PERFECT :drool:

casillas_girl
09-21-2006, 06:12 PM
His shoulders are still teenager's shoulder. The rest is ...... PERFECT :drool:
my god, yeah, he's perfect! :hearts: like the perfect son in law! ;)

Langers
09-21-2006, 07:02 PM
Terrific thread! :yeah:

I've been saying it for a while now; he is simply one of the most overrated and overhyped players on tour.

njorker
09-22-2006, 02:27 AM
Terrific thread! :yeah:

I've been saying it for a while now; he is simply one of the most overrated and overhyped players on tour.


Don't you worry....he will certainly live up to his potential and all this 'hype' in 1-2 yrs time. Just you watch!

guy in sf
09-29-2006, 06:55 AM
It seems that most people who responded disagree with the author of this topic.

MariaV
09-29-2006, 08:44 AM
Just had to come in and say Richie is not overhyped, I hope he'll live up to his talent. :D
(..... unlike Marat *cough* 'cough* :o)

Action Jackson
09-29-2006, 08:46 AM
Just had to come in and say Richie is not overhyped, I hope he'll live up to his talent. :D
(..... unlike Marat *cough* 'cough* :o)

Yes, I forgot Safin should have won 25 Slams by now.:)

MariaV
09-29-2006, 08:54 AM
Yes, I forgot Safin should have won 25 Slams by now.:)

:p I'd settle just for 2 more. ;)

fadou
09-29-2006, 09:04 AM
i hope gasquet won't follow safin's career
2 talented guys who deserve more than 2 GS ( gasquet is young but i don't know if he will be able to win a GS

Action Jackson
11-24-2006, 04:22 AM
Have to agree with Rafa=FedKilla on this one.

spencercarlos
11-24-2006, 04:56 AM
So many people seem to be believe this guy will be a multiple GS champion.

How is that possible when he is one the most mentally incompetent players.
Do people beleive his talent is so great that his brain doesn't matter.

Baggy, Murray & Djoko will all be more successful than him in the future. Gasquet is all flash and no substance.

My logic is the light for MTF.
The only mentally incompetent here is you.

Gasquet sure has not reached the expectations, but still he has reasonable good season by finishing in the top 20 just like last year.
Murray, Dojko and Gasquet are all but separated by 3 ranking points and they are 16-18 ranked players.
In fact Murray did not win an event in the second half of the season unlike Richard, Novak and Marcos.
I think it´s way too early to start crossing names, like your dear fave Nadal did to Federer last week :rolleyes:

Jimnik
11-24-2006, 10:42 AM
Baggy, Murray & Djoko will all be more successful than him in the future. Gasquet is all flash and no substance.

Who knows, maybe all of them will come to nothing.

The thing about Djokovic is that I don't see what all the fuss is about. I don't see any big weapons in his game, or at least nothing that he can build his game around. He strikes me as just an all-round solid player. He's very mature for his age but I don't see any room for improvement.

Murray and Gasquet seem to have more potential. They have the big weapons in their games to beat the top players and win Grand Slams. They have much more room for improvement than Djokovic.

JustmeUK
11-24-2006, 10:49 AM
Is he over hyped? It depends on what you're hyping him to do I guess. To say he could have a career like Roger's is probably overhyping but that he is talented is beyond doubt. But this business of predicting how many GSs he will have is anybody's guess.

What he will achieve will depend on him alone. How hard is he prepared to work at the physical aspect where he is far short of folk like Nadal/Federer. But compare him to his more normal peers. Is he any less fit than Monfils/Murray/Djokovic? All 3 aren't the fittest of players though all are working on it.

Also mental toughness but here at least I am more confident that he will buck the trend compared to recent French players (Grosjean is the only one who isn't an out and out headcase). You have to remember this guy has been the second coming since he made the cover of the French Tennis magazine and then won his first ATP tour match at the age of 15. He's had to learn to cope with pressure more than most. At this point, he's doing things for at his own pace (as they all do) and though he has lost some matches where he imploded, you have to say he's come back stronger each time.

