Gasquet and Nadal [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Gasquet and Nadal

Rex
06-18-2005, 07:10 PM
Does anyone think that if both of these talented players carried on playing hte way they do, that maybe Gasquet could turn out to be better than Nadal. Im taliking like in their mid-20s not now. I mena Gasquet has a game which allows him to play great tennis on all surfaces, whereas nadal plays his best tennis on clay.

Maybe, im just lookin at something thats not there, but hey! It is a possibility.

NATAS81
06-18-2005, 07:13 PM
Yeah, Gasquet is definitely a contender at all tourneys now.

This tournament here proved it. The 10tele.com Open.

I haven't seen him on grass, but he really shined.

Tomorrow is a big step in his development, and we will learn alot about the young phenom.

The Dent and Mirnyi wins in straight sets are incredible at his age.

Definitely ahead of Rafa on the grass learning curve.

We haven't seen alot from Nadal on grass either.

They both have alot of time to grow and conform their games to play their best on the surface.

Wimbledon will be the first big step for Nadal, I'm not expecting anything past round three for him.

He doesn't have the serve to compete on grass and the ball bounces faster and higher at Wimbledon where the giants will feast on his ground game.

delsa
06-18-2005, 07:17 PM
:eek: Oh no! Not a thread like this! That's just what i feared might happen... :rolleyes:
Let them grow up and stay spectators of their development...Don't try to guess or imagine anything...

vincayou
06-18-2005, 07:21 PM
Maybe Nadal will surprise us all (I wouldn't be surprised), who knows.

After all, Hewitt has won Wimbledon. ;)

Leo
06-18-2005, 07:22 PM
I think Gasquet will develop into a better all-court player, but it's still early for both.

Auscon
06-18-2005, 07:29 PM
hard to say

whats easier to say is that Guccione will trump both guys in the allcourt dept :)

Scotso
06-18-2005, 07:30 PM
:yawn:

delsa
06-18-2005, 07:33 PM
hard to say

whats easier to say is that Guccione will trump both guys in the allcourt dept :)
Good conclusion. Let's stop it here.

K-Dog
06-18-2005, 07:35 PM
Gasquet has more shots and more weapons than Nadal. Gasquet has to get into better shape and learn like Roger how to use all his weapons effectively. Nadal is a great backcourt player, but his serve, volleys, and variety need to be improved to win on something besides clay!!

marifline
06-18-2005, 08:38 PM
Richard made a final on every surface, hard, clay and grass where he won...the way he won today was just amazing...nobody expected he wins so easily... I thing he can be compare to Federer, a nesthetic game , an excellent technique and an " intelligence of the game" ( dunno if this phrase exists in english ) He just need time to improve his stamina and the resulats will come to prove his talent and his potential. No doubt he will enter the top 10 soon.
Nadal just made results on clay and hard...we just have no test match to see how he's doing on grass... ( I don't thing Halle's one was an example) But he has different weapons..his stamina, his determination , tremendous mental strenght who can help him in every situation... They are youg both so they don't have showed all they were able to do yet..."Laissons du temps au temps" well's see

joeb_uk
06-18-2005, 09:03 PM
I think gasquet will be a great player on EVERY surface, although i think nadal will be good on hard as well as clay (i am not so sure, about grass and the other faster surfaces though).

NYCtennisfan
06-18-2005, 09:40 PM
Maybe, maybe not. I do know that Gasquet has a game made for all surfaces and is quite pleasing to watch.

NicoFan
06-18-2005, 09:47 PM
I was thinking the same thing NYCtennisfan.

Right now Rafa is much better than Gasquet on clay. Obviously Gasquet has just done well on grass and I doubt Rafa will do well on it at all. Rafa is starting to get a hardcourt game - looked good to me in Miami - but his serve will hold him back on hardcourts for awhile. I think this summer will be exciting watching how the both of them do on the hardcourts.

If both stay focused and don't have a lot of injuries, I believe we'll see a great rivalry between the two in a couple of years. I personally am not a big fan of Gasquet - but the game comes first for me, and a rivalry between these two would be awesome of tennis.

I'm hoping Gasquet comes up quickly because how thrilling will it be to have Roger, Andy, Rafa, Richard, Lleyton, Safin all battling it out major tournament after major tournament. Its all good....

