PDA

View Full Version : nalbandian is overrated on TW


roddickfan90
03-25-2009, 12:03 PM
hes good, but everyone talks about him like he's a genius when someone like roddick who is underrated on TW is actually a much better player - consistently and talent wise. im just sayin hes overrated - he aint anything special....................................He's also a fat chocker

Tennis_Maestro
03-25-2009, 12:05 PM
The most over rated player on this forum by a country mile!

Reason for it? He sometimes beats their hero's in semi major competitions. (Federer, Nadal)

gj011
03-25-2009, 12:16 PM
Roddick is way overrated on this board. Nalbandian is not.

grafselesfan
03-25-2009, 12:17 PM
Roddick is way overrated on this board. Nalbandian is not.

I am new to this forum so not sure exactly how those two are rated here. However while I far prefer Nalbandian to Roddick it is Roddick who has achieved more overall.

DarthFed
03-25-2009, 12:24 PM
Roddick? overrated? tskk

Shaolin
03-25-2009, 12:25 PM
Roddick is way overrated on this board. Nalbandian is not.


Roddick is actually underrated here. Everyone hates the guy.

Nalbandian is impossible to categorize. Weirdest player ever...Somedays he destroys the world #1 or #2, somedays he loses to a scrub first round. Seems to not care about being 20-30 lbs overweight in a sport where agility and mobility are of supreme importance.

One thing is sure: Nalbo could be unreal if he pulled an Agassi, got in great shape and got his mind right.

grafselesfan
03-25-2009, 12:33 PM
Roddick is actually underrated here. Everyone hates the guy.

Nalbandian is impossible to categorize. Weirdest player ever...Somedays he destroys the world #1 or #2, somedays he loses to a scrub first round. Seems to not care about being 20-30 lbs overweight in a sport where agility and mobility are of supreme importance.

One thing is sure: Nalbo could be unreal if he pulled an Agassi, got in great shape and got his mind right.

Agree with what you say pretty much. However wasting ones talent is really the biggest crime of all IMO.

Shaolin
03-25-2009, 12:35 PM
Agree with what you say pretty much. However wasting ones talent is really the biggest crime of all IMO.



True that. He's right there with Rios and Safin in the talent-wasting department. Probably even worse. At least the two I mentioned kept themselves in shape.

canuckfan
03-25-2009, 12:36 PM
Nalbandian does not have the consistency or slam toughness that is needed to be truly great. But when he's on, its a thing of beauty. His talent is not overrated.

breadstick
03-25-2009, 12:36 PM
I don't care what you say, Nalbandian is still awesome.

blackfrido
03-25-2009, 12:42 PM
hes good, but everyone talks about him like he's a genius when someone like roddick who is underrated on TW is actually a much better player - consistently and talent wise. im just sayin hes overrated - he aint anything special....................................He's also a fat chocker

how many times have you seen Nalbandian playing?

by the way, is Roddick a tennis player?

Ripster
03-25-2009, 12:43 PM
Nalbandian is not overrated. People constantly say he has shot at beating the top guys because, in fact, he does.

Nadal_Freak
03-25-2009, 12:44 PM
Roddick is the more consistent player but Nalbandian is the more dangerous player. Roddick plays conservative with his baseline game while Nalbandian is very aggressive on both sides. I'm glad Nadal doesn't have Nalbandian in the early rounds this time even though it would bring quite an exciting match.

tacou
03-25-2009, 12:47 PM
I do not think some posters know what the term "over-rated" means.

Nalbandian is not over-rated at all. When playing well, not even at his best, Nalbandian is a complete beast who can bully ANYONE from the baseline and has enough court sense/touch to finish at net. When he is playing ON, he can destroy the beast players in the world without breaking a sweat. Those are facts.

However, it is widely acknowledged that Nalby can go from "on" to "off" in the blink of an eye and these days rarely shows up at the big events. At best he's considered one of the dark horse's at slams.

So over-rated? No. That is the general opinion of David on these boards and that is pretty accurate.

As for Roddick, overrated? Seriously? I think there are like 6 posters (myself included) who actually like Roddick and think he's a goo player. How is he overrated?

aldeayeah
03-25-2009, 12:47 PM
Nalbandian is the GOAT at ruining people's predictions.

DarthFed
03-25-2009, 12:59 PM
I do not think some posters know what the term "over-rated" means.

Nalbandian is not over-rated at all. When playing well, not even at his best, Nalbandian is a complete beast who can bully ANYONE from the baseline and has enough court sense/touch to finish at net. When he is playing ON, he can destroy the beast players in the world without breaking a sweat. Those are facts.

However, it is widely acknowledged that Nalby can go from "on" to "off" in the blink of an eye and these days rarely shows up at the big events. At best he's considered one of the dark horse's at slams.

So over-rated? No. That is the general opinion of David on these boards and that is pretty accurate.

As for Roddick, overrated? Seriously? I think there are like 6 posters (myself included) who actually like Roddick and think he's a goo player. How is he overrated?

Good post, and lol im one of the six

rubberduckies
03-25-2009, 01:09 PM
Let's not forget that the only reason Roddick can call himself a Slam champion is that he and his Flushing Cronies stole one from Nalbandian.

luckyboy1300
03-25-2009, 01:13 PM
Roddick is way overrated on this board. Nalbandian is not.

then you must be so ashamed that your boy received a very bad spanking from an overrated player.

gj011
03-25-2009, 01:15 PM
then you must be so ashamed that your boy received a very bad spanking from an overrated player.

Actually I am ashamed. That spanking (and yes it was a very bad spanking) in IW by a quite inferior player was a big embarrassment for Novak.

roddickfan90
03-25-2009, 01:19 PM
Let's not forget that the only reason Roddick can call himself a Slam champion is that he and his Flushing Cronies stole one from Nalbandian.

so how did he steal it, oh yeah, bcuz nalbandian chocked. roddick won his slam fair and square.PERIOD

blackfrido
03-25-2009, 01:23 PM
Gilbert talking about the overrated;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f86e_09EChI

gj011
03-25-2009, 01:25 PM
Let's not forget that the only reason Roddick can call himself a Slam champion is that he and his Flushing Cronies stole one from Nalbandian.

Agreed here. Nalbandian would have won that SF match if there was not that ridiculous line call in the 3rd set TB.

roddickfan90
03-25-2009, 01:29 PM
Gilbert talking about the overrated;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f86e_09EChI

i love it how they're talking about argentinians - and yet they leave out there only GS champion (gaudio)

bluetrain4
03-25-2009, 01:39 PM
I think everyone is highly rating Nalbandian's inherent "talent" level (an oft-discussed and hard-to-pin-down concept) as well as his "potential". We've seen Nalbandian play other-wordly tennis (mainly indoors) against Fed and Nadal, so naturally, many people will rate him highly, because his "best" tennis really is at a very high level.

