Gasquet: Will He Follow The Path of Federer or Nalbandian? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Gasquet: Will He Follow The Path of Federer or Nalbandian?

Jaffas85
10-13-2006, 01:39 PM
It's basically agreed that Gasquet is a very talented player with an all court game but over the next year or two do you see him having a Federer type break through by winning a Masters Series Event or possibly even a Grand Slam title or will he more likely go down the path of Nalbandian of being obviously a great player but never quite reaching that level of being threating for major titles?

Which of the Grand Slams do you think he has the greatest chance of going deep in or perhaps even winning?

Do you think he be in the Top 10 by this time next year? *barring any injuries*.

Thanks.

CmonAussie
10-13-2006, 01:44 PM
It's basically agreed that Gasquet is a very talented player with an all court game but over the next year or two do you see him having a Federer type break through by winning a Masters Series Event or possibly even a Grand Slam title or will he more likely go down the path of Nalbandian of being obviously a great player but never quite reaching that level of being threating for major titles?

Do you think he be in the Top 10 by this time next year? *barring any injuries*.

Thanks.
:wavey:
Gasquet will have something in between;) ~ not as good as Fed & not as underachieving as Nalbandian:p
........
........Honestly I don`t seen Gasquet winning a Slam~~ however I do think he`ll win several tournaments & a few TMS-->> maybe his career will be somewhere in between a Henman & a Rios:devil: ......ie somewhere between 11-18 titles:cool:

If Nalbandian doesn`t reach double digits in terms of tourney wins then he`ll go down as the biggest underachiever ever:eek: ~currently he only has 5-titles!!

Byrd
10-13-2006, 01:45 PM
Federer most likely, he's actually devoted to the game, not like Nalbandian who would prefer fishing or racing in his spare time.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 01:52 PM
He is not winning a Slam.

Jaffas85
10-13-2006, 02:02 PM
He is not winning a Slam.


Never?

Not to say that he's going to be as great as Federer but in 2001 Federer had a great game but was having some dodgy results so it's possible that Gasquet can breakthrough and win at least 1 or 2 grand slams throughout his career.

Though which Grand Slam title would he be more likely to win? The U.S. Open maybe?

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 02:05 PM
Never?

Not to say that he's going to be as great as Federer but in 2001 Federer had a great game but was having some dodgy results so it's possible that Gasquet can breakthrough and win at least 1 or 2 grand slams throughout his career.

Though which Grand Slam title would he be more likely to win? The U.S. Open maybe?

As I said Gasquet is not winning a Slam, if he does, then I am proven wrong. It's not hard to comprehend, the French are still searching for hero after Noah.

Federer and Gasquet aren't in the same league, it's not hard to see that, even in 2001, but lets continue with the overhype.

disturb3d
10-13-2006, 02:06 PM
Gasquet has about 5% of the overall talent that Federer has.
He won't have a career even closely resembling Roger's.
If Nalbandian fails to rack up major success in the second half of his career, then Gasquet has a good chance of leaving a larger footprint in tennis history.

Gasquet's problem is that he has no significant talent.
Whereas Nalbandian is infamous for creating angles, and Federer for his court sense.
He has little toss and arm extension on his serve, and a forehand grip with no place in today's game.

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:07 PM
I think it will mostly depend on his physical strength. If he gets a good physical condition then he'll be able to win a slam. Most probably, wimbledon or the usopen. But I also think he could do well in both the australian and french opens.

I am sure he will win TMS as he has already reached 2 finals (both lost against federer). He'll probably do better than nalby but I don't think he'll do better than fed!

jayjay
10-13-2006, 02:11 PM
The path of Federer is out of the question.

As for Nalbandian - Nalbandian has made a Slam F and countless Slam SF's, is Gasquet capable of that? Sure. Will he win a Slam? I'd bet on no rather than yes. (and if the answer proves to be yes, I can always claim it was a fix as is the MTF way) Will he win a Masters Cup like Nalbandian did last year? First off he has to end the year in the top 8, and there are other players of the present and future who'll be battling to get in there too, so it's no guarantee Gasquet will even be at the Masters Cup consistently to eventually have a shot at winning it.

Davis Cup wise, France are always a strong side - so he may have success there.

