How can Nalby/Davy/Hass have 1 GS final & Fedal have neally 40 with the same talent? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

How can Nalby/Davy/Hass have 1 GS final & Fedal have neally 40 with the same talent?

2003
12-10-2011, 07:22 AM
I think it wouldnt be presumptous to say that most of MTF would agree that guys like Nalbandian and Davydenko and maybe to a lesser extent Hass combined probably have as much talent as Federer and Nadal combined. Maybe a little more one way or the other.

Leaving tournaments won out of it, look at the GS finals.

All 3 are from a similar generation though not identical.

How on earth can Nalbandian/Davy and Hass have 1 slam final between them with their talent and endless opportunities?

I really dont think injuries explain it, I mean Nadal has had almost as many as those three. They might account for some of it though.

Is tennis so much more a mental game than a physical one?

I can understand a propensity to choke games against big time players. Nalbandian blew something like a 6-3 5-1 lead against Nadal a short time ago. But in his prime Nalbandian and Hass were lethal. How did they cock up so many chances? Even at the back end of their career? Hass beat Djokovic in Wimbledon 09 so he can be a big time player.


I just cant believe the magnitude of the gap. Nalbandian is every bit as talented as Fedal. Hass was very fit and Davydenko is like zero percent body fat. He owns Nadal in the h2h, and hasnt played Fed in grand slams that much.

How have they butchered sooooo many chances?

Har-Tru
12-10-2011, 07:28 AM
They couldn't find the right forum, that's why.

leng jai
12-10-2011, 07:46 AM
Haas has more talent Davydenko - he and Nalbandian are pretty similar talent wise.

Haas has had a ridiculous injury run at horrible times in his career and just general poor luck. In 2002 he was in glorious form and had two big chances to bag a slam. The AO was just a fiasco with the rain delay against Safin. He was one of the favourites going into the USO but was stiff to run into Sampras and lose a very tight 4 setter. By the end of the year he sustained a serious shoulder injury which would see him out until 2004. Shoulder injuries are arguably the worst injuries you can get as they seriously damage your ability to serve. By the time he recovered he pretty much lost his window with Federer arriving and winning everything under the sun. He has never been the same player since and has had to adjust his whole game because of the injuries.

Nalbandian has less excuses...he should really have a slam right now but squandered some key opportunities. He was never winning the final against Hewitt at Wimbledon though - he wasn't ready. Robbed at the USO against Roddick and in tennis you don't get too many golden opportunities. His career is littered with puzzling losses which can only be put down to some mental dysfunction. Without Federer around he probably would have won a slam or two as well.

Davydenko ...pretty sure no one has expected this guy to win a slam. He is definitely one of those SF type of players.

samanosuke
12-10-2011, 08:29 AM
Haas has more talent Davydenko - he and Nalbandian are pretty similar talent wise.

Haas has had a ridiculous injury run at horrible times in his career and just general poor luck. In 2002 he was in glorious form and had two big chances to bag a slam. The AO was just a fiasco with the rain delay against Safin. He was one of the favourites going into the USO but was stiff to run into Sampras and lose a very tight 4 setter. By the end of the year he can sustained a serious shoulder injury which which see him out until 2004. Shoulder injuries are arguably the worst injuries you can get as they seriously damage your ability to serve. By the time he recovered he pretty much lost his window with Federer arriving and winning everything under the sun. He has never been the same player since and has had to adjust his whole game because of the injuries.

Nalbandian has less excuses...he should really have a slam right now but squandered some key opportunities. He was never winning the final against Hewitt at Wimbledon though - he wasn't ready. Robbed at the USO against Roddick and in tennis you don't get too many golden opportunities. His career is littered with puzzling losses which can only be put down to some mental dysfunction. Without Federer around he probably would have won a slam or two as well.

Davydenko ...pretty sure no one has expected this guy to win a slam. He is definitely one of those SF type of players.


good post.

he should have asked djokovic for the advice. this guy resolving any shoulder issues in a week time

Mae
12-10-2011, 08:44 AM
Haas has more talent Davydenko - he and Nalbandian are pretty similar talent wise.

Haas has had a ridiculous injury run at horrible times in his career and just general poor luck. In 2002 he was in glorious form and had two big chances to bag a slam. The AO was just a fiasco with the rain delay against Safin. He was one of the favourites going into the USO but was stiff to run into Sampras and lose a very tight 4 setter. By the end of the year he can sustained a serious shoulder injury which which see him out until 2004. Shoulder injuries are arguably the worst injuries you can get as they seriously damage your ability to serve. By the time he recovered he pretty much lost his window with Federer arriving and winning everything under the sun. He has never been the same player since and has had to adjust his whole game because of the injuries.