But, he is overrated overall because he doesn't seem to have the fitness, motivation, concentration, mental toughness, and consistency to perform at that level on even a semi-regular basis. These are less sexy concepts than "talent" but are hugely important for a player to be a truly great player.

deltox
03-25-2009, 01:45 PM
As for Roddick, overrated? Seriously? I think there are like 6 posters (myself included) who actually like Roddick and think he's a goo player. How is he overrated?

im a roddick fan, re-energized with his renewed training and game this year.

deltox
03-25-2009, 01:48 PM
Let's not forget that the only reason Roddick can call himself a Slam champion is that he and his Flushing Cronies stole one from Nalbandian.

o wow didnt know that.. did he jack the trophy after nalby won it? or was it one of those holding his mom as hostage things?

get real, you cant steal anything, all tennis players have the same rules and they all play at home and away. same umps and line judges called for others. homecourt advantage is a possiblity but you cant call winning at home stealing one can you?

WHY do people hate Roddick>? was a ***** in an interview sometime or what?

kinda like the hawkeye incident last week.. noone STOLE anything, a bad call was made at NO fault of the person it went in favor of. hate the system for faults not the player.

ferim
03-25-2009, 02:01 PM
Nalbandian is a very talented player. I love watching him play. When he's on, he can beat any player in the tour. The problem is that he lacks mental toughness, loves to party (there's nothing wrong with that), and has other interests that are more important than tennis (cars, pies, and BBQs).

ESP#1
03-25-2009, 02:08 PM
The guy has talent in spades thats a fact, he just seems to lack those other intangibles that make up a champion. When he is on it is truly something special, however for whatever reasons he has trouble maintaining that level.

Federer and Nadal speak highly of Nadal also, i wish i had a clip

S H O W S T O P P E R !
03-25-2009, 02:13 PM
Roddick is actually underrated here. Everyone hates the guy.

Nalbandian is impossible to categorize. Weirdest player ever...Somedays he destroys the world #1 or #2, somedays he loses to a scrub first round. Seems to not care about being 20-30 lbs overweight in a sport where agility and mobility are of supreme importance.

One thing is sure: Nalbo could be unreal if he pulled an Agassi, got in great shape and got his mind right.

Exactly. He treats tennis as his job, but if he was more passionate about the sport, we would have a war on this forum between the *******s and the Nalbanditards, with a small 3rd faction of *********s.

380pistol
03-25-2009, 02:22 PM
Let's not forget that the only reason Roddick can call himself a Slam champion is that he and his Flushing Cronies stole one from Nalbandian.

Agreed here. Nalbandian would have won that SF match if there was not that ridiculous line call in the 3rd set TB.

Please!!!!!!!! If that's the route we're taking, then me can take the 2001 US Open from Hewitt. Shall we recall the overrule at 4-4 in the 5th set?? Nalbandian was up 2 sets on Roddick, and you don't blow a 2 set lead on one point.

Nalbandian is overrated around here. I have to hear he has the talent and this that and the 5th. Yeah well so did Safin, so did Rios, and they certainly don't get the love that Nalbandian gets around here.

MarrratSafin
03-25-2009, 02:44 PM
True he's way overrated here, as well as Gasquet.:neutral:

Gorecki
03-25-2009, 02:51 PM
so how did he steal it, oh yeah, bcuz nalbandian chocked. roddick won his slam fair and square.PERIOD

you mean "out of the square" right?

TheTruth
03-25-2009, 02:59 PM
I think everyone is highly rating Nalbandian's inherent "talent" level (an oft-discussed and hard-to-pin-down concept) as well as his "potential". We've seen Nalbandian play other-wordly tennis (mainly indoors) against Fed and Nadal, so naturally, many people will rate him highly, because his "best" tennis really is at a very high level.

But, he is overrated overall because he doesn't seem to have the fitness, motivation, concentration, mental toughness, and consistency to perform at that level on even a semi-regular basis. These are less sexy concepts than "talent" but are hugely important for a player to be a truly great player.

Agree.....

edmondsm
03-25-2009, 03:12 PM
So who is better than Nalbandian who doesn't get enough credit?

oneguy21
03-25-2009, 03:20 PM
Nalbandian isn't overrated. His game is just technically flawless. Every technical aspect of his game is very sound. You saw what he's capable of in his past results. Roddick on the other hand is slightly overrated I'd say. His baseline game isn't terrible; in fact I would say it's enough to keep him just in the top 100. His serve is his lifeblood though.

I just wish Nalbandian would be mentally stronger. What happened at Indian Wells was just ridiculous (kudos to Nadal), but Nalbandian had more than enough chances to close it out.

380pistol
03-25-2009, 03:30 PM
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whoop de do, he got hot and beat Fed (who's been playing tough since they were 15), Nadal (on wonky knees at the ime), and Djokovic (who was losing to damn near everyine that fall) and bnow he's the 2nd coming!!!!!

In here he's spoken about like he's something special and on skill (and /or skill set) he still trails.......

-Rafael Nadal
-Roger Federer
-Novak Djokovic
-Tommy Haas
-Andy Murray
-Marat Safin

...and possibly more. And don't gibe me this he's technically flawless cuz Borg, Graf and Courier were technically attrocious and how'd they do. AROUND HERE... he's given credit beyond his abilities and acheiements. End of story.

msc886
03-25-2009, 03:39 PM
The one thing that really bothers me is that people here seem have the impression that talent is only skill. Poeple all go on about how talented Gasquet, safin, Nalbandian so talented and they are (well in the skills department). However I think people should consider that talent does not just cover skill. it also covers determination, diligence, focus, drive etc. Its not as if anybody can just have those qualities easliy. So yes, if you put the qualities I metioned into consideration, then Nalbandian is a bit overrated in terms of talent. Whereas roddick is a bit underrated. He lacks the skill department but he has the diligence and persistence which kept him in the top 10 for so long.
People really need to look at the bigger picture instead of basing opinions on superficial qualities. Just look at the greats, could they have have been great on skill alone?

Satch
03-25-2009, 03:41 PM
Nalbo is a genius, period.

Ballinbob
03-25-2009, 03:43 PM
Nalbo is a genius, period.

+1...favorite player to watch by far

ESP#1
03-25-2009, 03:43 PM
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whoop de do, he got hot and beat Fed (who's been playing tough since they were 15), Nadal (on wonky knees at the ime), and Djokovic (who was losing to damn near everyine that fall) and bnow he's the 2nd coming!!!!!

In here he's spoken about like he's something special and on skill (and /or skill set) he still trails.......

-Rafael Nadal
-Roger Federer
-Novak Djokovic
-Tommy Haas
-Andy Murray
-Marat Safin

...and possibly more. And don't gibe me this he's technically flawless cuz Borg, Graf and Courier were technically attrocious and how'd they do. AROUND HERE... he's given credit beyond his abilities and acheiements. End of story.

Got alot anger built up it seems pistol, the simple fact is that when he is on his game is above the rest he just isnt able to maintain that level for a long period of time.

I mean a horse can outrun a cheetah over long distances, that has no deterrence of our perception of a cheetah speed

tudwell
03-25-2009, 03:47 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjL7JASDfQA

I'll offer this as evidence of Nalbandian's superb talent (look at all the return winners!) and also take the time to ask: Why is this match never included in discussions of great/epic matches? I know Federer had a bum ankle, but some of those shots Nalbandian pulled off are just astonishing, no matter who he's up against.

oranges
03-25-2009, 03:51 PM
Nalbandian is not overrated in any way. Absolutely amazing game that he can impose on absolutely anyone. The fact that he doesn't play like that consistently is also generally recognized.

