Is Gasquet the most over-hyped, overrated player Ever? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Is Gasquet the most over-hyped, overrated player Ever?

jocaputs
02-07-2007, 03:01 PM
it seems these days you cant read GM without finding a post/poster that believes he is the next big thing in tennis, he will be a multiple GS champ, he will beat federer and be no.1 for years, decades.
and how do the gasquettards back this up?
- they say his backhand is better than federer's, when its only a flashy shot and melts down when he is under pressure
- they remember you he beated federer in Montecarlo 2005, while a big win can happen to anyone(and notice that after nadal almost beat federer at Miami 2005, gasquet fans were laughing at rafa since he was a "dirtballer", when we all know wich youngster had more success)

and yeah his fans are the dumbest -tards, they diss evryone that doesnt like their boy(richie_21):rolleyes: ant they cant just get over the frenchie is overrated and will never make it past a GS QF:wavey:

ExcaliburII
02-07-2007, 03:04 PM
Gasquet and Murray are the most overrated players here at MTF.

Puschkin
02-07-2007, 03:04 PM
:zzz:

CooCooCachoo
02-07-2007, 03:08 PM
:yawn:

scoobs
02-07-2007, 03:23 PM
Didn't we JUST have one of these threads? :scratch:

*julie*
02-07-2007, 03:40 PM
Didn't we JUST have one of these threads? :scratch:

Yes... threads about Gasquet's hype are overhyped here.

vincayou
02-07-2007, 03:41 PM
and yeah his fans are the dumbest

it seems that you beat Gasquet fans at their own game. :lol:

GlennMirnyi
02-07-2007, 03:42 PM
Gasquet and Murray are the most overrated players here at MTF.

Agreed.

Corey Feldman
02-07-2007, 03:45 PM
He is overhyped, not the worst case i'd say.

the 'baby-fed' tag is cheesy and insulting king fed as well.
and those saying Muzza is the most overhyped can go and smoke Bilbo's fat one.

bokehlicious
02-07-2007, 03:51 PM
the 'baby-fed' tag is cheesy and insulting king fed as well.


True :)

Andre'sNo1Fan
02-07-2007, 03:53 PM
Nah, he is that good, just wait....

vincayou
02-07-2007, 03:55 PM
Reading that post, it would be fun to elect the fantard of the year.

For each category (FedTard, RafaTard, GasquetTard, Croatard, MurrayTard, DjokoTard, etc...), a tard would be choosen and each champion would meet each other in a grand final. :)

TMJordan
02-07-2007, 04:32 PM
Another one of the great threads of MTF :rolleyes:

Loremaster
02-07-2007, 04:42 PM
Too fast to make such opinions he is 20 so he is very young and he had some great success so far

- he was no.1 junior being 15
- he won mixed doubles title being 16
- he was ranked no.12 being 19 and missed whole fall after UsOpen with injury
- reached 4th round of Slam twice
- reached 2 TMS finals
- he has wins over great players
- he is strong Top20 player second year in row
- he won titles on almost every surface

I think he has talent to make something big but if he makes something big I don't know he has game to do it

AND

HIS GAME IS SO WONDERFULL :worship: :worship:

richie21
02-07-2007, 05:32 PM
Too fast to make such opinions he is 20 so he is very young and he had some great success so far

- he was no.1 junior being 15
- he won mixed doubles title being 16
- he was ranked no.12 being 19 and missed whole fall after UsOpen with injury
- reached 4th round of Slam twice
- reached 2 TMS finals
- he has wins over great players
- he is strong Top20 player second year in row
- he won titles on almost every surface

I think he has talent to make something big but if he makes something big I don't know he has game to do it

AND

HIS GAME IS SO WONDERFULL :worship: :worship:


yes,especially a win against Federer at 18 ;)

i remain convinced that Richard will have a breakthrough this year(and it will be at Wimbledon,you can quote me on that).....he just needs to believe more in himself when he plays the top players.

He is overhyped, not the worst case i'd say.

the 'baby-fed' tag is cheesy and insulting king fed as well.
and those saying Muzza is the most overhyped can go and smoke Bilbo's fat one.

not if you look at what Roger had achieved at Richard's age.....:o
at 20,had Roger won 4 titles,made 2 MS finals and beaten the world number 1 at 18???

Loremaster
02-07-2007, 05:44 PM
you forgot that he has also beaten Federer at 18 ;)

i remain convinced that Richard will have a breakthrough this year(and it will be at Wimbledon,you can quote me on that).....he just needs to believe more in himself when he plays the top players.



not if you look at what Roger had achieved at Richard's age.....:o

Yeah I agree
And I remember his win over Roger it was one of the best(if not the best) best of three matches in last years.

He will have breakthrough , but he is a little bit unfortunate he was injured in UsOpen against Hewitt (I mean these cramps )

I think he can have big year and crack Top10 , Wimby is risky but I think he can make 2 QF of Slam these year maybe even SF (it depends on draw). and go deep in TMS

danton
02-07-2007, 07:13 PM
He is definately a good player but he also completely overated here.

A previous poster listed one of his achievements as being a solid top 20 player - erm.......exactly - he is hardly the second coming for tennis.

I'm sure Fed doesn't lose any sleep.

scarecrows
02-07-2007, 07:16 PM
He will have breakthrough , but he is a little bit unfortunate he was injured in UsOpen against Hewitt (I mean these cramps )



GWH is gonna love this :)

Puschkin
02-07-2007, 07:19 PM
GWH is gonna love this :)

As we all know what he is going to say, maybe he refrains from doing it. However, :o :devil: I even agree with him on this particular point.

Klaas_nalbandian
02-07-2007, 07:22 PM
I love richie

Mistaflava
02-07-2007, 07:23 PM
1) WTF is the difference between YES HE IS and YEAH SURELY????

2) Gasquet is an overrated piece of trash


Thats it

vincayou
02-07-2007, 07:43 PM
He is definately a good player but he also completely overated here.

A previous poster listed one of his achievements as being a solid top 20 player - erm.......exactly - he is hardly the second coming for tennis.

I'm sure Fed doesn't lose any sleep.

Not more overrated than Murray.
And Federer isn't losing sleep on anyone.

DrJules
02-07-2007, 07:44 PM
He is overhyped, not the worst case i'd say.

the 'baby-fed' tag is cheesy and insulting king fed as well.
and those saying Muzza is the most overhyped can go and smoke Bilbo's fat one.

He certainly keeps surprising me. I did not expect Murray to beat Federer, Davydenko, Roddick (2 times) and Ljubicic in the last year and come so near to beating Nadal (expected Nadal to win in straight sets).