The next 2-3 years are the crucial years though. If he truly wants to make a run for the top 10 greatest achievers in tennis then he's got quite a bit of work to do to catch Federer and Nadal up. Has he got the potential? Given his achievements till present - of course. But it's all in his hands to achieve or to throw away. It all boils down to desire now and how much we shall see soon enough.

Gulliver
11-24-2006, 12:51 PM
Don't you worry....he will certainly live up to his potential and all this 'hype' in 1-2 yrs time. Just you watch!


What he has started to do is to put down a few markers on all surfaces that his game can bring results. He's got 4 titles (grass, clay, indoor) and has reached the F of 2 TMS (clay and hard). He's been on the tour 4 years.

The nearest are Berdych with 2 titles including 1 TMS ( 4 years on tour), and Djokovic with 2 titles (3 years on tour).

Compare that with Fat Dave (over-hyped and over-rated) who's been 6 years on tour and won his 5th title this year. I can't see Gasquet stagnating like this joker.

TennisOz
11-24-2006, 02:11 PM
Good post. I haven't read any of this thread apart from the last page so not sure what has been said up to now. I don't think (but only time will tell) that Gasquet is going to set the world alight in terms of achievements. He might be full of Gallic flair, aesthetically pleasing stokes and all that but I just don't see him being good enough, by the time Federer retires (possibly after the 2012 Olympics at Wimbledon) to win much.

In my view his groundstrokes are too long (Gallic flair) and rely a bit too much on timing which can go off, depends on bounce, mood, mental strength etc.

Noah, Forget, Clement, Grosjean, Boetsch, Santoro, Gasquet et al (1 GS singles between them - Paris). There's just something about the French player with flair (quirkyness in Fabrice's case) which says something to me. Gasquet may break the mould and surprise but I don't think so. Berdych has more chance for me, let alone Murray, Djokovic, Baghdatis etc.

TennisOz :)

Is he over hyped? It depends on what you're hyping him to do I guess. To say he could have a career like Roger's is probably overhyping but that he is talented is beyond doubt. But this business of predicting how many GSs he will have is anybody's guess.

What he will achieve will depend on him alone. How hard is he prepared to work at the physical aspect where he is far short of folk like Nadal/Federer. But compare him to his more normal peers. Is he any less fit than Monfils/Murray/Djokovic? All 3 aren't the fittest of players though all are working on it.

Also mental toughness but here at least I am more confident that he will buck the trend compared to recent French players (Grosjean is the only one who isn't an out and out headcase). You have to remember this guy has been the second coming since he made the cover of the French Tennis magazine and then won his first ATP tour match at the age of 15. He's had to learn to cope with pressure more than most. At this point, he's doing things for at his own pace (as they all do) and though he has lost some matches where he imploded, you have to say he's come back stronger each time.

The next 2-3 years are the crucial years though. If he truly wants to make a run for the top 10 greatest achievers in tennis then he's got quite a bit of work to do to catch Federer and Nadal up. Has he got the potential? Given his achievements till present - of course. But it's all in his hands to achieve or to throw away. It all boils down to desire now and how much we shall see soon enough.

Puschkin
11-24-2006, 02:18 PM
In my view his groundstrokes are too long (Gallic flair)


What is wrong with long ground-strokes? :confused:

even more: :confused: What is wrong with Gallic flair? ( if there is such a thing;)) That sounds as if no French(wo)man ever achieved something in sports.

vincayou
11-24-2006, 02:21 PM
Have to agree with Rafa=FedKilla on this one.

are you bored?

TennisOz
11-24-2006, 02:34 PM
I probably should have said that in my view Gasquet's groundstrokes are TOO long - for the reasons I indicated, and I didn't mention what if Richie is playing outdoors on a windy day and the problems that may be presented by the ball moving about. There's nothing wrong either with Gallic flair, it's pleasing to the eye, it just hasn't produced much silverware, Men's singles GS's is all I'm saying - without going back to the Muskateers, Lacoste etc.

