Whats the future for Richard Gasquet?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by ogruskie, Apr 17, 2008.

  1. ogruskie

    ogruskie Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,103
    He's one of my favorite players, and I really enjoy watching him play. I believe he's #10 in the world right now, which I guess is a good rank (but I'm not sure what a "good rank" is defined as around here...)

    What do you guys think is the future for this? Will he ever win any Grand Slams or go up the rankings?
     
    #1
  2. Fedace

    Fedace Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    23,292
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    ^^Lets be fair to Gasquet. I know he is bit of a baby and all. but you just have to understand the man. He has grown up and was born with Silver spoon in his mouth. He has been pampered and worshiped all his life. People getting him things and catering to his every need and so on and so on. so how can he not be spoiled ?? Although, he lacks the will and toughness, he is a once in a lifetime talent with wonderous control of the racket head. So lets all enjoy his genius and hope one day, he will make a breakthru and win a slam. I think that is about all he is capable of.
     
    #2
  3. flyer

    flyer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,065
    Who knows, certainly can't ignore his talent, if he grow a pair and a heart he could be quite scary
     
    #3
  4. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    I suspect his future does not include a sustained stay in the top 10 and it certainly does not include a slam title. Most of the 1985-1987 brigade are overrate. Nadal and Djokovic have proven to be as good as advertised, actually in Djokovic's case especialy much better then predicted. Gasquet and Murray are both very overrated though, and both Berdych and Baghdatis are even moreso. Dont even get me started on Monfils, he is more likely to drop down to being a challenger circuit regular then to enter the top 10. Tsonga is underrated and could easily outshine this whole class of overrated players outside of Nadal and Djokovic in the future.
     
    #4
  5. IvanAndreevich

    IvanAndreevich Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,492
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    I think all the players you mentioned have talent to win a slam. Like Baghdatis, for example. It's other aspects of their personality / game that prevent them from getting through.
     
    #5
  6. flyer

    flyer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,065
    I would be surprised if he didn't win a Wimbledon
     
    #6
  7. ScovilleJenkins

    ScovilleJenkins Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    261
    i would be surprised if he DID win a wimbledon

    or any slam for that matter
     
    #7
  8. federerfanatic

    federerfanatic Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    3,046
    Ditto. Extremely surprised if he ever wins a slam.
     
    #8
  9. ogruskie

    ogruskie Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,103
    What do you mean by him "growing a pair"?

    I don't mean to sound defensive, but I'm just curious why you guys are bashing him. :confused:
     
    #9
  10. ScovilleJenkins

    ScovilleJenkins Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    261
    because he's a pu$$y and wont play in Davis Cup when the tie is on the line, among other things
     
    #10
  11. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    I agree with this assessment for the most part. Murray and Gasquet aren't overrated in terms of talent but the expectations are too high for the moment because they don't necessarily have the fight in them.

    It's a crap shoot as to who else will emerge from the bunch with big wins.
     
    #11
  12. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    An example of growing a pair would be to... I don't know, play Davis Cup when your team needs you rather than just showing up and playing a pointless rubber hours later instead? That would be an example off of the top of my head.
     
    #12
  13. Cridal

    Cridal New User

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    94
    Gasquet does not have what it takes to win 7 straight matches. He might be brilliant on a given day, but for some reason he loses motivation, drive or interest over the course of a long tournament (like a slam). Than he rationalizes why it's OK not go all out and leave it all on the court.

    However, a combination of 90% Gasquet and 10% Nadal (or Roddick for that matter) would would bring many a tournament win and a couple slams.

    The question remains if he develops this ingredient by himself or do we need a possibly risky medical procedure...
     
    #13
  14. maverick66

    maverick66 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,137
    Location:
    Valhalla
    one example that comes to mind was withdrawing from the us open when he was supposed to play donald young. i know he was sick but it was donald young. unless you are hospilitzed suck it up and go play. i dont care if you were sick. i can remember watching tiger woods crawl his way around a golf course having food poisining cause he was the leader going into the last day. thats what makes a champion. its when things arnt going your way that u find a way to compete.

    the davis cup thing sucks but i really could care less. what gets me is why show up? if he hadnt shown up no one would even had cared. if hes that banged up why not head home and heal up before clay courts.
     
    #14
  15. 0range

    0range Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,706

    Wow Fedace I completely agree with what you say here.

