More talented: Sebastien Grosjean or Richard Gasquet [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

More talented: Sebastien Grosjean or Richard Gasquet

Forehander
12-27-2011, 05:50 PM
Both have lethal weapons but fatal flaws:

Grosjean had magnificent footwork similar to Federer gliding style and most unique awesome forehand that can generate miracle like shots from insane positions, however he also possessed one of the worst of the worst backhand ever for a top 10 player. He possesses a great serve for his height can generate up to 217kmph thanks to his brilliant smooth service motion. He wasnt the world number one in junior singles/doubles and wimbledon semi finalist (2003, 2004) twice in a row for no reason, for he also possess a fantastic touch up the net combined with a good slice. Grosjean is a difficult player to play against, his versatility, counter punching and court coverage can make opponent make heaps of unforced errors at the same time hit myriad amount of winners thanks to his cannon forehand but because the horrid backhand is such an obvious weakness players who have played him a few times will eventually know how best to counter his game (tommy haas was a good example). His backhand was weak, but that actually wasnt his main weakness - His main weak was that he was a super mental midget with choking ability second to nobody.

Gasquet as we all know have a stunning one of the best ever one handed backhand. If therre is david nalbandians or marat safins two handed backhand, then theres richard gasquets one handed backhand, its that simple. However, while his respectable senior countryman Sebastien Grosjean Big John possessed one of the worst backhand on tour, Gasquet lol possess one of the worst of the worst of the worst forehand ever. His horrid forehand is somewhat of a tradeoff for having such a beautiful backhand, for without the gripping, his backhand will not be the same despite fantastic technique. Gripping combined with a slow non flowing preperation technique forces him to continuously play weak reverse top spin forehands which constantly lands short is the lethal blow to his game. The slow footspeed doesnt help either, it forces him to play weak defensive slices, and just further exposes the weakness on the forehand side. Despite his obvioux weakness though the guy is almost unstoppable once he is given a good day when he finally find some balls to play aggressive tennis and In that regards Grosjean and Gasquet are very similar.

So who do you think is more talented? I have seen both of them live quite many times and they both ooze with talent in their sport, but my personal vote goes to my favourite Sebaastien Grosjean.

tennishero
12-27-2011, 06:36 PM
gasquet

rocketassist
12-27-2011, 06:37 PM
Grosjean was an absolute genius and his backhand is no worse than most recent top 10ers.

asmazif
12-27-2011, 06:41 PM
Seb any day of the week.

(except Tues)

Ozone
12-27-2011, 07:04 PM
Gasquet in every phase of the game

Nathaliia
12-27-2011, 07:09 PM
Grosjean. I love them both though.

leng jai
12-27-2011, 09:05 PM
They're actually pretty similar players but I would give Grosjean the edge. Grosjean's forehand was an incredible shot and one of the most versatile ones you'll ever see. His ability to blast winners from anywhere was obscene. Besides the choking, his backhand was always exposed in big matches and could never hold up. Corretja pretty much dismantled his entire game via the backhand in their RG semi-final.

Gasquet is a slightly inferior player in most aspects but having an awesome single handed backhand always gets you noticed more.

Gagsquet
12-27-2011, 10:15 PM
Gasquet of course. This kid is more talented technically than Federer but he wastes all the genius because he is mentally, tactically, physically and psychologically a massive joke.
Grosjean is the best player cause only results matter.

hicdick
12-27-2011, 10:20 PM
This kid is more talented technically than Federer

:lol:

but yeah, talent-wise gasquet > grosjean.

Gagsquet
12-27-2011, 10:37 PM
:lol:

but yeah, talent-wise gasquet > grosjean.

Gasquet is more naturally talented than Federer. Hard to believe but that's true. However, in professional tennis, natural talent is just one of several factors in order to be successful. And Richard sucks big time in the others factors whereas Fed is quite excellent in all of them.

leng jai
12-27-2011, 10:51 PM
Gasquet is more naturally talented than Federer. Hard to believe but that's true. However, in professional tennis, natural talent is just one of several factors in order to be successful. And Richard sucks big time in the others factors whereas Fed is quite excellent in all of them.

Are you high? Gasquet lacks takent in the two most important shots in the game - serve and forehand. The only area of the game he is extremely gift in is the backhand. Federer is extremely gifted on serve, forehand, movement and effortlessness in his play.