TennisOz :)

What is wrong with long ground-strokes? :confused:

even more: :confused: What is wrong with Gallic flair? ( if there is such a thing;)) That sounds as if no French(wo)man ever achieved something in sports.

ezekiel
11-24-2006, 03:40 PM
Who knows, maybe all of them will come to nothing.

The thing about Djokovic is that I don't see what all the fuss is about. I don't see any big weapons in his game, or at least nothing that he can build his game around. He strikes me as just an all-round solid player. He's very mature for his age but I don't see any room for improvement.

Murray and Gasquet seem to have more potential. They have the big weapons in their games to beat the top players and win Grand Slams. They have much more room for improvement than Djokovic.

Djokovic has the biggest forehand and all around game than anyone his age and since he is the youngest he will improve the most, namely the stamina , the experience, but all the ingredients are there for a top player. Murray while good all around is too defensive and Hewitt like. Gasquet is too artistic and awkard at the same time. He runs awkward and has short arms. His serve and forehand , the two main shots are very forgettable . Top 10 yes but I don't see him as a winner.

Dusk Soldier
11-24-2006, 03:43 PM
if you hate him so much, why do you NEVER FAIL TO MENTION HIS NAME EACH TIME YOU POST?
you're confusing hate with indifference.

ezekiel
11-24-2006, 03:53 PM
:lol: There is not even a hint of ressemblance between Safin and Gasquet.


No ressemblance except maybe their carreer path but I doubt Gasquet wins a GS or two

vincayou
11-24-2006, 05:09 PM
I probably should have said that in my view Gasquet's groundstrokes are TOO long - for the reasons I indicated, and I didn't mention what if Richie is playing outdoors on a windy day and the problems that may be presented by the ball moving about. There's nothing wrong either with Gallic flair, it's pleasing to the eye, it just hasn't produced much silverware, Men's singles GS's is all I'm saying - without going back to the Muskateers, Lacoste etc.

TennisOz :)

Richie is typically a player who would benefit from a windy day.

Klaas_nalbandian
11-24-2006, 05:16 PM
gasguet is great and not overhyped

zimzim
11-24-2006, 06:48 PM
Fed said that Richie reminds him of himself. No better role model than he, imo.:yeah:

richie21
11-24-2006, 06:50 PM
all i have to say is that some people there will ,i think,quickly regret what they said about Gasquet. :o
i've not seen a french player as talented as him for the last 25 years(yes i include Noah in that list!) so i don t think that because former french players as talented as Forget,Leconte or Pioline didn t win a GS,that will obviously mean the same for Gasquet.

Djokovic has the biggest forehand and all around game than anyone his age and since he is the youngest he will improve the most, namely the stamina , the experience, but all the ingredients are there for a top player. Murray while good all around is too defensive and Hewitt like. Gasquet is too artistic and awkard at the same time. He runs awkward and has short arms. His serve and forehand , the two main shots are very forgettable . Top 10 yes but I don't see him as a winner.

i wouldn t say he has a better all around game than Gasquet
don t forget that Gasquet is the only player this year to have made finals in every surfaces (Grass,Hard,Indoor,Clay).....bar Federer obviously.
that clearly shows he has a great all around game.

Jlee
11-24-2006, 07:37 PM
I think Gasquet has potential but it's nothing if he doesn't prove himself to be consistent and to have heart. The USO match did something to prove the latter though...

And I think Federer's statement is the one we should really be paying attention to. The point is that Gasquet has so many options in his game that he hasn't put them together yet, similar to the young Roger, but if he does he could very well be the next Federer.

Jim Courier
11-24-2006, 08:19 PM
Gasquet is more than a technical talent, he has a great touch but compared with say Leconte and his magical left arm, Gasquet has a great court sense (the right shot at the right time), and great placement (the final small steps).
His serve and forehand have progressed, he still needs to work on his serve and rally forehand which is often a bit short unlike his attack forehand.
His combativity is getting better too.
If he can get a few big wins, he will be a real danger if he isn't plagued by injuries.

richie21
11-24-2006, 09:20 PM
Gasquet is more than a technical talent, he has a great touch but compared with say Leconte and his magical left arm, Gasquet has a great court sense (the right shot at the right time), and great placement (the final small steps).
His serve and forehand have progressed, he still needs to work on his serve and rally forehand which is often a bit short unlike his attack forehand.
His combativity is getting better too.
If he can get a few big wins, he will be a real danger if he isn't plagued by injuries.


not to mention more firepower ;)

jacobhiggins
11-24-2006, 10:12 PM
Anybody that really knows tennis knows Gasquet is going to be a really good player, possibly a great player.

