Safin or Nalbandian [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Safin or Nalbandian

vahep
06-15-2009, 06:56 PM
Who was the bigger underachiever? Safin did win 2 slams, but since he was (IMO) more inherently gifted, he did waste what could have been a legendary career. Nalbandian was less gifted, but had more than enough talent to have bagged a number of slams. Rare as it was, an in form Nalbandian was a handful for anybody on any surface.

marcRD
06-15-2009, 07:04 PM
I may be in a minority but I actually think Nalbandian had more potential than Safin. His twohanded backhand is the best I have seen since I started watching tennis in the mid 90s (yes, better than Agassi's twohanded imo).

Certinfy
06-15-2009, 07:05 PM
Easily Nalby, he didn't even win a slam :(

Cafisho
06-15-2009, 07:06 PM
Fat dave is too good when he's on fire.

rubbERR
06-15-2009, 07:09 PM
there are no underarchievers, pfffffffffff

bokehlicious
06-15-2009, 07:10 PM
Dave... hands down

shotgun
06-15-2009, 07:13 PM
Obviously Nalbandian. Safin had a hall-of-fame worthy career, winning two Slams and reaching no. 1. Nalbandian will retire with a good but not exceptional career, not eligible for the HOF.

green25814
06-15-2009, 07:16 PM
Nalbandian, and its not close.

HeretiC
06-15-2009, 07:23 PM
I may be in a minority but I actually think Nalbandian had more potential than Safin. His twohanded backhand is the best I have seen since I started watching tennis in the mid 90s (yes, better than Agassi's twohanded imo).

Well, I am watching since the start of 80s and still haven't see more technically sound 2 handed backhand than his.

MalwareDie
06-15-2009, 07:27 PM
Nalbandian has no Slams. He is easily the bigger underachiever.

Mint Chip
06-15-2009, 07:42 PM
Both of them are underachievers in their own way. They can beat anyone and lose to someone outside the top 500. If they only had more desire to be the best, they would be one of those with the most slams in their generation. The injury that Nalby has hopefully makes him appreciate tennis more than what he was doing before and he can still win a slam when he comes back. Safin can still win a slam if he really concentrate for his last year and win Wimbledon or the U.S. open but I doubt he wants it that much anymore

tennishero
06-15-2009, 07:42 PM
nalbandian

Dini
06-15-2009, 07:43 PM
Nalby. See sig.

oliverbwfc
06-15-2009, 08:40 PM
Fat Dave by far. Perhaps a little less talent than Marat but Safin still won 2 slams.

MisterQ
06-15-2009, 08:42 PM
Nalbandian. And I don't think he is less gifted than Safin in terms of skill -- perhaps in some physical respects...

Federerhingis
06-15-2009, 08:49 PM
Fat Dave by far. Perhaps a little less talent than Marat but Safin still won 2 slams.

I don't know if Safin is more talented or not, but he does have a more complete game. A huge serve that would have given Nalby a slam or two by now with the backhand that he has. Safin's forehand while streaky can be menacing. Nalbandian's forehand while not pathetic pales in comparison to his backhand; actually his forehand along with his serve tend to let him down especially under pressure situations.

Leo
06-15-2009, 08:50 PM
Safin, hands down. Should own around 6 Slams.

Nalby should have more titles, and about 1 Slam. He's not necessarily done yet, although his future looks bleak. Safin's is obviously bleaker, especially because he's retiring and in his time left on the tour he is resigned to being a two-time GS champ and that's it.

miura
06-15-2009, 08:52 PM
This must be the, what.. 82nd thread on this very matter?

oz_boz
06-15-2009, 09:00 PM
Nalby, not even close.

GlennMirnyi
06-15-2009, 09:12 PM
Nalbandian is an underachiever only as far as it concerns his performances at the Buffet World Cup.

Goldenoldie
06-15-2009, 09:51 PM
Nalbandian could have, should have.
Safin did.