In conclusion, I don't think Gasquet will follow the path of Federer or Nalbandian. He will create his own category and 5-10 years from now someone will make a thread on a particular young talented player which will ask - Player X:Will He Follow The Path of Federer, Nalbandian or Gasquet?

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:12 PM
Federer and Gasquet aren't in the same league, it's not hard to see that, even in 2001, but lets continue with the overhype.

:eek:

Gasquet has about 5% of the overall talent that Federer has.

:eek:

Gasquet's problem is that he has no significant talent.

:eek:

Come on guys, are you nuts, gasquet no talent!?!

How many young guns have already beaten fed and reached a couple of TMS finals apart from rafa?!?

Only one, so stop talking :bs: !!!

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 02:13 PM
In conclusion, I don't think Gasquet will follow the path of Federer or Nalbandian. He will create his own category and 5-10 years from now someone will make a thread on a particular young talented player which will ask - Player X:Will He Follow The Path of Federer, Nalbandian or Gasquet?

What is MTF without knee jerk reactions, overreactions and bandwagon jumping?

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 02:15 PM
:Only one, so stop talking :bs: !!!

Do you want me to explain it you in point form?

The guy beats Federer once and all of a sudden he is so great, not bad from a child prodigy, has been and a hack and then it all changes back to the great hype. Yes, that's the reason the world is round.

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:18 PM
Do you want me to explain it you in point form?

The guy beats Federer once and all of a sudden he is so great, not bad from a child prodigy, has been and a hack and then it all changes back to the great hype. Yes, that's the reason the world is round.

:scratch: I'm not sure I get your point?

gasquet is very talented and unpredictable. If he plays his best, he can beat anybody and win big titles, that I'm sure of...

disturb3d
10-13-2006, 02:22 PM
:eek:



:eek:



:eek:

Come on guys, are you nuts, gasquet no talent!?!

How many young guns have already beaten fed and reached a couple of TMS finals apart from rafa?!?

Only one, so stop talking :bs: !!!Let's not blow this out of proportion.
Gasquet has talent. But at the status of Fed or Nalbandian? No.

There are many permanent flaws in his game, relative to today's tennis.
Gasquet's swings are ridiculously overexaggerated, and in today's game, you have to be able to return bombs, and hit on the run.
His groundstrokes rely on a perfect foot plant, which will hurt his transition.

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:22 PM
Have a look at this and then tell again me the guy has not talent!!!

Note, that these are the highlights and despite the fact that the young boy lost 7-6 1-6 3-6 he was the one to make the unbelievable shots!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7Cnq7s8j8k

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 02:22 PM
:scratch: I'm not sure I get your point?

gasquet is very talented and unpredictable. If he plays his best, he can beat anybody and win big titles, that I'm sure of...

Gasquet qualifies for Monte Carlo as a 15 yr old and defeated Davydenko and Squillari and those were very good scalps and the media and the hype machine were all over him and even before that.

Then he got injured and lost his way and was a has been and forgotten about, then he wins a few challengers and then beats Fed in Monte Carlo and then the bandwagon was over the top. A wheel is round and it has turned the full circle.

So what's talent, if they aren't prepared to work at it. What he has an excellent one hand backhand and hits winners, so.

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:25 PM
Let's not blow this out of proportion.
Gasquet has talent. But at the status of Fed or Nalbandian? No.

There are many permanent flaws in his game, relative to today's tennis.
Gasquet's swings are ridiculously overexaggerated, and in today's game, you have to be able to return bombs, and hit on the run.
His groundstrokes rely on a perfect foot plant, which will hurt his transition.

Have a look at the highlights I just attached!!! Note that he returned roddick's serve very well ("received" only 8 aces despite roddick's 1st serve of 71%).

ezekiel
10-13-2006, 02:26 PM
I am sure he'll be sort of an elite player , top 10 that is, but he will never be dominant player because he has no game or mentality for that . Here is some other comparison, he'll be between Safin and Nablandian

One question, do you think he has really short arms aka crocodile arms and how does that impact his game ?

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:34 PM
Gasquet qualifies for Monte Carlo as a 15 yr old and defeated Davydenko and Squillari and those were very good scalps and the media and the hype machine were all over him and even before that.