If you can't see that then you don't know how to judge talent in tennis and not a true fan of the sport.

Havok
11-24-2006, 10:37 PM
Anybody that really knows tennis knows Gasquet is going to be a really good player, possibly a great player.

If you can't see that then you don't know how to judge talent in tennis and not a true fan of the sport.
Exactly.:)

Jimnik
11-24-2006, 10:44 PM
Djokovic has the biggest forehand and all around game than anyone his age and since he is the youngest he will improve the most, namely the stamina , the experience, but all the ingredients are there for a top player. Murray while good all around is too defensive and Hewitt like. Gasquet is too artistic and awkard at the same time. He runs awkward and has short arms. His serve and forehand , the two main shots are very forgettable . Top 10 yes but I don't see him as a winner.
Djokovic has the biggest forehand? I couldn't agree less. Murray can strike his forehand harder than any of the other young players, it's just that he often chooses not to, and usually after nailing one big FH he misses the next one. He's inconsistent and immature, but give him time (and Brad Gilbert), and I bet he won't be.

When you see Murray strike his FH on the run, you can see how much potential he has. Not only his movement but the shot itself is drilled back to his opponent with such power and depth that only Federer can match. His return of serve is only matched by Nalbandian. Murray's problem is when he's involved in a simple mid-court rally. After about 10 strokes, he starts missing easy shots. He can produce some incredibly difficult shots but he hasn't mastered the simple stuff yet.

Whereas Djokovic is the exact opposite. He can do all the simple stuff, rally with his opponents, he can produce all the shots that he's suppose to produce, but he can do nothing extra. I just don't see any special weapons in his game that you need to be a multiple GS champion.

Sjengster
11-24-2006, 11:31 PM
Actually I saw some remarkable shots from Djokovic in his matches with Murray and Gonzalez in Madrid, particularly in the former where I was rooting for him in the end just because he was the one trying desperately to find openings in the rallies while Murray was in brick wall mode. He's particularly good at taking the forehand early and redirecting it down the line or cross-court, the flat hit means that it really zips through the court and he was able to wrong-foot Murray a few times with that tactic.

richie21
11-25-2006, 12:11 AM
What he has started to do is to put down a few markers on all surfaces that his game can bring results. He's got 4 titles (grass, clay, indoor) and has reached the F of 2 TMS (clay and hard). He's been on the tour 4 years.

The nearest are Berdych with 2 titles including 1 TMS ( 4 years on tour), and Djokovic with 2 titles (3 years on tour).

Compare that with Fat Dave (over-hyped and over-rated) who's been 6 years on tour and won his 5th title this year. I can't see Gasquet stagnating like this joker.

too bad (or perhaps that was a good thing for his progression....) he had to face Federer in this 2 finals :p

Action Jackson
12-03-2006, 09:16 AM
are you bored?

Why? Cause people are continuing to overhype a guy that has not got to a QF a Grand Slam and then to counteract that they will say he is only young, well if he was good as he has made out to be, then at least he'd have made the QF stage of a Slam.

When he starts winning Slams or more than 2 TMS events, then maybe the hype might be justified. Just cause he has an excellent backhand that is aesthetically pleasing doesn't mean he isn't going to be as great as media and the MTF masses would like to think he is.

TennisOz (aka the maestro) makes a very valid point about French success at GS level, still searching for the hero to follow Noah, keep searching.

Fedex
12-03-2006, 10:09 AM
Anybody that really knows tennis knows Gasquet is going to be a really good player, possibly a great player.

If you can't see that then you don't know how to judge talent in tennis and not a true fan of the sport.

