Nalbandian only Argentina player ever with potential to dominate?

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by NadalAgassi, Oct 29, 2012.

  1. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Argentina has produced alot of great players over the years. However most of them were in the shadows of other greats. Was Nalbandian the only Argentine player ever, man or women, who had the ability to dominate.

    Vilas- was never going to dominate when he was basically a poor mans Borg, playing in the Borg era. Along with that Connors and McEnroe were much better players as well.

    Sabatini- always in the shadow of Graf, Seles, Navratilova, Sanchez Vicario, and Capriati. Never had the ability to be on top amongst that group, or probably win more than the 1 slam she did.

    Coria- was never going to dominate, career potential was probably just 1 French which he blew in 2004.

    Nalbandian though is the one who people consider to have had the ability to win 6 or more majors and dominate tennis. Is he the only Argentenian man or women ever who had that potential.
     
    #1
  2. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,080
    Location:
    Australia
    I'd say so. It's too bad he didn't live up to his potential. I would have loved to have seen more Nalbandian finals.
     
    #2
  3. reaper

    reaper Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,102
    Nalbandian was/is a terrible choker. He contrived a way to lose from two sets to love and a break up against Baghdatis is the semis the year Baghdatis made the Australian Open final. He barely showed up in the Wimbledon final where he was crushed by Hewitt. Del Potro looks to me to be set for a big 2013 and is the best Argentine I've seen, Vilas having been before my time.
     
    #3
  4. hisrob777

    hisrob777 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    Messages:
    253
    Location:
    FL
    Great player. One of the best backhands EVER. People always talk about his lack of fitness.
     
    #4
  5. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,320
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Vilas by a mile.
     
    #5
  6. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Vilas did dominate the second half of 1977. Utterly dominated. I believe he won 72 of his last 73 matches in the calendar year, and the 1 loss was the infamous spaghetti strung racquet against Nastase.

    Coria, when he had reached the 2004 French Open final, had won 48 of his last 50 matches on clay, dating back to the start of 2003 Hamburg.
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2012
    #6
  7. not_federer

    not_federer Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2010
    Messages:
    301
    POTENTIAL to dominate? How is nobody talking about Del Potro? I'm hardly a huge fan of his but look at the facts:

    -already won a major
    -lost to Fed in five epic sets in the French that same year; had a damn good chance of beating Soderling too if he made the final
    -lost to Fed again at the French this year, pretty much only because of injury
    -showed potential on grass at the olympics too

    So he already has one HC major, came *this close* to winning the French that same year which would make him a two-slams-in-one-year champion which so few people have ever done.
     
    #7
  8. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Nobody today remembers Vilas or Coria as being a "dominant player", nor even having the potential to be so. Being a dominant player requires more than dominating 3-5 months once in your career, especialy almost entirely based on only one surface. By that logic Rafter (summer of 1998), Azarenka (winter 2012), Kvitova (fall of 2011), Rios (February-May 1998 ), would be considered dominant players.
     
    #8
  9. Disgruntled Worker

    Disgruntled Worker Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    389
    Yeah. If we're talking about potential how about a guy who not only defeated one of the all-time greats en route to a major, but made him look down right silly!
     
    #9
  10. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I dont think he ever showed the potential to dominate thus far. At his thus far career peak (late 2008-2009) he ended a year ranked #5, spent a few weeks only at #4, won only 1 title above 500 level (yes it was a huge win, winning the U.S Open by beating Nadal and Federer back to back), and had terrible records vs then #3 and #4s Djokovic and Murray.
     
    #10
  11. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,320
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Hindsight is always 20/20....
     
    #11
  12. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I am not saying Nalbandian is the best Argentine player of all time btw. He isnt since he didnt come anywhere near fulfilling his vast potential, despite that he had by far the most of any Argentine player ever. Vilas, Sabatini, and Del Potro would all have to rank higher, Vilas and Sabatini both considered to have fully maxed out what their potential was. However Nalbandian was IMO the only one of those with potential to be a dominant player that could win 6 or more slams, spent various periods as a legitimate #1, etc..
     
    #12
  13. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I'm going by objective facts. Vilas dominated the second half of 1977, winning 72 of his last 73 matches of the calendar year, and Coria had an excellent run on clay from 2003 Hamburg to the 2004 French Open. Even going into 2005, Coria had those masters series finals against Nadal in Monte Carlo and Rome, before a very surprising R16 loss to Davydenko at the French Open when Coria had been the clear favourite to reach the final from the bottom half of the draw.