@msc886 Has there been a great player without skill/talent? I don't see what's so bothersome about highlighting someone with extraordinary talent. Determination. mental toughness, etc are different categories and people also mention them separately when dissceting and analyzing. In fact, if there's anything annoying, it's the *****ing about talented guys lacking mental toughness, as if that's not as much an inherent ability as talent and all they need to do is decide to be clutch all the time.

Gorecki
03-25-2009, 03:55 PM
this is the only place i know where will\determination is a form of talent...

if it's will\determinaton.. it is not - i repeat- it is not Talent... in any language, any place in the world, any way...

ps: determination is not talent... ffs. merriam webster is there for you guys to search!

Satch
03-25-2009, 04:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjL7JASDfQA

I'll offer this as evidence of Nalbandian's superb talent (look at all the return winners!) and also take the time to ask: Why is this match never included in discussions of great/epic matches? I know Federer had a bum ankle, but some of those shots Nalbandian pulled off are just astonishing, no matter who he's up against.

amazing match, you can see all the potential Nalbo had then, too bad he was more injured than healty during career :(

blackfrido
03-25-2009, 04:42 PM
another excellent performance by David;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRiFVNscsXI

grafrules
03-25-2009, 05:42 PM
He is overrated in many ways. Yes he is very talented, yes he can beat top players on a good day, but how many players can we say both those things about. It isnt true that he had the potential to win 8-10 slams if he just focused as some seem to suggest. He also cant just beat anyone anytime as some suggest either. He is no threat on grass, his fluke Wimbledon final in one of the worst Wimbledons ever in 2002 notwithstanding. On clay he is somewhat a threat, but a lesser one. In fact the only surface he has beaten any of the real top players and won any significant titles in the last 5+ years has been indoors, and no almost doesnt cut it (eg- the round of 16 vs Nadal at the Pacific Life).

People brag about his owning Federer when his overall head to head now trails 8-10, and when he has lost 10 of their last 13, and not beaten him on an outdoor court since 2003 now. People like to build up his ability to win any tournament or beat anyone when he is on when the only surface this is true of is indoors, and maybe a slow-medium outdoor hard court. Lastly he is too evaluated on his perceived potential and not his results, like many of the other "underachieving" types.

grafrules
03-25-2009, 05:46 PM
So who is better than Nalbandian who doesn't get enough credit?

When we factor in consistency and actual achievements, rather than perceived potential which goes unfulfilled, then Roddick is one. If we evaluate overall results and consistent performance over the last 3 years (although career wise Nalbandian has the edge probably) then Davydenko is another.

dincuss
03-25-2009, 07:32 PM
Nalbandian is the GOAT at ruining people's predictions.

Thats why hes so great to watch

random guy
03-25-2009, 08:12 PM
I don't think that he's overrated here, unless you're talking of people that thinks that he has to have 8 or 9 slams who I think are really few. When people talk about his talent is talking most of the times of things that are really easy to see, that is, the quality of all aspects of his game (except his serve). Is ridiculous to say that there's a lot of people that in a good day can play like that against Nadal or Federer (not only beat them, but beat them playing like that).

I don't know why is so difficult for people to distinguish between hard work (which is a great thing in itself)/consistency/mental toughness and the like and talent that has to do a lot more with creativity and finesse.

edmondsm
03-25-2009, 09:17 PM
When we factor in consistency and actual achievements, rather than perceived potential which goes unfulfilled, then Roddick is one. If we evaluate overall results and consistent performance over the last 3 years (although career wise Nalbandian has the edge probably) then Davydenko is another.

While I don't agree that Nalbandian should be rated above Roddick, the point must be made that David has a very good record against two of the most dominant players in tennis history (Nadal and Fed) and Roddick has basically been completely pwned by both of them.

Davydenko? Nah. Sure he has been slightly better over the last three years, but Nalbandian has a Masters Cup and a Wimbledon final to his name. Plus he has been to the semis of all 4 slams, also something Davy hasn't done. Nalbandian has had quite a better career IMO.

This has nothing to do with "percieved potential". Nalbandian has had great results in his career.

IvanAndreevich
03-25-2009, 09:19 PM
another excellent performance by David;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRiFVNscsXI

Man how I love to see Fed and Nalby go at it :) One of the most fun match-ups.

Dilettante
03-25-2009, 09:28 PM
He is overrated in many ways. Yes he is very talented, yes he can beat top players on a good day, but how many players can we say both those things about. It isnt true that he had the potential to win 8-10 slams if he just focused as some seem to suggest. He also cant just beat anyone anytime as some suggest either. He is no threat on grass, his fluke Wimbledon final in one of the worst Wimbledons ever in 2002 notwithstanding. On clay he is somewhat a threat, but a lesser one. In fact the only surface he has beaten any of the real top players and won any significant titles in the last 5+ years has been indoors, and no almost doesnt cut it (eg- the round of 16 vs Nadal at the Pacific Life).

People brag about his owning Federer when his overall head to head now trails 8-10, and when he has lost 10 of their last 13, and not beaten him on an outdoor court since 2003 now. People like to build up his ability to win any tournament or beat anyone when he is on when the only surface this is true of is indoors, and maybe a slow-medium outdoor hard court. Lastly he is too evaluated on his perceived potential and not his results, like many of the other "underachieving" types.

I completely agree.

Many people here is dazzled by some streaks of brilliant game and by indoor perfomances, and they forget that Nalbandian is a good player (10-12 ATP titles, 1 GS final, not bad) but nothing similar to a "great" player like the Feds, Nadals. He's not even in the same kind as, to say, Safin, who made 2 GS titles and 2 GS finals in his prime.

But people see a flashy game and some victories over the top players (on his favourite surface) and they start to go delusional about stuff like "potential" and the eternal Woulda-Coulda-Shoulda.

One good example is when your read what some people say about Indian Wells: right, Nalbandian played one and a half terrific sets versus Nadal, but Nadal won the match and even bagelled Nalby in the 3rd, it's not like Nalbandian won 6-1, 6-1.... guys, that DIDN'T happen.

In tennis, it happened thousands of times that a player overwhelm his rival during 1, 2 sets, but at the end doesn't win the match. Nalbandian had 1 or 2 brilliant sets, but people, see how Ljubicic (Ljubo, anyone? you didin'tthought of him any more, did you people?) played Nadal in Madrid some years ago.

If the some posters' Woulda-Coulda-Shoulda won matches, Santoro would have 15 slams by now, and Safin probably 35 or 40.

And about Roddick: Andy has much better results than Nalbandian. Get over it.

380pistol
03-25-2009, 09:34 PM
Got alot anger built up it seems pistol, the simple fact is that when he is on his game is above the rest he just isnt able to maintain that level for a long period of time.

I mean a horse can outrun a cheetah over long distances, that has no deterrence of our perception of a cheetah speed

When his game is above the rest??? I tell you this, when my game is above Nadal's, Rafa's going down, so what does that mean.

