Why did Ferrero become an "average player" ? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Why did Ferrero become an "average player" ?

duong
01-02-2009, 12:10 PM
Sorry for that, but I'm starting this thread to get an answer to a question I don't have enough information to answer myself :

Why did Ferrero become an "average player" ?

I remember Ferrero between 2000 and 2003 : he was a "top-player" in that time, especially on clay.

But since then he has totally lost his credit.

Hewitt and Roddick are still considered as top-players (Hewitt plays less than before and has more injuries, but if you look at his results when he played in 2007, they were those of a top-10 player).

Safin is a very special case.

But Ferrero ? :confused:

I'd be glad if some "people who know" can tell me why his carreer went that way ?

Action Jackson
01-02-2009, 12:15 PM
If you watched tennis during this time, then you should have your own views as to what happened.

The game evolves, some players reach their peak earlier than others. Ferrero lost a little speed after his illness in 2004, players were hitting just as hard as he was when he was near the top of the game.

Roddick had the huge forehand in 2003 when he went on that big tear in addition to the serve, but the players got used to his forehand and while it was massive then, it's not really massive now, but he has the serve to back him up, which Ferrero doesn't.

wilmar
01-02-2009, 12:17 PM
If I remember correctly, he had a bad case of chicken pox, and then some injuries. Had found it difficult to get back to his peak level after that.
Also, I remember him saying he didn't feel like a "real" #1 being there only for a short while. Prolly found it difficult to have that same motivation after scaling the rankings and then to peak there for a short while.

Kolya
01-02-2009, 12:18 PM
I think he just burnt himself out after the 2003 season, plus the illness.

Action Jackson
01-02-2009, 12:20 PM
If I remember correctly, he had a bad case of chicken pox, and then some injuries. Had found it difficult to get back to his peak level after that.
Also, I remember him saying he didn't feel like a "real" #1 being there only for a short while. Prolly found it difficult to have that same motivation after scaling the rankings and then to peak there for a short while.

Yes, 2004 was where he had the chicken pox in the early part of the season and then had niggling problems throughout the year. He lost to Andreev at RG and he really didn't look like himself.

But the others caught up to him and he wasn't able to adapt within his game to changes in the game, it's not like he had great variation and he didn't have a massive serve like Roddick to help him either.

duong
01-02-2009, 12:41 PM
If you watched tennis during this time, then you should have your own views as to what happened.

The game evolves, some players reach their peak earlier than others. Ferrero lost a little speed after his illness in 2004, players were hitting just as hard as he was when he was near the top of the game.

Roddick had the huge forehand in 2003 when he went on that big tear in addition to the serve, but the players got used to his forehand and while it was massive then, it's not really massive now, but he has the serve to back him up, which Ferrero doesn't.

Yes I watched tennis in that time, but not as much as now (I'v watched tennis from the beginning of the 80's but I was more boring or busy in the end of the 90's and the beginning of the 2000's), then I have to confess that it's a little bit difficult for me to remember.

Then I must admit the answer is not clear at all for me.

I remember a player with a very solid game, bringing back every ball, and with a good lift on clay.
Imo he looked very near to Kuerten on clay for instance.

But then he still is this kind of player, but not at all as effective.

And it's difficult for me to imagine that the game has changed so much in 2004. I would be interested in more information about that (rackets ? balls ?), but anyway, you don't have to answer every one of my interrogations.

Anyway, there were several different answers, and this is maybe not very clear for some other people either,

then I'm looking forward to more precisions if possible :wavey:

Andi-M
01-02-2009, 12:42 PM
He was always been a very good player rather than a great one he had sucess during a weak time for mens tennis.

Action Jackson
01-02-2009, 12:52 PM
Yes I watched tennis in that time, but not as much as now (I'v watched tennis from the beginning of the 80's but I was more boring or busy in the end of the 90's and the beginning of the 2000's), then I have to confess that it's a little bit difficult for me to remember.

That makes sense.

Then I must admit the answer is not clear at all for me.

I remember a player with a very solid game, bringing back every ball, and with a good lift on clay. Imo he looked very near to Kuerten on clay for instance.