    Vilas had a packed schedule into those months, playing as many matches as Djokovic did in a whole year in 2011. Besides, that run by Vilas is more dominant than anything Nalbandian has managed. Nalbandian's most dominant performances on a consistent basis were his Madrid and Paris Indoor performances in late 2007. As dominant as those tournaments were for Nalbandian, he also had a loss to Wawrinka in Basel in between those tournaments.

    You're seriously comparing those runs to Vilas in the second half of 1977? Seriously? Vilas had a period when he was the dominant in-form player in the world, for 6 months. Nalbandian had it for 2 weeks.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2012
    #13
  14. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    You obviously have no clue what a dominant player is. Someone who won only 2 real slams (since the Aussies of the late 70s were such a joke for both men and women they should all be disregarded, and since Vilas is so extremely far from slam champion calibre on grass), is ranked miles behind many others of their era- Connors, McEnroe, Borg, Lendl, Newcombe, and never held the #1 ranking is not a dominant player. Even if you wish to argue he dominated half a year, dominating half a year in no planet makes you a dominant player. Even arguing Jim Courier as a dominant player is a huge stretch, and he was much closer to being that than Vilas is, as he was the games top player for about a year and half, and won 4 majors and reached 7 slam finals in only about 2 years. Then Coria, that is something far beyond laughable. Having a great clay court season where you win only 1 Masters and dont even win the French, and being ZERO threat to win anything on any other surface, I think peaking at #4 or #5 in the rankings, and you were a dominant player, ROTFL!!!!! Why not even argue Sabatini as a dominant player then as Sabatini >>>>> Coria, and she had numerous stretches more impressive than Coria's best ever one (note I am not arguing Sabatini as a dominant player, just putting in perspective how ridiculous arguing Coria ever was one is).

    I am going to ignore anything else you have to say in this thread as your delusions that Vilas and even Coria are regarded as "dominant" players is simply trolling and detracts the thread from its main topic point.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2012
    #14
  15. SoBad

    SoBad Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,727
    Location:
    shiran
    Nalbandian looks a little bit overweight, but he is still in better shape than Seles was after Graf tried to take her out.
     
    #15
  16. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,756
    I agree. The only thing Nalbandian had the potential to dominate was the donut stand. Hugely overrated player imo. Is he talented? Sure. But I don't think he ever had the potential to dominate, people just talked him up a lot and made him seem better than what he actually was.
     
    #16
  17. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    He has a 8-10 (or maybe it is 8-11 now) record vs Federer. That is mighty impressive. He wasnt playing past his prime Federer like Murray and Djokovic were either, he is virtually the same age, and his prime years were exactly the same as Federer's. After Federer was born at Wimbledon 2003 and until the end of 2007 when Federer fans claim his prime ended, he had 5 losses to Nalbandian, including major matches like the 2003 U.S Open and 2005 WTF final. This despite that he was overweight, unfit, and not fully commited to tennis in Serena Williams style (even less dedicated than Serena in her good years probably).

    Watch his performances fall of 2007, especialy the ones where he destroyed Nadal and Federer, and one can see why people rate his raw talent so highly.
     
    #17
  18. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    How did you fail to mention Delpo?????? He's clearly shown much more potential to dominate, did you miss the 09 US Open, he completely dominated Rafa and was close to losing to Fed until turning it around. He actually won a slam versus Nalbandian who has been close, but as for potential, Delpo showed absolute potential in that summer, unfortunately he got hurt and the rest is history. Not sure how you mentioned Coria and Nalby and left him out, the one guy who has won a slam?????
     
    #18
  19. Ripster

    Ripster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,238
    Nalbandian could and should have dominated. Of course he had the potential, the guy made the semis of all four slams, the Wimbledon final, won several Masters and a World Tour final. He's clearly the best player to have never won a GS and if he had of given it his all he would have been a multiple slam winner.

    There were definitely periods where he could have dominated, he had Federer's number for awhile in the early 2000's and there were plenty of opportunities for him pre - 2008. After that point the big 4 were pretty much established.
     
    #19
  20. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,756
    I have seen him play many times and live too. I think he is talented but you asked which Argentine had the greatest potential to dominate and I don't think it is Nalbandian. I would put Vilas above Nalbandian. Nalbandian was a lazy sod and despite his talent he was never going to dominate.
     
    #20
  21. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Nalbandian is the player with the most raw talent to have come from Argentina. Your OP is senseless as there have been dominant players who've come from Argentina, even if it's on "just one surface." Dominance is dominance.
     