Daveed at his best.....
vs. Nadal at his best - he loses
vs. Federer at his best - he loses
vs. Djokovic at his best - he loses
vs. Safin at his best - he loses
vs. Roddick at his best - close
vs. Murray at his best - still a struggle for Nalfatian
vs. Haas at his best - I'm still not sure about Daveed

It's always about when Fatso's at his best... what about when everyone else is that their pinnacle???

And again AROUND HERE he's is very overrated!!!!!!!!!

grafselesfan
03-25-2009, 11:04 PM
When his game is above the rest??? I tell you this, when my game is above Nadal's, Rafa's going down, so what does that mean.

Daveed at his best.....
vs. Nadal at his best - he loses
vs. Federer at his best - he loses
vs. Djokovic at his best - he loses
vs. Safin at his best - he loses
vs. Roddick at his best - close
vs. Murray at his best - still a struggle for Nalfatian
vs. Haas at his best - I'm still not sure about Daveed

It's always about when Fatso's at his best... what about when everyone else is that their pinnacle???

And again AROUND HERE he's is very overrated!!!!!!!!!

I agree with all those except for Haas. Haas was never that great IMO, and currently he is a past his prime 30 or 31 year old year old player. Even whatever his so called best would be at this point, Nalbandian would win over it easily at his best. The others though I agree with.

grafselesfan
03-25-2009, 11:17 PM
Got alot anger built up it seems pistol, the simple fact is that when he is on his game is above the rest he just isnt able to maintain that level for a long period of time.

I am sorry but I am not sure how you make such a sweeping generalized statement. First of what are the specifics. What surface(s) are you referring to.

On grass there are probably about 20 players whose best are better than Nalbandians best. Yeah he had a Wimbledon final in 2002 in one of the worst Wimbledons ever where he had one of the dream draws ever. Even here we saw the grass court tennis of his life only beats Lapentti and a ailing Malisse (Malisse would have won their semi that year healthy) in 5 tough sets. Then he gets destroyed by Hewitt to complete his grass court tournament of a lifetime, and even Hewitts 2002 best on grass would barely be top 5 on grass today probably. So obviously this excludes grass.

Now we move to clay. Players whose best would be better than Nalbandians best on clay would include: Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Ferrer, Davydenko. Others possibly on clay would be Verdasco (taking into account his improved abilities), Almagro, Monfils, Del Potro, and Gonzalez.

So that leaves only hard court type surfaces- outdoor or (more likely for him) indoor. Even here his best does not neccessarily beat Federer, Djokovic, and Murray at their best, especialy on an outdoor hard court. He is a bad matchup for Nadal so possibly more shot vs him in this case but it has more to do with matchup than relative ability. Last fall he played great in Paris and still lost to Tsonga, and this was indoors which is his favorite of favorite surface. Does even his best beat Verdasco in his Australian Open form. I could go on to other examples as well.

Nalbandians best isnt even close to the best on either grass or clay, and on hard courts he still would have alot of competitions from some others at their best now.

I am new to this forum but reading this thread I can already see, yes Nalbandian is overrated.

oranges
03-26-2009, 05:44 AM
When his game is above the rest??? I tell you this, when my game is above Nadal's, Rafa's going down, so what does that mean.

Daveed at his best.....
vs. Nadal at his best - he loses
vs. Federer at his best - he loses
vs. Djokovic at his best - he loses
vs. Safin at his best - he loses
vs. Roddick at his best - close
vs. Murray at his best - still a struggle for Nalfatian
vs. Haas at his best - I'm still not sure about Daveed

It's always about when Fatso's at his best... what about when everyone else is that their pinnacle???

And again AROUND HERE he's is very overrated!!!!!!!!!

Funny, all those guys must have played terrible for him to beat them way too often for you to have a point :p

edmondsm
03-26-2009, 07:24 AM
I completely agree.

Many people here is dazzled by some streaks of brilliant game and by indoor perfomances, and they forget that Nalbandian is a good player (10-12 ATP titles, 1 GS final, not bad) but nothing similar to a "great" player like the Feds, Nadals. He's not even in the same kind as, to say, Safin, who made 2 GS titles and 2 GS finals in his prime.

But people see a flashy game and some victories over the top players (on his favourite surface) and they start to go delusional about stuff like "potential" and the eternal Woulda-Coulda-Shoulda.

One good example is when your read what some people say about Indian Wells: right, Nalbandian played one and a half terrific sets versus Nadal, but Nadal won the match and even bagelled Nalby in the 3rd, it's not like Nalbandian won 6-1, 6-1.... guys, that DIDN'T happen.

In tennis, it happened thousands of times that a player overwhelm his rival during 1, 2 sets, but at the end doesn't win the match. Nalbandian had 1 or 2 brilliant sets, but people, see how Ljubicic (Ljubo, anyone? you didin'tthought of him any more, did you people?) played Nadal in Madrid some years ago.

If the some posters' Woulda-Coulda-Shoulda won matches, Santoro would have 15 slams by now, and Safin probably 35 or 40.

And about Roddick: Andy has much better results than Nalbandian. Get over it.

Honestly, are there people on this board saying that Nalbandian is in Fed and Nadal's league? Are there people saying that Nalbandian had a better career then Safin? Or Roddick? Please point me to these posts and I will admit that David has at times been overrated on this board.

You are 100% wrong about Nalbandian vs. Nadal. Nalbandian didn't dominate Nadal for 2 sets, he dominated him for 6. Their meetings in Paris and Madrid, butt-kickings, and then he had 5 match points in IW before Nadal overwhelmed him.

David is a giant killer, who also has had great results in his career. People love a player like that. YOU need to get over it.

edmondsm
03-26-2009, 07:33 AM
I am sorry but I am not sure how you make such a sweeping generalized statement. First of what are the specifics. What surface(s) are you referring to.

On grass there are probably about 20 players whose best are better than Nalbandians best. Yeah he had a Wimbledon final in 2002 in one of the worst Wimbledons ever where he had one of the dream draws ever. Even here we saw the grass court tennis of his life only beats Lapentti and a ailing Malisse (Malisse would have won their semi that year healthy) in 5 tough sets. Then he gets destroyed by Hewitt to complete his grass court tournament of a lifetime, and even Hewitts 2002 best on grass would barely be top 5 on grass today probably. So obviously this excludes grass.

Now we move to clay. Players whose best would be better than Nalbandians best on clay would include: Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Ferrer, Davydenko. Others possibly on clay would be Verdasco (taking into account his improved abilities), Almagro, Monfils, Del Potro, and Gonzalez.

So that leaves only hard court type surfaces- outdoor or (more likely for him) indoor. Even here his best does not neccessarily beat Federer, Djokovic, and Murray at their best, especialy on an outdoor hard court. He is a bad matchup for Nadal so possibly more shot vs him in this case but it has more to do with matchup than relative ability. Last fall he played great in Paris and still lost to Tsonga, and this was indoors which is his favorite of favorite surface. Does even his best beat Verdasco in his Australian Open form. I could go on to other examples as well.

Nalbandians best isnt even close to the best on either grass or clay, and on hard courts he still would have alot of competitions from some others at their best now.