Mistaflava
02-07-2007, 07:44 PM
Murray is much better and will be much better than Gasquet

Loremaster
02-07-2007, 07:52 PM
Murray is much better and will be much better than Gasquet

Maybe he will but Gasquet is the one who had much better results.

Mistaflava
02-07-2007, 07:53 PM
Maybe so but Gasquet's work ethic and desire to be better sucks ass and he will always be a could have been.

richie21
02-07-2007, 07:55 PM
He certainly keeps surprising me. I did not expect Murray to beat Federer, Davydenko, Roddick (2 times) and Ljubicic in the last year and come so near to beating Nadal (expected Nadal to win in straight sets).

it was a pretty disappointing result for Murray i would say.
Nadal is in my opinion overrated on hard court......actually he hasn t won a tournament since the last FO!

Maybe he will but Gasquet is the one who had much better results.

not to mention he has easily beaten Murray in their only encounter so far :)

Loremaster
02-07-2007, 07:56 PM
Maybe so but Gasquet's work ethic and desire to be better sucks ass and he will always be a could have been.

he is 20 so he can change his work ethic I remember that Roger who became one of the best tennis players in history was also considered underachiever until being 22 he won Wimby and then started to dominate tennis.

Mistaflava
02-07-2007, 08:03 PM
You Gasquetaires need to start finding a new bandwagon player...

R.Federer
02-07-2007, 08:36 PM
he is 20 so he can change his work ethic I remember that Roger who became one of the best tennis players in history was also considered underachiever until being 22 he won Wimby and then started to dominate tennis.

He was 21 when he won his first slam, but that aside I think there is some possible truth in your statement.

danton
02-07-2007, 10:18 PM
it was a pretty disappointing result for Murray i would say.
Nadal is in my opinion overrated on hard court......actually he hasn t won a tournament since the last FO!



not to mention he has easily beaten Murray in their only encounter so far :)


errrrr.... were you watching the same match as me?

danton
02-07-2007, 10:22 PM
Maybe he will but Gasquet is the one who had much better results.

To be fair to Murray Gasquet has been on the atp tour for 3 years longer than Andy.

richie21
02-07-2007, 10:39 PM
errrrr.... were you watching the same match as me?

yes i watched it!
Gasquet outplayed Murray in that match......you can t say the contrary or else,you would look a fool.

Allure
02-07-2007, 10:40 PM
So many people picking on Richie today.:awww:

Well, I don't think I overhype him. I never said, ''Richard will win 10 slams and will be the best ever.'' What I do say is I think he is very talented. What he will achieve, though, depends on him.

richie21
02-07-2007, 10:42 PM
To be fair to Murray Gasquet has been on the atp tour for 3 years longer than Andy.

but he is only one year older than him
you must take into account that Gasquet played his first ATP match ridiculously soon (at 15!!).
actually i don t think you should count his first 2 years on the ATP tour.....he was sooooo young.

yakuzaninja
02-07-2007, 10:45 PM
yes i watched it!
Gasquet outplayed Murray in that match......you can t say the contrary or else,you would look a fool.

You can't judge whether a player is going to be better than the other just because they beat him in their first match.

By that theory Byron Black should be better than Federer for beating him 6-3 6-0.

richie21
02-07-2007, 10:56 PM
You can't judge whether a player is going to be better than the other just because they beat him in their first match.

By that theory Byron Black should be better than Federer for beating him 6-3 6-0.

i obviously agree with you ;)

but it's just that i' m a bit surprised to hear some people saying that Murray is much better than Gasquet......wheras there are a few things which would actually suggest the contrary.

Pfloyd
02-07-2007, 11:29 PM
The original poster of this thread is over rated.

bigbhoy
02-07-2007, 11:49 PM
i obviously agree with you ;)

but it's just that i' m a bit surprised to hear some people saying that Murray is much better than Gasquet......wheras there are a few things which would actually suggest the contrary.

Like what?

scoobs
02-07-2007, 11:53 PM
Cramps is not injury, cramps is lack of conditioning. Much as I admire Gasquet's gutsy fight in the fifth set against Hewitt, it shouldn't have been necessary because he should by now be fit enough to play a long five sets in a night match in New York. I can understand fitness issues from someone like Del Potro at his level of experience but Gasquet has been at this much longer and should have been able to last the distance.

scoobs
02-07-2007, 11:59 PM
I don't think Murray is necessarily better than Gasquet and results-wise it's not easy to argue that he is, convincingly. They both have a win over Federer though Gasquet's was much more hard-fought. Gasquet has more titles so far. Murray has, I think, more big-name scalps.

I do think Murray seems to have more fight and determination than Gasquet right now. Murray was stung by the criticism of his fitness and has gone out and worked bloody hard and improved it massively. Has Gasquet?

Finally, I think Murray is a bit mentally stronger. They both reached the fourth round in Australia. Gasquet had much the easier draw in that round and failed to impress with his performance or his fight. Murray took it right to Nadal and pushed hard for nearly four hours before going down in 5 tough sets.

I guarantee that if Gasquet puts in a performance like Murray did against a top player, even if he loses, as long as it's not down to his physical conditioning, but because he fights bloody hard and pushes all the way before being beaten...a lot of the criticism you see levelled at him will fall away.

richie21
02-08-2007, 12:03 AM
Like what?

like the number of titles won or the number of MS finals made

richie21
02-08-2007, 12:07 AM
I don't think Murray is necessarily better than Gasquet and results-wise it's not easy to argue that he is, convincingly. They both have a win over Federer though Gasquet's was much more hard-fought. Gasquet has more titles so far. Murray has, I think, more big-name scalps.


something to put Murray's win into perspective: after the match,Federer said that he played one of his worst matches since 2003 and that he was really tired after his win at Toronto the previous week......whereas after the match against Gasquet ,he didn t say that.....he even said that in the second set,Gasquet was just too good and he didn t even think he played bad himself.

scoobs
02-08-2007, 12:10 AM
I doubt anyone would seriously dispute Federer playing against Murray was the same or better than Federer playing against Gasquet in Monte Carlo. Clearly Federer played better against Gasquet and Richard played very well to win.