    Also he wasn't just pampered... he's also under a lot of pressure from the french people... sort of a weird combination.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2008
    #15
  16. Vision84

    Vision84 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,655
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Sounds like Murray with the brits.
     
    #16
  17. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,036
    gasquet is so talented and I'd be surprised if he doesnt win a slam, he's so young, but I'd be more surprised if he's a consistent threat for the next few years. he's too flaky.
     
    #17
  18. flyer

    flyer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,065
    hmm, im not really sure where to start, Davis Cup for one, he pleaded not to play, pulling out of his USO match against Young w/ like a fever or something, winning a tourny that actually remotely matters, he just doesnt seem to be all that hungry to be honest
     
    #18
  19. Ross K

    Ross K Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,232
    If he grew a pair?!:wink:... I agree that would be quite scary!
     
    #19
  20. AlpineCadet

    AlpineCadet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,649
    Does he still use the LM Instinct Tour with the MG Extreme paint job? Been wondering if he'll stay with that frame.
     
    #20
  21. shwetty[tennis]balls

    shwetty[tennis]balls Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    Messages:
    326
    I didn't know he had much of a future.
     
    #21
  22. roddick89

    roddick89 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    188
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    I think hell be like nalbandian, make a few impressions at grand slams (maybe even get to a final like nalb.), but never win one. He'll be one of those players that will have a good career but not good enough considering his mind blowing level of talent.
     
    #22
  23. mrmo1115

    mrmo1115 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    3,967
    i believe gasquet will be up there in the class of "most wasted talent"

    i believe he will end up with 0 grand slams and everyone will look back and say "he was a waste of talent"
     
    #23
  24. yourmom08

    yourmom08 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    206
    just imagine what a grand slam winning machine you would have if gasquet had half the fight in him nadal does. No doubt he has the game to win slams, it is how much heart he has that is holding him back. Just doesn't seem to have a champion's spirit.
     
    #24
  25. BNK

    BNK Rookie

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    178
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Talent: Yes
    Passion: Not so much
    Future: ??? it's up to him really

    I definitely enjoy watching Richard Gasquet playin his best tennis but with his attitude and also pressures since he's a kid, I don't think the 'Prodigy' can make any big statement in the future sadly. Although it is still possible, it is up to him to step up and play his best game before it's all too late.
     
    #25
  26. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,016
    Location:
    Weak era
    If he is going to win a slam it would definitely have to be Wimbledon as he had his best results on grass so far.So far he doesn't have a mental toughness of a champion but you never know he may mature and toughen up in the future,he is still young and developing.
     
    #26
  27. kabob

    kabob Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    879
    Location:
    Dallas
    As of last week's Davis Cup dead rubber, yes.
     
    #27
  28. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    Right now he's relegated to being that guy we're wowed by when he's playing his best. I just don't see the competitive intensity.

    He needs a good coach.
     
    #28
  29. anointedone

    anointedone Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,655
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    His entire game is overrated besides his backhand. People who talk about how talented he is just so look at all the amazing shots he hits which you cant really dispute but they all come from the backhand. There are many guys with better forehands and better serves, the two most important shots in mens tennis these days. Compare his forehand or serve to Federer at his best for example and they are light years apart. He is pretty quick, but there are quite a few who still cover the court better. He volleys pretty well, but again there are quite a few still better in that area. His return doesnt seem to be that good, certainly not close to one of the best. So what weapons does he have to take down any of the best other then a backhand. It takes more then that. I never feel when he plays a top dog he is capable of actually winning the match, they have to lose the match, you can only hit so many backhand winners in a match.

    The one exception might be when he plays Roddick who he beat at Wimbledon, but lots of good players are capable of outplaying Roddick if they can just get a few of his serves back and keep concentration on their own serve games. Despite that even Roddick has owned him outside of that match and could have easily won that match in straight sets.

    So ok people who dispute this, start talking about what is so great about his game outside of his backhand.
     
    #29
  30. Tempest344

    Tempest344 Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,221
    Location:
    Sydney
    ^
    I would say he is a very capable vollyer

    serve and Forehand are really average at best

    If Gasquet wants to do better he needs to stand further in
    (except on Clay)
     
    #30
  31. anointedone

    anointedone Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,655
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    I would agree with that, but you need to be better then "very capable" in something other then just your best shot.

    I agree here too, huge huge problem in todays mens game.

    Definitely.
     
