Players to challenge Federer in 2007

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by ckthegreek, Mar 2, 2007.

  1. ckthegreek

    ckthegreek Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    380
    Players that have a realistic chance of beating Federer this year...

    Haas
    Nadal
    Djokovic
    Murray
    Baghdatis
    Gonzalez
    Gasquet
    Safin
     
    #1
  2. The Grand Slam

    The Grand Slam Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,780
    Location:
    the earth..?
    Head-to-heads:

    Haas: 7-2, with Federer winning the last 6 of their meetings.
    Nadal: 3-6, with Federer winning the last 2 of their meetings.
    Djokovic: 4-0.
    Murray: 1-1, with Murray winning ther last meeting.
    Baghdatis: 4-0.
    Gonzalez: 10-0.
    Gasquet: 5-1, with Federer winning the last 5 of their meetings.
    Safin: 7-2, with Federer winning 4 of their last 5 meeting.
     
    #2
  3. diegaa

    diegaa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,091
    Location:
    somewhere in between
    nalbo is always there. their last meeting at the FO 06 was a liar result.
     
    #3
  4. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Haas-a chance, but wont.

    Nadal-if they play 3 times on clay this year, Nadal will win 1 of the 3, and it wont be the French Open. If they play 2, Nadal still probably wins 1 of the 2, but if Fed wins the first and the second is the French 0 for Nadal.

    Djokovic-could but wont.

    Murray-good chance to sneak out a win, wont be in a grand slam, but good shot to do it in another event, even a Masters.

    Baghdatis-hell no.

    Gonzalez-hell no.

    Gasquet-definitely not.

    Safin-not a prayer.
     
    #4
  5. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046

    Nalbandian has a much better chance then Baghdatis, Gonzalez, has been Safin, or Gasquet, that is for sure. I would give him even a better shot to actually "beat" Federer then Djokovic or Haas do in fact.
     
    #5
  6. diegaa

    diegaa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,091
    Location:
    somewhere in between
    you are now in my official OK list. :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2007
    #6
  7. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    Actually I thought Robin Soderling gave pretty good challenge to Federer
    in a match of 2006.

    2006 ATP Masters Series Madrid
    Spain Hard R16 Federer 7-6(5) 7-6(10)

    In fact, I personally thought it was the toughest challenged match to Federer in 2006
    (of course on non-clay surfaces)
    Robin pushed Federer pretty hard in that match.
     
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2007
    #7
  8. diegaa

    diegaa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,091
    Location:
    somewhere in between
    yeah, i was there. it was even closer than it looks.
     
    #8
  9. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Kewl, thanks. :p
     
    #9
  10. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Actualy Soderling also gave Federer very tough matches in the 2004 Canadian Open round of 16 and Halle first round 2005 I believe. I think all their matches have been very close. Another lower ranked player who has given Federer very tough matches now the last multiple times they played is Oliver Rochus.

    Those two probably have a better chance to upset Federer then alot of the very highly ranked guys people automaticaly look at. The highest ranked guys are not neccessarily the best chances. I dont care what the rankings say, Soderling or Rochus as of now have a better chance to beat Federer then Roddick, Davydenko, Ljubicic, Blake, or Robredo despite their much higher rankings.
     
    #10
  11. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Gasquet can on the right surface

    Gasquet has shown he can challenge Federer on clay and on slow hardcourts. He beat Fed at Monte Carlo at age 18 (2005). And he thoroughly outplayed Federer from the baseline to win the first set of last year's Rogers Cup final in Toronto just before the US Open. In that match Federer had to abandon the baseline against Gasquet and start attacking the net, or it was obvious he would loose the match in straight sets.

    In his run to the final, Gasquet beat Murray and Blake easily in straight sets.

    The only guy on the pro tour today who moves better than Gasquet is Federer. Gasquet is five years younger than Fed, so it's just a matter of time before he begins taking matches from him.

    Gasquet has played extremely close five set matches in the Slams and Davis Cup against the top players like Safin and Hewitt and has done well against the other top talent his age.