NicoFan
06-18-2005, 09:50 PM
Gasquet has more shots and more weapons than Nadal. Gasquet has to get into better shape and learn like Roger how to use all his weapons effectively. Nadal is a great backcourt player, but his serve, volleys, and variety need to be improved to win on something besides clay!!

And forgot to say but your post reminded me - the only thing holding Gasquet back right now is his conditioning. I'm not being mean, I want him to do well. But his fitness is truly horrid, and will hurt him on hardcourts. He really needs to get a good fitness coach.

NYCtennisfan
06-18-2005, 10:19 PM
I'm hoping Gasquet comes up quickly because how thrilling will it be to have Roger, Andy, Rafa, Richard, Lleyton, Safin all battling it out major tournament after major tournament. Its all good....

NicoFan, I don't think we are that far away:) BTW, where are you posting from?

Chloe le Bopper
06-18-2005, 10:25 PM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors :p, grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

NicoFan
06-18-2005, 11:06 PM
NicoFan, I don't think we are that far away:) BTW, where are you posting from?

Hey - Will send you a private message.

savesthedizzle
06-19-2005, 01:42 AM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors :p, grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

*passes over plate of cookies*

chocolate chip okay?

LaTenista
06-19-2005, 02:40 AM
Nadal can play on grass - he made to SFs in Wimby junior in 2002, 2003 he beat Ancic (last man to defeat Federer on grass) and made it to 3rd round - equaling Becker's record as the only 17 year olds to do that. Two years away from grass has made him rusty maybe but I'm not willing to consider writing off his previous grass results as flukes or just plain luck. I will agree indoor hard seems to be Rafa's biggest challenge. The only thing I can say about his play on carpet was he was able to win a crucial rubber against Stepanek on the surface in the Czech Republic during DC 2004 1st round. From a very early age (about 10) Moya & co have been saying he's destined to do great things in the game. In this respect he is very much like Federer, whom everyone declared was going to be one of the best players ever after he beat Pete Sampras at Wimby. The more I watch Nadal's matches, the more impressed I get with the young man. With Rafa, all things are possible.

Haven't been following Gasquet that long, but good results on clay (Monte Carlo), indoor hard (Metz), and now grass (Nottingham) by his 19th birthday herald some attention in my book. What about carpet?

Right now, if Gasquet and Nadal meet in the 3rd round of Wimbledon I would say Gasquet has the technical advantage and Nadal the mental advantage. When Gasquet's nervous it seems to affect his playing more, like against Agassi in Rome. Nadal rises to the occasion in big matches, like Federer at RG. Nadal sees any match against Gasquet as a big match, so much so he refused to withdraw from a match against him even though he had a stress fracture and still ended up beating him!

Long term I think it is too soon to tell as they are both barely 19 years old. They both have various aspects of their games that need improvement. I wonder if this was what it was like when Sampras and Agassi were winning their first titles and slams. I'm just excited to see their careers unfold.

silverwhite
06-19-2005, 03:10 AM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors :p, grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

I didn't think you were serious until I read your second paragraph. :eek:

silverwhite
06-19-2005, 03:12 AM
Right now, if Gasquet and Nadal meet in the 3rd round of Wimbledon I would say Gasquet has the technical advantage and Nadal the mental advantage. When Gasquet's nervous it seems to affect his playing more, like against Agassi in Rome. Nadal rises to the occasion in big matches, like Federer at RG. Nadal sees any match against Gasquet as a big match, so much so he refused to withdraw from a match against him even though he had a stress fracture and still ended up beating him!


Yes, which is why I think Nadal will win if the match happens. People are really underestimating him because of that one Halle match.

Chloe le Bopper
06-19-2005, 03:29 AM
Yes, which is why I think Nadal will win if the match happens. People are really underestimating him because of that one Halle match.
They also underestimate him because of the ESP beside his name and the fact that he's awfully good on clay - a surface which doesn't count.

Regardless, I don't imagine that we'll see a repeat of the beat down Nadal laid out on Gasquet at RG. If he wins he'll probably have to eek it out, and I won't be putting any pretend money on him to do so.