Well, he is a talent, no doubt about that but he has yet to live up to all the hype. I think he could become a really good player some day, and possibly win a few slams, but I have to laugh at those who think he's the next Federer.

CmonAussie
12-03-2006, 11:33 AM
##
i`ve said it before & i`ll say it again~> Gasquet is simply a glamourised version of Seb Grosjean!!! & like Seb his career will also be a disappointment!

At best i can see Gasquet winning a few AMS titles & making maybe one GS final~> though i don`t think he`s got the spark to win one||.

Honestly I believe Dimitry Tursunov has a better chance of Slam success than Grosjean><..

Boris Franz Ecker
12-03-2006, 11:37 AM
##
i`ve said it before & i`ll say it again~> Gasquet is simply a glamourised version of Seb Grosjean!!! & like Seb his career will also be a disappointment!

At best i can see Gasquet winning a few AMS titles & making maybe one GS final~> though i don`t think he`s got the spark to win one||.

Honestly I believe Dimitry Tursunov has a better chance of Slam success than Grosjean><..

Gasquet has already won more titles than Grosjean.

CmonAussie
12-03-2006, 11:44 AM
Gasquet has already won more titles than Grosjean.
:wavey:
Yeah Gasquet`s four titles have been pure quality haven`t they:p ! Did he have to beat any other Top-Twenty players for those titles:confused:

Atleast Grosjean won a TMS title, & a TMC final, plus multiple GS SFs;) .. Has Gasquet even got to a GS QF yet:confused:

Action Jackson
12-03-2006, 11:47 AM
:wavey:
Yeah Gasquet`s four titles have been pure quality haven`t they:p ! Did he have to beat any other Top-Twenty players for those titles:confused:

Atleast Grosjean won a TMS title, & a TMC final, plus multiple GS SFs;) .. Has Gasquet even got to a GS QF yet:confused:

Awwwwww, you used facts. But Gasquet will win 13 Slams and is the apprentice to JesusFed.

CmonAussie
12-03-2006, 11:54 AM
Awwwwww, you used facts. But Gasquet will win 13 Slams and is the apprentice to JesusFed.
:wavey:
Yeah I mean they both use single handed backhands:angel: & they were both World #1 Juniors:eek: ~~> unfortunately that`s where the career comparisons will end for the panzy Richard:p

Oriental_Rain
12-03-2006, 12:26 PM
overhyped? :eek: murray is more overhype than him

richie21
12-03-2006, 12:28 PM
:wavey:
Yeah Gasquet`s four titles have been pure quality haven`t they:p ! Did he have to beat any other Top-Twenty players for those titles:confused:

Atleast Grosjean won a TMS title, & a TMC final, plus multiple GS SFs;) .. Has Gasquet even got to a GS QF yet:confused:

no but there were top twenty if not top ten players in the draws of those tournaments he won ;)
at Lyon,he beat Safin and Soderling(Federer could only beat him with tie breaks at Madrid) who are at the very least top-twenty indoor players.

vincayou
12-03-2006, 02:10 PM
Why?

Why? For reopening this thread despite the fact that you already commented on it.

Derek1206
12-03-2006, 02:13 PM
Anybody that really knows tennis knows Gasquet is going to be a really good player, possibly a great player.

If you can't see that then you don't know how to judge talent in tennis and not a true fan of the sport.

Well said.


Richard has tons of talent, but it's up to him to decide how much of it he is going to use.

Boris Franz Ecker
12-03-2006, 03:18 PM
:wavey:
Yeah Gasquet`s four titles have been pure quality haven`t they:p ! Did he have to beat any other Top-Twenty players for those titles:confused:

Atleast Grosjean won a TMS title, & a TMC final, plus multiple GS SFs;) .. Has Gasquet even got to a GS QF yet:confused:

Gasquet is only 20. What do you want?

There can't be always a 17-year old Wimbledon champion.

Puschkin
12-03-2006, 04:48 PM
the one mistake gasquet fans are doing is making a comparison between him and roger federer


I admit falling into that trap in the beginning, but the more I saw of Richard, the less I compare him to Roger, my impression is that these two are very different personality-wise and tennis-wise, and I don't think that their careers will develop similarly. There is however, a large field to occupy, between a second Federer and an overhyped Gallic crap-player who will never achieve anything. :p

CmonAussie
12-03-2006, 05:01 PM
Gasquet is only 20. What do you want?