    Like Fed, Gasquet can play on any surface and has a beautiful all-court attacking game, and has a more lethal backhand drive than Fed.

    Gasquet will begin winning some big titles in two or three years.
     
    #11
  12. Heavy Metal Tennis Star

    Heavy Metal Tennis Star Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,162
    Location:
    U.S. And A.
    when murray beat roger last year, it was because fed was exhausted and tired.

    if murray cant even beat roddick and nadal, what chance does he have on roger, lets say on wimbledon?

    djokovic will not be able to beat federer, hes just not talented enough.

    nadal can on clay, and maybe nalbandian too.
     
    #12
  13. DueSouth

    DueSouth Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    England
    I dont really see how you can say that because Nadal and Murray have only played once...and murray managed to take him to 5 sets, so its not like he has i high match loss deficit to Nadal.
    And also murray is 3-2 up in h2h with roddick,one of those wins being at wimbledon and the another was very recently(San Jose 2007),so i dont think that point is very valid. I think he'd hav a shot at beating Fed though....we will have to wait and see
     
    #13
  14. splink779

    splink779 Guest

    Gasquet, Murray, and Nadal. Thats it! Unless Safin can play like he did 2 years ago.

    Haas, no matter how well hes playing, has shown he still cant do it.

    What these other guys have shown is that at their best, they have what it takes and have done it.
     
    #14
  15. Heavy Metal Tennis Star

    Heavy Metal Tennis Star Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,162
    Location:
    U.S. And A.
    but it was on hardcourts, what if they were to play on clay, ofcourse nadal will stil win, and i understand his h2h with roddick, its pretty close, but my point is, if murray is haivng a tough time with roddick, then what chance does he have on fed, i mean fed just takes roddick as a joke.
     
    #15
  16. DueSouth

    DueSouth Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    England
    true but i dont think murray is having a hard time with roddick,sure roddick won the last meeting but i dont think murray has that much of a hard time beating him. I read this article and for some reason murray really wants to play on clay and thinks he has a chance of beating nadal....well its good to be optomistic andy:-D Lol
    Anyway everybody loses to federer on grass.....so i dont think any of the guys mentioned at the top have a chance against him on grass...the 5 times he was beaten last year were 2 on h/c and 3 on clay
     
    #16
  17. boreas

    boreas New User

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    Hmm... I know most people here hate Roddick, but damn. I personally think they are very close as of right now. Roddick was slumping big time, but since have picked up his game, right when Murray started also picking up his game. I will agree that Murray will eventually have more tools and/or will be able to use them more effectively.
     
    #17
  18. DueSouth

    DueSouth Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2006
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    England
    I dont hate roddick,he is actually one of my faves,i just think,like you said, that murray is going to hav the upper hand in the future.
     
    #18
  19. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Murray yes. Gasquet no. Nadal on clay, that is it. Nadal has wins over Federer in the past on hard courts but wont happen again. Murray can beat Federer on a given day.

    Gasquet no, his best in the Canadian Open final wasnt good enough to beat a sluggish Federer, when Federer was also "on" like when they played at the first round of Wimbledon he whooped Gasquet. Gasquet's only ever win was after saving a match point on "clay", and was their first ever meeting.

    Djokovic has a better shot of beating Federer then Gasquet does. Nalbandian also has a better shot then Gasquet, even today.
     
    #19
  20. boreas

    boreas New User

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    I guess I was just confused since you didn't really mention you were thinking in future terms. The last couple meetings I have watched between the two have been very entertaining. The one that really stood out with the cincinnati 06 quarters, both taking shots at each other when at net. You could definitely tell there is some ambiguity there.
     
    #20
  21. TGV

    TGV Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    141
    Just Nadal and Murray and maybe Nalbandian.

    Of course he could lose to other players but that would more likely be a fluke/law-of-numbers catching up etc.

    As for Gasquet, he is very talented but I don't think he has the return game to trouble Federer. In his last 5 matches (14 sets), he broke Fed's serve just 3 times and 2 of those were in the first set of Toronto final.