    #21
  22. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Vilas was Borg's lapdog, he went 6 years without beating him at one point, so with Borg being the best player of that era there was clearly zero potential to dominate. Along with that he was only a top player on clay, as his record at Wimbledon, and the U.S Open once it went to hard courts, shows. That is why I would say Nalbandian had much more potential to dominate, he wasnt owned by anyone of his era, not even Federer. Many people believe he should have won 6 or more slams and been #1 at various points if he were commited to tennis. Nobody would ever say that about Vilas (especialy as he in no way lacked commitment, he was one of the hardest workers ever, so what he was is the absolute max of what he could have been). Some think Sabatini was an underachiever but does anyone really think she could have been a dominant player in the era of Navratilova, Evert, Graf, Seles, and Sanchez Vicario.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 29, 2012
    #22
  23. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    He had potential to be the dominant player of 2003 and be Federer's biggest rival on top of the mens game by far from 2004-2006. Even past 2006 with Nadal starting to become a good player on non clay surfaces for the first time, Djokovic emerging, and the field starting to get tougher, his potential was still huge as his late 2007 performance showed.
     
    #23
  24. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,690
    I don't think that Nalbandian ever had the ability to completely dominate men's tennis, but I certainly think he had the ability to achieve a Hewitt like career, winning a couple of slam titles and spend some time as the world no. 1.

    To me he was huge underachiever on hard courts during his career, never reaching a final at either the Aussie Open or US Opens, and never winning a masters series title on outdoor hard, getting spanked by at Montreal in 2003 in his one final appearance.

    I don't think think he was ever good enough to win RG or Wimbledon, but I do think he was good enough to win both the Aussie and US Opens.

    Argentina have produced a lot of underachievers over the years. Clerc was such a talented player with so much power and shotmaking ability, and he could make even the likes of Mac and Lendl look completely helpess at times. However he never reached a slam final, with just two RG semi-final appearances in 1981 and 1982. He won a lot of titles during his career including the 1981 Italian Open where he beat Lendl in the semis, and must be considered as one of the best players never to have reached a slam final.

    Alberto Mancini and Agustin Calleri were also huge underachievers. Mancini only won 3 ATP titles during his career, but two of them were big ones at Monte-Carlo and Rome in 1989. He went into RG that year as one of the hot favourites, but was well beaten by Edberg in his QF. He beat Becker two times out of 3, in that 1989 Monte-Carlo final and on his way to the Miami final in 1992. Plus he beat Wilander 3 times out of 3 in 1989. I loved his backhand.

    Calleri also had so much raw ability and sheer power, with one of the hardest backhands I've ever seen. He had some great victories such as destroying the world no. 1 and reigning RG champion Ferrero on clay in the Davis Cup in 2003, giving Agassi at tennis lesson at Miami in 2004 (Agassi had won his last 20 matches at Miami and won that event 6 times in total) and outclassing Hewitt at the US Open in 2007 (the US Open was Hewitt's strongest grand slam). It was ridiculous that he only won 2 ATP titles and never even reached the 2nd week at RG. In one of the biggest matches of his career, the 2002 Buenos Aires final, he committed a huge choke against Massu, a player that he otherwise owned.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2012
    #24
  25. vive le beau jeu !

    vive le beau jeu ! G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,441
    Location:
    Ometepe, Pink Granite, Queyras, Kerguelen (...)
    delpo has far more potential to dominate than nalbandian...
     
    #25
  26. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    Nalbandian didn't own anybody either, which is quiet necessary to be a dominant player.

    Everybody agree that he had a huge talent, that he could (and maybe still can) beat the best player on a could day, which most players can't. However, he lacks consistency which is more important than talent to dominate (see David Ferrer).

    Now Coria could have been a different player had he not lost against Gaudio. Del Potro as well had he not been hurt. And I can still him win a few slams during the next years. I wasn't born when Vilas played so I won't speak about him.
     
    #26
  27. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    I don't understand how it's possible to say Vilas was'nt a dominant player. Vilas was in the top ten during ten years and dominated 1977, winning 14 tournaments, with 2 Grand Slams.
    Coria and Nalbandian, and even Del Potro, did nothing, compared to Vilas.
     
    #27
  28. 5point5

    5point5 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    667
    Location:
    1 floor above, dropping the bass.
    Nalbandian never had the serve to dominate. He peaked, and that was the best he was ever going to do with his B rated serve.
     
    #28
  29. Boricua

    Boricua Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,084
    Del Potro has the potential to be a dominant player. He beat Federer last week. His main weakness is lack of consistency but his power game is very tough.
     