Having said that, the flashes of brilliance from Gasquet have been few and far between since.

richie21
02-08-2007, 12:14 AM
Finally, I think Murray is a bit mentally stronger. They both reached the fourth round in Australia. Gasquet had much the easier draw in that round and failed to impress with his performance or his fight. Murray took it right to Nadal and pushed hard for nearly four hours before going down in 5 tough sets.

that's a pretty ridiculous statement if you want my opinion!!!!
don t forget that Robredo was one of the players who worried(even if that's a big word) Roger the most during the AO.
once again,Nadal is being overrated on hard court.......as Gonzalez showed it by making quick work of him.

acually,Gasquet's performance against Hewitt at US OPEN was in my opinion more relevant than Murray's performance against Nadal at AO as Hewitt has always had pretty good results at US OPEN contrary to Nadal at AO and he is (or at least, has been)a proven quantity on hard court,which in my opinion is still not the case of Nadal despite his final at Wimbledon.

the reality is that even though he played pretty well,Murray lost against a player who hasn t won anything since the last FO......

scoobs
02-08-2007, 12:22 AM
Disagree. The scoreline against Robredo was much closer than the match ever was because Roger was nowhere near his best and seemed to be saving his energies for the ass-whipping he handed out in the SFs.

Gasquet vs Robredo was an easier matchup than Murray vs Nadal. It just was - sorry. Robredo can be tricky, sure, but he can inconsistent and he is capable of mentally folding under the pressure - unlike Nadal who continues to fight hard right until the last ball has been hit.

Gasquet had a real chance to advance to the QFs and blew it - lets face facts and not make excuses. Murray had a tougher draw and in my opinion should have won that match - no excuses for him either. He blew a couple of crucial moments and the match eventually got away from him. Gasquet didn't even put himself in that position. It was disappointing from him.

The Gasquet performance at the US Open was, in my view less relevant than the performance at the AO against Robredo or the Murray-Nadal match. What we saw at the US Open was a fairly typical Gasquet performance - he played very well at times, poorly at others, and couldn't go the full 5 set distance and get the win on the big occasion. Physically that time he couldn't last - we saw he couldn't last mentally in the DC ties against Safin and Tursunov last year, too. Also Hewitt was woefully short of match play going into that US Open, as we saw when Roddick knocked him over relatively easily in the next round. Gasquet should have been the one to do that - instead Hewitt advanced and Roddick benefited.

silverwhite
02-08-2007, 12:24 AM
Can we have this thread merged with the other one?

richie21
02-08-2007, 12:24 AM
Gasquet had a real chance to advance to the QFs and blew it - lets face facts and not make excuses. Murray had a tougher draw and in my opinion should have won that match - no excuses for him either. He blew a couple of crucial moments and the match eventually got away from him. Gasquet didn't even put himself in that position. It was disappointing from him.
.

i never said the contrary!
i just find it a bit funny that you are saying that facing Robredo was a lot easier than facing Nadal,especially considering Nadal's results since the last Wimbledon.......that's all i'm saying.

Corey Feldman
02-08-2007, 12:26 AM
Can we have this thread merged with the other one?I think Silverwhite is over-hyped

:p

nolop
02-08-2007, 12:27 AM
yes he is overrated but hey he is cute:shrug:

scoobs
02-08-2007, 12:28 AM
Well the evidence has to suggest that Robredo is an easier proposition than Nadal - Robredo has never won a TMS on hard, Nadal has won 2. Robredo has never been to a slam final, Nadal has been to 2 on clay and one on grass. Nadal is #2 and Robredo was, I think, #6?

I'm not saying Robredo was a pushover but it's matches like that Gasquet needs to be winning. Nadal was a tougher proposition in my view, but again, it's matches like that I want to see Murray winning sooner rather than later.

Fact is, the shine off Gasquet's win over Federer has long since diminished and people are left asking "well...when are you going to do something spectacular" and are still waiting.

Maybe it will be this season.

silverwhite
02-08-2007, 12:29 AM
I think Silverwhite is over-hyped

:p

You are beginning to sound like your London-based compatriot. :ras:

richie21
02-08-2007, 12:29 AM
Also Hewitt was woefully short of match play going into that US Open, as we saw when Roddick knocked him over relatively easily in the next round

Gonzalez knocked Nadal even more easily.....so it cancels your point :o

scoobs
02-08-2007, 12:32 AM
Nope - reinforces it. It was a similar situation for Murray and Nadal as for Gasquet and Hewitt at the US Open - although again I'd rate Nadal as tougher opposition than Hewitt at this point in time. Gasquet should have beat Hewitt, instead he softened him up for Roddick but physically didn't have enough to get the job done.

Murray softened up Nadal but couldn't get the job done either, mentally more than anything. Gonzalez then picked him off next round.

That experience Gasquet had against Hewitt should have stood him in good stead against Robredo this time around but :shrug: nothing happened.

Corey Feldman
02-08-2007, 12:37 AM
You are beginning to sound like your London-based compatriot. :ras:been compared to RDucky and now adee-gee all in one night...
its to much :sad:

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 12:59 AM
i obviously agree with you ;)

but it's just that i' m a bit surprised to hear some people saying that Murray is much better than Gasquet......wheras there are a few things which would actually suggest the contrary.

Murray is maybe even more overrated than Gasquet, but until now he can't be said to be better than Gasquet.

gulzhan
02-08-2007, 01:39 AM
i think this thread was opened as a joke :lol: eric, it's not a good one! :(
i'll badrep you! :ras: :lol:

adee-gee
02-08-2007, 02:13 AM
Ancic is worse.

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:16 AM
Ancic is worse.

Why?

adee-gee
02-08-2007, 02:20 AM
Why?
Because he's rated highly and he's not particularly good. Certainly not a patch on your darling Muzza ;)

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:22 AM
Because he's rated highly and he's not particularly good. Certainly not a patch on your darling Muzza ;)

So being a top 10 is not being particularly good?

adee-gee
02-08-2007, 02:22 AM
So being a top 10 is not being particularly good?
Apparently being #2 isn't being particularly good in your eyes ;)

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:26 AM
Apparently being #2 isn't being particularly good in your eyes ;)

Ancic is no moonballer. ;)

adee-gee
02-08-2007, 02:28 AM
Ancic is no moonballer. ;)
And he's won 3 mickey mouse titles....I think I'd rather be a moonballer if it gets me 2 grand slams and numerous masters series titles :dance:

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:30 AM
And he's won 3 mickey mouse titles....I think I'd rather be a moonballer if it gets me 2 grand slams and numerous masters series titles :dance:

At least he has a chance to have a carrer after he's 23. :dance:

adee-gee
02-08-2007, 02:33 AM
At least he has a chance to have a carrer after he's 23. :dance:
He can continue taking 4 games off Henman and losing to the likes of Koubek, Ginepri, Fish and Kohlschreiber while Nadal retires at age 23, counting his euro's and his trophies :dance:

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:39 AM
He can continue taking 4 games off Henman and losing to the likes of Koubek, Ginepri, Fish and Kohlschreiber while Nadal retires at age 23, counting his euro's and his trophies :dance:

Ancic 2-1 Blake
Ancic 2-1 Berdych

Ancic has defeated Federer in Wimbledon, something you know who will never do.

adee-gee
02-08-2007, 02:43 AM
Ancic 2-1 Blake
Ancic 2-1 Berdych

Ancic has defeated Federer in Wimbledon, something you know who will never do.
:haha:

What a feeble attempt at an argument, I expect better from you....pehaps you should throw in your Guccione trump card :banana:

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:51 AM
:haha:

What a feeble attempt at an argument, I expect better from you....pehaps you should throw in your Guccione trump card :banana:

Unfortunately Ancic has never played Guccione. :)

Bad Religion
02-08-2007, 02:53 AM
Ancic 2-1 Blake
Ancic 2-1 Berdych

Ancic has defeated Federer in Wimbledon, something you know who will never do.