Nalbandian has less excuses...he should really have a slam right now but squandered some key opportunities. He was never winning the final against Hewitt at Wimbledon though - he wasn't ready. Robbed at the USO against Roddick and in tennis you don't get too many golden opportunities. His career is littered with puzzling losses which can only be put down to some mental dysfunction. Without Federer around he probably would have won a slam or two as well.

Davydenko ...pretty sure no one has expected this guy to win a slam. He is definitely one of those SF type of players.

Great summary of Tommy's Career--injury after injury--not just one, but three surgeries on his right shoulder :sad: Most recently a hip replacement to be added to the list. Actually he has had so many injuries plus illnesses in his career that I have lost track!

Mae
12-10-2011, 08:51 AM
good post.

he should have asked djokovic for the advice. this guy resolving any shoulder issues in a week time

Nole has had shoulder problems, but never any surgeries on his shoulder at all.

Action Jackson
12-10-2011, 08:58 AM
At the highest level the mental side is the most important, if it was natural talent and style then Nalbandian and Mecir would have a multi Slam winners.

It's not solely down to hard work, if it was then any donkey would be able to win a Slam. It's just the combo of the two, mental application/strength and maximising natural ability.

tyruk14
12-10-2011, 09:35 AM
Talented though they are all three, it is a myth that either Haas, Davydenko or Nalbandian are more talented than Federer or Nadal. Results speak for themselves; mental and physical fortitude are themselves an aspect of overall tennis talent. Just because you prefer the technically flawless aesthetic of Nalbandian's forehand to Nadal's more bullish approach to the stroke it does not mean that one is better from a technical tennis standpoint than the other; each shot has its respective strengths and weaknesses.

leng jai
12-10-2011, 09:46 AM
When people talk about talent they refer to natural technical prowess in the given context not generic factors (such as mental fortitude and endurance) that could be attributed to any sport.

Roger_Federer_15
12-10-2011, 09:48 AM
Don't often post but those 3 alone don't have the talent that Roger has in his little toe!

samanosuke
12-10-2011, 09:51 AM
nadal has that physical talent like you said that could be attributed to any sport and I can imagine him being successful in other sports also but for example Federer , he has that technical talent and I can't imagine him playing other sport on highest level

2003
12-10-2011, 09:59 AM
Haas has more talent Davydenko - he and Nalbandian are pretty similar talent wise.

Haas has had a ridiculous injury run at horrible times in his career and just general poor luck. In 2002 he was in glorious form and had two big chances to bag a slam. The AO was just a fiasco with the rain delay against Safin. He was one of the favourites going into the USO but was stiff to run into Sampras and lose a very tight 4 setter. By the end of the year he sustained a serious shoulder injury which would see him out until 2004. Shoulder injuries are arguably the worst injuries you can get as they seriously damage your ability to serve. By the time he recovered he pretty much lost his window with Federer arriving and winning everything under the sun. He has never been the same player since and has had to adjust his whole game because of the injuries.

Nalbandian has less excuses...he should really have a slam right now but squandered some key opportunities. He was never winning the final against Hewitt at Wimbledon though - he wasn't ready. Robbed at the USO against Roddick and in tennis you don't get too many golden opportunities. His career is littered with puzzling losses which can only be put down to some mental dysfunction. Without Federer around he probably would have won a slam or two as well.

Davydenko ...pretty sure no one has expected this guy to win a slam. He is definitely one of those SF type of players.

If Marcos freaking Burgerdatis can make a slam final, being down 2 sets and a break in the semi no less, Savywanko really has no excuse.

2003
12-10-2011, 10:02 AM
Does anyone think the 5 set format might have something to do with this?

Though only making 1 slam final between them, Davydenko and Nalbandian have reached many finals and won many best of 3 set events thrashing many top players along the way.

Action Jackson
12-10-2011, 10:08 AM
Does anyone think the 5 set format might have something to do with this?

Though only making 1 slam final between them, Davydenko and Nalbandian have reached many finals and won many best of 3 set events thrashing many top players along the way.

No, both of them have over 50% records in 5 setters.

leng jai
12-10-2011, 10:11 AM
If Marcos freaking Burgerdatis can make a slam final, being down 2 sets and a break in the semi no less, Savywanko really has no excuse.