But then he still is this kind of player, but not at all as effective.

Yes, he hit the ball hard and deep off both sides, but he was quicker then, it's not exactly difficult to work out for a guy who relies so much on his footspeed, that having an illness, then trying to get back to the same condition he was previously, and having niggles took the edge off his speed, therefore while he is still fast around the court, he isn't as quick as he was, and his shots don't have the same penetration. In addition he played a lot of tournaments as Kolya said in those 3 years and the body shut down for a while.

One works into the other.


And it's difficult for me to imagine that the game has changed so much in 2004. I would be interested in more information about that (rackets ? balls ?), but anyway, you don't have to answer every one of my interrogations.

Racquets and string technology are in constant evolution, because that's how technical it is. Like I said about Roddick, the same context applies to Ferrero, both had big weapons that were better than the others at the time, but it didn't last very long, as the other players caught up.

Look at Jim Courier and then look at Ferrero, then you can see the similarities. Both were at the top for a short period of time, except Courier was more successful, when the other players caught up to them, they weren't able to adjust, while being very good players and having the odd big win, they weren't what they were.

Evolution.

duong
01-02-2009, 01:31 PM
Racquets and string technology are in constant evolution, because that's how technical it is. Like I said about Roddick, the same context applies to Ferrero, both had big weapons that were better than the others at the time, but it didn't last very long, as the other players caught up.

Look at Jim Courier and then look at Ferrero, then you can see the similarities. Both were at the top for a short period of time, except Courier was more successful, when the other players caught up to them, they weren't able to adjust, while being very good players and having the odd big win, they weren't what they were.

Evolution.

Thanks for your answer.

The cases of players being in the very-top and then becoming quite "anonymous" are not very common though. If the evolution of the game was so quick, these cases would happen more often.

I will take in mind the idea that, as for Courier the key was rather mental (that's what I remember ... I sometimes think that he suffered more from Sampras than Agassi did), for Ferrero, the key is rather the fact that he lost his speed (and maybe power ?) : it's true that in that time, his speed and ability to bring back every ball were real strengths in my memories.

Action Jackson
01-02-2009, 01:43 PM
Thanks for your answer.

The cases of players being in the very-top and then becoming quite "anonymous" are not very common though. If the evolution of the game was so quick, these cases would happen more often.

I will take in mind the idea that, as for Courier the key was rather mental (that's what I remember ... I sometimes think that he suffered more from Sampras than Agassi did), for Ferrero, the key is rather the fact that he lost his speed (and maybe power ?) : it's true that in that time, his speed and ability to bring back every ball were real strengths in my memories.

There haven't been that many players ranked number 1 have there? You have to look at the respective playing styles of them, Courier and Ferrero were quite physical and Wilander was mental, then others were on transition nature and for varying reasons.

It was mental for Ferrero as well, the mental side is the biggest part of the game at pro level. Once the confidence is lost, it's very hard to get back, considering Ferrero wasn't as naturally gifted as some. The problem for these types of players with tough physical games, like any individual they have a particular point, they are going to reach and then once they have reached that point, then their decline tends to be quicker than say a player like Edberg.

Horatio Caine
01-02-2009, 01:50 PM
A combination of injuries/illness throwing him off his stride and the fact that the game naturally caught up with him, imo.

buzz
01-02-2009, 01:54 PM
Thanks for your answer.

The cases of players being in the very-top and then becoming quite "anonymous" are not very common though. If the evolution of the game was so quick, these cases would happen more often.



No there a so few cases because most players are able to evolute themselves along with the evolution of the game. But Fererro couldn't do this because his strengths were precisely the aspects in which the game evoluted (court speed, consistency).

In other words: When you have a big service, it is as hard as most players to improve your court speed, but when your strength is courtspeed it is harder to get even faster. For Usain Bolt it is harder to improve his best 100meter time with a second, then for me.

Corey Feldman
01-02-2009, 02:01 PM
players have so much in the tank for an entire career

and JCF blew all of his in one year - 2003

Grenouille
01-02-2009, 02:11 PM
I think he has never been a top player in his head. Mentally, I've always found him weak. He lacks self-confidence.