Nadal defeated Ancic (yaaawn) in Wimbly 2003 with 17 years old :dance:

2003 Wimbledon
R128 Nadal 6-3 6-4 4-6 6-4

GlennMirnyi
02-08-2007, 02:57 AM
Nadal defeated Ancic (yaaawn) in Wimbly 2003 with 17 years old :dance:

2003 Wimbledon
R128 Nadal 6-3 6-4 4-6 6-4

Then lost to Waske. :wavey:

Federer&Hingis
02-08-2007, 03:00 AM
Gasquet isn't overrated.

danton
02-08-2007, 06:41 PM
yes i watched it!
Gasquet outplayed Murray in that match......you can t say the contrary or else,you would look a fool.

The way I read your post I thought you meant the Rafa match against Murray.

Action Jackson
02-18-2007, 11:38 AM
been compared to RDucky and now adee-gee all in one night...
its to much :sad:

You are strong, you will survive.

leng jai
11-15-2007, 01:33 PM
This thread deserves a bump.

Gasquet is easily the most overrated player on this board. People equate talent to how many flashy winners he can hit in a match and then overlook all the other rubbish shots he hits especially on the forehand. How can a player be the most talented with a forehand that is terrible 90% of the time. People see a flashy single handed backhand as well and think that somehow makes him more talented.

Gasquet is a pansy who gives up far too easily when hes being outplayed. Then in the press conference he'll harp on about how his opponent was incredible which implies that he believes there was basically no way for him to win the match. His a shotmaker but shot making only wins you 15-20 points a match max, theres still the meat of the match to play. This is why he gets smashed by grinders like Pics and can't beat a moonballing Nadal playing at 70% capacity.

Jozie
11-15-2007, 01:41 PM
No he is ranked 8th in the world, honestly, what a daft thread.

richie21
11-15-2007, 01:43 PM
He is certainly one of the most hated anyway,at least recently.

Havok
11-15-2007, 01:44 PM
He still needs to grow up and mature tennis wise. When and if that will happen, I have no clue though I hope it does happen soon. We need some more consistent players on tour because the Federer-Nadal story is becoming a bore year after year.

krystlel
11-15-2007, 01:50 PM
Not really. He seems to get criticised in the match results threads more than most other players. In comparison, the media and commentators are more complimentary towards him.

adee-gee
11-15-2007, 01:51 PM
He is certainly one of the most hated anyway,at least recently.
Absolutely nowhere near.

I don't hate him, I just like pissing your off ;)

Deivid23
11-15-2007, 01:55 PM
Definetely in MTF, not even a contest.

For further examples check out this last thread of overrating at its best:

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113165

richie21
11-15-2007, 01:55 PM
Absolutely nowhere near.

I don't hate him, I just like pissing your off ;)

Well usually,he is not but recently ,i've noted a lot of hate around him in MTF (mostly coming from the Nadaltards and the Murraytards)

Jozie
11-15-2007, 02:14 PM
Nadaltards and Murraytards are feeling threatened....

gulzhan
11-15-2007, 02:22 PM
in my opinion, gasquet is under-hyped :p
as geniuses always are :sad:

ordinary people feel the geniuses by their 6th sense of "greyishness" and always gang together to haunt them :shrug:

Renaud
11-15-2007, 02:23 PM
Well usually,he is not but recently ,i've noted a lot of hate around him in MTF (mostly coming from the Nadaltards and the Murraytards)


This hate is for you mate.
Because you never stop telling shit.
What about leaving this forum ? :p

Jaap
11-15-2007, 02:27 PM
Yes.

By all them muppet Gasquetqueers.

Deivid23
11-15-2007, 02:41 PM
in my opinion, gasquet is under-hyped :p
as geniuses always are :sad:

ordinary people feel the geniuses by their 6th sense of "greyishness" and always gang together to haunt them :shrug:

OMFG, this is too much :haha:

Action Jackson
11-15-2007, 02:49 PM
in my opinion, gasquet is under-hyped :p
as geniuses always are :sad:

ordinary people feel the geniuses by their 6th sense of "greyishness" and always gang together to haunt them :shrug:

You have been drinking too much Snow Queen vodka.

adee-gee
11-15-2007, 03:07 PM
Nadaltards and Murraytards are feeling threatened....
By Gasquet? :spit:

gulzhan
11-15-2007, 04:33 PM
You have been drinking too much Snow Queen vodka.

don't be jealous, george :p

you know gasquet is a tennis genius, don't you? i respect ferrer a lot (and wish him to win shangahai this year :rocker2:) but he is just another very good player on high :yeah: when richard plays as he can, it's art :worship:

guy in sf
11-15-2007, 04:36 PM
Can we PLEASE end all threads about Gasquet being overhyped????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????
How many freakin times has this being covered???????????????????????????????????????????
Please stop the torture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After he wins a good match, we get threads like "Is Gasquet going to be the next great champion"?
After he loses a match, we get threads like THIS ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bad Religion
11-15-2007, 04:40 PM
The most overrated clown of all time IMO and has the most delusional fanbase of all time

Jozie
11-15-2007, 04:40 PM
By his fans... Murray did'nt make TMC, so nothing to cheer about there, Nadal is not at his best, so they have to perpetually run down Gasquet. Pathetic.

FedFan_2007
11-15-2007, 04:41 PM
Gasquet is a over-hyped, overrated fool who will fall out of the top 50 in 5 months. He is dead to me.

elessar
11-15-2007, 07:48 PM
Gasquet is a over-hyped, overrated fool who will fall out of the top 50 in 5 months. He is dead to me.

Oh I wonder how he'll ever get over that :crying2:

FedFan_2007
11-15-2007, 07:58 PM
He won't get over it. He fails to see the light. Pansies can't see the light.

richie21
11-15-2007, 08:07 PM
He won't get over it. He fails to see the light. Pansies can't see the light.