Gagsquet
12-27-2011, 11:16 PM
Gasquet's serve is underrated. Pretty good shot overall. But his fragile shoulder prevent him from using the full capacity of this shot.
And talking about his forehand would be a very long story but in a nutshell his forehand was pretty good in his young years. Then he modified it (with Benhabiles) and the shot turned into a wreck. Naturally, it was a good shot and he proves it when he uses his attacking forehand (lethal weapon) but his defensive and "waiting-shot" forehand was definitely altered, it's not his natural shot. Nevertheless I agree that Federer is more gifted than Richard in the forehand side of course.
Movement is not a technical skill so irrelevant in my point.

leng jai
12-27-2011, 11:25 PM
Gasquet's serve is underrated. Pretty good shot overall. But his fragile shoulder prevent him from using the full capacity of this shot.
And talking about his forehand would be a very long story but in a nutshell his forehand was pretty good in his young years. Then he modified it (with Benhabiles) and the shot turned into a wreck. Naturally, it was a good shot and he proves it when he uses his attacking forehand (lethal weapon) but his defensive and "waiting-shot" forehand was definitely altered, it's not his natural shot. Nevertheless I agree that Federer is more gifted than Richard in the forehand side of course.
Movement is not a technical skill so irrelevant in my point.

So your argument is that Gasquet has an underrated serve vs Federer who has one of the greatest second serves ever behind Sampras. Attacking forehands that are good - 80% of the top 100 have that as well. The question is how good and how consistent. Gasquet's forehand is never consistently good and hes never dominated a match with it against a good player.

Movement is most definitely a technical skill in terms of agility - its not just about being fast. Federer in his prime was incredibly light on his feet which allowed him to adapt to most situations and rarely be out of position. Footwork is essential in tennis for your groundstrokes - its not irrelevant at all. How do you think Federer makes up for his backhand deficiencies - with his quick feet which allows him to run around the shot and hit a forehand.

rocketassist
12-27-2011, 11:40 PM
Grosjean's better at everything bar the backhand.

tommyg6
12-28-2011, 12:03 AM
I voted Grosjean. One of my favorite all time French players.

philosophicalarf
12-28-2011, 12:19 AM
Gasquet.

Grosjean was the better player though.

Dyraise
12-28-2011, 12:23 AM
Gasquet's serve is underrated. Pretty good shot overall. But his fragile shoulder prevent him from using the full capacity of this shot.
And talking about his forehand would be a very long story but in a nutshell his forehand was pretty good in his young years. Then he modified it (with Benhabiles) and the shot turned into a wreck. Naturally, it was a good shot and he proves it when he uses his attacking forehand (lethal weapon) but his defensive and "waiting-shot" forehand was definitely altered, it's not his natural shot. Nevertheless I agree that Federer is more gifted than Richard in the forehand side of course.
Movement is not a technical skill so irrelevant in my point.
:help::help::help:

Mystique
12-28-2011, 02:35 AM
Grosjean by a country mile. Gasquet is overrated.

Saberq
12-28-2011, 03:34 AM
Gasquet is more naturally talented than Federer. Hard to believe but that's true. However, in professional tennis, natural talent is just one of several factors in order to be successful. And Richard sucks big time in the others factors whereas Fed is quite excellent in all of them.

:haha: :haha: :haha:

I dont know who is a bigger mug you or ossie ................:wavey:

SaFed2005
12-28-2011, 03:57 AM
Two of my favorite players! I feel that overall Grosjean was more talented. He had a better serve and a much better forehand = two of the most important shots in tennis. I also feel that Grosjean had the better all around game. As amazing as Gasquet is playing from 20 feet behind the baseline is not going to get you anywhere too often. He seems to need way too much preparation time to his his shots. Even his amazing BH, he needs a lot of time to actually hit them.

rocketassist
12-28-2011, 04:01 AM
:help::help::help:

He's right.

Movement isn't a tennis talent. It's an athletic trait.

leng jai
12-28-2011, 04:27 AM
He's right.

Movement isn't a tennis talent. It's an athletic trait.

Tennis related body position and footwork isn't an athletic trait.

fast_clay
12-28-2011, 04:40 AM
if you take court sense and overall shotmaking into account, you'd go with grosjean... grosjean actually converted his talent into results to the max pretty much...

what makes this choice reasonably hard is the fact that gasquet's talent is actively being used not to overcome his opponent, but to overcome several glaring technical deficiencies in his own game - most notably his forehand which belongs in another age... what a waste of talent...