NYCtennisfan
06-19-2005, 03:56 AM
I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

Giving Chloe a big hero cookie...:)

Chloe le Bopper
06-19-2005, 03:58 AM
:hearts:

Fedex
06-19-2005, 04:01 AM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors :p, grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.
I agree

rommel99
06-19-2005, 04:19 AM
right now we can only speculate.. but if you look at history if the better shotmaker acually matures then he would dominate more.. its up to gasquet definitely..

Lourdes
06-19-2005, 04:46 AM
Given time both will get better, and as of right now, Nadal is the sole slam winner so I'll stay in his corner because he seems to be going along a fine line.

World Beater
06-19-2005, 05:33 AM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors :p, grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

acck...thats a safe answer, hedging your bets...be a little more adventurous! :devil:

Clara Bow
06-19-2005, 06:34 AM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors , grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

Tosses a bag of Milanos through the wonder that is the internet.

I do think that Gasquet will soon become a strong player on all surfaces. (Although must say that really feel like this process is already well in motion.)

That stated, I do not think that Nadal's game is done developing at all. So far he has been focusing mostly on clay. But as he works more on adapting his game to other surfaces such as grass (and I would have to think getting used to adjusting his grip for the surfaces) he will indeed improve in those areas.

I myself would be pleased as punch if these two fellows formed a good competative rivalry in the coming years. I would love to see a good rivaly a'la Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe that featured two different players with real differences in their game.

DDrago2
06-19-2005, 10:47 AM
Does anyone think that if both of these talented players carried on playing hte way they do, that maybe Gasquet could turn out to be better than Nadal. Im taliking like in their mid-20s not now. I mena Gasquet has a game which allows him to play great tennis on all surfaces, whereas nadal plays his best tennis on clay.


I'v been thinking the same thing recently. I also feel that Gasquet will turn out to be a more dangerous player than Nadal. I'm not sure that Gasquet will ever have Nadals determination, which would allow him to win more titles than him, but I guess he will be feared more than Nadal, except maby on clay.

Deivid23
06-19-2005, 11:23 AM
Nadal can play on grass - he made to SFs in Wimby junior in 2002, 2003 he beat Ancic (last man to defeat Federer on grass) and made it to 3rd round - equaling Becker's record as the only 17 year olds to do that. Two years away from grass has made him rusty maybe but I'm not willing to consider writing off his previous grass results as flukes or just plain luck. I will agree indoor hard seems to be Rafa's biggest challenge. The only thing I can say about his play on carpet was he was able to win a crucial rubber against Stepanek on the surface in the Czech Republic during DC 2004 1st round. From a very early age (about 10) Moya & co have been saying he's destined to do great things in the game. In this respect he is very much like Federer, whom everyone declared was going to be one of the best players ever after he beat Pete Sampras at Wimby. The more I watch Nadal's matches, the more impressed I get with the young man. With Rafa, all things are possible.

It was long time ago I didn´t read such an accurate post about Rafa like this (I have a very similar opinion, but I don´t like to get too serious here :) ). You definetely know Nadal and that may be surprising but not many people around do ;)

nermo
06-19-2005, 06:44 PM
Regardless, I don't imagine that we'll see a repeat of the beat down Nadal laid out on Gasquet at RG. If he wins he'll probably have to eek it out, posted by Chloe

First thing's first..Chloe, u really deserve a big plate of cookies for your serious replies in here so far ;)

well, honestly yes..i don't think we'll see a repetition of RG match ,but still both have a looong way to go..i think its too early and also too unfair to compare them at their beginning steps if we can say so..Gasquet is still has alot to go through in mental stability ..he becomes nervous easily and sometimes i don't think he knows the value of his shots at a specific big moments..
Nadal still has a way to go with his serve, backhands, has to be more offensive or have some more offensive ideas
Both 'll be affected by lots of things as time unfolds for them..so shortly..
its too early to judge the future of a beginner :angel:

Ash86
09-29-2012, 01:05 PM
Gasquet is currently fairly good on all surfaces, or so it seems. Nadal is currently sublime on one, not bad on another (hard), and seems to be behind Gasquet on the others (anything indoors :p, grass).

Given time I believe that Nadal will be a contender everywhere. Given time, Gasquet will probably be more than just "fairly good" everywhere.

I'd like a hero cookie for my serious reply on this matter.