    #29
  30. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I am surprised so many think Del Potro has the potential to be a "dominant" player. I do think he has the potential, or atleast did have the potential at one point, to win more than 1 slam, but I would be hard pressed to see him ever be ranked #1, let alone have a season like many of Federer's, Nadal's 2008 or 2010, or Djokovic's 2011 in this season. His records vs all the top 4 are quite poor, he is totally owned by both Djokovic and Murray especialy, and even at his peak his U.S Open win was his only title above 500 level, he couldnt even win a regular Masters. He also has serious problems with staying fit.

    Is Del Potro really more talented than Nalbandian?
     
    #30
  31. PeteD

    PeteD Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,397
    Location:
    The Commonwealth (of PA)
    Del Potro is only 24 years old, and anybody who has seen him play close up, the guy is absolutely scary the way he whips the forehand like he's playing jai-alai. The question is his wrist. Big scare when it hurt earlier this year but it seems fine now, and the longer that maintains the better the prognosis I would guess.
     
    #31
  32. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,876
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    Delpo has the most potential to dominate easily.
     
    #32
  33. single_handed_champion

    single_handed_champion Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,104
    Nalbandian? Dominate? Has the word acquired a radically new definition recently?? When did he ever show such potential? 1 GS final when nobody had ever heard of him and in FEderer's shadow all his career. Even the early H2H advantage he had ultimately meant zip. In fact, you can make a case that each of VIlas, Sabatini and Coria showed more potential than Nalbandian in this respect. And I am not talking just pretty backhands.

    At least del Potro has won a Slam against far superior competition. With his game, he has the POTENTIAL to dominate. Not sure it will happen however.
     
    #33
  34. BER256

    BER256 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    Messages:
    74
    If you look at Del Potros losses to Federer this year and eventual win, you can see his progrression and his coming back to form. 2013 will be a huge form, he has all the weapons and I most certainly think he will dominate in 2013. I think he can take one of the big 4 out of the top 4 and win a slam. So Delpo had the potential to dominate most certainly, and I think he will next year. Nadal loses to big hitters, he has a good matchup with federer. Murray and Djokovic are tough matchups for him though.
     
    #34
  35. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    What you said is not dominating though. Dominating would be winning 2 slams and reaching #1 at minimum.
     
    #35
  36. BER256

    BER256 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    Messages:
    74
    Dominating in an Era with players like Novak Djokovic, Rafa Nadal, Roger Federer, and Andy Murray, is simply impossible. Although I believe your definition of winning 2 slams and reaching #1 would classify dominating a year, but then no one dominated the 2012 calendar year. So I don't foresee any players dominating in 2013 because the level of skill among the top 4 and Del Potro makes it so you cannot count anyone out. That being said Delpo is my favorite player and I could see him winning the AO, and UO, with an interesting advantage on Nadal at the FO, and Wimby was never his strongest tournament.
     
    #36
  37. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,320
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Delpo has the game to dominate. He might not have the physical recovery or the ability to keep from getting injured. We do have to look at history here.
    Nalbandian can stay near the top longer, but not dominate.
    Vilas, when he was still playing, had the game and a chance. His matches were all interesting and entertaining, most rooting for him to succeed, but as we now know, an artist seldom beats the technicians.
    And big power seldom trumps the technicians, because big power has problems applying the game thru 6 rounds, week after week.
     
    #37
  38. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,328
    Vilas perhaps could have dominated to an extent if not for his daddy Borg. Del Potro could have dominated most definitely to a reasonable degree but that injury set him back years it seems. He hasn't been the same since late '09 and it may be safe to say he never will be
     
    #38
  39. Jeff Nuese

    Jeff Nuese New User

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    45
    Great thread as Im a huge Nalbandian fan. On any given day his game was parallel to none, and this list includes Roger and Rafa. The mans talent is unrivaled and probably the purest ball striker of our generation. I would also agree that his mental and physical approach often diminished his ability to hit a tennis ball. As he is getting older , I dont think a grand slam will be in the cards for Dave, which is a shame based on his talent, but still a pro's pro and a joy to watch.
     
    #39
  40. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,356
    Agree completely. People freakin' forget this for some reason. Serve, forehand, and court coverage/athleticism are more important now than they've ever been, and Nalbandian doesn't score high in any of those categories (although his forehand was pretty good, particularly CC).