Well,it doesn't seem this loss bothered him a lot ,judging by his post match reaction......which in some sense is a bit worrying i would say :o

davis
11-15-2007, 08:24 PM
People, the guy is TWENTY-ONE!!! Cut him some slack and wait another 4-5 years before you call him overrated.
This was his first Masters, nobody can seriously expect him to win straight away. Apart from today (yes, he sucked) he delivered good performances. It's all part of the learning experience. Talent really seems to intimidate people...

FedFan: I'm glad he's dead to you, maybe you can stop bitching now!
richie21: What's he gonna do in a post-match interview? Cry and chastise himself? He gave due credit to the better player and seems happy he made it to Shanghai in the first place. Good attitude.

Andi-M
11-15-2007, 08:47 PM
He's a good young talent so in that respect not overrated.

But there are so many delusional people that think because Richies game has some similarities with Federer's game that he will have the same kind of sucess. The guy is weak physically and mentally.

EternalxJourney
11-15-2007, 08:54 PM
Gasquet is a over-hyped, overrated fool who will fall out of the top 50 in 5 months. He is dead to me.

:D :D :worship: :worship:

FedFan_2007
11-15-2007, 09:11 PM
BTW, I hope I do not come across as mediter.

Andre'sNo1Fan
11-15-2007, 09:22 PM
BTW, I hope I do not come across as mediter.
No, you come across more as Rafa = Fed Killa to be honest. Sound surprisingly like him.

FedFan_2007
11-15-2007, 09:48 PM
No, you come across more as Rafa = Fed Killa to be honest. Sound surprisingly like him.

You do realize that anyone can deliberately sound like someone else for the purposes of mocking? You do realize that one of my main objectives is to mock RFK relentlessly like the Spartan I am. :worship: :angel: :confused:

Dusk Soldier
11-15-2007, 10:26 PM
its been almost a year and this thread is still relevant. I love it.

Gasquet is one of my favourite players and all, but he is an over-hyped showpony and you'd have to be in denial to not be able to see it.

r2473
11-15-2007, 10:32 PM
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=5922157#post5922157

This topic has been beaten to death.

richie21
03-28-2008, 11:20 PM
I've defended Gasquet a lot in the past but now,i'm beginning to think that he deserves threads like this.

Corswandt
03-28-2008, 11:36 PM
I don't know if he's overrated or not.

But I can't understand why people say he'd be a great champion if he wasn't such a wuss. I look at his game, and I fail to see why he's supposed to go on and win Slams. It's just not that good.

Ackms421
03-28-2008, 11:47 PM
I don't know if he's overrated or not.

But I can't understand why people say he'd be a great champion if he wasn't such a wuss. I look at his game, and I fail to see why he's supposed to go on and win Slams. It's just not that good.

Yeah, he lacks weapons. This is similar to Federer before 2003. Everyone saw brilliant point construction and natural ability, but he always fell just a little short.

I don't see quite the brilliance in Gasquet that some others do though. He can put together some pretty stuff *sometimes* but I think on the spectrum of players he'll be more of a Rios than an Agassi...

richie21
03-28-2008, 11:57 PM
I don't know if he's overrated or not.

But I can't understand why people say he'd be a great champion if he wasn't such a wuss. I look at his game, and I fail to see why he's supposed to go on and win Slams. It's just not that good.


That's perhaps because of matches like that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKiG29fcVdY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAHX0z5FwG8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORY9LxK9uM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORY9LxK9uM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAHCy5WkZzw



Sadly those matches happened 2-3 years ago when he was 18-19.:sad:

World Beater
03-29-2008, 12:06 AM
Yeah, he lacks weapons. This is similar to Federer before 2003. Everyone saw brilliant point construction and natural ability, but he always fell just a little short.

I don't see quite the brilliance in Gasquet that some others do though. He can put together some pretty stuff *sometimes* but I think on the spectrum of players he'll be more of a Rios than an Agassi...


RIOS was more talented that gasquet was from the baseline.

rios can actually take the ball early. gasquet cant quite do that consistently.

gasquet was not like federer before 2003.

Bernard Black
03-29-2008, 12:14 AM
It's a bit too early to rule out Gasquet as a power in tennis, but I must admit his development has been slower than I anticipated. I remember him getting some remarkable results as a 15 year old new to the circuit, I thought he would surely have risen to the very top by the time he was 20. Saying that, he has had some good results in slams, so there is hope for the future.

leng jai
03-29-2008, 12:37 AM
Murray and Gasquet are both overrated. Gasgay has a GS semi at least but hes not playing a great brand of tennis anymore.

richie21
03-29-2008, 12:42 AM
Murray and Gasquet are both overrated. Gasgay has a GS semi at least but hes not playing a great brand of tennis anymore.

I hugely disagree for Murray.
I truly think he'll be in the top 5 by the end of the year.

Albop
03-29-2008, 12:43 AM
gasquet sucks

Clay Death
03-29-2008, 12:49 AM
gasquet sucks

afirmative.

Corey Feldman
03-29-2008, 04:03 AM
jejejejejejeje

Clay Death
03-29-2008, 04:08 AM
Yeah, he lacks weapons. This is similar to Federer before 2003. Everyone saw brilliant point construction and natural ability, but he always fell just a little short.

I don't see quite the brilliance in Gasquet that some others do though. He can put together some pretty stuff *sometimes* but I think on the spectrum of players he'll be more of a Rios than an Agassi...


time to dispense with cheap liquor old sport. Gasgay should never ever be mentioned in the same conversation with Rios and Agassi. Gasgay is not 1/2 the man these guys were.

JimmyV
03-29-2008, 04:16 AM
I don't see quite the brilliance in Gasquet that some others do though. He can put together some pretty stuff *sometimes* but I think on the spectrum of players he'll be more of a Rios than an Agassi...

Rios was the #1 in the world, made a slam final, and won 5 shields.....

After Wimbledon Gasquet may not even be in the top 10 and he's done nothing this year.

Are we watching the same guy?

JimmyV
03-29-2008, 04:18 AM
Oh hai guyz, Querrey can beat some top 30 players sometimes, I think he'll be more of an Ivanišević than a Sampras.

Clay Death
03-29-2008, 04:28 AM
Rios was the #1 in the world, made a slam final, and won 5 shields.....

After Wimbledon Gasquet may not even be in the top 10 and he's done nothing this year.

Are we watching the same guy?

exactly. Gasgay is on an accelerated decline program. he should never have been in the top 10 to begin with.