*bunny*
01-02-2009, 02:42 PM
I may be biased, but I don't think his game has been that physical...his strength in his prime was to take the ball early and control the rallies with his FH, moving the opponent from side to side and attack. Although his primary strength shone on clay, his tennis has been adoptable for fast surfaces as well (He started playing tennis on hard courts as a child). His serve has never been massive, but he has a very reliable kick second serve that has won him many points (In 2003, he was No. 1 on the second serve points won table on the ATP stats, and No.2 on first serve points won after Roddick). Unlike some players whose main weapon is their FH, his BH is no liability either.

Anyway, 2004 was annus horribilis for him....the first sign of physical trouble started during AO where he had a back and abductor problems, the latter of which hampered his movement during SF against Federer (Ferrero's both thighs were heavily taped.) Then chicken pox hit in March, followed by a minor wrist injury and a rib injury just a few weeks before Roland Garros where he was the defending champion.
I think all those problems stemmed from too much tennis in 2003. Reaching two slam finals and winning one, playing his third Tennis Masters Cup, and reaching the Davis Cup final in which he lost to Hewitt and Philippousis in five sets on Australian grass in December.

And I think he made mistakes by returning to court too early after the illness and then after the rib injury, which I suspect was a main reason for his FH becoming less potent than it once was. Apparently his coach and entourage all told him to withdraw from RG that year, but he insisted on playing. Anybody who watched him play that year would know that he was in no shape for playing competitive tennis and that it was a near miracle that he won the first round against Haas. Ferrero couldn't even raise his arm properly to serve.

Then he changed his racket from Prince to Head in the autumn of 2004, and IMHO that was not the right time to make such a change because I think he still hadn't fully recovered from the injuries, which also affected his footwork. (He officially returned to Prince in 2007)

Some signs of his return to form could be seen from 2006, and I think he has been slowly getting back to where he once was. Sure he's not getting any younger, and he might not have fully regained confidence, but he was actually playing some good tennis in 2008 although another abductor injury hit him in April and sidelined him for three months from June.

I just hope he will have an injury free season this year, and, if possible, that he will be able to win a title again....

Also, I remember him saying he didn't feel like a "real" #1 being there only for a short while. Prolly found it difficult to have that same motivation after scaling the rankings and then to peak there for a short while.
When and where did he say that? I don't think I've read/heard that kind of remarks by him.

duong
01-02-2009, 03:12 PM
Thanks everybody.

I didn't have the impression that the game had changed so quickly,
this is something which is difficult for me to fully realize.

GlennMirnyi
01-02-2009, 03:35 PM
Ferrero has always been a mediocre player.

Action Jackson
01-02-2009, 03:43 PM
Thanks everybody.

I didn't have the impression that the game had changed so quickly,
this is something which is difficult for me to fully realize.

What is it that you don't get about the game changing at a fast pace? Don't adapt to the trends within your game, then the players will be left behind.

Lee
01-02-2009, 03:57 PM
I may be biased, but I don't think his game has been that physical...his strength in his prime was to take the ball early and control the rallies with his FH, moving the opponent from side to side and attack. Although his primary strength shone on clay, his tennis has been adoptable for fast surfaces as well (He started playing tennis on hard courts as a child). His serve has never been massive, but he has a very reliable kick second serve that has won him many points (In 2003, he was No. 1 on the second serve points won table on the ATP stats, and No.2 on first serve points won after Roddick). Unlike some players whose main weapon is their FH, his BH is no liability either.

Anyway, 2004 was annus horribilis for him....the first sign of physical trouble started during AO where he had a back and abductor problems, the latter of which hampered his movement during SF against Federer (Ferrero's both thighs were heavily taped.) Then chicken pox hit in March, followed by a minor wrist injury and a rib injury just a few weeks before Roland Garros where he was the defending champion.
I think all those problems stemmed from too much tennis in 2003. Reaching two slam finals and winning one, playing his third Tennis Masters Cup, and reaching the Davis Cup final in which he lost to Hewitt and Philippousis in five sets on Australian grass in December.