    #31
  32. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Gasquet grew a pair when he refused to play Roddick

    All you guys are like typical white American males with strongly authoritarian personalities... the kind who vote for Bush and McCain and believe "The Surge" will work if we just keep pouring the money and the troops into it.

    Gasquet did the sensible thing and put his own interests first for a change -- ahead of the tennis system that represents authority. He's worked his butt off for French Davis Cup, and then when he loses a close match to a worthy opponent he only gets the kinda crap from the French press that you guys are ladling out here.

    Gasquet knew he couldn't beat Roddick on that court -- just like Nadal knew he couldn't beat him. And even if either player had, his team would probably lose. That outcome was pretty certain after Tsonga messed up his knee. The French had no chance. And the odds were still against them even with Tsonga. So why should Gasquet play two tough five-set Davis Cup matches -- for nothing? USA was still going to win, and Gasquet goes into the clay-court season exhausted, emotionally drained and with no preperation.

    Doing well in Monte Carlo, Rome and the French Open are much more important than winning perhaps one Davis Cup match in a losing effort.

    I don't know how many Davis Cup matches Pete Sampras or John McEnroe or Andy Roddick won, but I know how many GS titles they all won. Roddick will be remembered as a wasted talent if he only wins that one US Open title -- regardless how many Davis Cup matches he wins.

    Gasquet joined the team with Tsonga because he believed they had a shot at going all the way. When Tsonga was lost, there was no reason to waste himself on pointless quest. Try it again next year.

    To win the Davis Cup takes a good draw, getting the home court advantage at the right times and having a good enough team. Look how long it's taken the US to get all the pieces in place to win another one.

    Gasquet is showing the same realism about Davis Cup that Federer and Nadal do. Davis Cup is kinda like the Olympics: some feel good for the guys who can't win the majors.

    I believe Gasquet will win Wimbledon. His forehand is highly underrated, and so is his court movement. After Federer, he has perhaps the most complete game on the men's tour, and he is a brillian shotmaker -- perfect for grass.
     
    #32
  33. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    Haha, your name fits. I guess love for your favorites can really be blinding. Gasquet is not even close to as complete a player as Nadal or Djokovic who dont get the same love from people since they bore people by very rarely veering off their own extremely high standards, and consistently coming up with incredible shots.

    Compared to Djokovic it isnt clear Gasquet does even one thing better. Djokovic has a far better serve and forehand, arguably just as great a backhand, a much better return of serve, is a bit quicker, volleys atleast equally well, and is mentally far tougher.

    As a Federer fan I can say I would be extremely happy if Gasquet really did not have the next most complete game on tour other then Federer. Since if that were really true it would mean Federer would dominate on all surfaces for another 10 years probably. It is a shame that you are actually far from correct and there are far more rounded players then Gasquet like Nadal and Djokovic there who make Federer's life much more difficult.

    The only Wimbledon title Gasquet will ever win is the 35 and over doubles someday.
     
    #33
  34. crawl4

    crawl4 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    334
    i agree with Gasquetrules when he says how much slack gasguet has been getting for pulling out of the davis cup. Its unfair for a guy like that to be seen as unpatriotic, even federer seems to think so with his interview in estoril a few days back about how tennis is mainly an individual game.

    With his game however, how can you think he is the second most complete player?? He's been past the 4th round once, his serve and mental game are the parts where he struggles the most . The only area which he is exceptional in is his backhand and to lesser extent his volleys which are great but not up there with the best (fed..even hewitt)

    He has more potential and talent then a couple of top 10 people like berdych, blake and ferrer but i just cant see him in the top 10 in the future. But his potential is hyped to an unreachable level which is sad.
     
    #34
  35. Richie Rich

    Richie Rich Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,274
    this is where you are totally off base. when you play for your country you are expected to give your all regardless of the possible outcome. the point of davis cup is that you put aside personal results for the benefit of the team.

    saving himself for clay - bullocks. he wasn't and isn't going to win the french anyway. i hope the fans at the french let him know that what he pulled was really stupid. somehow i have a feeling they will.
     
    #35
  36. pound cat

    pound cat G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    13,741
    Like Safin, but not with as much talent, he doesn't have the killer instinct. So he'll keep playing tennis until he loses interest in the sport & will occasonally have a really great win until then.
     
    #36
  37. unjugon

    unjugon Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    Come on, Gasquet volleys significantly better than Djokovic.
     