Bravo for a great prediction so early in their careers! :)

Sanya
09-29-2012, 01:18 PM
Back then I believed Richie would win more. :facepalm:

Certinfy
09-29-2012, 01:41 PM
Gasquet talented? :haha:

Even Gulbis is more talented.

Forehander
09-29-2012, 02:37 PM
lolz

Forehander
09-29-2012, 02:39 PM
Gasquet talented? :haha:

Even Gulbis is more talented.

Please.. name anyone but Gulbis...

tennishero
09-29-2012, 02:44 PM
:haha:

sexybeast
09-29-2012, 03:26 PM
People asked me why I ranked Gasquet as nr1 on my "overrated list", here is why!

The idea that Gasquet has the weapons to somehow be one of the best in the world, contender with Nadal, Djokovic and Federer is absurd. Just like the idea that Gasquet had more potential or was more talented than Nadal, you guys have no idea what you are talking about.

Orange Wombat
09-29-2012, 04:35 PM
Gasquet's game is beautiful, that it all. It lacks the efficiency of Nadal. Average serve, floaty forehand, standing way far too back, of course he does not have the weapons to dominate like Nadal. A decent mentality and consistency have allowed him to become a good top 20 player, but the idea of him dominating is silly.

GOATsol
09-29-2012, 04:36 PM
This thread :haha:

Thanks for bumping!

Orange Wombat
09-29-2012, 04:38 PM
Oh :stupid: I didn't realize that most of the posts were from 2005. Either way:haha:

GOATsol
09-29-2012, 04:51 PM
Oh :stupid: I didn't realize that most of the posts were from 2005. Either way:haha:
The fact that it's from 2005 makes it hilarious.

TBkeeper
09-29-2012, 05:43 PM
JUST as i saw the thread
i was something like
:spit: what in common have these two names and why are they in the same sentence :D
Here's the answer some 2005 opinions thanks for the bump guys :superlol:

abraxas21
09-29-2012, 05:46 PM
the only similarities between these two is that they both play from meters behind the baseline, they're both overrated and both have consumed stuff - not gonna refer to what exactly.

GSMnadal
09-29-2012, 05:54 PM
Poor Nadal has been underrated since he started, and they still haven't learned.

out_grinder
09-29-2012, 06:19 PM
Gasquet doesn't even have a backhand as good as Nadal's

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
09-29-2012, 07:34 PM
gasquet had more potential than nadal (nadal also had great potential)

nadal works harder than anyone in history

thats why nadal is an all time great

he put the effort in

LeChuck
09-29-2012, 09:42 PM
After their entertaining Monte-Carlo semi-final in 2005, I remember many people hyping up their 3rd round showdown at RG a month later. However Nadal won that glamour match so easily and Gasquet struggled to cope with the expectations placed on him by his home fans and media.

They were on course to meet in the 3rd round at Wimbledon that year as well, but Nadal lost to Muller in the 2nd round. Given that Nadal was raw and very much a work in progress on grass at the time, that may have been Gasquet's best opportunity to score a victory over Nadal. In that tournament his tank in the 3rd set after losing the first two sets of his 4th round match against Nalbandian was pretty pathetic.

TigerTim
09-29-2012, 09:52 PM
Gasquet doesn't even have a backhand as good as Nadal's

Agreed, Gasquet's backhand is the most overrated shot in tennis history.

Ash86
09-29-2012, 10:06 PM
The difference between Nadal and Gasquet - one is a more complete player 7 years on, the other has moved backwards. Nadal has always talked about his desire to improve - to improve his volleys, his BH, his serve, be more aggressive etc. From his interviews in 2005 to those now, that is the one thing he constantly says (in fact at Wimbledon 2005 he said that he knew he wasn't ready for Wimbledon yet but he wanted to be in a few years and would be working on all the areas he needed to to be more competitive on grass...). He wants to feel himself becoming a better player and will always be working on certain things in practice.

I can't recall any Gasquet interview where he's shown half that drive. It's like he's always been told he's a great player, has an amazing backhand and then was shocked by not becoming a consistent Masters/slam contender straight away. He had the raw skills to do FAR better than he has done. And I say this as a Gasquet fan. Tennis involves natural talent but also your character and mental strength really matter. Nadal has always worked harder, maybe because he had to, and has clearly been mentally stronger from the start. When they played in Petit As as juniors I think most expected Gasquet to do more and even in 2005 it was thought they would have a good rivalry. At the end of 2012, Gasquet is yet to get a win on the ATP tour against Nadal, yet to win a Masters and his best slam result was back in 2007...

grahampros
09-29-2012, 10:30 PM
ROTF, LMAO. :haha. It's not even a valid question.