I am new to this forum but reading this thread I can already see, yes Nalbandian is overrated.

Your assessment makes me think you started watching tennis 6 months ago. Nalbandian has better clay results in his career then Verdasco, Almagro, Del Potro, and Gonzalez. You can't compare them. Nalbandian is out of his prime but that means he has been around much longer then these guys.

I don't see anyone on this board saying that Nalbandian is the next slam winner. But like another poster said, you put him up against anyone in the world on a good day and his opponent is in for a tough one. You saw that in IW. Don't try and tell me that Nalbandian is just a bad matchup for Nadal. Nadal is the #1 player in the world, and he crushed Andy Murray in the final who is also "a bad matchup" for Nadal.

nalbyvsfed
03-26-2009, 07:49 AM
When his game is above the rest??? I tell you this, when my game is above Nadal's, Rafa's going down, so what does that mean.

Daveed at his best.....
vs. Nadal at his best - he loses
vs. Federer at his best - he loses
vs. Djokovic at his best - he loses
vs. Safin at his best - he loses
vs. Roddick at his best - close
vs. Murray at his best - still a struggle for Nalfatian
vs. Haas at his best - I'm still not sure about Daveed

It's always about when Fatso's at his best... what about when everyone else is that their pinnacle???

And again AROUND HERE he's is very overrated!!!!!!!!!

Nalbandian at his best( if he is mental good.) and fittest possible is very hard to beat on every court. when at his best, nalbandian serve is difficult to attack, he returns better than he does now. ( two most important things in tennis). and i also think, nalbandians backcourt game is better than federers. he can do almost everything with a ball. i only agree with nadal winning on clay ( will be close). all the other matches nalbandian will win.

ESP#1
03-26-2009, 08:05 AM
When we factor in consistency and actual achievements, rather than perceived potential which goes unfulfilled, then Roddick is one. If we evaluate overall results and consistent performance over the last 3 years (although career wise Nalbandian has the edge probably) then Davydenko is another.

Achievements? Consistent results? I am yet to here anyone brag about these factors when it comes to Nalbandian.

When I refer to Nalbandian's talent I refer to his ability to construct points, his ability to make opponents scramble dictating play by hitting on the rise, the variety in his game, he has great touch, he can do anything with that backhand,

What variety does Roddick have? The guy doesn't even seem like he's thinking out there so you can't talk about him constructing points. What can I possibly learn from Roddicks game? Don't get me wrong I have nothing against Roddick.

Again results aren't synonymous with talent

roddickfan90
03-26-2009, 08:41 AM
Achievements? Consistent results? I am yet to here anyone brag about these factors when it comes to Nalbandian.

When I refer to Nalbandian's talent I refer to his ability to construct points, his ability to make opponents scramble dictating play by hitting on the rise, the variety in his game, he has great touch, he can do anything with that backhand,

What variety does Roddick have? The guy doesn't even seem like he's thinking out there so you can't talk about him constructing points. What can I possibly learn from Roddicks game? Don't get me wrong I have nothing against Roddick.

Again results aren't synonymous with talent


so safin is better than fed,nadal and sampras...........on talent alone

380pistol
03-26-2009, 08:49 AM
When his game is above the rest??? I tell you this, when my game is above Nadal's, Rafa's going down, so what does that mean.

Daveed at his best.....
vs. Nadal at his best - he loses
vs. Federer at his best - he loses
vs. Djokovic at his best - he loses
vs. Safin at his best - he loses
vs. Roddick at his best - close
vs. Murray at his best - still a struggle for Nalfatian
vs. Haas at his best - I'm still not sure about Daveed

It's always about when Fatso's at his best... what about when everyone else is that their pinnacle???

And again AROUND HERE he's is very overrated!!!!!!!!!

Funny, all those guys must have played terrible for him to beat them way too often for you to have a point :p

Well let me dumb it down for you.??? If Daveed is at his best, name any multiple(2 or more) slam winner EVER, that he is above. That list better be long or what is your point???

He's played Fed tough since they were 15. he beat Nadal on wonky knees, and Djokovic, when Novak was losing to everyone last fall. Let's call a spade a spade. Is that supposed to impress me, and warrant him the grand status and adulation he gets around here???

380pistol
03-26-2009, 08:56 AM
Nalbandian at his best( if he is mental good.) and fittest possible is very hard to beat on every court. when at his best, nalbandian serve is difficult to attack, he returns better than he does now. ( two most important things in tennis). and i also think, nalbandians backcourt game is better than federers. he can do almost everything with a ball. i only agree with nadal winning on clay ( will be close). all the other matches nalbandian will win.

Nalbandian at his, yes and....?? When Federer, Nadal, Safin, Djokovic are at their best, you know what?? I'm putting my $$$ on them over Daveed.

He serves well and is difficult to break. His serve is still behind, Rodick, Safin, Federer, Djokovic and more, so what if they are serving well. He does return well, but if it came down to a ery godd server serving well vs Nalbandian's return, Nalbandian will lose that battle more time than not.

His backcourt game better than Roger that I don't know. Best weapons (Rog's forehand vs. Nal's backhand), I'll take Fed's FH. Fed's BH can breakdown, so maybe David's FH slightly over Federer's BH (and still I'm not sure). Fed moes far better, defends, better, transitions better. So I don't see how Nalbandian gets the edge fromthe backcourt.

So if you feel Nalbandian (at his best) will win matches cs. Nadal (except. clay), Federer, Djokovic, Safin, and more (at their respective bests), I disagree.

nalbyvsfed
03-26-2009, 09:11 AM
Nalbandian at his, yes and....?? When Federer, Nadal, Safin, Djokovic are at their best, you know what?? I'm putting my $$$ on them over Daveed.

He serves well and is difficult to break. His serve is still behind, Rodick, Safin, Federer, Djokovic and more, so what if they are serving well. He does return well, but if it came down to a ery godd server serving well vs Nalbandian's return, Nalbandian will lose that battle more time than not.

His backcourt game better than Roger that I don't know. Best weapons (Rog's forehand vs. Nal's backhand), I'll take Fed's FH. Fed's BH can breakdown, so maybe David's FH slightly over Federer's BH (and still I'm not sure). Fed moes far better, defends, better, transitions better. So I don't see how Nalbandian gets the edge fromthe backcourt.

So if you feel Nalbandian (at his best) will win matches cs. Nadal (except. clay), Federer, Djokovic, Safin, and more (at their respective bests), I disagree.


allright you all know nalbandian has maybe 3-5 kg too much on his body. he chokes alot. if he solves this problem( and he will when he is at his best), nalbandian has almost no weaknesses left... every one is mentioning nalbandian's forehand but i think his forehand is quite good. his backhand is aswome, great angles both sides. great touch at net. hes pretty fast for a fat guy, he will be faster if he loses some weight. when he is on, he is complete.

but is nalbandian able to be be fit and mental tough, i dont think so. that i must agree. but when on he is at least as good as anyone out there.

nalbyvsfed
03-26-2009, 09:28 AM
yea one more thing, we can at least say that nalbandian now isnt as fit as nadal or a federer. and he still manages to give them difficulties( nadal IW). well i know if nalbandian trains as hard as those top 4players then i give the edge to nalbandian everythime except on clay against nadal.

but we can say if, if , if but this must happen first.

oranges
03-26-2009, 10:43 AM
Well let me dumb it down for you.??? If Daveed is at his best, name any multiple(2 or more) slam winner EVER, that he is above. That list better be long or what is your point???