Then he got injured and lost his way and was a has been and forgotten about, then he wins a few challengers and then beats Fed in Monte Carlo and then the bandwagon was over the top. A wheel is round and it has turned the full circle.

So what's talent, if they aren't prepared to work at it. What he has an excellent one hand backhand and hits winners, so.


You're right! But if he can "get his game together" I think he could well be right there on top of the game in few years from now!

The problems with him are his mindset and physical condition. But he's still very young, so plenty of time to work on these 2 parameters!

Here is some other comparison, he'll be between Safin and Nablandian

safin's got 2 slams + 2 finals!

Why couldn't gasquet get one slam?!?

mangoes
10-13-2006, 02:34 PM
Too early to answer that question, but I'm going to hope he follows Federer's path.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 02:39 PM
Why couldn't gasquet get one slam?!?

He makes a Slam final at best.

TMJordan
10-13-2006, 02:41 PM
Not many guys are like that Federer fella, he is real good. :)

RogiFan88
10-13-2006, 02:43 PM
hopefully Federer's although there is no player like Rogi but I can't wait to see Gasquet fulfill his promise and be up there w the best ;)

FSRteam
10-13-2006, 02:44 PM
He makes a Slam final at best.

What makes you so sure?

We'll see... :)

Neverstopfightin
10-13-2006, 02:47 PM
I don't understand why people open this kind of threads and insist on comparing every young talented and tehcnical player ( Gasquet , Murray , Berdych , Baghdatis ) with Federer :shrug: . Do people realize that there is only one Federer every a lot of years ?? . Do people realize Roger is an incredible innate talent and is quite tricky to find a player with his same innate gifts ??

Do people realize that Gasquet has worse forehand, serve , return , volley , mobility , stamina and mental strenght than Roger ?? . Gasquet has only one aspect superior to Roger, the backhand.

Maybe Gasquet and Marcos are mini Federers but from mini to the real Roger there is a lot of distance.

Puschkin
10-13-2006, 02:47 PM
As I said Gasquet is not winning a Slam, if he does, then I am proven wrong. It's not hard to comprehend, the French are still searching for hero after Noah.

Federer and Gasquet aren't in the same league, it's not hard to see that, even in 2001, but lets continue with the overhype.

Not only to contradict you, but out of total conviction: RG will win a grand slam tourney, (barring a carreer-threatening injury), it will happen in 2008. And by then, I want to see you on your knees;).

He will not have a career like Roger, though.

Monteque
10-13-2006, 02:47 PM
Gasquet has a big talent and potential to future no.1. Who said that he has nosignificant talent is ridiculous.
He just need some more yaers to be complete player and I'm sure he will.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 02:51 PM
Not only to contradict you, but out of total conviction: RG will win a grand slam tourney, (barring a carreer-threatening injury), it will happen in 2008. And by then, I want to see you on your knees;).

He will not have a career like Roger, though.

Austria have more chance of winning a Davis Cup.

Puschkin
10-13-2006, 02:54 PM
Austria have more chance of winning a Davis Cup.
:haha: Time wil tell :p

silverwhite
10-13-2006, 03:02 PM
I think he should thank the heavens if he manages to have a career similar to Nalbandian's. :shrug:

Jadranka
10-13-2006, 03:13 PM
Federer never, but Nalbandian ;)

vincayou
10-13-2006, 03:19 PM
Gasquet is maybe the best French tennis player of the last 50 years. So I certainly hope that he will win one slam. It's obviously not a sure thing (because it depends as well on people on the other side of the net), but stating that he never will is certainly stupid.

Remember that GWH was saying that it was impossible that Nadal would win RG at his first try. He scarcely do prediction but they are always wrong.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 03:23 PM
Gasquet is maybe the best French tennis player of the last 50 years. So I certainly hope that he will win one slam. It's obviously not a sure thing (because it depends as well on people on the other side of the net), but stating that he never will is certainly stupid.

Remember that GWH was saying that it was impossible that Nadal would win RG at his first try. He scarcely do prediction but they are always wrong.