GSMnadal
09-29-2012, 10:31 PM
ROTF, LMAO. :haha. It's not even a valid question.

It was back then :shrug:

Sanya
09-29-2012, 10:47 PM
Richie was better player in 2005 than now.

Yep, this comparison in 2012 looks funny, but what a short memory some people have - Gasquet appeared on the stage with solid, fresh tennis and few great runs and victories unlike some current "future tops" who has nothing behind them.

grahampros
09-29-2012, 10:50 PM
Richie was better player in 2005 than now.

Yep, this comparison in 2012 looks funny, but what a short memory some people have - Gasquet appeared on the stage with solid, fresh tennis and few great runs and victories unlike some current "future tops" who has nothing behind them.

7 YEARS does not qualify as short memory. Don't get why someone dredged up such an old thread.

Sanya
09-29-2012, 10:56 PM
I meant that 7 years ago it was nothing wrong with this question, especially before Rafa took RG. Now we all discuss who will win more - Raonic, Tomic, maybe Harrison. And imagine that one of them will win 7-10 GS and others - zero. It will be in years ridiculous to assume that different people had different opinions, but now it`s not obvious at all. As it wasn`t 7 years ago.

Orange Wombat
09-29-2012, 11:01 PM
What is wrong with Gasquet's career now? Nothing. He has had a good year- 4th round at all the slams.

Ash86
09-29-2012, 11:08 PM
7 YEARS does not qualify as short memory. Don't get why someone dredged up such an old thread.

I was simply congratulating someone who made a great prediction - always tough to do. Back then, with Nadal having won just one RG, it was good insight to say that Nadal would improve and have success on all surfaces whilst Gasquet would only be mediocre on all of them...

In a few years I'm sure people will look at who was correct in the Tomic/Raonic/Harrison predictions. Personally think none of them will be megastars and we'll have more of a late 90s/early 00s scenarios with a mixed bag of slam winners.

Slasher1985
09-29-2012, 11:11 PM
In a few years I'm sure people will look at who was correct in the Tomic/Raonic/Harrison predictions. Personally think none of them will be megastars and we'll have more of a late 90s/early 00s scenarios with a mixed bag of slam winners.

And a lot of short-term number 1 ranked players.

IOFH
09-30-2012, 12:02 AM
What is wrong with Gasquet's career now? Nothing. He has had a good year- 4th round at all the slams.

Because apparently according to MTF, if you're not a multiple slam winner, you've failed at life.

:worship: at bumping 7 year old threads to laugh at the predictions though.

Topspindoctor
09-30-2012, 01:39 AM
Gasquet has more shots and more weapons than Nadal. Gasquet has to get into better shape and learn like Roger how to use all his weapons effectively. Nadal is a great backcourt player, but his serve, volleys, and variety need to be improved to win on something besides clay!!

:superlol:

How hilarious this post seems right now. Drugsquet remained a clown throughout what passes for his "career" while Nadal won 11 slams and became a legend and an all time great. Just shows how much MTF "experts" know about this game. A limited mug like Drugsquet could never ever surpass a monster like Nadal. End of story.

bleu_cheese
09-30-2012, 02:24 AM
Who's in a final this week, and who's not? I rest my case.

GOATsol
09-30-2012, 02:25 AM
Who's in a final this week, and who's not? I rest my case.
:worship:

Han Solo
09-30-2012, 02:31 AM
Ah the benefit of hindsight. Of course those posts from 2005 seem off NOW. But back then many very knowledgeable tennis pundits were predicting Gasquet could/would win majors...

Topspindoctor
09-30-2012, 02:33 AM
Ah the benefit of hindsight. Of course those posts from 2005 seem off NOW. But back then many very knowledgeable tennis pundits were predicting Gasquet could/would win majors...

Those pundits must have never watched a tennis match in their life to predict a clown with no serve, forehand and fitness like Drugsquet would win majors.