Rios could spank Gasgay even today.

~*BGT*~
03-29-2008, 04:35 AM
Why is it wrong for fans to hope he will win a slam or be #1 in the future? :shrug:

Clay Death
03-29-2008, 04:40 AM
Why is it wrong for fans to hope he will win a slam or be #1 in the future? :shrug:


well BGT his game is in decline. amazingly, Roddick, on the other hand, is surging again. Roddick has 2 titles and showed that he was not scared of the top guns when he went to Dubai and took the title there. dont be surprised if Roddick takes the title here.

i would say that Roddick has a chance at the U.S. Open if the draw opens up a little. he may even do well at Wimby.

i just have a feeling that Roddick is going to have a great year. Gasquet, sadly, could be out of top 10 or even top 15.

JimmyV
03-29-2008, 04:43 AM
Why is it wrong for fans to hope he will win a slam or be #1 in the future? :shrug:

Nothing, I mean I'll always support Roddick even when he has no chance in hell.

But some people act like he's the second coming of christ and is this up and coming, 19 slam winning tennis genius.

sheeter
03-29-2008, 04:58 AM
This isn't a poll.

Schu
03-29-2008, 04:58 AM
How many overhyped threads are we going to have? What difference does it make if a player is overhyped. We all know it's results that matter. It's not Gasquet or Murray or any of the other "overhyped" players who do the hyping; it's the media and irrational fans.

It is extremely difficult to carry the hopes of a entire country and thousands of fans on your shoulders so give these guys a break! And ignore those who overhype! Yea maybe they suck sometimes and don't play up to their potential but most of the overhyped players never proclaimed they were going to be the next #1. Most aren't Djoke or Mama Djoke they just play and don't ask to be their national hero or fulfill the fantacy of their fans.

Branimir
03-29-2008, 05:14 AM
Gasquet posses incredible natural talent for tennis, no doubt about it. I am not by any means fan of Gasquet, but when he plays like he can play he is up there with the top 5. His problem is his mentality, and he doesn't want to be the champion. At least I don't see it. You must be willing to work hard, to do whatever it takes to get to that number 1 spot. I am big Djokovic fan, but I admit, nor I ever tried to neglect that Gasquet has more natural game. What I mean by that is that it doesn't look like he is forcing something, unlike Djokovic who sometimes wins points very ugly. Both Djokovic and especially Nadal sometimes run their ass of even when they know they might easily lose the point. That's not the case if Gasquet. He is not willing to work hard, to increase intensity when needed. That's why he will never archive anything, unless he changes his attitude in the matches. I don't know how he practices but if he plays like he is practicing, than he must change his practice routines too. Expression "you play how you practice" is not unknown.

World Beater
03-29-2008, 07:45 AM
gasquet has technical deficiencies. Its not just a matter of being mentally strong.

Matchu
03-29-2008, 07:58 AM
Yes, but Donald Young is a shoe in for second place.

davis
03-29-2008, 08:33 AM
gasquet has technical deficiencies. Its not just a matter of being mentally strong.

I agree there's areas he can improve in, but no one has perfect technique, really. I'm more worried about his tactical deficiencies. My toe nails curly up every time I see him step BACK when awaiting a second service. And him constantly playing 3 m+ behind the baseline...:rolleyes:
For being such a seemingly clumsy guy, he transforms when stepping on the court and he plays such graceful tennis - I could watch a rewind of his backhand for hours - but he's not taking the initiative often enough. His forehand has improved a lot lately, and if he would take those groundstrokes and actually hit them ON the baseline, he could put so much more pressure on his opponents and win a lot more easy points.

Add to that his brainmelts... He's a horrible backrunner. I actually couldn't believe he even won the second set yesterday. Must have been more Tursunov choking than Gasquet charging, I suppose. A while ago, Richie said something along the line of being in tennis for the love of the game; and that he didn't like to push himself in losing situations. And that attitude won't get him anywhere, sadly.

Maybe he needs to grow up still - I guess with all the hype he hasn't had time for it. And maybe that'll make him a true champion. So I won't call him "over-hyped" or "overrated" just yet. Sympathies for you Richie, don't let all the hustle around you get to you.:kiss:

Truc
03-29-2008, 09:30 AM
It is extremely difficult to carry the hopes of a entire country and thousands of fans on your shoulders so give these guys a break! And ignore those who overhype! Yea maybe they suck sometimes and don't play up to their potential but most of the overhyped players never proclaimed they were going to be the next #1. Most aren't Djoke or Mama Djoke they just play and don't ask to be their national hero or fulfill the fantacy of their fans.I know MTF seems to think the whole country is waiting for Gasquet to salvage the French tennis, but that's very exaggerated. My French friends who don't care about tennis all know Mauresmo, but they didn't even know who Gasquet is last time I asked them. He's just big for French tennis fans imo.

Exodus
03-29-2008, 09:35 AM
yupp mugay and gasgay are the most overrated players on MTF

babuska6
03-29-2008, 09:47 AM
no i don´t agree...richard is just not able to be concentrated for all matches and to do his best during all matches..he is still quite young,maybe his mentality is not as strong as the mentality of other young players like djokovic and nadal.. these unstable results (win-lose) has also berdych,murray,tsonga or berdych.this is only about age and forwardness!

FedFan_2007
03-29-2008, 10:38 AM
Who knows maybe Gasquet shocks the world and wins Wimby and becomes the new Federer...

Acer
03-29-2008, 10:47 AM
Unlikely

~*BGT*~
03-29-2008, 03:51 PM
Gasquet posses incredible natural talent for tennis, no doubt about it. I am not by any means fan of Gasquet, but when he plays like he can play he is up there with the top 5. His problem is his mentality, and he doesn't want to be the champion. At least I don't see it. You must be willing to work hard, to do whatever it takes to get to that number 1 spot. I am big Djokovic fan, but I admit, nor I ever tried to neglect that Gasquet has more natural game. What I mean by that is that it doesn't look like he is forcing something, unlike Djokovic who sometimes wins points very ugly. Both Djokovic and especially Nadal sometimes run their ass of even when they know they might easily lose the point. That's not the case if Gasquet. He is not willing to work hard, to increase intensity when needed. That's why he will never archive anything, unless he changes his attitude in the matches. I don't know how he practices but if he plays like he is practicing, than he must change his practice routines too. Expression "you play how you practice" is not unknown.