    #37
  38. Gugafan

    Gugafan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Messages:
    3,954
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    Excellent post. Gasquet has no weapons outside hes backhand to hurt opponents. In addition, he looks timid when playing against big hitters like James Blake. He does not really have that grit and determination to grind a match out and win ugly, something Murray does well.
     
    #38
  39. miniRafa386

    miniRafa386 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,689
    i agree, but golf takes less strength to play than tennis. tennis has a harder physical bearing on the body than golf. but what you are saying is 110% correct. if he really, REALLY wanted to be good, he wouls have at least walked onto the court.
     
    #39
  40. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    He beat Roddick on grass, so is it so impossible that he could beat Roddick on a faster indoor court? It's not such a stretch. And since when do players just decide not to play because they think they might lose? This is tennis!

    Answer the simple question: why did he play the dead rubber and not the live one?
     
    #40
  41. maverick66

    maverick66 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,137
    Location:
    Valhalla
    cause there was no pressure to play the dead rubber. he didnt want to put anything on the line when it mattered. problem with him is he has little heart. isay little cause that was a gutsy performance against Roddick at wimbledon but then he pulls this crap plus the us open where he pulls out with an ailment.
     
    #41
  42. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    I'll answer the question... here it is


    I don't believe Gasquet could have beaten Roddick on that fast surface, and I don't think Gasquet believed he could, either. So if he plays and loses, he gets all the hyper-nationalistic French tennis fans trash-talking him again for the next year about losing another Davis Cup for France. He's obviously a senstiive young man, and the unjust criticism stings.

    And again, if he had played both singles rubbers the physical toll would have delayed his preperation for Monte Carlo, a place where he needs to do well and that is important for his professional career.

    Both Llodra and Mathieu have better singles records than Gasquet does this year (which has all been on hardcourts so far) and their games are probably better suited to a fast surface than Gasquet's is, so why not let them play? They've earned the right. They are the hot singles players on the French team. Why deny them just because Gasquet is Gasquet?

    So looking at the situation on the final Sunday, If Gasquet had gone out and played the first rubber, who would have played Blake? Llodra? Clemment? Llodra had already played two matches. I don't think Clemment could have beaten Blake. Mathieu had played Blake in the first rubber, so he couldn't play him again. If Llodra was physically up to the challenge, after his single and doubles play, he would have had to beaten Blake in the fifth match. Perhaps Forget should have played Llodra against Blake on day one. Llodra might have won that match fresh, considering how well he played against Roddick.

    So basically, even if Gasquet could have pulled off the upset of Roddick in the fourth match, the French team was out of bullets for the fifth. So what is the point of Gasquet going onto the court? It's kinda like all those French and British lads who were ordered "over the top" in Wordl War I in a pointless attempt to gain a few hundred yards of ground, only to be cut down by German machine gun fire. Patriotic? Yes. Worthwhile? No. A waste? Yes.

    Tennis isn't like trench warfare, but when it becomes driven by nationalistic pride and the players are pawns much like footsoldiers, then it can get stupid and ugly. I personally don't like all the hyper-nationalism that has attached itself to US tennis over the last several years. The huge flag and military honor guards and stuff at the US Open are a good example. Such excessive displays of militaristic nationalism nauseate me. And when Davis Cup becomes as politicized and nationalistic as the Olympics, I don't like it, either. Most of the knowledegable tennis fans at the Davis Cup matches are there to see the tennis and appreciate it. They don't get into the excessive cheering and "U.S.A." chanting. But the yahoos do, the ones who would probably be just as happy at a stock car race or monstor truck show.

    I personally think Gasquet should skip French Davis Cup for a year or two and focus on winning tournaments and doing well in the Masters-level events and the Slams. If he wins Wimbledon, then the French yahoos will still love him. But right now Davis Cup has become a huge burden for Gasquet, one that has hurt his development much more than it has helped him.

    Next year the ATP will begin awarding ranking points for Davis Cup play. If the points are generous and commensurate with the time and effort that the players have to put into Davis Cup, then Gasquet can approach it with a different attitude.

    But being sent "over the top" each year by the French Davis Cup establishment is getting old for Gasquet. I think he let them know it in Winston-Salem.
     
    #42
  43. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    That is all nice all Gasquetrules but you have yet to address the universal question alot of us are still waiting for someone to give an answer to. Exactly what is so great about Gasquet's game apart from his backhand?
     