Burgerbandian lost that SF to Burgerdatis. There you go.

fran70
12-10-2011, 10:12 AM
At the highest level the mental side is the most important, if it was natural talent and style then Nalbandian and Mecir would have a multi Slam winners.

It's not solely down to hard work, if it was then any donkey would be able to win a Slam. It's just the combo of the two, mental application/strength and maximising natural ability.

Well, there are different reasons why certain amazing players were unable to win a Slam. As you well said hard work, mental strenght or natural ability (combined or individually one of those skills) helped certain players to win a GS. But at the same time some great players found amazing rivals and were unable to win a Slam or more than one (for example, Roddick would had definitely picked up a Wimbledon trophy and always failed to do it against the same player: Roger Federer)

I would add certain players that were good but not enough to reach a GS final or never pictured themselves rising a Slam trophy and they did it like Gaudio, Thomas Johansson, Albert Costa or Andres Gomez for instance that had good tennis skills and found two fantastic weeks of their careers to win a GS title. Other players that found amazing rivals and were unable to win it like Mecir in the two chances he found in his career (the two times he reached a GS final Lendl trashed him).

Nalbandian, Haas, Enqvist, Rios, Corretja or Mecir are really good examples of players that remained slamless and definitely should had been on that priviledge list. And there are certain players that had been unfair if they wouldn`t managed to win at least one GS title like Moya, Ferrero, Korda, Chang, Ivanisevic, Muster or Cash just to mention a few of them.

Even on these days where players find easier chances to win any GS (RG is not as slow as it used to be in the past or Wimbledon as fast either) you still see that there aren`t new individual names on those lists of GS winners. That is why I do still believe that winning any GS at least once in your career is not for anyone and is remarkable to see what certain players did or are doing on their careers.

BodyServe
12-10-2011, 10:20 AM
Don't often post but those 3 alone don't have the talent that Roger has in his little toe!

Don't post more please.

These guys have mental lapses, thats why and for Davydenko it's more a physical problem, sustaining good form and footwork in best of 5 is too much for him.

nalbyfan
12-10-2011, 11:32 AM
Nalby, Haas and Davy all have a fragile body. They were plagued by injured all along their career with several surgeries for Haas and Nalby. Davy had a big foot problem and a wrist problem who stopped him from playing during a long time

ossie
12-10-2011, 12:21 PM
same talent? there is like an ocean of difference in their levels thats why.

tennis2tennis
12-10-2011, 12:32 PM
http://i54.tinypic.com/2ni9r9x.jpg

abraxas21
12-10-2011, 01:24 PM
even though i love the guy, davy isn't quite as talented as haas or that prick nalbandian. his height and physical built doesn't help him. perhaps if he were a couple of inches higher he'd have developed greater volley skills and a bit more variety in his backcourt game.

still, you've got to wonder how come davy has 0 GS final while djokovic has 4 GS. it is clear to see that djokovic is a less talented and more defensively-oriented player than davydenko...

leng jai
12-10-2011, 01:28 PM
Davydenko has 0 slam finals

abraxas21
12-10-2011, 01:32 PM
sorry.. need to put that in my sig as a reminder

buzz
12-10-2011, 02:54 PM
They just didn't reach the same tennis level. Forehand is the main difference, most important shot in tennis.

Haelfix
12-10-2011, 03:04 PM
Davydenko is just a little too frail to really progress to that next level, he is the 2ks equivalent of Michael Chang. Great player, but just not quite good enough to beat the best and there was no random opening like there was in the 90s to sneak in.

Haas probably should have had a final or two, but injury and a lack of that special magic cost him.

Nalbandian definitely should have won some slams. The lack of a good serve and lack of physical preperation of course hurt his consistency in the 7 game slam format.

peRfect-Tennis
12-10-2011, 03:12 PM
Yeah I don't think you can put Davydenko in the same category of talent as Haas or Nalbandian. He's just a (or was a) fairly consistent pusher. But never a slam contender.

Haas has talent, but doesn't have the ability to stay injury free for a long enough period to win a slam. Nalbandian, probably should have won 1 considering he times it so well, but injury, poor mental fortitude cost him big time.

But realistically, none of them are close to Fed in terms of talent, none of them have an all court game that transfers well onto all 4 surfaces. The only one who isn't a million miles away would be Haas.

Haelfix
12-10-2011, 03:55 PM
I wouldnt call Denko a pusher. He was and still is, an excellent ballstriker.