Find where I said it was impossible that Nadal would win RG at his 1st go. if you can do that, then come back to me.

vincayou
10-13-2006, 03:26 PM
I think he should thank the heavens if he manages to have a career similar to Nalbandian's. :shrug:


Are you kidding? Nalbandian's career is a big waste.

silverwhite
10-13-2006, 03:29 PM
Are you kidding? Nalbandian's career is a big waste.

Yes, he should have achieved/should be achieving more but he has reached numerous GS QFs, some SFs and a final and has won a TMC. Richard hasn't reached a GS QF yet. :shrug:

revolution
10-13-2006, 03:29 PM
Are you kidding? Nalbandian's career is a big waste.

A TMC victory mustn't be worth much then?

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 03:33 PM
Yes, he should have achieved/should be achieving more but he has reached numerous GS QFs, some SFs and a final and has won a TMC. Richard hasn't reached a GS QF yet. :shrug:

Nalbandian has made the SF at least once at every Slam, and this from a guy who doesn't really love the game and actually has interests outside of tennis, something Gasquet doesn't.

silverwhite
10-13-2006, 03:36 PM
Nalbandian has made the SF at least once at every Slam, and this from a guy who doesn't really love the game and actually has interests outside of tennis, something Gasquet doesn't.

The first half of that sentence is true. Not so sure about the second half.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 03:41 PM
The first half of that sentence is true. Not so sure about the second half.

Could you imagine Gasquet going off and doing something else while during his tennis career like Nalbandian has starting a rally team for example?

Puschkin
10-13-2006, 03:48 PM
Nalbandian has made the SF at least once at every Slam, and this from a guy who doesn't really love the game and actually has interests outside of tennis, something Gasquet doesn't.

How do you know?

silverwhite
10-13-2006, 03:49 PM
Outside interests can range from rally driving to reading to playing a musical instrument. ;)

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 03:55 PM
Outside interests can range from rally driving to reading to playing a musical instrument. ;)

Ok, so would Gasquet go off and do stuff like play in a band during the main tennis season or would he be focused on his tennis? You know the answer to that and if he was a chess wiz, would he go play a chess tournament instead?

Very unlikely, Nalbandian just turns up for the majors and Davis Cup is Gasquet like that?

Puschkin
10-13-2006, 03:58 PM
Ok, so would Gasquet go off and do stuff like play in a band during the main tennis season or would he be focused on his tennis?

If it was like that, it would be perfectly fine with me. Infact, this is a hidden compliment: Richard just focuses on his tennis. :p

njorker
10-13-2006, 03:58 PM
Have a look at this and then tell again me the guy has not talent!!!

Note, that these are the highlights and despite the fact that the young boy lost 7-6 1-6 3-6 he was the one to make the unbelievable shots!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7Cnq7s8j8k

Thanks for posting it! A lot of amazing winners from both players.

But in response to the thread, it's hard for any player to follow Fed's footsteps. It may be a while before he gets dethroned and before we'll see another player like him. But Gasquet is a lot more talented than Nalbandian. Surely, he will have more career titles than Nalby, he's already got 3 and he's only 20 yrs old while Nalby's only got 5 and he's 24 yrs old.

silverwhite
10-13-2006, 03:58 PM
Ok, so would Gasquet go off and do stuff like play in a band during the main tennis season or would he be focused on his tennis? You know the answer to that and if he was a chess wiz, would he go play a chess tournament instead?

Very unlikely, Nalbandian just turns up for the majors and Davis Cup is Gasquet like that?

Well, if your definition of outside interests refers to involvement to that extent, then many players do not have outside interests. :lol:

Jaffas85
10-13-2006, 04:08 PM
Gasquet has yet to reach the QF stage of a Grand Slam tournament.

Of the 4 Grand Slams which one do you think he's most likely to reach the QF's or further first?

I say most likely the U.S. Open though I think he has the ability to do well at any of them.

NeverSayDie
10-13-2006, 04:10 PM
Of the 4 Grand Slams which one do you think he's most likely to reach the QF's or further first?

I say most likely the U.S. Open though I think he has the ability to do well at any of them.

I agree :yeah: I really hope he will be as good as Federer in the future. His fitness and his consistency are the only things holding him back :rolleyes:

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-13-2006, 04:26 PM
Gasquet is overrated, overhyped and mentally inept.