    Since Federer is a threat to break your serve at any time, to keep up with Fed, it is paramount that you must be able to make inroads into Federer's service games. If you look at Fed's recent losses, his opponents were able to break Fed's serve several times: Murray 7 times in 2 sets, Nalbandian 11 times in 5 sets, Nadal 9 times in 4 sets at 2005 FO etc.

    (On a sidenote, in the last two matches with Nadal, Federer lost his serve only 3 times and just faced 5 break points. So I think that bodes well for Fed in his future meetings with Nadal)
     
    #21
  22. caulcano

    caulcano Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,637

    Pretty much summed it up for me.
     
    #22
  23. christos_liaskos

    christos_liaskos Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,473
    Location:
    Sheffield, England
    I dont think the h2h's with other players means anything when it comes to playing Federer. Its like saying that because Nadal has a bad record against Berdych, what chance would he have against Fed, clearly the h2h between Nads and Berdy has no influence on the h2h between Fed and Nads.
     
    #23
  24. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    As regards touting Gasquet...

    I agree with the people who don't see Gasquet beating Federer this year. Gasquet can push Federer on the right surface, but Federer is just too good right now for Gasquet to beat him.

    My prediction for Gasquet is down the road two or three years. Fed will go the way of Sampras one day. He'll get into his late 20s and begin to loose just a bit of that quickness. The wear and tear will begin to show as it does in all great atheletes. Stamina will slip a bit. A player doesn't have to slip but a shade to become vulnerable on the ATP Tour.

    And of all the younger players out there, Gasquet has the most complete game. He comes closest to Federer with his balance, court movement and overall athletic ability. He already has the groundstrokes to stay with the best of the baseliners and just needs to get a bit more consistent in his net play.

    He's still young. Even Federer said of him that too much has been expected of him too young, just as it was with him. Federer still hadn't put it all together when he was Gasquet's age.

    But when Federer is 28 and Gasquet is 23, things could begin to change.

    And even if Gasquet never wins a single Slam, after Federer he is still the most beautiful player to watch on the ATP Tour right now. Guys like Murray, Ljubicic, and Blake (Gasquet beat them all easily in Toronto) look wooden in comparison to Gasquet. He beat them with superior court movement and athletic ability.

    Aesthetically, there are Federer and Gasquet -- beautiful tennis players. The rest, in compariosn, are mechanical. Murray looks like a robot when opposite the net from Gasquet.
     
    #24
  25. chaz_233

    chaz_233 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    359
    At this point, only Murray, if he's having a good day and Fed is having a miserable day. Nada-l would have to seriously get in shape if he wants to compete with Fed. The rest, no way.
     
    #25
  26. fr600

    fr600 New User

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    At Federer's current form, chance of anyone defeating him is close to zero.
     
    #26
  27. goforgold99

    goforgold99 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    718
    The only one that can beat Federer is Roger himself.
     
    #27
  28. skiracer55

    skiracer55 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Messages:
    2,005
    Believe it or not...

    ...I'm gonna say James Blake. I know, there's no reason he should, I just think he will...he has a great game, but more than that, he's really determined, and doesn't let previous losses deter him....
     
    #28
  29. Vlad

    Vlad Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437


    Djokovic, so far only won 2 sets from Roger in 4 meetings.. Murray only beat Roger because Fed had no intentions in winning Cincy and wasn't that interested in that match.. Gasquet, on the other hand, won on clay, and pushed him all the way on hard in Toronto and grass in queens (served for the match).., so Richard CAN be competitive with Roger on every single surface.
     
    #29
  30. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Federer played like crap at Halle and Toronto, and Gasquet at his best still couldnt beat him, and the Toronto win wasnt even that close in the end, even though it was 3 sets, despite Roger being sluggish. Federer was losing sets to everybody at those 2 events, so it he wasnt sharp at all. When Federer played well at Wimbledon he whooped Gasquet, Gasquet had only 5 winners the whole match, and Federer wasnt spraying the ball like he did in those other 2 matches to let Gasquet in the match.