Tennis related body position and footwork isn't an athletic trait.

yes... spacial awareness (shape around contact) is definitely not an athletic trait... and more a tennis specific (or instrument based sport) talent...

initial reaction and finding your way to that position is more athletic...

green25814
12-28-2011, 04:54 AM
Grosjean by a country mile

Gasquet has a pretty backhand and fuck all else

Mystique
12-28-2011, 05:48 AM
Gasquet of course. This kid is more talented technically than Federer but he wastes all the genius because he is mentally, tactically, physically and psychologically a massive joke.
Grosjean is the best player cause only results matter.

WTF are you smoking? Gasquet is a mental midget who is overrated by most people. He has a flashy backhand (I agree, pure joy to see that in full flight) but pretty much all else sucks most of the time.
Just coz he can run around hitting a few good looking single handers doesnt mean he is as talented as people make out of him. And dont even compare him with a guy like Federer. Federer can do more things with a tennis ball than that "kid" can dream of.

Grosjean is not only a more complete player (and even more fun to watch), he has had better results inspite of being a mental midget himself. He is better tennis player and thats the end of it.

n8
12-28-2011, 06:59 AM
Gasquet.

Grosjean was the better player though.

Agreed. I believe results at a young age are a good measure of talent and Gasquet was one of the best juniors ever. In 2002 he won 2 boys' Grand Slams and was junior world number one. He was still young enough to play juniors in 2004. Also in 2002 he ranked in the top 200 at 16 years and 1 month. Back then a lot of people thought he would have a better career than Nadal (also a prodigy of course).

Imperfect Angel
12-28-2011, 07:22 AM
Game wise, arguably Richard but physically, Sebastian hands down.:p

Forehander
12-28-2011, 07:35 AM
Gasquet's serve is underrated. Pretty good shot overall. But his fragile shoulder prevent him from using the full capacity of this shot.
And talking about his forehand would be a very long story but in a nutshell his forehand was pretty good in his young years. Then he modified it (with Benhabiles) and the shot turned into a wreck. Naturally, it was a good shot and he proves it when he uses his attacking forehand (lethal weapon) but his defensive and "waiting-shot" forehand was definitely altered, it's not his natural shot. Nevertheless I agree that Federer is more gifted than Richard in the forehand side of course.
Movement is not a technical skill so irrelevant in my point.

There is definitely technical skill involved when we talk about movement in tennis. Gasquet when watching live is very impressive and is clearly one of the most talented by miles, but he is no Federer, who seems to be on another planet when stepping onto the tennis court wielding a tennis racquet.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 07:57 AM
Movement is an athletic skill. Rocketassist is right. Or at least it's 90% physical and 10% technical.
Roger is an awesome athlete, that's why his movement is so good. Almost zero technical skill involved at all.
It's all about being fast and agile. Both physical traits.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 08:02 AM
He is better tennis player and thats the end of it.

You are right. But Gasquet was a better junior by a country mile. Then he fucked it up because natural talent is not enough in professional tennis and Gasquet sucks in all the others factors whereas Fed excels in all of them.

nalbyfan
12-28-2011, 08:12 AM
Gasquet is much better than Grosjean

Puschkin
12-28-2011, 08:33 AM
Two of my favorite players! I feel that overall Grosjean was more talented. He had a better serve
I don't think so. Richard's serve is quite versatile and if he is not hampered by shoulder or ellbow-problems, he gets quite some free points from it, I don't remember that from Séb.

Action Jackson
12-28-2011, 10:01 AM
Grosjean

Fujee
12-28-2011, 10:50 AM
Grosjean, his game was a joy to watch. Underrated player

Nixer
12-28-2011, 11:17 AM
You are right. But Gasquet was a better junior by a country mile. Then he fucked it up because natural talent is not enough in professional tennis and Gasquet sucks in all the others factors whereas Fed excels in all of them.

Grosjean was #1 junior in singles and doubles.. how is Gasquet better in that? :confused:

n8
12-28-2011, 11:42 AM
Grosjean was #1 junior in singles and doubles.. how is Gasquet better in that? :confused:

Gasquet ranked number one as a 16 year old, Grosjean as an 18 year old. Gasquet won 2 boys' Grand Slams while Grosjean didn't do too well in the very biggest boys' events.