    #43
  44. lambielspins

    lambielspins Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,715
    Exactly. You hit the nail on the head. There was no excuse for pulling out of that match since "he didnt think he could win." This is the future star his fanboys want us to believe will be lifting slam trophies in the future amidst the world of sharks like Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. Please.
     
    #44
  45. laurie

    laurie Guest

    I don't know enough about the Davis cup situation to make a comment.

    To answer the question posed about Gasquet, i agree with most people's assessments - I like Federerfanatic's comments - they sound a bit harsh but mainly correct.

    As we know Gasquet has one of the best backhands around, on a par with someone like Kuerten. his forehand is not underarated - it's not the best. He's not able to dominate with it , I don't remember him consistently hitting winners or setting up the point to hit a forehand winner. On hardcourts, Sampras liked to serve a kicker to the backhand, get the return, run around the backhand and hit the forehand down the line for a winner - a quick effective play that is quite satisfying to perform. Gasquet doesn't really do plays like this - I would have thought it's easier to run around the backhand to hit forehands than to run around the forehands to hit backhands - so already Gasquet is at a disadvantage as in the modern game you cannot be a great player without a world class forehand.

    On hardcourts as has been mentioned, Gasquet has a terrible issue with the return of serve and rallies - he stands too far back especially when recieving the second serve, he's not able to put any pressure on his opponent - this brings us too another problem - yes Gaquet has a magnificent topspin backhand - but whatever happened to the slice backhand return off a kicker serve? Gasquet does not use this return because he's not prepared to stand on the line to receive, so his return is very predicable and he's not able to take time away from his opponent. A slice return into the corners or deep on grass and hardcourts is as effective as drive returns.

    So it seems almost bizarre for a player like Gasquet to be so talented yet so limited in his options when on a Tennis court - either through his lack of thought processes or coaching or bad habits and an unwillingness to experiment. All of these factors along with his seeming lack od desire to get to the very top is preventing him from becomming a great player.
     
    #45
  46. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Good and thoughtful post.... but...

    That was a very thoughtful post, laurie, but like so many other people you seem to keep repeating cliches and opinions which aren't exactly true.

    I've seen quite a few of Gasquet's matches where he hits more forehand winners than backhand winners. Gasquet has a good forehand, and he is able to pull off some stunning winners with it.

    Regarding his service return, he can indeed hit the sliced backhand -- and often does. I've watched a lot of his matches where he stands inside the baseline on the first serve return, and then actually backs up to take a big swing on the second serve. It depends on the surface and the opponent. Yes, Gasquet is known for taking the return deep at times, but not always. He very often moves well inside the court to chip and charge -- or just crush and charge.

    I think you are like most of the other Gasquet critics. You spend a lot more time reading what the Gasquet haters write about Gasquet -- and then repeat it -- than actually watching him play his matches.
     
    #46
  47. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Gasquet didn't play the fourth rubber because...

    Gasquet didn't play the fourth rubber because there was no logical reason to play it -- other than to make the yahoos happy.

    Monte Carlo was coming up... something much more important than a losing Davis Cup effort.

    If Roddick and Blake are so brave, why aren't they playing Monte Carlo right now? It's a Masters tournament. Lots of money and ranking points. Where are they? Why aren't they playing? Are they cowards? Or have they just made the very logical decision that they aren't competitive on that surface and don't want to waste their time and effort on a pointless quest that will gain them very little?

    Why the double standard?

    Oh, they don't get to wave the Stars and Stripes and be big heroes before a stadium full of yahoos, so they don't play. Instead, they get their butts whipped by some guy outside the top 50 in their first match and are brought back down to their true level.

    Cowards... I think.
     
    #47
  48. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    The future for Richard Gasquet?

    A dystopian one, where giant caterpillars with cone-shaped silver hats control the planet, and humans are their food. Only one man can stop them...
     
    #48
  49. Gasquetrules

    Gasquetrules Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    And that man is....

    Richard Gasquet!!!
     
    #49
  50. flyer

    flyer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,065
    We'll see, he really only has one huge weapon, people say hes so talented but that really only applies to his backhand, everything else in his game is pretty mediocre in conparisson to the other top players, taking nothing away from his backhand which i think is the best in the game I think he might be overrated just from a talent standpoint
     
    #50

Share This Page