    Djokovic actually took Federer to 3 sets in events he wasnt struggling and wasnt going to 3 sets with everybody he played.

    Beating even a disinterested Federer on hard courts in 2 sets as Murray has done, is more impressive then beating Federer on "clay" in 3 sets after saving a match point.

    Come to me a few years from now and see who has the most success vs Federer. It wont be Gasquet who relies on poor play from Roger to even be competitive. It will be Murray and/or Djokovic.
     
    #30
  31. Vlad

    Vlad Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437

    Fed did not play poor tennis in last 2 sets in Toronto final.. first set, yes, he didn't play well, but also credit to Gasquet who was hitting some sick winners all over the place. In second and third sets, Roger played some really solid tennis to win that match. That Monte Carlo match was a quaterfinal, which Gasquet WON instead of Fed losing it.. I suggest you watch that match again if you get a chance, especially second set demolition where Gasquet couldn't do a single thing wrong and Fed simply had no answers..


    Djokovic so far is not even part of coversation when it comes to beating Fed.. until he plays a match that will be at least close in final set.. Murray did beat him, but that was Fed's worst match of the last 3 years probably (as most of even Fed fans would agree in here)

    no matter how much you deny, fact is Gasquet played him tough on ALL surfaces (hard, clay and grass) and had his chances even on grass.


    Djokovic? Not really.. at least not YET.
     
    #31
  32. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Federer ended his match in Toronto with Gasquet with over 20 more unforced errors then Gasquet had, and those certainly were not caused by the Nadal-like retrieving or counter-punching skills of Gasquet. Federer did not play well for his standards in that match, or that event in fact, and still won comfortably in the 3rd set. He played even worse in their Halle match which I got to see later on, maybe Djokovic or Murray would have beaten him playing like that, although we will never know for sure. Even you say he didnt play well in the first set of Toronto, but did play well in the 2nd and 3rd, well guess what the 1st set is the set Gasquet won, and the 2nd and 3rd were pretty easy for Fed.

    I saw Gasquet's win over Federer in Monte Carlo. That is still to this day the best match Gasquet has ever played, and yes he did win that match. However that is vs Federer on clay, Federer on clay is miles different from any other surface. He would never be able to dictate play for periods of the match the same way on any other surface, their other matches since on other surfaces prove this.

    You say Djokovic has only taken any sets off Federer in 2 out of 4 matches, well Gasquet only has in 3 out of 6, so no difference at all, except Gasquet has that 1 win after saving a match point. There is almost no difference at all. As I said Djokovic took a set off Federer the last 2 times when he was playing better tennis at those events then the last 2 times Gasquet took a set.

    Proof, look at Federer's scores in those tournaments:

    Monte Carlo

    First round-Novak Djokovic 6-3 2-6 6-3
    Second round-Alberto Martin 6-0 6-1
    Round of 16-Benjamin Ballaret 6-3 6-2
    Quarters- David Ferrer 6-1 6-3
    Semis- Fernando Gonzalez 6-2 6-4
    Finals- Rafael Nadal 2-6 7-6(2) 3-6 6-7(5)


    Dubai

    First round- Kristian Pless 7-6(2) 3-6 6-3
    Round of 16- Daniele Bracialli 7-5 6-3
    Quarters- Novak Djokovic 6-3 6-7(6) 6-3
    Semis- Tommy Haas 6-4 7-5
    Final- Mikhail Youzhny 6-4 6-3


    Halle

    First round- Rohan Bopanna 7-6(4) 6-2
    Round of 16- Richard Gasquet 7-6(7) 6-7(7) 6-4
    Quarters- Olivier Rochus 6-7(2) 7-6(11) 7-6(5)
    Semis- Tommy Haas 6-4 6-7(4) 6-3
    Final- Tomas Berdych 6-0 6-7(4) 6-2