For a Djokovic fan, you make a lot of sense. ;) :p

Richie doesn't seem to want to work very hard off the court. He also, has no emotion on the court, whether he is losing or winning. But still, he is still very young and he has not even entered his prime. Give him a few years. I think he'll be a contender. :wavey:

Renaud
03-29-2008, 04:07 PM
I know MTF seems to think the whole country is waiting for Gasquet to salvage the French tennis, but that's very exaggerated. My French friends who don't care about tennis all know Mauresmo, but they didn't even know who Gasquet is last time I asked them. He's just big for French tennis fans imo.

Same here.

Pixie
03-29-2008, 04:11 PM
And same here too.

The ones who keep on critcising the overrate/overhype thing are those who talk the most about him actually. richie21 is the perfect example of it. Lots of people have seen him play enough times to rate him the good way nowadays.

richie21
03-29-2008, 06:24 PM
Who knows maybe Gasquet shocks the world and wins Wimby and becomes the new Federer...

Grass is the only surface where i can see him doing well this season.

~*BGT*~
03-29-2008, 06:26 PM
2 bad it's only 4 weeks. :sad:

platinum
03-29-2008, 06:50 PM
Damn!

Puschkin
03-29-2008, 06:57 PM
He is not willing to work hard, to increase intensity when needed.


Richie doesn't seem to want to work very hard off the court.

How did that wisdom fall upon you both? Have you watched his off-court work, do you know his pratice schedule? :rolleyes:

Corswandt
03-29-2008, 11:12 PM
Gasquet's presser after his loss:

Q - Richard Gasquet quel est le sentiment qui domine à la sortie d'un tel match ?

A - Comme toujours, j'éprouve de la déception de perdre un match 7-6 au troisième set. Je suis déçu, c'est entièrement normal.

Q - Éprouvez-vous également de la frustration, par rapport au niveau de jeu que vous avez produit ?

A - J'ai donné ce que j'ai pu sur le court, alors... de la frustration ? Oui, de ne pas être bien, en début de match, mais après, j'ai donné 100% de ce que je pouvais le jour donné, je ne pouvais pas mieux faire aujourd'hui (vendredi). Je n'étais pas au top au début, ensuite c'est quand même devenu un bon match de tennis. Tursunov a très bien servi, il a très bien joué. Mais cela aurait pu très bien tourner de mon côté au troisième set. C'est ça qui est un peu dur.

Q - Ce match face à Dmitry Tursunov a eu une physionomie quelque peu étonnante.

A - Il y a eu deux matches dans le match. Au début, ce n'était pas bon, on ne peut pas dire le contraire. Après, c'était presque un match de filles, avec les breaks, les débreaks ... C'était quand même très bizarre, surtout que Tursunov est un gros serveur et que moi je ne sers pas mal non plus... Me faire breaker trois fois de suite, c'était trop, je suis devenu fou, dans ma tête, c'était la fusion. Puis, dès 5-5 au deuxième, c'est devenu un bon match de tennis. C'est dommage, cela aurait pu être un match un peu « déclic » , qui m'aurait fait du bien.

Q - « C'était la fusion », dites-vous. Pour quelles raisons ?

A - Je n'y arrivais pas, je commettais beaucoup de fautes. Mais bon, c'est : soit je joue très mal, soit je joue très bien. C'est souvent ça... La victoire m'aurait fait du bien. Ce n'était vraiment pas loin, même si c'est sûr que je peux mieux jouer au tennis. C'était un peu la même physionomie de rencontre que contre « Jo » en Australie. Pas extraordinaire, mais un bon niveau.

Q - Mais qu'est-ce qui fait que vous n'y arrivez pas ?

A - Je ressens un peu de crispation. Je veux aller loin dans le tournoi, je n'ai pas envie de perdre dès mon premier tour... Et après, j'ai eu du mal à être mentalement bien sur le court. On pointe ça aujourd'hui, mais l'an dernier, c'était exactement la même chose quand j'ai perdu beaucoup de matches sur terre battue. Il faudrait que je sois un peu plus décontracté, et que je relâche plus. Il y a des périodes où l'on n'est pas au top, c'est comme ça. Là je stagne un peu, mais je vais remonter.

Q - Vous traversez un passage un peu difficile actuellement...

A - Normal, je dirais. Un passage pas fabuleux, c'est clair, mais des passages comme ça, j'en ai connu des vingtaines ou des trentaines, donc je ne suis pas plus inquiet que ça. Je ne sais pas trop pourquoi je suis comme ça, mais je sais qu'il y a des moments comme ça, où il suffit de s'accrocher et ça repart très vite. J'ai déjà connu ça. Il n'y a aucune raison pour que je ne rebondisse pas.

Q - Le quart de finale de Coupe Davis qui se profile face aux Etats-Unis peut être une manière de rebondir justement.

A - Exactement. C'est une belle rencontre à jouer, donc cela peut aussi être une belle manière de rebondir. Mais, franchement, après une telle défaite (contre Tursunov) je ne suis pas à me tourner la tête vers un autre tournoi.

Not sure how to interpret Gasquet's attitude. I mean, he's clearly deluded - I just don't know to what extent and in which way.

He may be deluded in a pessimistic way - i.e. he knows he's not a born competitor and feels he'll never win anything because of it. Which is false; if you're good enough, you will win, even if you're not a born winner.

He may be deluded in an optimistic way - i.e. he feels he's got the greatest game in the world and that only his lack of mental fortitude is preventing him from winning big. Which is false; his game isn't all that. He's occasionally flashy, but too defensive and somewhat underpowered for today's game, and at his worse he's reminiscent of Volandri, only not as good.

~*BGT*~
03-30-2008, 12:17 AM
Can you translate that? :)

Action Jackson
09-30-2012, 01:32 PM
Thankfully not as overrated as he was, but still overhyped.

Sanya
09-30-2012, 01:39 PM
Wow, so many people hate Richie. :sad:

Nole Rules
09-30-2012, 01:41 PM
Yes he is.

Certinfy
09-30-2012, 01:44 PM
Indeed.

yuri27
09-30-2012, 01:48 PM
It's funny because most of the guys who call him overrhyped or overrated now were probably the same who were saying in 2005 that this guy would win a GS for sure and probably even more.

Let's be honest, how many people there would have believed back then (2005 and even end of 2006) that this guy would not only stay slamless for the 7 following years but even worse, would not even be able to win an ATP 500 or a MS???

The expectations were fully justified back then, not only because of his amazing and abnormal junior career but also, because of the level of play he showed at such a young age.
The fact he has not even been close to fulfill the expectations he created is more down to him rather than people having overrated his abilities at the beginning.

Hian-GOAT
09-30-2012, 01:48 PM
Overrated crap.

TigerTim
09-30-2012, 01:52 PM
Overrated crap.

Agreed.

Action Jackson
09-30-2012, 02:02 PM
No, richie he was overrated then and is now.