His biggest problems was that he kept running into Federer during a large part of his peak years. Obviously that didn't help. In so far as tennis is concerned, his lack of an elite serve definitely hurt him. Also the fact that its very hard for him to generate his own pace. That led to a lot of grinding, and he invariably would run out of steam by the time the Qfs of slams were in play.

Sapeod
12-10-2011, 04:18 PM
Federer's talent >>>>> the talent of Haas, Davydenko, Nalbandian and Nadal added together.

philosophicalarf
12-10-2011, 04:53 PM
Davydenko hit the "next level" in the second half of 09: wins Hamburg and Umag back to back, struggles with injury for a bit (has to retire UO R4 vs Sod), returns in Asia winning KL and Shanghai, then wins WTF, then Doha start of 11.

During this stretch he beat Nadal, Federer, (peak) DelPot, Federer again, Soderling, Nadal again, Nadal yet again, Djokovic, Gonzo, Verdasco, Soderling, Monf, Gonzo and Ferrer.

Aus10 was his big chance - continuing this form, had Fed on the ropes in the QF, set up, gets the break ...... and loses 13 games in a row. For me, that basically speaks to a mental limit for him. Even at his career peak, in the best situation possible in a slam, he blew it.

He got the wrist injury soon after, and hasn't been the same since.


Assessing his "talent" on the grander scale? Much of his top level impact comes from his extraordinary matchup advantage over Nadal (4-0 outdoor hard, 2-1 indoor), and the fact he won 3 masters+WTF - outside the current top4, that's very rare. Still, his lack of impact at the slams is pretty telling.


Davydenko-Nadal Doha 2010:
http://youtu.be/wElC2tNJYjY

philosophicalarf
12-10-2011, 05:21 PM
As for Nalby, two stats says it all: outdoors he's 0-20 vs top4 since 2003, and career he's 12-37 versus top10.

Indoors of course it's totally different.

SetSampras
12-10-2011, 05:28 PM
Because you have only solved HALF the equation in tennis with having talent.. Why does Nalbandian have no slams? Why does Safin only have 2 slams? Why does Michael Stich only have one slam despite being one of the most talented players there was? Why does Muster only have one slam?

Why does Tsonga, Roddick,Murray, Ferrer etc.. only have 1 slam between all of them? Lack of mental toughness and ability to perform well on the big stage when the pressure is on.

There are many talented guys in tennis, but a very small portion of that crowd has both the mental toughness and ability

GSMnadal
12-10-2011, 05:47 PM
When oh when is MTF going to stop with this talent crap. Comparing greatness, ok, time traveling H2H, pushing it, but still acceptable.

But 'talent', some god gift every new born baby receives which determines who will be able to play some funky shots. Maybe even beat Fedal this one time somewhere in no man's land, because that's what talent is according to MTF, right? Usually those players have zero power, poor stamina, have lesser mental fortitude than Verdasco and are at best mediocre tennis players, but lets not focus on those small details.

Just stop it. We don't know how much is done on talent alone and how much every player has trained to come this far in their respective careers. For all we know you or me was the most talented player ever born, but we've never bothered to pick up a racket when we were young, so who knows? Or maybe it was some African guy who never even heard of the game tennis.

TBkeeper
12-10-2011, 06:05 PM
Davydenko choked so many times it's not even funny ...

selyoink
12-10-2011, 07:18 PM
Davydenko is just a little too frail to really progress to that next level, he is the 2ks equivalent of Michael Chang. Great player, but just not quite good enough to beat the best and there was no random opening like there was in the 90s to sneak in.

You've obviously never seen Davy play if you think he is a pusher. In his prime he was one of the most attacking players in the game.

leng jai
12-10-2011, 09:34 PM
You've obviously never seen Davy play if you think he is a pusher. In his prime he was one of the most attacking players in the game.

As a pure ball striker he was a genius but he just lacked that extra something most of the tie to really win big GS matches.

2003
12-10-2011, 11:19 PM
Im talking of just making finals here.

Heck, would people agree Haas and Nalbandian have the talent of Murray?

Even Murray, the biggest slam bottler in recent times, still has 2 more slam finals than Hass, Davy and Nalbandian.

And at a young age too. Hass, Davy and Nalby still have like 5 years on Murray. Thats another good 16-20 atempts to make more finals.

Topspindoctor
12-11-2011, 12:58 AM
The answer is simple: Fanbandian, Baldenko and Haas are vastly overrated and don't have the talent of Fedal. If they did, they'd win majors or at least reach major finals. They have been hyped by fanboys, but in reality they are not champion material.