    Canadian Open

    First round- Paul-Henri Mathieu 6-3 6-4
    Secound round- Sebastien Grosjean 6-3 6-3
    Round of 16- Dmitry Tursunov 6-3 5-7 6-0
    Quarters- Xavier Malisse 7-6(4) 6-7(5) 6-3
    Semis- Fernando Gonzalez 6-1 5-7 6-3
    Final- Richard Gasquet 2-6 6-3 6-2


    Federer was struggling alot more at the tournaments Gasquet took a set, taking a set vs Federer at those events wasnt that significant a feat, after all everybody else was doing it too. The events Djokovic took a set, only 1 other person at the 2 events combined took a set. Djokovic can take a set off Federer when he is not struggling, Gasquet has not done that since their first match.

    Who cares if Murray's win over Federer was with Federer playing badly, Gasquet cant even beat Federer in three chances last year, two matches when Federer was playing badly, Murray had only that 1 chance last year, and if he did get lucky playing Federer when he did, he still didnt get any other chances to show himself vs Federer. Their only other match was 16 months ago, so even if you refuse to accept Murray's 2 set win on hard courts last year, there is no other chances Murray had to show himself vs Federer except his rookie season. Gasquet had many chances.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2007
    #32
  33. Vlad

    Vlad Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Djokovic never even had a lead in his matches against Roger.. he only won 2 sets which where second sets after he lost the first and as you know the pressure is off in second set, because you have nothing to lose and go for your shots.. and also notice that he lost third sets relatively easily in those matches..


    another thing to consider is that Roger's 2 wins out of 5 over Gasquet were in FINALS of Masters events. This is where Roger usually plays his best tennis, just look at his finals record since 2003.. meanwhile Djokovic only played Roger in quarters ONCE which was Dubai, other matches where 1st round, DC playoff to stay in World Group, and R16 in slam. All in all, I think Gasquet played Roger tougher SO FAR and in more important matches.

    The only lopsided match between Roger and Richard was in WImbledon first round where Gasquet had to play the next day in the morning after winning his second title on grass and therefore had little time to prepare or get rest.
    And yeah, Roger played great tennis in that match too.


    Murray: they only played twice, so there isn't much information to conlude how their matches will go in the future, because the match that Murray won was arguably the worst match Fed played in long time. A lot of people would agree on that.. some say he even tanked (Mary Carillo), I think he did too as he had little interest in that match. He was coming off a win in Toronto and was tired, needed a rest and good prep for US Open, instead of trying to grind it out in Cincy, which he thought of skipping in the first place..
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2007
    #33
  34. Ten_is

    Ten_is Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    385
    Earlier I said Nadal is going to get injured soon. Which he is now getting injuries. This is because of his style of play. He's quite jerky and stiff. Not as fluent and flexible as other players.

    Now I say this.. Andy Murray will be the next guy giving Federer a hard time and I think he'll go up to #2 spot this year / next year. I'm serious. Not because he beat him due to Fed's fatigue, but because he's now thinking more and playing better. Doesn't matter if he can't win against Roddick yet.

    I see the way he plays and his time is coming. Yes I agree with Gasquet.. he played great in Toronto. So Gasquet will be #3 but isn't going to be #1. His baseline is most competitive to Roger's I agree. He is amazing and has very strong backhands but forehands need improvement. That's exactly why Roger attacked him at the net in Toronto and beat him. Either way,.. Gasquet had some Amazing clean winners especially with his backhand. Should be nice to see who can give Fed a run. Fernando Verdasco plays very similar to Fed especially on his forehand side. The downside with Verdasco, is his temper. He gets frustrated easily and talks to himself when he's angry or not playing well.. if he can pass that and strengthen his mental game, he could easily outrun and outbeat Federer in the next few years.

    Just some predictions
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2007
    #34
  35. Ten_is

    Ten_is Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    385
    Just a thought..


    Isn't it funny how most players fight and fight and almost take Fed in the first but die so early while Fed gets better?