There can't be always a 17-year old Wimbledon champion.
:wavey:
Well i was hearing a lot about Gasquet from 4-5 years ago...before Nadal came on the scene actually:eek:
In that time Nadal has won TWO FOs, plus 6-TMS, a Davis Cup, Wimby final & back-to-back #1:worship: ... Whereas Gasquet has won FOUR Mickey Mouse titles:rolleyes: ..& not even a single QF at a Slam:o

richie21
12-03-2006, 09:34 PM
hi richie ,

i definitely believe gasquet has the talent to be in the top 5 and he will someday . but my point is i hve read many posts and people calling him baby fed and thts something tht will not help his career in the long run because lets face it not everyone can hve a career like a roger federer .
its important from richards point of view to hve a good run at the early tournaments next year to begin with the right foot forward and people please dont make comparisons btween him and roger ,it is not helping his career at all because if he wins one tournament we hype him up saying he is delivering to our set standards tht we expect him to deliver and when he doesn't we start critising him badly ..sometimes wht v expect is just a bit tooo much
yes richard will win a grandslam , maybe more but tht only time can tell...
it would hve been great for him (my selfish view)to hve come a couple of years later maybe when Federer would slow down because today i feel it is going to be really difficult for anyway else to win a slam ( expect nadal on clay ) ..
:)


eh personnally i would be already pretty satisified if he had the same career as Safin ,let alone Federer ;)
i don t think he( or any of the current players) will ever achieve the incredible level of consistency Roger has showed in the last 3 years.....but i certainly wouldn t be surprised to see him winning a few GS and making the top 5 in the future.:)

:wavey:
Well i was hearing a lot about Gasquet from 4-5 years ago...before Nadal came on the scene actually:eek:
In that time Nadal has won TWO FOs, plus 6-TMS, a Davis Cup, Wimby final & back-to-back #1:worship: ... Whereas Gasquet has won FOUR Mickey Mouse titles:rolleyes: ..& not even a single QF at a Slam:o

you forgot he also made 2 MS finals (both lost against.......Federer) :rolleyes:


anyway ,why is Gasquet overhyped?
perhaps because of points like that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPXwC0klF2Y
:)

Naranoc
12-03-2006, 09:44 PM
anyway ,why is Gasquet overhyped?
perhaps because of points like that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPXwC0klF2Y
:)

It doesn't follow from your proposition that because someone can hit some awesome points, he is going to have the consistency to become a multiple slam champion. You've then admitted that your overrating him because he showed heart, and managed to pull of some great shots, in one match? He's not the first nor will be the last person to do that.

richie21
12-03-2006, 09:50 PM
It doesn't follow from your proposition that because someone can hit some awesome points, he is going to have the consistency to become a multiple slam champion. You've then admitted that your overrating him because he showed heart, and managed to pull of some great shots, in one match? He's not the first nor will be the last person to do that.


don t take it to the first degree ;)

Action Jackson
12-24-2006, 12:48 PM
Why? For reopening this thread despite the fact that you already commented on it.

It's still holds true and it's not often I agree with R=FK, but he is right in this case.

The overhyped one will win a couple of small titles again and the cycle will continue in 07.

jayjay
12-24-2006, 12:58 PM
Anybody that really knows tennis knows Gasquet is going to be a really good player, possibly a great player.

If you can't see that then you don't know how to judge talent in tennis and not a true fan of the sport.

Anybody that really knows tennis knows Gasquet is a player of good shots, possibly great shots.

If you can't see that then you don't know how to judge talent and the potential of that talent to turn into something more substantial or not other than the odd flashy backhand and are not a true fan of the sport.