HKz
12-14-2011, 07:13 AM
Injury, fitness, mental strength pretty much sums it up.

But I do have to say one thing, they also struggle with best of 5 matches because none of them have a huge reliable consistent weapon to end points. Sure you can say Nalbandian/Haas/Davydenko backhands are pure class, but how often do you see players do a 2-3 punch play ending with their backhands? It is much easier to just fire off a forehand winner even if you are known for your backhand like Novak. None of them have particularly big serves too which is needed to really win a slam, at least on the faster surfaces even if you are very talented and have an all-round game. You need those cheap, free points to take off the mental toll placed on you and to last physically in a match.

TBkeeper
12-14-2011, 10:26 AM
The answer is simple: Fanbandian, Baldenko and Haas are vastly overrated and don't have the talent of Fedal. If they did, they'd win majors or at least reach major finals. They have been hyped by fanboys, but in reality they are not champion material.

you know these FATBANDIAN AND BALDENKO have a WTF title and Nadal has only 1 FINAL :D :D :D

leng jai
12-14-2011, 11:48 AM
Injury, fitness, mental strength pretty much sums it up.

But I do have to say one thing, they also struggle with best of 5 matches because none of them have a huge reliable consistent weapon to end points. Sure you can say Nalbandian/Haas/Davydenko backhands are pure class, but how often do you see players do a 2-3 punch play ending with their backhands? It is much easier to just fire off a forehand winner even if you are known for your backhand like Novak. None of them have particularly big serves too which is needed to really win a slam, at least on the faster surfaces even if you are very talented and have an all-round game. You need those cheap, free points to take off the mental toll placed on you and to last physically in a match.

Having a big forehand is far more useful than a backhand. Good backhands are only useful for sexy tennis.

Sophocles
12-14-2011, 11:57 AM
The premiss is wrong. Neither Haas, Nalbandian, nor Davydenko is as talented as Federer OR Nadal.

Henry Chinaski
12-14-2011, 11:57 AM
dodgy forehands, dodgy second serves under pressure, dodgy brains, dodgy luck.

MariaV
12-14-2011, 12:08 PM
2003, could you at least in the thread title write the correct name HAAS, please. Don't let leng jai deceive you, Hass is not the correct spelling of his name. ;)

Sunset of Age
12-14-2011, 12:12 PM
2003, could you at least in the thread title write the correct name HAAS, please. Don't let leng jai deceive you, Hass is not the correct spelling of his name. ;)

Isn't that one of the major running gags round this forum?
I've seen one guy "Hasse" make some appearences over here as well. :spit:

Naudio Spanlatine
12-14-2011, 03:51 PM
Look everyone it all comes down to the mental part at the end, it doesnt matter how much talent you have, you can have the most AMAZING talent but if you cant back it up with a strong mental side than the talent part become useless:shrug:

stewietennis
12-15-2011, 01:22 AM
Tragedy hit Haas just as he was on the rise – he made some SF and F in 2001/2002 – then took a lot of time off because his parents were in an accident then he had shoulder surgery shortly after. He returned to the tour pretty much as he was supposed to be at his peak 26. But it would've taken a while to get back to playing form after a year off and surgery, which would make him about 28 which is pretty old in tennis years. Add to this, more injuries and it's not hard to see why Tommy didn't get to reach his potential.

2003
12-15-2011, 05:17 AM
The premiss is wrong. Neither Haas, Nalbandian, nor Davydenko is as talented as Federer OR Nadal.

I respectfully disagree.

Nalbandian is a notch below Federer, and more talented than Nadal.

At least in terms of shotmaking.

I do think though that in terms of footwork and positioning and speed, hes not as good as Nadal.

But he has every shot in his arsenal.

And hes given Nadal a few good hidings in his time.

Sophocles
12-15-2011, 10:33 AM
I respectfully disagree.

Nalbandian is a notch below Federer, and more talented than Nadal.

At least in terms of shotmaking.

I do think though that in terms of footwork and positioning and speed, hes not as good as Nadal.

But he has every shot in his arsenal.

And hes given Nadal a few good hidings in his time.

So what? Nadal's given Federer a few good hidings, and he's hardly as talented as Fed. Hewitt used to hammer Sampras. Nalbandian has great ball-striking ability but his backhand is no better than Nadal's forehand and his forehand is no better than peak Nadal's backhand. (Peak) Nadal's serve is harder to return than Nalbandian's, Nadal defends way better, & his volleying isx only a bit behind. Nalbandian has a better return, at least on the 2nd serve, that's about it.