Unless the level of tennis falls dramatically in the next few years, Gasquet has no chance of winning a slam.

vincayou
10-13-2006, 04:26 PM
Find where I said it was impossible that Nadal would win RG at his 1st go. if you can do that, then come back to me.

Like here?
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=1670521&postcount=417

Not bothered to look further, but you didn't put him winning.

Puschkin
10-13-2006, 04:28 PM
Gasquet is overrated, overhyped and mentally inept.

Unless the level of tennis falls dramatically in the next few years, Gasquet has no chance of winning a slam.

:haha: no need to panick already. :p

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 04:57 PM
Well, if your definition of outside interests refers to involvement to that extent, then many players do not have outside interests. :lol:

Well not everyone can be like Nalbandian or the Williams sisters for example or want to be when it comes to tennis and other distractions.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 05:02 PM
Like here?
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=1670521&postcount=417

Not bothered to look further, but you didn't put him winning.

Wow, end of the world I got a prediction wrong, it's not like it has never happened before. Of course you forget when I called Berdych beating Nadal in Cincy or that Acasuso should be playing DC this year before the comp started, but hey I got one wrong. Time to jump off a bridge.

That was scepticism and proven unfounded, not flat out like I am saying here with Gasquet. This is clear that I don't think he will win a Slam and he is overhyped.

Pixie
10-13-2006, 05:04 PM
As I said Gasquet is not winning a Slam, if he does, then I am proven wrong. It's not hard to comprehend, the French are still searching for hero after Noah.

Federer and Gasquet aren't in the same league, it's not hard to see that, even in 2001, but lets continue with the overhype.

crap. Most of french tennis fans knows his strenghts and limits. You just take into account a few fans - mostly kids - who believe he could turn everything he touches into gold and 'specialized' tennis reporters who don't have anything to write about. If you want to believe this overhype that's your problem. Searching for hero doesn't necessarily equal to a biased point of view.

I can't stand all these comparisons and has never believed this minifed nickname. That said since the first time I saw him play when he was ten y-o, I've reckoned he's got big potential. Whether he'll be able to win a slam is something I am unaware of. As for now, it's unlikely because he's got technical, physical and mental issues. But I can't predict what it'd be like in 4 or 5 years.

As for the interests outside tennis argument, I am speechless.

RogiFan88
10-13-2006, 05:10 PM
Gasquet called himself "Federer of Nottingham" after he won that title for the 2nd consecutive year. ;)

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 05:20 PM
crap. Most of french tennis fans knows his strenghts and limits. You just take into account a few fans - mostly kids - who believe he could turn everything he touches into gold and 'specialized' tennis reporters who don't have anything to write about. If you want to believe this overhype that's your problem. Searching for hero doesn't necessarily equal to a biased point of view.

I can't stand all these comparisons and has never believed this minifed nickname. That said since the first time I saw him play when he was ten y-o, I've reckoned he's got big potential. Whether he'll be able to win a slam is something I am unaware of. As for now, it's unlikely because he's got technical, physical and mental issues. But I can't predict what it'd be like in 4 or 5 years.

As for the interests outside tennis argument, I am speechless.

It's not my problem actually. I do remember when he qualified for Monte Carlo and when Davydenko was allegedly in tears after losing to him. Hey, you beat Federer once and then that player is automatically going to win a Grand Slam.

So he has potential and what there aren't other players on the tour that don't. I don't believe the hype and I am not taking just a few kids viewpoint, there are more than enough people wanting to overrate him at this moment in time.

Ok, so Gasquet is as disinterested in tennis as Nalbandian, is he?

Pixie
10-13-2006, 05:44 PM
It's not my problem actually. I do remember when he qualified for Monte Carlo and when Davydenko was allegedly in tears after losing to him. Hey, you beat Federer once and then that player is automatically going to win a Grand Slam.

So he has potential and what there aren't other players on the tour that don't. I don't believe the hype and I am not taking just a few kids viewpoint, there are more than enough people wanting to overrate him at this moment in time.

I agree for the first part. For the second, there are more than enough people wanting not to overrate him. If I had to interview most people I meet when watching matches on the challengers or futures circuit, I know what they'd tell me as I have had enough discussions with these tennis fans.