MariaV
12-28-2011, 11:56 AM
Gasquet. :)

rocketassist
12-28-2011, 02:15 PM
I love Seb threads as it gives me an excuse to show this again:

Qejr9i0oKd8

This >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything in 2011

Saberq
12-28-2011, 03:31 PM
I love Seb threads as it gives me an excuse to show this again:

Qejr9i0oKd8

This >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything in 2011

you are right those two guys would have beaten Novak at AO open this year :wavey:

Orka_n
12-28-2011, 04:01 PM
I like Gasquet but to be perfectly honest, I also think many people here are overestimating him. He was a talented junior but then again many are. As the years went on he just couldn't keep up with the others despite having that beautiful backhand. Actually, I think that's just it - the LOOK of that particular shot have made people expect perhaps too much from Gasquet.

Seb was a more complete player and his forehand was an ever bigger weapon than Richard's BH. Who knows exactly which one of them was the bigger talent but if I was a player myself, I know I'd be more afraid of Grosjean.

you are right those two guys would have beaten Novak at AO open this year :wavey::scratch: How can you be so sure they wouldn't? Pointless arrogance.

Mateya
12-28-2011, 04:31 PM
Grosjean.
Hadn't he be mentaly and physicly limited, he would have at least 2 slams. Great serve for his size, solid backhand and one of the best forehands the game has ever seen.

When on fire, that forehand was almost making me wet. ;)
Thank god we still have this youtube highlights.

rocketassist
12-28-2011, 04:34 PM
you are right those two guys would have beaten Novak at AO open this year :wavey:

Pointless bait.

yuri27
12-28-2011, 05:01 PM
When at his best, Gasquet can play at a level Grosjean can only dream of playing.
Could you even picture Grosjean throwing something like 40 winners - 6 UEs in 2 sets and half against a guy like Murray on grass?? Not me anyway.

Saberq
12-28-2011, 05:12 PM
When at his best, Gasquet can play at a level Grosjean can only dream of playing.
Could you even picture Grosjean throwing something like 40 winners - 6 UEs in 2 sets and half against a guy like Murray on grass?? Not me anyway.

you're right Murray is a monster on grass :facepalm:

yuri27
12-28-2011, 05:20 PM
you're right Murray is a monster on grass :facepalm:

He is better than any of the player Grosjean ever beat on grass, that's for sure!

Saberq
12-28-2011, 05:29 PM
He is better than any of the player Grosjean ever beat on grass, that's for sure!

I cant say for sure

RafaNadal2012!!!
12-28-2011, 05:34 PM
Sebastien Grosjean, set off Rafa at French. That takes talent.

rocketassist
12-28-2011, 05:35 PM
He is better than any of the player Grosjean ever beat on grass, that's for sure!

Hewitt and Henman? :confused:

HKz
12-28-2011, 06:28 PM
Gasquet is more naturally talented than Federer. Hard to believe but that's true. However, in professional tennis, natural talent is just one of several factors in order to be successful. And Richard sucks big time in the others factors whereas Fed is quite excellent in all of them.

Not really. Gasquet's movement is pretty poor, his forehand is flawed and his serve is mediocre. Yes, he can come up with insane winners and has some nice touch, but still doesn't mean anything as all that talk was hype when he was a teenager and people carried it into his 20s.

Of course, Gasquet is still talented, certainly more talented than a good portion of the top 100, but I've always thought when the tennis world tried to hype Richard by saying he was more talented naturally than Federer, that it was all just talk. Plus, when they meet, Federer normally shows who has the better backhand ;)

Between the two, I would have to say Grosjean by far. He was incredible at his best, had a pounding forehand, poor but still talented backhand, huge serve and great touch. He did all this being 4 inches shorter than Gasquet too.

Just look at this match for example Qejr9i0oKd8

Sombrerero loco
12-28-2011, 06:50 PM
gasquet is more talented but i prefer grosjean so much :)

Ouragan
12-28-2011, 08:55 PM
Gasquet.

Grosjean was the better player though.

Great reply this.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 09:23 PM
Not really. Gasquet's movement is pretty poor, his forehand is flawed and his serve is mediocre.

Movement is a physical trait not technical.
His forehand is not good yes.
His serve is not mediocre, it's a pretty good shot overall.

There is no debate between Seb and Richard. Gasquet is more talented. And, on the other hand, Grosjean is the better player.

leng jai
12-28-2011, 09:29 PM
Movement is a physical trait not technical.
His forehand is not good yes.
His serve is not mediocre, it's a pretty good shot overall.

