Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well we have a thread by aura of moya that got us thinking about people who have underachieved, and tennischick made a comment about an overachiever, so that got me thinking...

Any names for who some major overachievers are? People who made the most of the little talent they had, wether they were just mentally stronger than their peers, or they happened to have a window of opportunity - old great players on their way out, young players not quite there yet..

Anyhow , I have heard people refer to Courier in this catagory a lot before, but I didn't watch tennis enough back then to clarify this.

Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Having a succesful carreer for someone you would think wouldn't have done that well..

Winning slams isn't key, though it is easier to define.

Like maybe someone who won like a dozen or so titles, and was consistently well ranke, without really being remarkabley talented, and just a hard worker.

People who worked hard, and made the most of little talent - wether that means slams or not, is up for you guys to decide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
I think Michael Chang did a lot more with his talent than he should have. He was just so determined. I don't think that his talent ever quite matched his career high number 2 ranking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks tazban - I never saw Michael in his prime, so I'm not sure what to make of him.

It sounds bad, but its sort of a shame he is American - I mean being in the shadow of Agassi and Sampras all that time - had he been from *almost* anywhere else, save Germany or Sweeden, I think that what he has done would have been celebrated a lot more.

Saying someone overachiever IMO is a compliment - its sort of saying that "play X made it because they worked hard and earned it the hard way"... so fans of the players named shouldn't feel it is a slap at that player!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,430 Posts
When I think of hard work, Patrick Rafter comes to my mind instantly. A great guy, totally focused in what he was doing, and making the most of his talent. He is not like an Overachiever for me, though, caue he should have won Wimbledon and the Aussie Open at least one time each.

Chang is a good name, too. He was like number two in the world with his consistency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Rafter is more your typical late bloomer... if I remember right he was in challengers till his early 20's and did nothing remarkable untill the year before that first US Open win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
Not Chang I think. He is/was really talented. Courier surely has had a bigger career than I thought he would have. Others? Korda: a slam and a slam final, more than other, more gifted players. Todd Martin maybe (not necessarily in slams, but in position on the ranking list in his best period)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,938 Posts
One name comes to mind, agassi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Pea - can you elaborate a bit?

The popular concensus is that Agassi underachiever, due to his lapses of interest and weak pysch.

Just curious why you feel the way you do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,771 Posts
Lleyton Hewitt aka The Potato. he doesn't have a single weapon but he is the #1 player in the world and he already has the Slams and titles to prove it. unbe-fricking-lievable! :mad: he has already overachieved! :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I disagree TC ;)

Hewitt *does* have weapons - he has a decent serve, that is consistent and doesn't break under pressure. I may be wrong, but I think Schalken is the only player who broke him at Wimbledon?

And he has great returns, either the best on tour, or second the Agassi, IMO.

He is also among the fastest guys on tour.

His shot selection is very good. His groundstrokes are excellent.

But hey we''ll just have to disagree me thinks :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
I think Kafelnikov was an overachiever....

2 GS Wins
1 GS Final
Olympic Gold

25 titles in total.

When you see how he plays when he is off it is a wonder how different he is when he is on. Unfortunately I can't get my head round how well he's done. He hasn't won a Masters Series event, I would have thought 5 or 6 masters events instead of a grand slam. But he won 2! amazing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,276 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Sonic, funny - you think he overachieved for the same reason that I think he underachieved.

When he is on, he can beat anyone.

He just is so in and out, that that stopped him, IMO :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Esp weird is the #1 ranking. For all his ups and downs, and the more strict ATP ranking system, he still reached the top.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Rebecca said:
Its funny, if I recall correct after reaching number one he lost 6 straight matches :eek:
The funny/sad thing is that he became number 1 DURING the losing streak. I think people made too much out of that losing streak though. True, he definitely tightened up a couple times, but he ALWAYS has a bad clay court season. People acted as if it was just so shocking that he kept losing.

The other strange thing that year was that he held the number 1 position for 6 weeks, all through the slump, while other players who were playing well only managed to hold it for 1 or 2 weeks.

P.S. when I write funny/sad, I mean that it was sad for him. He was so depressed when he became number 1. Can you imagine finally achieving your lifelong dream and have it be one of the most miserable periods of your career? I think Yevgeny truly wants the game to do well, so he felt bad because he thought he was hurting the game when he became number 1. I remember the big uproar when John McEnroe made the "You're number 1" comment to Yevgeny and Yevgeny answered "Unfortunately". Fortunately, he seems to be able to look back and appreciate and take pride in it.

It was also really sad for him because the game was really being criticized and scrutinized and Yevgeny took a lot more scorn than even he's used to. It's still amazing to me that people can't figure out that the ranking is based on a whole year so a top player can lose and still hold his place.

I mean really, when I started watching tennis, I knew ZERO about the game. I learned the rules through watching it on TV and it took me a little while to figure out the scoring systems. I remember it took me the longest time before I even figured out whether Mary Carillo was a man or woman! (sadly, I'm not joking). And even as ignorant as I was, I never once thought, oh, he lost, why is he ranked that high?

P.P.S. To explain the Mary Carillo thing. When I was still in the "figuring it out" stage of my tennis watching, she had this really poofy curly hair that didn't have much shape. I couldn't figure out if it was a woman with really bad hair (I've seen women with hair like that) or a man with really bad hair (I've seen men with hair like that). Plus, her voice is so low, but at the same time, I didn't think it sounded exactly like a man's or a woman's. I went back and forth for a long while. It wasn't until I actually saw her name go up on the screen that I finally knew for sure. I must have had the worst luck in timing because it was a couple months before I actually saw her name come up on the screen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
The Crow said:
Not Chang I think. He is/was really talented.

Yes, he's very talented, but I think that there were a lot of guys who were a lot more talented than Chang but didn't do nearly as well. He trumped them with determination, hard work, and mental strength. That's why I think he overachieved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Rebecca said:
Thanks tazban - I never saw Michael in his prime, so I'm not sure what to make of him.

It sounds bad, but its sort of a shame he is American - I mean being in the shadow of Agassi and Sampras all that time - had he
I was a fan of Michael at the time and I thought the exact same thing. I felt kind of bad for him. Though, isn't he still really popular in Asia? I know that he at least had a huge following their when he was in his prime. So at least he gets appreciated somewhere.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top