Ok, so Gasquet is as disinterested in tennis as Nalbandian, is he?

If I am speechless, that's just because I fail to see the argument. Even if I could prove the fact that Gasquet does much playstation than Nalb does rally, that wouldn't change anything. I mean you can be interested in tennis, be talented but not fulfill your potential for a reason or another and you know what I mean I guess.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 05:52 PM
I agree for the first part. For the second, there are more than enough people wanting not to overrate him. If I had to interview most people I meet when watching matches on the challengers or futures circuit, I know what they'd tell me as I have had enough discussions with these tennis fans.

No one wanted to know about Gasquet until he beat Federer in Monte Carlo, he was forgotten about and a has been, then all of a sudden he is the great talent, but there are plenty of others.

If I am speechless, that's just because I fail to see the argument. Even if I could prove the fact that Gasquet do much playstation than Nalb do rally, that wouldn't change anything. I mean you can be interested in tennis, be talented but not fulfill your potential for a reason or another and you know what I mean I guess.

So Gasquet has pulled out of a tournament to play Playstation? Fact is Nalbandian doesn't really care about the game that much, it's an end to a means, it's just something he is very gifted at. There's your difference Gasquet seems to care about tennis whereas Nalbandian doesn't, is that clear enough?

Pixie
10-13-2006, 06:02 PM
No one wanted to know about Gasquet until he beat Federer in Monte Carlo, he was forgotten about and a has been, then all of a sudden he is the great talent, but there are plenty of others.

There are obviously plenty of others and that's why I've just said you can be talented, interested in tennis and not fulfill your potential. As I love watching tennis in general, I've never and will never consider him as the chosen one, far from it.


So Gasquet has pulled out of a tournament to play Playstation? Fact is Nalbandian doesn't really care about the game that much, it's an end to a means, it's just something he is very gifted at. There's your difference Gasquet seems to care about tennis whereas Nalbandian doesn't, is that clear enough?

That wasn't my point. No doubt Nalbandian could have done far better than he does and he never ceases to amaze me when he's concerned and healthy. My point was precisely that no comparison can be done between players. And there are too much 'what if' in seeking after what could have been if every player had fulfilled his potential. And I am not specially speaking about Nalb and Gasquet.

Xristos
10-13-2006, 06:06 PM
He is not winning a Slam.

Will I win a slam?

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 06:08 PM
There are obviously plenty of others and that's why I've just said you can be talented, interested in tennis and not fulfill your potential. As I love watching tennis in general, I've never and will never consider him as the chosen one, far from it.

Actually it was a bit more than no one, it was very few wanted to know. So there have been more gifted and talented than players than Gasquet not win Slams and that's what it's about it in the end. Then again this depends on how good Gasquet is and yes he is overrated.

There isn't a what if when comes it down to Nalbandian, he has chosen this path for himself and has to take the consequences.

Pixie
10-13-2006, 06:24 PM
Actually it was a bit more than no one, it was very few wanted to know. So there have been more gifted and talented than players than Gasquet not win Slams and that's what it's about it in the end. Then again this depends on how good Gasquet is and yes he is overrated.

Gasquet has had 2 problems since he's been playing tennis : being so much precocious so that people has confused it with incredibly upper talent. Moreover, he has beaten Federer being a youngster. No need to say he's gonna be shoot in flames every now and then. But not by those who don't overrate him...Gasquet is not the first nor the last to have to stand this kind of behaviour...

There isn't a what if when comes it down to Nalbandian, he has chosen this path for himself and has to take the consequences.

As long as he is happy with his life everything is fine :)

jayjay
10-13-2006, 06:26 PM
Have a look at this and then tell again me the guy has not talent!!!

Note, that these are the highlights and despite the fact that the young boy lost 7-6 1-6 3-6 he was the one to make the unbelievable shots!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7Cnq7s8j8k

That's the thing with Gasquet, he's capable of hitting great shots. It takes more than that though to achieve sustained success or any success at all at the kind of levels we are talking about here.

Action Jackson
10-13-2006, 06:29 PM
That's the thing with Gasquet, he's capable of hitting great shots. It takes more than that though to achieve sustained success or any success at all at the kind of levels we are talking about here.