He's played Fed tough since they were 15. he beat Nadal on wonky knees, and Djokovic, when Novak was losing to everyone last fall. Let's call a spade a spade. Is that supposed to impress me, and warrant him the grand status and adulation he gets around here???

Let me dumb it down to your level, name one player who has better record against the top players of his time. Good luck and good bye, stupidity played arrogant is not my favorite, to say the least

grafselesfan
03-26-2009, 11:45 AM
Let me dumb it down to your level, name one player who has better record against the top players of his time.

Nadal by a long shot for starters.

oranges
03-27-2009, 12:13 PM
Nadal by a long shot for starters.

Genius, you pick No1 player and to top it all he has a negative H2H with him. Certainly proves everything :p

baselinerT
03-27-2009, 05:02 PM
lol@ RoddickFan90's status

grafselesfan
03-27-2009, 05:23 PM
Genius, you pick No1 player and to top it all he has a negative H2H with him. Certainly proves everything :p

Well ignorant one you said the best record against top players so that would mean more than just the specific head to head between the two of them. Nalbandian certainly doesnt have a winning head to head with everyone in the current top 10 like Nadal does, not even close. Overall Federer does much better vs the top players than Nalbandian as well with only losing records to Nadal and Murray out of everyone (as well as a winning head to head with Nalbandian). I am sure there are others with better records vs the top players than Nalbandian as well, but you said to just pick anyone who does and it was very easy to do so.

If it is just head to head between Nalbandian and specific top players you want then fine. Federer has a winning head to head with him, and has owned him pretty much since 2004. Djokovic is 2-1 vs him and allowed David only 5 games and 1 game in his two wins. Ferrer is 6-4 vs him. Roddick is 3-2 vs him. Tsonga won their only meeting in a Masters final on Nalbandian's best surface. Safin leads him 6-3. Monfils leads him 2-1. Blake won their only meeting easily, losing only 5 games. He has never played Simon.

If anything he has more top players with losing head to heads with than winning. I would check my facts before being so arrogant about something you were apparently really clueless about.

veroniquem
03-27-2009, 07:26 PM
Well ignorant one you said the best record against top players so that would mean more than just the specific head to head between the two of them. Nalbandian certainly doesnt have a winning head to head with everyone in the current top 10 like Nadal does, not even close. Overall Federer does much better vs the top players than Nalbandian as well with only losing records to Nadal and Murray out of everyone (as well as a winning head to head with Nalbandian). I am sure there are others with better records vs the top players than Nalbandian as well, but you said to just pick anyone who does and it was very easy to do so.

If it is just head to head between Nalbandian and specific top players you want then fine. Federer has a winning head to head with him, and has owned him pretty much since 2004. Djokovic is 2-1 vs him and allowed David only 5 games and 1 game in his two wins. Ferrer is 6-4 vs him. Roddick is 3-2 vs him. Tsonga won their only meeting in a Masters final on Nalbandian's best surface. Safin leads him 6-3. Monfils leads him 2-1. Blake won their only meeting easily, losing only 5 games. He has never played Simon.

If anything he has more top players with losing head to heads with than winning. I would check my facts before being so arrogant about something you were apparently really clueless about.
Not that it alters your point really but Federer also has a losing record to Simon.

oranges
03-27-2009, 08:09 PM
Well ignorant one you said the best record against top players so that would mean more than just the specific head to head between the two of them. Nalbandian certainly doesnt have a winning head to head with everyone in the current top 10 like Nadal does, not even close. Overall Federer does much better vs the top players than Nalbandian as well with only losing records to Nadal and Murray out of everyone (as well as a winning head to head with Nalbandian). I am sure there are others with better records vs the top players than Nalbandian as well, but you said to just pick anyone who does and it was very easy to do so.

If it is just head to head between Nalbandian and specific top players you want then fine. Federer has a winning head to head with him, and has owned him pretty much since 2004. Djokovic is 2-1 vs him and allowed David only 5 games and 1 game in his two wins. Ferrer is 6-4 vs him. Roddick is 3-2 vs him. Tsonga won their only meeting in a Masters final on Nalbandian's best surface. Safin leads him 6-3. Monfils leads him 2-1. Blake won their only meeting easily, losing only 5 games. He has never played Simon.

If anything he has more top players with losing head to heads with than winning. I would check my facts before being so arrogant about something you were apparently really clueless about.

Is there some magnet that attracts all the fools with deep seated complexes to this board? Ignorant one, you jumped into the conversation with another one eager to put someone down. None of your or his mental masturbations show in any way how exactly is Nalbandian's game overrated and why would all those listed supposedly easily beat him if both at their best. Mind you, I'm a Safin and Haas fan and not Nalby's and I disagree. This place has seriously become strictly fanboyish/girlish idiocy and low-self-esteem-curing-by-denigrating-and-pontificating types. It depresses me.

flying24
03-28-2009, 12:30 AM
Well ignorant one you said the best record against top players so that would mean more than just the specific head to head between the two of them. Nalbandian certainly doesnt have a winning head to head with everyone in the current top 10 like Nadal does, not even close. Overall Federer does much better vs the top players than Nalbandian as well with only losing records to Nadal and Murray out of everyone (as well as a winning head to head with Nalbandian). I am sure there are others with better records vs the top players than Nalbandian as well, but you said to just pick anyone who does and it was very easy to do so.

If it is just head to head between Nalbandian and specific top players you want then fine. Federer has a winning head to head with him, and has owned him pretty much since 2004. Djokovic is 2-1 vs him and allowed David only 5 games and 1 game in his two wins. Ferrer is 6-4 vs him. Roddick is 3-2 vs him. Tsonga won their only meeting in a Masters final on Nalbandian's best surface. Safin leads him 6-3. Monfils leads him 2-1. Blake won their only meeting easily, losing only 5 games. He has never played Simon.

If anything he has more top players with losing head to heads with than winning. I would check my facts before being so arrogant about something you were apparently really clueless about.

Very well said. Nalbandian fanboys seem to be in a state of delusion to what he has ever really proven, shown anyone, or achieved.

Mind you this oranges sad excuse of a troll/dimwit has so many players he is delusional on it is hard to keep count- Safin, Nalbandian, Gasquet, Haas.

Leublu tennis
03-28-2009, 01:57 AM
As for Roddick, overrated? Seriously? I think there are like 6 posters (myself included) who actually like Roddick and think he's a goo player. How is he overrated?There used to be 7 of us, until Roddick started mixing tennis with politics, for whatever reason.

Bhagi Katbamna
03-28-2009, 08:56 AM
Nalbandian is one of those players, like Haas who hasn't really done anything and yet has his share of fanboys for some bizarre reason on this forum.

edmondsm
03-28-2009, 10:06 AM
Nalbandian is one of those players, like Haas who hasn't really done anything and yet has his share of fanboys for some bizarre reason on this forum.