Mark Lenders
09-30-2012, 02:35 AM
Ah the benefit of hindsight. Of course those posts from 2005 seem off NOW. But back then many very knowledgeable tennis pundits were predicting Gasquet could/would win majors...

Kind of a contradiction here. No knowledgeable analyst would ever predict Gasquet to win Slams. He was nowhere near good enough to do it.

There are some players who could potentially win a Slam if they get hot for two weeks and get a favorable draw at some point, Gasquet isn't even in that category. There's no combination of draw/form that would ever give him even the slightest shot at a Slam title, except maybe if the entire top 20 withdrew.

grahampros
09-30-2012, 02:55 AM
Kind of a contradiction here. No knowledgeable analyst would ever predict Gasquet to win Slams. He was nowhere near good enough to do it.

There are some players who could potentially win a Slam if they get hot for two weeks and get a favorable draw at some point, Gasquet isn't even in that category. There's no combination of draw/form that would ever give him even the slightest shot at a Slam title, except maybe if the entire top 20 withdrew.

Correct. Gasquet was never on the "future grand slam winner" list of anyone credible. Nadal was early.

grahampros
09-30-2012, 02:57 AM
I meant that 7 years ago it was nothing wrong with this question, especially before Rafa took RG. Now we all discuss who will win more - Raonic, Tomic, maybe Harrison. And imagine that one of them will win 7-10 GS and others - zero. It will be in years ridiculous to assume that different people had different opinions, but now it`s not obvious at all. As it wasn`t 7 years ago.

Even 7 years ago it was obvious, so i disagree.

Mountaindewslave
09-30-2012, 03:46 AM
Kind of a contradiction here. No knowledgeable analyst would ever predict Gasquet to win Slams. He was nowhere near good enough to do it.

There are some players who could potentially win a Slam if they get hot for two weeks and get a favorable draw at some point, Gasquet isn't even in that category. There's no combination of draw/form that would ever give him even the slightest shot at a Slam title, except maybe if the entire top 20 withdrew.

Gasquet has the talent and game to win a slam easily, he just lacks the mindset necessary as well as the physical training

grahampros
09-30-2012, 04:28 AM
Gasquet has the talent and game to win a slam easily, he just lacks the mindset necessary as well as the physical training

So we all know he will now never win one, so what's the debate?

Mark Lenders
09-30-2012, 04:35 AM
Gasquet has the talent and game to win a slam easily, he just lacks the mindset necessary as well as the physical training

No, he doesn't, no mindset could possibly save him.

He has one standout shot, the BH, which ends up being his biggest weakness in a way too. The long preparation makes him play too far behind the baseline. With the court positioning his BH brings, he'd need Del Potro's forehand or Nadal's movement and defense to have any sort of success at the highest level. As it stands, he's cannon fodder not only to the top guys but to most good players.

He never had even a remote chance of winning a Slam, having a pretty BH isn't enough.

J99
09-30-2012, 06:51 AM
Who's in a final this week, and who's not? I rest my case.

LOL, um ok.

J99
09-30-2012, 06:55 AM
Correct. Gasquet was never on the "future grand slam winner" list of anyone credible. Nadal was early.

I don't think so, IIRC Gascan was getting mass hype, he was the one being talked about with having the most talent and the one who would be a very top player.

Marcoo
09-30-2012, 08:42 AM
I'm always for Nadal and i know he'll still be able to surprise us all ;)

yuri27
09-30-2012, 01:39 PM
For all those haters who keep saying that the hype over Gasquet was never justified, let's put it that way:

Do you find it normal that a 18 years old player who is capable of playing like this (against peak Federer who had only lost to 3 other guys that year: Nadal, Safin and Nalbandian....not a bad company to be with for a teenager):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp6StHAeqZI

and this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdxbiAHxRdk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhDYxccVqlQ&feature=relmfu

couldn't even win an ATP 500, let alone MS and GSs in the following 7 years of his career??

The funny things is that i'm sure that among those haters, most of them were the same who were on Gasquet's bandwagon after MC 2005 and even at the end of 2006, especially after his amazing match against Hewitt at US Open and his great run at Toronto where he destroyed Berdych (who had beaten Nadal), Murray in 1/2 final and peak Federer for 1 set in final.