    Gonzo in Australian open
    First set he was close to having it, at set point then lost it. After that.. you could see he lost confidence. He got tired earlier and his serves were much much weaker.

    Gasquet at Rogers Cup Toronto
    Won first set 6-2, was over happy about it but couldn't do it in the second. Fed outsmarted him. Once he lost that second set 6-3, his confidence dropped very low and lost the third easily 6-2 while Fed got better and better.

    Roddick US Open
    First set seemed easy for Fed with Roddick fighting the second and winning. Third went to Fed and then Roddick gave up the fourth completely to 6-1.
     
    #35
  36. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Federer vs. Gasquet at Tornoto 06

    Federer didn't play badly in the first set of the Toronto final last year. Patrick McEnroe predicted a possible upset, especially if Federer played Gasquet the same way Lubijcic, Blake and Murray did -- trying to rally with him and out-hit Gasquet from the baseline. And that's just the way Federer started that match: staying back.

    Gasquet set up the rallies as often as possible to be crosscourt backhand rallies, and Federer was forced into all those unforced errors -- just as Blake was forced into them. The court was a relatively slow and high-bouncing hardcourt that was perfect for Gasquet's powerful topspin groundstroks, especially his backhand. None of the other guys with one handers (Lujbicic, Blake or Federer) could win hit through or overpower Gasquet's backhand. Gasquet hit heavy and deep and forced the errors from all these players.

    Murray has a two-handed backhand and did hit a few of his big flat backhands for winners, but overall Gasquet outhit Murray from the back of the court... and from the middle of the court... and from the net. Basically, Gasquet beat Murray, and to a degree Blake, too, with his superior movement and athleticism. Gasquet made Murray look wooden, plodding and downright slow. He did the same to Lujbicic and Blake. Gasquet ran circles around James Blake. Just go back and watch the match. I have all these matches on DVD, so my memory is pretty fresh here. Gasquet left Blake standing flat-footed as he blew winners by him from both sides and controlled the net, too.

    Anybody who sees Murray as having more potential for greatness than Gasquet should watch the way Gasquet squashed Murray in straights in Toronto.

    Gasquet broke his opponents right at half the time during his run to the final and broke Federer twice in the first set.

    The difference between Federer and these other guys that Gasquet straight setted was that Federer has some real variety in his game. Plus, he is arguably the best mover any of us have ever seen on a tennis court. Gasquet couldn't make Federer look slow or wooden, even if he proved to everyone -- including Federer himself -- that he could outhit Fed from the baseline. In the second Federer began attacking the net at every opportunity and using his great movement and athleticism to play a different game. Gasquet clearly had a let down in the second, and once Federer got the match back even he gained confidence and kept Gasquet off balance and on the defense with his continued dominance of the net.

    These other guys couldn't do this against Gasquet. Murray tried to take the net, as did Blake, but Gasquet passed them at will.

    I also have the Gasquet-Federer match at Monte Carlo when Gasquet pulled off the upset at age 18. Federer played well. He didn't play poorly. But after Gasquet kept busting him up in their baseline exchanges and Federer fell behind, Fed turned the match around by taking the net. But on clay the odds were not with the net man so much as on a hardcourt. Gasquet hung tough and the third set went to a tiebreak -- which Gasquet won with an unbelievable running backhand pass up the line to pass Fed at the net and take matchpoint.

    I believe Gasquet has more talent than Nadal. Nadal just peaked early, and clearly now he is slipping.

    On the other hand, Gasquet was injured for most of the 2006 clay-court season and really only played decent tennis (for him) in the second half of the year. Gasquet just needs to avoid injury and improve his conditioning and the wins will come in time. Great talent takes longer to fully mature and be realized. Federer is the perfect example. We can't really expect Gasquet to achieve more at an earlier age than Federer himself did. Give him some time. The talent is there.

    James Blake's one big year was 2006. His results have been pretty spotty since last year's run at the US Open. He's losing to journeymen in 2007. He's older than Federer, so anyone who believes Blake can challenge Fed is delusional. Blake will do well to win a tournament this year.