Man there is some serious hate on this forum for Nalbandian for some reason. You know I posed the question, "who deserves more credit than Nalbandian but doesn't get it?" and none of the haters really had an answer. Roddick maybe, but I'll be the first "Nalby fanboy" to say that Roddick has done more than David.

Now we're likening Nalbandian to Haas??? Good God, Nalbandian has had 3 times the career that Haas has had. Nalbandian has a history of knocking down the giants in tennis, and he's an interesting character. People are going to like and root for a guy like that. I don't understand why the haters don't understand that.

GameSampras
03-28-2009, 11:14 AM
Im not sure how much credit David deserves. Lets face it .. The guy has had ample opportunity after opportunity in his career to pick up some slams and some masters shields. Hes tough player, and does have some major talent. But you can only defend the guy for so long. He hasnt met or exceeded expectations many have put on him considering his talent. The guy has game. But definitely lacks the overrall package of a great. Hes just solid. Kind of an "era filler" at this point. Not terrible but not great. Hes that happy medium

grafselesfan
03-28-2009, 11:48 AM
Not that it alters your point really but Federer also has a losing record to Simon.

You are right, thanks for pointing that out. Still as you said that doesnt detract from my overall point on Nalbandian.

edmondsm
03-28-2009, 12:02 PM
Im not sure how much credit David deserves. Lets face it .. The guy has had ample opportunity after opportunity in his career to pick up some slams and some masters shields. Hes tough player, and does have some major talent. But you can only defend the guy for so long. He hasnt met or exceeded expectations many have put on him considering his talent. The guy has game. But definitely lacks the overrall package of a great. Hes just solid. Kind of an "era filler" at this point. Not terrible but not great. Hes that happy medium

Well maybe the standards were a bit high then. You know the guy isn't the most nimble mover out there, and the modern game is all about movement. His serve is not very potent and can go off at times, same story with his forehand.

But to me this means he is an underachiever, not overrated. Those two words are far from having the same meaning. I don't like calling players underachievers, because it implies that mental aspect of tennis is an easy fix. Players like Rios, Safin, and Nalbandian can't just force themselves to aquire a better mental outlook. If anything, it's much harder to deal with the brain then the body.

If you're saying that David is overrated, well I have yet to have anybody prove that to me. Not even close.

GameSampras
03-28-2009, 12:17 PM
Well maybe the standards were a bit high then. You know the guy isn't the most nimble mover out there, and the modern game is all about movement. His serve is not very potent and can go off at times, same story with his forehand.

But to me this means he is an underachiever, not overrated. Those two words are far from having the same meaning. I don't like calling players underachievers, because it implies that mental aspect of tennis is an easy fix. Players like Rios, Safin, and Nalbandian can't just force themselves to aquire a better mental outlook. If anything, it's much harder to deal with the brain then the body.

If you're saying that David is overrated, well I have yet to have anybody prove that to me. Not even close.



I would definitely lean towards the underachiever side. I mean in what way is he overrated? He hasnt won a whole lot of major tournaments. But he is capable of defeating anyone today. The key word is capable though

Tennis Dunce
03-28-2009, 12:19 PM
Seriously...MAestro needs to lay off the chili dogs and cheese wedges and get back into top form...'cuz when he is...he really has no weaknesses.


NALBANDIAN!

edmondsm
03-28-2009, 12:56 PM
I would definitely lean towards the underachiever side. I mean in what way is he overrated? He hasnt won a whole lot of major tournaments. But he is capable of defeating anyone today. The key word is capable though

Definitely capable. But he is an enigma. One day he is giving the world #1 all he can handle, the next he's going down to Victor Troicki 3 and 1.

tangerine
03-28-2009, 01:25 PM
Fatbandian ***** have been bitter about Roddick since 2003, lol. :lol:

Tennis Dunce
03-28-2009, 03:52 PM
Roddick has a Slam and Nalbandian doesn't...

Something REALLY ain't right about this...

You Nalbandian haters will realize true greatness when he captures the U.S. Open this year...just watch.

EDIT: NALBANDIAN!!

tahiti
03-29-2009, 01:46 AM
I wouldn't have said so, but after his last match.... which was appalling, one might think so :)

diegaa
03-30-2009, 05:17 AM
nalbandian doesn't care about the sport. he uses tennis as a way of earning his bucks. when he retires he will be doing anything but something related to tennis. Still, he is a great (wasted) talent

Dilettante
03-30-2009, 06:52 AM
I would definitely lean towards the underachiever side. I mean in what way is he overrated? He hasnt won a whole lot of major tournaments. But he is capable of defeating anyone today. The key word is capable though

He doesn't defeat "anyone" and never did.

He had some big runs on his favorite surface, but if he would been capable to beat "anyone" in some moment in his career he would have won at least a slam or two.

Still, he is a great (wasted) talent

Wasted? why?

He has done what he is capable to do. Never showed anything similar to a real dominance, not even during a single slam.

diegaa
03-30-2009, 07:02 AM
Wasted? why?

He has done what he is capable to do. Never showed anything similar to a real dominance, not even during a single slam.


He has wasted his talent, yes. Why? He showed us all he is capable to play really well in ALL surfaces and do it more than well. He seemed to reach his potential only by matches in different tournies, sadly.
Obviously he could have done it better, as he does prefer car racing than training.

Dilettante
03-30-2009, 07:28 AM
HHe seemed to reach his potential only by matches in different tournies, sadly.

Many players do that at one point or another of their careers. If it was for what the players can do in specific matches, we would have dozens of "wasted potential slam winners".

Nalbandian did a GS final once, that was his big feature, but he was no serious competition to Hewitt at all. Don't tell me Nalbandian was more focused on racing in that Wimbledon. He was focused on Wimbledon, but he showed he was not Grand Slam material and he's never been. He's a solid player, a legitimate Top Ten with a good career as many other players we've seen through years, but he did NEVER show the qualities of a Big One.

What fools you is the fact that Nalbandian can beat big players (on NON-SLAM tournaments though) but don't forget Tsonga once destroyed Nadal, Blake beat Nadal with ease (both in GS!) Caņas beat Federer, etc. That happens.

And Nalbandian not caring anything about tennis, I don't buy it. Read my lips: I DON'T BUY IT. Maybe he doesn't train as much as he should, but he's prepared enough to compete in ATP tournaments and pass rounds, that's an absolute fact. Many tennis players have hobbies and many of them are kinda party guys too, but when someone just don't care about tennis, he just falls far from the top rankings. Don't buy the "he could be the #1 but he doesn't want to" crap from Argentinean press.

edmondsm
03-30-2009, 08:24 AM
Fatbandian ***** have been bitter about Roddick since 2003, lol. :lol:

*******s, always humbling us with their grace and maturity.:rolleyes:

Josherer
03-30-2009, 08:27 AM
He has an amazing ability but can't put it together when it counts. He shows up and can beat anyone but that isn't something that happenes overly often.

I aggree with OP though in the sense that Roddick is terribly underated on this forum when he is a great solid and consistent player.