Gasquet deserves some hate(sportive hate of course, not pure hate) for having underachieved so much relatively to his obvious potential but to say he's been widely overrated from the beginning is wrong i think.
If you consider his level of play at 18 and add to that the incredible junior career he had (especially in term of precocity) and the fact he was the youngest player ever to win a MS match(against Squillari who was a RG 1/2 finalist or finalist, don't remember), it was VERY VERY VERY hard to not hype him as a future Grand Slam winner BACK THEN.

And nevertheless, 7 years later, the guy has yet to win even an ATP 500.....:facepalm:

Han Solo
09-30-2012, 09:19 PM
For all those haters who keep saying that the hype over Gasquet was never justified, let's put it that way:

Do you find it normal that a 18 years old player who is capable of playing like this (against peak Federer who had only lost to 3 other guys that year: Nadal, Safin and Nalbandian....not a bad company to be with for a teenager):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp6StHAeqZI

and this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdxbiAHxRdk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhDYxccVqlQ&feature=relmfu

couldn't even win an ATP 500, let alone MS and GSs in the following 7 years of his career??

The funny things is that i'm sure that among those haters, most of them were the same who were on Gasquet's bandwagon after MC 2005 and even at the end of 2006, especially after his amazing match against Hewitt at US Open and his great run at Toronto where he destroyed Berdych (who had beaten Nadal), Murray in 1/2 final and peak Federer for 1 set in final.

Gasquet deserves some hate(sportive hate of course, not pure hate) for having underachieved so much relatively to his obvious potential but to say he's been widely overrated from the beginning is wrong i think.
If you consider his level of play at 18 and add to that the incredible junior career he had (especially in term of precocity) and the fact he was the youngest player ever to win a MS match(against Squillari who was a RG 1/2 finalist or finalist, don't remember), it was VERY VERY VERY hard to not hype him as a future Grand Slam winner BACK THEN.

And nevertheless, 7 years later, the guy has yet to win even an ATP 500.....:facepalm:

Yeah, thanks...backs up my earlier post with some hard evidence here. Exactly: it's easy to write off Gasquet NOW and say he never had it in him to win majors. But all those posters - eg. TopSpin Doctor, Mark Lenders, etc - that claim he never had it in him, show me proof that you thought this back in 2005, after he had beaten Federer as an 18 year old, then take Nadal to a final set at Monte Carlo final, and I'll hail you as visionaries and great readers of the game. But if you're just saying it now...nah, not so much.

yuri27
09-30-2012, 09:49 PM
Yeah, thanks...backs up my earlier post with some hard evidence here. Exactly: it's easy to write off Gasquet NOW and say he never had it in him to win majors. But all those posters - eg. TopSpin Doctor, Mark Lenders, etc - that claim he never had it in him, show me proof that you thought this back in 2005, after he had beaten Federer as an 18 year old, then take Nadal to a final set at Monte Carlo final, and I'll hail you as visionaries and great readers of the game. But if you're just saying it now...nah, not so much.

And to make it even more "hilarious", i wouldn't be surprised if among those guys, there are many of them who are now on guys like Raonic's, Gulbis's or Tomic's bandwagons, predicting them Grand Slams in the future.
And this,despite the fact none of those guys have come close to show at 18 the level of play (i'm not even talking about results) Gasquet showed at this same age (ok, PERHAPS Gulbis a little bit).

Gagsquet
09-30-2012, 10:10 PM
"Gasquet deserves some hate"

Fucking yuri27 idiot, crawl back to your fucking hole and do what you do the best : don't fucking post here, fucking dumbass.

finishingmove
09-30-2012, 11:34 PM
Yeah, thanks...backs up my earlier post with some hard evidence here. Exactly: it's easy to write off Gasquet NOW and say he never had it in him to win majors. But all those posters - eg. TopSpin Doctor, Mark Lenders, etc - that claim he never had it in him, show me proof that you thought this back in 2005, after he had beaten Federer as an 18 year old, then take Nadal to a final set at Monte Carlo final, and I'll hail you as visionaries and great readers of the game. But if you're just saying it now...nah, not so much.

Back in 2005, people still didn't know the slams belong to the top 3.

Now even Berdych knows it.

Basically, in the current state of affairs, the smartest thing to do is to write off every newcomer, if you want to end up being correct most of the time.