If it was just about great shots Fernando Gonzalez and Tursunov would be multiple Slam winners.

jayjay
10-13-2006, 06:30 PM
Are you kidding? Nalbandian's career is a big waste.

It's a partial waste - he still has time to acheive the kind of things he is capable of. He's taking things one year at a time - TMC in 2005, Davis Cup in 2006, Slam in 2007. :)

jayjay
10-13-2006, 06:32 PM
If it was like that, it would be perfectly fine with me. Infact, this is a hidden compliment: Richard just focuses on his tennis. :p

He should focus harder then and consistently make the latter stages of slams like El Rey. :p

jayjay
10-13-2006, 06:35 PM
But Gasquet is a lot more talented than Nalbandian. Surely, he will have more career titles than Nalby, he's already got 3 and he's only 20 yrs old while Nalby's only got 5 and he's 24 yrs old.

In what sense is Gasquet more talented than Nalbandian?:confused: Given Nalbandian's minimum schedule, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Gasquet wins more titles than Nalbandian once both their careers are done.

I'd wager though that Nalbandian would have won more of what really matters, like Slams, TMC, TMS or DC.

GlennMirnyi
10-13-2006, 06:36 PM
It's a partial waste - he still has time to acheive the kind of things he is capable of. He's taking things one year at a time - TMC in 2005, Davis Cup in 2006, Slam in 2007. :)

Wake up. He's over.

DrJules
10-13-2006, 08:22 PM
If it was just about great shots Fernando Gonzalez and Tursunov would be multiple Slam winners.

Even if it was just about great shots they would still have none, because Federer has more great shots than either player.

You say that Gasquet will not win a grand slam, but a player does have to win each of the 4 grand slams every year. Currently, it is difficult to see anyone other than Federer or Nadal (possibly Roddick) winning a grand slam. However, beyond those players Gasquet can compete with the rest.

If Gasquet does not win the grand slams who are the players who will?

chicky841
10-13-2006, 09:02 PM
All this is pointless. Let the results speak for themselves, well see what Richard can do in the coming years.

vincayou
10-13-2006, 09:25 PM
The guy is 20, has been in the final of two masters series on 2 different surfaces (and not the ones at the end of the year where everybody is out), and people would make us believe that he's hopeless.

El Legenda
10-13-2006, 09:28 PM
More likely the Path of FAT DAVE :)

LaTenista
10-13-2006, 11:21 PM
I'd say inbetween, he won't win as many Slams or Masters events as Fed but I think he'll do better than Nalbandian overall (whose only big title is TMC).

richie21
10-13-2006, 11:38 PM
Gasquet: Will He Follow The Path of Federer or Nalbandian? .

neither of them.....he'll have a worse career than Nalbandian :o
i mean ,he will probably never make the top 5 or win a Master.......he is just not good enough and it finally took me 2 years to understand that.

as i said yesterday,he has a great game to watch but unfortunately ,he really sucks in ,in my opinion,the most important areas of modern tennis: serve and return of serve
you just can t win GSs(especially on harcourt) if you have a weak serve AND a weak return
that's why i think guys like Murray,Baghdatis and Berdych will have better careers than him,precisely because contrary to Gasquet,they are very good at least in one of those two crucial areas (return of serve for Murray and Baghdatis,serve for Berdych)

RogiFan88
10-14-2006, 02:16 AM
Gasquet has had 2 problems since he's been playing tennis : being so much precocious so that people has confused it with incredibly upper talent. Moreover, he has beaten Federer being a youngster. No need to say he's gonna be shoot in flames every now and then. But not by those who don't overrate him...Gasquet is not the first nor the last to have to stand this kind of behaviour...



As long as he is happy with his life everything is fine :)

I wouldn't say Gasquet is precocious, just over-hyped by the French since he was, what, 9? His main problem is his fitness. If he improves that and "grows up" = gets serious, he can achieve better results. He has 3 titles so far; not bad, not fantastic, but it's a step in the right direction. :angel:

hammett
10-14-2006, 04:06 AM
I'd say inbetween, he won't win as many Slams or Masters events as Fed but I think he'll do better than Nalbandian overall (whose only big title is TMC).