There is no debate between Seb and Richard. Gasquet is more talented. And, on the other hand, Grosjean is the better player.

Why do you keep repeating false statements? By your logic Usain Bolt would have immaculate court movement and also have his feet in the correct position for every shot.

HKz
12-28-2011, 09:32 PM
Movement is a physical trait not technical.
His forehand is not good yes.
His serve is not mediocre, it's a pretty good shot overall.

There is no debate between Seb and Richard. Gasquet is more talented. And, on the other hand, Grosjean is the better player.

Lol? Movement in general is a physical trait, but it takes talent to have the right footwork as you have to be able to bounce at the right time and how to position yourself to hit the ball in the best possible spot. So, you're wrong, much of it has to do with talent too. Gasquet so often gets tangled up with his footwork.

Gasquet has even pointed out himself that he is most ashamed with his serve. His serve is really crappy. As pointed out several times, Grosjean had an amazing serve and he was 4 inches shorter than Richard. He doesn't have a terrible serve, but to say it is more than mediocre is a joke.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 09:37 PM
You don't have a clue, Gasquet's serve is a good shot. Ask to Puschkin.

@Leng jai Bolt wouldn't have immaculate court movement because he is not agile. Movement in tennis is a subtle mix between being fast and being agile. Both physical traits.

leng jai
12-28-2011, 09:46 PM
You are still missing the point. Just because you are agile doesn't mean you know how to position your body. The movements for each type of sport are completely different. Are deliberately being daft?

Puschkin
12-28-2011, 09:49 PM
Gasquet has even pointed out himself that he is most ashamed with his serve.
:eek: I never heard that. Working on it to improve it doesn't imply being "ashamed" of the status quo.

His serve is really crappy.

Grosjean had an amazing serve.

Wrong on both occasions.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 10:08 PM
You are still missing the point. Just because you are agile doesn't mean you know how to position your body. The movements for each type of sport are completely different. Are deliberately being daft?

Knowing how to position your body is not an innate gift. You learned it in the tennis school and the most agile and fast tennis players are able to do it to the perfection.

leng jai
12-28-2011, 10:13 PM
Knowing how to position your body is not an innate gift. You learned it in the tennis school and the most agile and fast tennis players are able to do it to the perfection.

Nothing is an innate gift by your definition. No one is born with the knowledge on what trajectory they need to swing the racket at for each shot. Just because you are agile doesn't automatically mean you can immaculately position yourself for shots. What kind of logic is that? It doesn't matter how fast you do it if its wrong.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 10:15 PM
Everything is an innate gift by your definition. Even the toss coin (all about how you throw the coin)

leng jai
12-28-2011, 10:25 PM
Nice deflection. You still haven't provided any evidence that movement in tennis is purely dictated by how fast and agile you are without any technical requirements. Please.

Saberq
12-28-2011, 10:25 PM
who cares anyway?

leng jai
12-28-2011, 10:29 PM
who cares anyway?

Not gloryhunters thats for sure.

Gagsquet
12-28-2011, 10:59 PM
Nice deflection. You still haven't provided any evidence that movement in tennis is purely dictated by how fast and agile you are without any technical requirements. Please.

Your only argument is to say that positioning your feet just before hitting a shot is a technical skill.
But it's not a movement skill anymore, it's an extended shot making skill.

green25814
12-29-2011, 12:09 AM
Movement in tennis is 100% a talent.

GlennMirnyi
12-29-2011, 12:10 AM
Grosjean had a forehand. And a very good one at that. So it's quite obvious.

fast_clay
12-29-2011, 01:40 AM
Grosjean had a forehand. And a very good one at that. So it's quite obvious.

:worship: :bowdown::bowdown:

paseo
12-29-2011, 02:04 AM
WTF? GlennMirnyi un-banned? :eek:

Arakasi
12-29-2011, 02:13 AM
Glenn is back :hearts:

HKz
12-29-2011, 03:59 AM
:eek: I never heard that. Working on it to improve it doesn't imply being "ashamed" of the status quo.





Wrong on both occasions.

You gotta be shitting me. Grosjean had an amazing serve for his height. He used to be absolutely bomb that ball.

As for the video, go ahead search for "atp worst shots." Gasquet will tell you, it is his serve. If his forehand is bad and he considers his serve his worst shot, oh gosh.

Grosjean had a forehand. And a very good one at that. So it's quite obvious.

what the hell?