Richard Gasquet. Overhyped and overblown. Great shot maker, not great player.

richie21
12-24-2006, 01:26 PM
dunno if he is overrhyped or not but one thing is sure: with the way he has been hyped so far(including by myself),he certainly owes us a big season in 2007(or at the very least in 2008)

Action Jackson
12-24-2006, 02:07 PM
dunno if he is overrhyped or not but one thing is sure: with the way he has been hyped so far(including by myself),he certainly owes us a big season in 2007(or at the very least in 2008)

You overhype him big time, in fact case and yourself are the biggest ones of overhyping Gasquet in this forum.

He is not a multi Slam winner and if he wins one, then he has done very well.

case
12-24-2006, 03:41 PM
You overhype him big time, in fact case and yourself are the biggest ones of overhyping Gasquet in this forum.

He is not a multi Slam winner and if he wins one, then he has done very well.

:haha: i heard that. he will win a slam-in fact he will win many.
the only thing that has been standing in his way, is his youth, which, sadly, everybody loses.


Oh, GW as much as it terribly pains me to say it also have to agree with you for once. Your avatar is great. If only bushie senior would have done that the world would have been a better place. For all of those people here who think americans are evil and have lost their minds, there are a few of us americans who cannot stand bush or his policies of hate and destruction.

richie21
12-24-2006, 05:03 PM
:haha: i heard that. he will win a slam-in fact he will win many.
the only thing that has been standing in his way, is his youth, which, sadly, everybody loses.
.

don t forget the injuries too.

Rafa = Fed Killa
08-27-2007, 04:48 AM
It's still holds true and it's not often I agree with R=FK, but he is right in this case.

The overhyped one will win a couple of small titles again and the cycle will continue in 07.

We are being proven right again.

Action Jackson
08-27-2007, 06:15 AM
We are being proven right again.

Yes, this seems to be the case so far.

Beforehand
08-27-2007, 06:18 AM
An unholy alliance indeed.

Action Jackson
08-27-2007, 06:23 AM
An unholy alliance indeed.

Not at all, some things are just very obvious.

Puschkin
08-27-2007, 07:59 AM
Not at all, some things are just very obvious.

Maybe some things are obvious, whatever this means.

Whereas Gasquet has won FOUR Mickey Mouse titles:rolleyes: ..& not even a single QF at a Slam:o

But other things are changing.:p

vincayou
08-27-2007, 08:00 AM
An unholy alliance indeed.

The more or less self proclaimed lights of MTF.

Rogiman
08-27-2007, 08:12 AM
I still believe he'll eventually win big titles, at least I hope so.

He's the only youngster who's capable of more than just bashing the ball.

Why were you born French, Richard :bigcry:

DrJules
08-27-2007, 11:37 AM
I still believe he'll eventually win big titles, at least I hope so.

He's the only youngster who's capable of more than just bashing the ball.

Why were you born French, Richard :bigcry:

Like the other overrated 7 in another thread he happens to be in the Federer/Nadal generation. It will be difficult to penetrate.

VolandriFan
08-27-2007, 12:30 PM
People think beauty translates as potential these days.

ezekiel
08-27-2007, 01:01 PM
he has like one good shot, the rest of his game is ugly but some people just repeat myths they heard

Puschkin
08-27-2007, 01:05 PM
he has like one good shot, the rest of his game is ugly but some people just repeat myths they heard

exactly, some people repeat myths, even if they are their own. :p

Action Jackson
08-27-2007, 01:06 PM
Maybe some things are obvious, whatever this means.

Let me know when he wins some big events.

silverwhite
08-27-2007, 01:28 PM
he has like one good shot, the rest of his game is ugly but some people just repeat myths they heard

Assuming you're right (i.e. you're not), that's one more nice shot than most players.

But I digress. Effectiveness and spartan tennis is what counts right? :shrug:

Rafa = Fed Killa
08-27-2007, 08:22 PM
Assuming you're right (i.e. you're not), that's one more nice shot than most players.

But I digress. Effectiveness and spartan tennis is what counts right? :shrug:

If Gasquet wanted to act pretty he should have become a figure skater.

Real tennis is efficient, effective and brutal.

Rogiman
08-27-2007, 08:24 PM
If Gasquet wanted to act pretty he should have become a figure skater.