    Again, Murray has some nice strokes, but his movement is only average and he doesn't show any signs of extraordinary athletic ability. My prediction is that Murray will never win a single Grand Slam event in his career.
     
    #36
  37. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Federer did play very badly in the first set of Toronto, in fact throughout the whole final, and most of that particular tournament, he did. He still beat Gasquet at his best since he is that much better. When Fed is "on" Gasquet is schooled like he was in the first round of Wimbledon.

    P-Mac is an idiot who usually predicts wrong. Nothing new.

    Since Federer's forehand is about 3 times better then the overhyped Gaskit, his backhand is atleast as good, and he is a much more efficient mover, and has much better court smarts with much better understanding how to contstruct a rally point, of course he can feel he can and will beat Gasquet staying back. He can beat Gasquet anyway he chooses to do so, and repeatedly does so.

    Murray was too worn out by the semis and put on a pitiful performance. So did Berdych in the quarters, except he did not have the fatigue excuse, he just always plays an awful match coming off a big win(his win over Nadal in the last round). Gasquet's only win over a top player playing decently that event was his win over Blake.

    Yes since Gasquet beat a weary and sluggish Murray comfortably in one match he must have more potential. Whatever.

    Gasquet never outhit Federer from the baseline. Federer hit himself off the court from the baseline in the first set. In the 2nd and 3rd sets he started coming in a bit, but he also started to dominate Gasquet from the baseline by keeping his superior groundstrokes, especialy his much superior forehand, in the court unlike the first set.

    Gasquet will be lucky to ever achieve what Nadal already has.

    Like you are on everything else you said you will be incredably wrong.
     
    #37
  38. psamp14

    psamp14 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,301
    since the federer loss these boards have gone crazy with all the new threads...i'm surprised no one has mentioned canas yet...LOL ;)
     
    #38
  39. Baghdatis72

    Baghdatis72 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,239
    Location:
    CY - UK
    You beat me to it :lol: :p
     
    #39
  40. ktownva

    ktownva Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    522
    Location:
    U. S. and A.
    I would add Sam Querrey and Fernando Verdasco to the list. These guys look like future top ten.
     
    #40
  41. diegaa

    diegaa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,091
    Location:
    somewhere in between
    verdasco????? no way man. he has a bit of the game, but lots to learn on the confidence field. besides, he is no kiddo.
     
    #41
  42. FitzRoy

    FitzRoy Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,415
    federerfanatic - I wanted to reply to your comments about Murray, Đoković, and Gasquet.

    I think Đoković is more likely to beat Federer this year than Murray. I like his game better - very fluid mover, with more speed and agility than Murray. He's my favorite player out of the young guys, and one of my favorite to watch on the whole tour.

    Murray has an incredible return of serve, though. It's tough for me to pick who has more talent between the two, but I have to go with Novak.

    As a previous poster said, I think Gasquet's return of serve will hold him back against Fed on fast courts. Gasquet doesn't seem to return as well as Đoković, and certainly not nearly as well as Murray. If a player can't consistently return Fed's serve (like Cañas did), then there will be more rallies on his serve than on Fed's (since Fed puts so many serves back in play), and that's a recipe for disaster. To me, this was basically what happened in all of the Federer-Gasquet matches since that one in Monte Carlo.
     
    #42
  43. ktownva

    ktownva Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    522
    Location:
    U. S. and A.
    I'm sticking to my honest opinion that he (Verdasco) is a dangerous cookie. He plays Grip & Rip off both sides, much like Gonzo but with a bigger backhand. Plus his forehand is as good as it gets. He does have a long way to go in the confidence dept, but that will happen after a breakthrough win. I like this dude a lot, he hits the crap out of the ball.
     
    #43
  44. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Verdasco impressive

    I was impressed with Verdasco's shot-making ability and overall game the first time I saw him. He sure looks dangerous. I'm surprised he hasn't had more wins on the tour than he has. Third round seems to be about it for him.
     