Gorecki
03-30-2009, 08:49 AM
Fatbandian ***** have been bitter about Roddick since 2003, lol. :lol:

the word is Mediocrity...

The mighty ******* would like to have a word with you!

edmondsm
03-30-2009, 10:50 AM
He has an amazing ability but can't put it together when it counts. He shows up and can beat anyone but that isn't something that happenes overly often.

I aggree with OP though in the sense that Roddick is terribly underated on this forum when he is a great solid and consistent player.

I'm a fan of Roddick, but his career has been on "repeat" since 2004. He has no ability to challenge whoever the top player in the world is, and hasn't for years. Nalbandian on the other hand, while not as consistent as Roddick, maintains great h2h's with Federer and Nadal. It is alot more fun to root for a guy that can win against anyone then a guy who's matches against the top players are a foregone conclusion.

nikdom
03-30-2009, 10:57 AM
Nalbandian on the other hand, while not as consistent as Roddick, maintains great h2h's with Federer and Nadal.

If you expect something from Nalbo you may be disappointed. I go into his matches expecting him to tank. But the times he does come out to play, he more than makes up for it. I think his shot-making ability is second to none!

Unfortunately we just have to accept that not all natural talents in life make the most of their ability in terms of achievement. I'm human and I know how flawed I am. I'm not going to hold it against someone like Nalbandian that he has flaws too. I'm just happy we get to see rare flashes of his brilliance from time to time.

380pistol
03-30-2009, 10:59 AM
allright you all know nalbandian has maybe 3-5 kg too much on his body. he chokes alot. if he solves this problem( and he will when he is at his best),

So he has to lose weight and be tougher mentally... and that's the Genesis for him



nalbandian has almost no weaknesses left...

What Nalbandian is this????


every one is mentioning nalbandian's forehand but i think his forehand is quite good.

Come on?? It's decent, yes, but nothing special.


his backhand is aswome, great angles both sides.

Yes but it still trails Agassi, Sain and Djokovic on the 2 hand side aloe, and while his maybe tecjnically better, some may say Nadal's is if not better, at least more effective... now.


great touch at net.

Is he Edberg?? McEnroe?? Anyone can look like they have great touch in this era of non volleying clowns. He's an OK volleyer, but let's not start boosting him beyond his abilities, hence while I feel he's overrated.



hes pretty fast for a fat guy, he will be faster if he loses some weight. when he is on, he is complete.

Really how fast?? Maybe he is, but I don't know if he slimmed down if he would be a great mover, maybe he would. I mean Murray's not the fastest guy, but has very good footwork and anticipates well.


but is nalbandian able to be be fit and mental tough, i dont think so. that i must agree. but when on he is at least as good as anyone out there


I don't think so. At his best he still trails Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Safin at their respective bests, and that's just off the top of my head.

380pistol
03-30-2009, 11:07 AM
Well let me dumb it down for you.??? If Daveed is at his best, name any multiple(2 or more) slam winner EVER, that he is above. That list better be long or what is your point???

He's played Fed tough since they were 15. he beat Nadal on wonky knees, and Djokovic, when Novak was losing to everyone last fall. Let's call a spade a spade. Is that supposed to impress me, and warrant him the grand status and adulation he gets around here???

Let me dumb it down to your level, name one player who has better record against the top players of his time. Good luck and good bye, stupidity played arrogant is not my favorite, to say the least


Ahhh that's right, no answer to the question.
Who has he beaten????

Federer - who he's been playing tough since they were 15
Nadal - both wins came when Nadal was having knee issues, and then what blew a lead and got bagelled
Djokovic - who he's 1-2 against and in his two losses won SIX games!!!!!!!

So let me get this straight get hot for 2 weeks, beat a wobbly kneed Nadal and Djokovic who lost his last 5 matches of the year to Santoro, Gasquet, Ferrer and Nadal along with Bellybandian. Santoro, Gasquet, Ferrer???? Huh???
So Daveed is great cuz he did what they did???

So this is what makes NalFATian someone I'm misjudging. What else has he done???? That's why I have to dumb down to you!!!

flying24
03-30-2009, 03:59 PM
I agree with 380pistol here. Nalbandian is way overrated on TW. I mostly just avoid topics on him since they venture in lala land of sorts.

Tennis Dunce
03-30-2009, 06:04 PM
David Nalbandian is one of the 40 most talented players of all time. Wasted talent or not...he is on that list.


NALBANDIAN!!!

crazylevity
03-30-2009, 06:37 PM
I believe some posters here are arguing that Nalbandian is overrated simply because he doesn't have results. Truth is, he has better results that you give him credit for. Masters Cup, a few Masters Series shields, and don't forget his amazing Davis Cup record.

But even if he didn't have all that, show me Nalbandian's game and I'd be a fan. Have you ever seen a two-handed backhand that was so versatile? Since Agassi, has anyone's ground game been this solid? I could watch the guy just hit in practice all day long. Every single stroke in the sweet spot, perfectly executed.

With all that criticism, it does make one wonder how many actually play tennis. If you did, you would realize how good Nalbandian is.

edmondsm
03-30-2009, 06:45 PM
If you expect something from Nalbo you may be disappointed. I go into his matches expecting him to tank. But the times he does come out to play, he more than makes up for it. I think his shot-making ability is second to none!

Unfortunately we just have to accept that not all natural talents in life make the most of their ability in terms of achievement. I'm human and I know how flawed I am. I'm not going to hold it against someone like Nalbandian that he has flaws too. I'm just happy we get to see rare flashes of his brilliance from time to time.

Exactly. I've been disappointed with Nalbandian more times then he's come through. But like you said, it doesn't matter how we think he should be accomplishing, he's the one who has to go out on the court and do it. If he doesn't well that's just how he is.

blackfrido
03-31-2009, 10:20 AM
nalbandian doesn't care about the sport. he uses tennis as a way of earning his bucks. when he retires he will be doing anything but something related to tennis. Still, he is a great (wasted) talent

Diegaa,

el sabado por la manana me levante temprano dispuesto a ver uno de mis jugadores favoritos > David
Maneje 35 millas, me sente comodamente muy cerca del court para ver a David y su modesto contrincante.
Que decepcion de escuchar desde el primer momento putear a David, diciendo que no le podia pegar en el centro de la raqueta o algo asi...............lo pero de todo es que el hace sus bucks de lo que nosotros "los giles" que lo admiran pagamos para ver si ese dia esta de humor para jugar.
Conclusion dudo que pague nuevamente para ver a David, me ha robado la plata como tantas otras veces que pague para verlo en Miami :oops:

Dilettante
03-31-2009, 10:44 AM
With all that criticism, it does make one wonder how many actually play tennis. If you did, you would realize how good Nalbandian is.

Mate, is not about how good Nalbandian is, of course he's good, he's a consistent top ten player.

It's about some people trying to imply that Nalbandian is more talented than the likes of Federer and Nadal.

Bhagi Katbamna
03-31-2009, 11:14 AM
Now we're likening Nalbandian to Haas???

Only in that for not doing anything really significant, he has a puzzlingly immense and devoted following on this forum.