    Nalbandian's serve is downright average, and below average for a top player. It's mighty hard to dominate an era with a pedestrian serve. Moreover, where was he gonna dominate? It wasn't gonna be grass and definitely not clay. Peak Nalby is a contender on hardcourts, no doubt, but he wasn't gonna dominate what with peak Fed (2004-2007), peak Nole, Rafa, Roddick, Murray etc. So where was this domination going to occur?
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2012
    #40
  41. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,356
    That's overdramatic. What Del Potro have you been watching? 2012 Delpo is about as good as he's ever been. 62-14 with 4 titles. So what if he hadn't won a major this year? He lost to Fed twice, Djoko once and Ferrer once at the slams. He darn near hit Fed off the court at Roland Garros, the Olympics, then beat him at his hometown event. I'd say he's pretty close to being the player he was in '09. He's definitely more consistent.
     
    #41
  42. smoledman

    smoledman Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,409
    Location:
    USA
    Del Potro obviously.
     
    #42
  43. Big_Dangerous

    Big_Dangerous Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    6,007
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Yeah I don't know how the OP missed Del Potro...
     
    #43
  44. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I didnt purposely miss him. I never felt he had potential to "dominate" tennis. How can someone who is owned by both Djokovic and Murray, and usually loses to Federer and Nadal, hasnt been a threat to win big titles on any surface but hard courts, and didnt win a Masters title in his best year ever, going to dominate. I should have factored in how overrated Del Potro is on this forum though. :lol:
     
    #44
  45. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,876
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    Delpo's not neccessarily overrated. He simply has/had the most potential to dominate. 2010 was set to be a pretty big year for him. He had beaten Fed twice in a row in 2009, he had just beaten Nadal pretty easily at Montreal and the USO, and Djokovic's 2010 as it turned out was pretty bad. He was serving more DF's than aces for gods sake. Federer said at the time that Delpo was playing like a #1 player or something of the sort, and the truth is, he was.
     
    #45
  46. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    One could just as easily say, "How was a player that never won a Grand Slam going to dominate?"
     
    #46
  47. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,328
    Its tough to say whether Del Potro could have dominated or not because his PEAK was cut short and he missed an entire year.. That can set you back a long time. The Del Potro that showed up to the USO in 2009 that took out Nadal and Fed back to back was scary and could have kept building off of that..

    Who knows what Del Potro really could have done if his best wasn't cut short.
     
    #47
  48. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    It wasnt that unbelievable. Federer served poorly and played his worst match in awhile in that final, and still would have won in straight sets if he didnt blow a bunch of chances in the 2nd set. Beating Nadal at that point was no real achievement for a decent top 15 player, his record vs the top 10 was something like 2-11 the last 4 months of 2010 after his return from injury. What would have happened had he had to play one of Djokovic or Murray, instead of Federer or Nadal. Djokovic and Murray are much worse opponents for him than Federer or Nadal, and he almost never beats either one, in fact has never beaten Murray on hard courts, and his only hard court win over Djokovic was one he retired after the 1st set. To win any hard court slam 2010 and beyond you would likely need to beat Djokovic (apart from the 2010 Australian Open where beating Murray in the semis, then a top form Federer in the final would have been required for him to win), and a couple of times possibly both Djokovic and Murray. Meanwhile his odds of beating a top form Nadal at Wimbledon or the French Open are miniscule at best, or even surviving to the finals of either event for that matter as he is mostly a hard court specialist.

    If this were his coronation as the new king of tennis why did he not win a tourament the rest of 2009, lose to Murray in the RR of the YEC, and lose easily to Davydenko in the final of the WTF. Sorry I just dont see it at all. I would agree he could have even risen to the top 3 at one point and won another slam or two had he remained healthy (maybe, very far from certain) but dominance, no way.
    Not to mention with his height, build, and lack of supreme fitness or athletic ability he would never be able to stay healthy for a whole year.

    One last note, why on earth are people still talking about his "comeback". He has been back from his major injury for over 2 years now. It is put up or shut up time for him. I actually like him so would be happy to see him back in the mix near the top, but as far as potential to dominate I do see Nalbandian as having had much more natural talent, ability to beat ALL the top players when on, and thus more potential to dominate than Del Potro ever had. Plus Nalbandian peaked in a weaker era, his only competition would have been Federer if he had it all together. Del Potro plays in an era of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, almost impossible to see him dominating in a group like that.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2012
    #48
  49. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,876
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    The big thing here is that the truth is, Nalbandian had no more potential to dominate than Delpo did.
     
    #49
  50. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Nalbandian is easily more talented than Del Potro is. Some talk about Nalbandian as being on par with Federer and Safin in raw talent. Nobody has put Del Potro up that high.
     
    #50

Share This Page