And I think he made mistakes by returning to court too early after the illness and then after the rib injury, which I suspect was a main reason for his FH becoming less potent than it once was. Apparently his coach and entourage all told him to withdraw from RG that year, but he insisted on playing. Anybody who watched him play that year would know that he was in no shape for playing competitive tennis and that it was a near miracle that he won the first round against Haas. Ferrero couldn't even raise his arm properly to serve.

Then he changed his racket from Prince to Head in the autumn of 2004, and IMHO that was not the right time to make such a change because I think he still hadn't fully recovered from the injuries, which also affected his footwork. (He officially returned to Prince in 2007)

Some signs of his return to form could be seen from 2006, and I think he has been slowly getting back to where he once was. Sure he's not getting any younger, and he might not have fully regained confidence, but he was actually playing some good tennis in 2008 although another abductor injury hit him in April and sidelined him for three months from June.

I just hope he will have an injury free season this year, and, if possible, that he will be able to win a title again....


I agree with these but I think mentally, he lacks the drive and believe after the injuries. I feel the rise of Nadal replacing as #1 in Spain affected him a lot.

Havok
01-02-2009, 03:58 PM
Hewitt is not considered a top player; at least not in my book :o.

Injuries/illness started his downfall as well as I believe a mini burn-out. After that his game was never as good as it used to be and the tour improved even more. Mentally I don't think he could cope with not being the top player he was for a good stretch of time and that is hurting him more than his game.

We have seen what his game can do when he shows up and plays like we all know he can. Thing is he can never sustain that, not even for the duration of an entire event :(.

ferrero007
01-02-2009, 04:27 PM
Ferrero has always been a mediocre player.

--> lol !

He has reached quater finals in the four Grand Slams..
.. which player in activity did it?

Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Nalbandian, Hewitt and Safin.. THAT'S ALL !!

If Juan Carlos is a mediocre player, there are many mediocre players in the ATP Tour.. lol.

HattonWBA
01-02-2009, 05:18 PM
Becasue every year he gets older i suppose

Forehander
01-03-2009, 04:45 AM
The game has lifted way too much for him to cope as simple as that.

Jimnik
01-03-2009, 10:27 AM
Confidence is everything. After injuries and illnesses in 2004, he just never regained it. Plus he switched from Prince to Head rackets and tried to change his FH to a more conservative motion. This was mostly because of the hip problems he suffered in 2004.

The last couple of years he's tried to go back to his old style and racket but bottom line he's older, slower and less confident than before. Also mentally he'll never have the patience and fight that he once had to compete at high-intensities over prolonged periods.

jrm
01-03-2009, 11:09 AM
He is just average now .. not even force to be reckon on clay!

JolánGagó
01-03-2009, 11:10 AM
Besides confidence and some speed he also lost motivation. Unlike many others, Ferrero does not consider his life must revolve around his own professional tennis career. He has started and developed a number of quite successful enterprises that take from him a lot of effort, time and motivation.

Ferrero has never been particularly weak in the mental side, quite on the contrary. Talks about mediocrity in the context of this topic amount to bullshit of the silliest stinkiest variety.

TankingTheSet
01-03-2009, 12:34 PM
In Ferrero's case physical illness and injuries suffered are very obvious. This has been decribed in detail earlier in this thread. There's no need to press the issue that 'he has lost all motivation' or that 'the increasing standard of tennis has caught up with him'. Those factors may play a role, but physical shape and illnesses/injuries suffered can be a critical factor for a sportsman, especially a tennis player.

If you look in detail at other ATP player's careers, very often you will see indications that illness and injury was decisive in causing a permanent decline in that player's ranking/competitiveness.

Professional tennis is hard on the body, not only because of the length of an actual match or tournament week, but also because tennis players are active throughout the year, often have little opportunity to rest, and have to travel very long distances to different timezones (jetlag) all the time which can take a lot energy. If your body suffers from the lasting effects of illness or injuries, that will greatly reduce your competitiveness in professional tennis.

ReturnWinner
01-03-2009, 08:37 PM
he had chicken pox but he has never changed his game which is pretty
predictable plus the field got better since the end of 2003 season.