Real tennis is efficient, effective and brutal.The kind of tennis you play, champ?

I bet you and sondraj make a great mixed doubles team.

my0118
08-27-2007, 08:28 PM
The kind of tennis you play, champ?

I bet you and sondraj make a great mixed doubles team.

I think he had been once a ballerino or a figure skater, but he quit because he sucked. That's why he likes efficiency, I guess.

Rogiman
08-27-2007, 08:30 PM
I think he had been once a ballerino or a figure skater, but he quit because he sucked. That's why he likes efficiency, I guess.You can ask fatty yourself, the moment he finishes his hamburger.

my0118
08-27-2007, 08:34 PM
You can ask fatty yourself, the moment he finishes his hamburger.

:confused:
RFK is not Nalbandian. :shrug:

Rafa = Fed Killa
08-27-2007, 08:43 PM
Gasquet plays tennis professionally so he is held to a higher standard than an amateur player.

Your petty insults dont hurt me Rogiman.
I am far too intelectually superior.

Rogiman
08-27-2007, 08:56 PM
Gasquet plays tennis professionally so he is held to a higher standard than an amateur player.

Your petty insults dont hurt me Rogiman.
I am far too intelectually superior.:haha:

You are a joke, calling other people 'pansies' when you had one chance in your miserable life to show some dignity but opted to cheat instead :retard:

Rogiman
08-27-2007, 09:11 PM
C'mon, bitch, aren't you going to come up with some quotes from another kindergarten-level movie, or at least spout some more shit about 'light' and 'fedtards'...?

Be attentive to your intellectual limitations.

sykotique
08-27-2007, 09:16 PM
he has like one good shot, the rest of his game is ugly but some people just repeat myths they heard

You forgot to mention that he can volley, something a lot of other young players can't and need help with.

NYCtennisfan
08-27-2007, 09:19 PM
Gasquet plays tennis professionally so he is held to a higher standard than an amateur player.

Your petty insults dont hurt me Rogiman.
I am far too intelectually superior.

:lol: The irony...

ezekiel
08-27-2007, 09:28 PM
Assuming you're right (i.e. you're not), that's one more nice shot than most players.

But I digress. Effectiveness and spartan tennis is what counts right? :shrug:


he has one good shot and that will get him to some respectability and decent results but I don't see the desire or the know how to expand his game. He probably has no clue how to bring his game to another level and if he has some clue then he won't have desire to work on them .

r2473
08-27-2007, 09:45 PM
He is just 21 and is ranked 13th in the world. When Fed was 21 (in 2002), he was ranked (are you ready for this) 13th (on August 26th, 2002).

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/playerprofiles/rankhistory.asp?playernumber=F324&selyear=2002

Using this logic, Gasquet will FOR SURE be the next Federer.

Or, using this logic, Gasquet still has time to develop into "whatever he will become".

Beforehand
08-27-2007, 09:46 PM
:lol: The irony...

:haha:

BlakeorHenman
08-27-2007, 10:10 PM
He is just 21 and is ranked 13th in the world. When Fed was 21 (in 2002), he was ranked (are you ready for this) 13th (on August 26th, 2002).

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/players/playerprofiles/rankhistory.asp?playernumber=F324&selyear=2002

Using this logic, Gasquet will FOR SURE be the next Federer.

Or, using this logic, Gasquet still has time to develop into "whatever he will become".

Great post!!!

Kuhne
08-27-2007, 10:49 PM
cos Federer said so and Federer > you

silverwhite
08-28-2007, 01:19 AM
he has one good shot and that will get him to some respectability and decent results but I don't see the desire or the know how to expand his game. He probably has no clue how to bring his game to another level and if he has some clue then he won't have desire to work on them .

Yes, there's one shot in his arsenal that stands out but to say that the rest of his game is ugly just exposes your lack of objectivity. And about expanding his game, his volleys and feel are above average at least. It's getting him to the net that is the problem.

Rafa = Fed Killa
08-28-2007, 03:35 PM
cos Federer said so and Federer > you

Federer also thought Gasquet is better than Djokovic.
He is far too clueless for words.