Gasquet won't win anything big while Federer is in his prime or until Federer is retired. All he can do is to wait 4 or 5 (more perhaps) years. Nalbandian didn't/doesn't/won't have that privilege (sp:confused: ) as he is practically the same age of Federer. Nalbandian chances of winning something have passed IMO (many times), I don't think he will get that many chances in the future as things go but Gasquet has yet to prove he can be there. He certainly hasn't. :wavey:

Mimi
10-14-2006, 04:16 AM
no one can win more than roger :p , i do think gasquet will win a few slams :)

Allure
10-14-2006, 07:03 AM
As a Gasquet fan, I hope he will mirror the road of Federer. At least win a few slams. But right now, he is still immature and mentally unstable.

Puschkin
10-14-2006, 08:09 AM
There's your difference Gasquet seems to care about tennis ....
what is wrong with a tennis player caring about tennis? :confused:

We all understood that you think RG is useless and will never achieve anything. But criticising him for taking his job seriously (which I occasionally doubt, BTW) is ridiculous.

Action Jackson
10-14-2006, 08:31 AM
what is wrong with a tennis player caring about tennis? :confused:

We all understood that you think RG is useless and will never achieve anything. But criticising him for taking his job seriously (which I occasionally doubt, BTW) is ridiculous.

You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel now aren't you. If you seriously think that there is a problem with taking their profession seriously, then it's you have the problem and not me.

I will make this easy for you and use Nalbandian as a reference, so you might get it. Something I wrote earlier in the year

Nalbandian needs to make some choices with his tennis. It seems to be that tennis is an ends to a means and that can be seen by his attitude to training and yes he has had some good coaches. What has he learnt from these people and has he used any of it in practice. If he is happy with going along like he is at the moment, then that is fine. It's a testament to his talent he has done as well as he has without being really dedicated to it.

The key is that Nalbandian shouldn't have regrets once he finishes his tennis career. If he gave it his best and wasn't able to win a Slam, then that wouldn't be so bad, though this does not seem likely.

Does Gasquet come into that category? If you answered yes to that question, then it's yourself who thinks that and not me.

yomike
10-14-2006, 10:57 AM
Well Roddick won a slam:o and he is not even that good. And did I mention he plays like crap on clay. Gasquet and Amelie will win the French one day you will see.

DrJules
10-14-2006, 11:00 AM
Well Roddick won a slam:o and he is not even that good. And did I mention he plays like crap on clay. Gasquet and Amelie will win the French one day you will see.

Reflects the excessive importance of the serve in mens tennis.

vincayou
10-14-2006, 11:23 AM
I wouldn't say Gasquet is precocious, just over-hyped by the French since he was, what, 9? His main problem is his fitness. If he improves that and "grows up" = gets serious, he can achieve better results. He has 3 titles so far; not bad, not fantastic, but it's a step in the right direction. :angel:

They put him on a cover at 9. And he's top15 at 19. Guess they were not that wrong.

*julie*
10-14-2006, 12:01 PM
We all understood that you think RG is useless and will never achieve anything. But criticising him for taking his job seriously (which I occasionally doubt, BTW) is ridiculous.

I agree with that. I don't know if he will win a slam... It will only depend on his will to work on his fitness and mental strenght. But he still lacks of motivation to work hard on these departments.

Pixie
10-14-2006, 12:33 PM
I wouldn't say Gasquet is precocious, just over-hyped by the French since he was, what, 9? His main problem is his fitness. If he improves that and "grows up" = gets serious, he can achieve better results. He has 3 titles so far; not bad, not fantastic, but it's a step in the right direction. :angel:

I wasn't talking about his current achievements on the main tour. From 9 to 16 y-o he has reached national ranking that hadn't been made before and has won most of the main international junior events. That said, that will never justify a cover of a tennis mag being 9 y-o.

But don't misunderstand me : I also believe he could achieve better results and has a big potential. I was just reacting about the overhype thing because even if he is still seen as a promising youngster in France, most of frenches don't call him something like Mozart right now, which is a good thing.

richie21
10-14-2006, 02:33 PM
Well Roddick won a slam:o and he is not even that good. And did I mention he plays like crap on clay. Gasquet and Amelie will win the French one day you will see.

in my opinion,Gasquet has a better chance to become number 1 than to win the french open.....and that says something!