    #44
  45. aramis

    aramis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    575
    Ferrero can challenge Federer. He has the power baseline game and he likes playing against him; he isn't intimidated by Roger like 99% of the tour.
     
    #45
  46. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Gasquet's return game

    You guys may be onto something I haven't noticed regarding Gasquet's return game. I looked at the stats on his win over Neimenen yesterday, and it was indeed clear that they played many more points on Gasquet's serve than on Jarko's. Gasquet defended an incredible number of break points, (so many of his games went to deuce) but converted on a much higher percentage of the few break chances he had. So clearly Gasquet was defying the odds and must have pulled out some great shots under pressure to win the match.

    Which leads me to ask: How fast are the courts at Indian Wells?

    I know that at the Rogers Cup Toronto tournament last summer, Gasquet broke his opponents about 48 percent of the time up through the semis. That was a slow hard court. Perhaps the return game just isn't as good on the faster surfaces.

    I expect Gasquet to have a good clay court season this year... provided he avoids injury.
     
    #46
  47. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Thanks for your thoughts. I do agree with your points to some extent on Djokovic vs Murray. Djokovic is definitely the smoother mover, with more general athletic ability then Murray. However I think upstairs between the ears Murray has it all on Djoko at this point, that could change as both mature though. You are right Murray has already an incredable return, and backhand as well I would add. Djokovic has wonderful groundstrokes off both wings IMO, technicaly sound and lots of power without much effort.

    You are also right on Gasquet's return. He does not return as well as either Murray or Djokovic, or perhaps even Berdych or Baghdatis in fact. Federer has a very underrated serve, and you have to get be able to pressure his serve to have a chance to beat him. Despite the limited success Djoko has had vs Federer so far he returned his serve quite well considering the quality of Federer's first serve the times he has played them, he was just outplayed the last couple times they played. The last time Murray played Fed, Fed's serve and overall game were not there obviously, but he has shown he can return Roddick's serve pretty well and make Roddick work on his serve which says something.
     
    #47
  48. Peter H.Gilmore

    Peter H.Gilmore New User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Messages:
    94
    Feels weird not to be mentioning Fed this late into the tournament. He´s usually this far into events. But on the upside there´s an open draw and we can freely say our picks for winning the event without being made fun of. I can´t really say who´s going to win this. Gonzo is strggling through the draw, Nadal seems to have his game moving up a little. But I think Roddick may win it.
     
    #48
  49. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    Gasquet - It's his forehand that is a problem right now whether it's service
    return or groundies. Some players take longer time to develope forehand.
    Example is Sampras. Sampras had very erratic forehand in his early days
    but later developed it into his #2 weapon. Of course, his backhand
    is simply best 1 hander on tour and in fact I've never seen this kind of
    1 handed hackhand in about 20 years....

    Verdasco - He's got great game. But he seems to almost always play
    horribly on critical points. Makes me wonder why some players are great
    on critical points and some don't...
     
    #49
  50. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Sampras's only problem off the forehand was too many UEs. Gasquet's forehand is nowhere near enough off a weapon compared to guys like Fed, Nadal, or even some of the other newbie kids. So different cases IMO.

    Verdasco has no tennis brain, he makes Roddick or Phillipousis look like masters thinking players by comparision. He just hits the ball as hard as he can, doesnt care too much how many go out, and just keeps doing that, and hopes to connect on enough to win matches, keep a decent ranking, and make money. I hate watching him play, even if he does have obvious weapons that go to waste pretty much.


    By the way I asked you on another thread since we seemed to be in disagreement on the potential of the leading 20ish up and coming 6 of-Gasquet, Berdych, Baghdatis, Murray, Djokovic, and Monfils, I asked you which order you would rather their potential, not currently who is better, but their future potential from most to least of the 6. Mine- 1. Murray, 2. Djokovic, 3. Berdych, 4. Gasquet, 5. Baghdatis...............way behind 6. Monfils, in that order.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2007
    #50

Share This Page