Sophitia36
09-30-2012, 04:26 PM
It's funny because most of the guys who call him overrhyped or overrated now were probably the same who were saying in 2005 that this guy would win a GS for sure and probably even more.

Let's be honest, how many people there would have believed back then (2005 and even end of 2006) that this guy would not only stay slamless for the 7 following years but even worse, would not even be able to win an ATP 500 or a MS???

The expectations were fully justified back then, not only because of his amazing and abnormal junior career but also, because of the level of play he showed at such a young age.
The fact he has not even been close to fulfill the expectations he created is more down to him rather than people having overrated his abilities at the beginning.

Well... I never believed in Gasquet. For me, he's very similar to another guy who's been way overrated, French cyclist Sylvain Chavanel. I see them as having the French disease of what is more or less a loser's attitude. Meaning they seem satisfied even when they did not really deliver, always tell you that they gave it their all but you really have the impression that it's not really true (I don't think they're lying, it's more that they don't realize it). They have very little mental strength and are not consistent. And then, sorry if I sound mean, but I think they're simply not very clever. I may be entirely unfair in this judgement, but it has always been my impression and I've always thought it was an important factor.

Now, it might seem strange to criticize Gasquet for being satisfied with too little, because as most people know I love Ferrer and he is also the kind of person who tells you he's happy with what he's got, that if other guy beat him or are more highly ranked, it's because they're better and that's all there is to it. But I don't know why, this philosophy seems to work for Ferrer, as if he's just being really realistic but that doesn't stop him from fighting and rising above even his own expectations. It's more a way of trying to evacuate negative emotions (frustration, jealousy...) With Gasquet, it obviously doesn't work. Sometimes it seems like he even starts finding excuses for losing before he's even played the match.

So yeah, he was definitely overrated, now I'm not sure he really is anymore. The infamous cocaine story also hurt his reputation. And the fact that he's just not delivering, at least not as much as many people expected.

Anyway, I don't hate the guy, he's just won Bangkok, congratulations to him, I hope that he can one day find the solution to his problems. It is not very likely but he's still young enough, who knows.

G4.
09-30-2012, 04:45 PM
Gasquet was extremely precocious for his age and was rightfully considered a tennis Mozart. At 11 he was already playing against adults in local tournaments and at 13 he was playing futures and beating ranked players (Novikov is 18 but has only won 4-5 future matches in his life). At 18-20 he was beating peak Federer and reaching finals in Masters, so i'd say it was legitimate to have high hopes in him. I think the problem is that he never really improved.

Gagsquet
09-30-2012, 07:12 PM
AJ is such a Richie hater. He must have believed a lot in him back in time.

yuri27
09-30-2012, 07:16 PM
Well... I never believed in Gasquet. For me, he's very similar to another guy who's been way overrated, French cyclist Sylvain Chavanel. I see them as having the French disease of what is more or less a loser's attitude. Meaning they seem satisfied even when they did not really deliver, always tell you that they gave it their all but you really have the impression that it's not really true (I don't think they're lying, it's more that they don't realize it). They have very little mental strength and are not consistent. And then, sorry if I sound mean, but I think they're simply not very clever. I may be entirely unfair in this judgement, but it has always been my impression and I've always thought it was an important factor.

Now, it might seem strange to criticize Gasquet for being satisfied with too little, because as most people know I love Ferrer and he is also the kind of person who tells you he's happy with what he's got, that if other guy beat him or are more highly ranked, it's because they're better and that's all there is to it. But I don't know why, this philosophy seems to work for Ferrer, as if he's just being really realistic but that doesn't stop him from fighting and rising above even his own expectations. It's more a way of trying to evacuate negative emotions (frustration, jealousy...) With Gasquet, it obviously doesn't work. Sometimes it seems like he even starts finding excuses for losing before he's even played the match.

So yeah, he was definitely overrated, now I'm not sure he really is anymore. The infamous cocaine story also hurt his reputation. And the fact that he's just not delivering, at least not as much as many people expected.

Anyway, I don't hate the guy, he's just won Bangkok, congratulations to him, I hope that he can one day find the solution to his problems. It is not very likely but he's still young enough, who knows.

Ferrer never had any weapons whereas Gasquet clearly does, that's why the expectations were much higher for him.
Hell, even Gasquet's FH can be more of a weapon on a good day than Ferrer's FH (see some of the monster FHs he can launch on a good day).

Sanya
09-30-2012, 07:28 PM
AJ is such a Richie hater. He must have believed a lot in him back in time.

I think a lot of his haters were once the same guys who believed he would win a lot as true fans. :shrug: I wrote it somewhere too.

Jimnik
09-30-2012, 07:30 PM
7 years ago.

Now he's underrented if anything.

yesh222
09-30-2012, 07:31 PM
... Ernests Gulbis?

yuri27
09-30-2012, 07:37 PM
7 years ago.

Now he's underrented if anything.

I don't know how he was overrated in 2005.
At only 18, he was one of the only 4 guys to beat peak Federer in 2005 and not by waiting him to make errors but producing winners after winners.
Name me all the other 18 years old players who showed that sort of level of play in the last 30 years.....you will probably only see multiple slams winners.

Sophitia36
09-30-2012, 08:00 PM
Ferrer never had any weapons whereas Gasquet clearly does, that's why the expectations were much higher for him.
Hell, even Gasquet's FH can be more of a weapon on a good day than Ferrer's FH (see some of the monster FHs he can launch on a good day).

It doesn't really have anything to do with my points though. I'm not comparing people's expectations for Gasquet with people's expectations for Ferrer. I'm comparing their approach to matches and especially their mental strength.

And well I won't get started again on the "Ferrer has no weapons whereas Gasquet does". If Gasquet's example is not enough to convince people that having a great attitude and a lot of mental strength IS a huge weapon, then I don't know what else I can say...

Gasquet was excellent as a junior, but then something went wrong and he just couldn't make the transition to become a real top player. I don't know how this can be explained, my idea is that he has an attitude problem and lack maturity and/or career intelligence, but I am hardly an authority on why excellent junior sportsmen sometimes fail to deliver.

yuri27
09-30-2012, 08:52 PM
It doesn't really have anything to do with my points though. I'm not comparing people's expectations for Gasquet with people's expectations for Ferrer. I'm comparing their approach to matches and especially their mental strength.



Sorry, my mistake then.;)
And i agree with you about lack of intelligence when it comes to Gasquet.
When i listen him or even when i see his tactics on the court, he doesn't look like the brightest guy out there.

And when i was talking about weapons, i was specifically talking about shots, not about the other things.