Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by The FishEXpress, Apr 15, 2008.
Who has been the biggest waste of talent never to win a grand slam in the history of atp tennis?
Although, I wouldn't say waste of talent, my choice would be:
Mecir, Philippoussis, or Leconte
I think it might be Marcelo Rios. He is one player who reached a #1 ranking without winning a single slam. Not a complete waste of talent though.
I'd def have to go with Rios, Phillipousis as a dishonorable mention
Rios is a tough name to avoid. I'd like to add David Nalbandian's name to the list.
hes def worth a mention
On top of the ones mentioned I will add Haas.
Rios, Mecir, Philippoussis, Martin, Norman, Coria, Leconte, Haas...
Rios for me. Simply because he had some amasing skills and whoever had the pleasure to see him knows what am I talking about. I agree with Ocean Drive on Mecir, Coria and Leconte. Haas was a spoiled rich kid and injuries did him no good. Jarryd was my favourite player never to do it back some decades ago.
As for the guys I was rooting for and who did it, Stich was deservably the wimby champ and I loved it. He could have been a guy without a slam but he won it and he deserved it. Krajicek and Ivanisevic pulled of the same, Phili was sadly left out.
Rios, Rios, and Rios.
mark phillipoussis. guy has major talent and should have definetely won at least one major.
rios, henman, nalbandian
Haas although Injuries really set him back
Nalbandian still has chances he isn't "done" yet
Henman as well although I think he never really had the confidence to win a grand slam....especially Wimbeldon
disagree with everyone saying haas. guy has had injury problems his whole career. rios is one that always comes to mind. so is nalby and gasquet is heading that way. gasquet mentally is no good. he has all the tools to be contending for the top spot but his head is questianable. and thats not just from his davis cup issues.
gasquet doesn't have all the tools. his forehand is weak.
"who has been the biggest waste of talent never to win a grand slam?"
Hicham Arazi. The man had extreme natural talent for the game oozing out of every pore.
He could hit shots that others could only dream of.
He also would routinely miss fairly easy shots.
Unfortunately, his mental game was as weak as his physical game was strong.
Although never a fan of his I would go for Henman here because when I have watched him he has always played a stylish and -often- exciting match
Even if he won 2 gran slams , i think marat Safin is THE BIGGEST waste of talent the tennis History has never had .
I am a newbie , fan of tennis for 10 years
Serena and Vénus Willimas fan , i am also from France so correct me if i do too much mistakes i am here to improve my english .
Disagree with the names you guys pick. I think a waste of talent is someone not training and givin enough, who isn't mentally good. Like for instance Safin, although he still managed to win some. Nalbandian, in my eyes, has used his talents fairly well. He's got some weaknesses that he'll always have, and living in a federer age, he's made the most of it IMO. Just like Henman, who was more unlucky than wasting his talents
Rios and Nalbandian
Both had/has an insane amount of talent. (David still has a chance, but it is tough at the top.)
I wouldn't add Henman. he had aamazing hands at the net but everything else just seem overshadowed by better players like Sampras and Agassi.
Philippoussis.. could have been as good as hewitt for us aussies. Nalbandian as well, i believe he will eventually win won though.
In my opinion, "waste" of talent means just that. Someone who took it for granted, threw it away, didn't use it to their full advantage for any number of reasons - partying, not working hard on the court, not working hard off the court, generally being unfocused, etc.
Chronically injured players, in my opinion, don't really "waste" their talent. I don't know much about Phillipousis' off-court life during tennis, so I can't say for sure. But, if the reason he is considered a waste of talent is because of the injuries, then I'd have to disagree.
Someone like Mecir, who simply seizes up mentally on big occasions, I wouldn't consider them a waste of talent either.
So, my vote goes for Rios. Capriati could have owned this title for the women if she had not had her remarkable comeback.
I never put Henman down (He is in my top 3 favourite players of all time) because I don't think he wasted his talent, he was just incredibly unlucky at times, the time he threw the racket towards the ball girl, we all know what happened against Ivanisevic, the heavens let out...
Henman could have been crowned Wimbledon champion in 2001 and French Open champion of 2004.
Mecir, in a huge way. Philippoussis, him I really believed would have but he had so many injuries from doing rather reckless things, or at least unusual things for a tennis player on tour. I always wanted El Anouyi (sp) to win one because I think the celebrations would have been exception.
guy has moments where he is unreal. people used to flock to his courts at challengers when he was a kid to watch him play. that guy has everything you need to be a top 5 player but always seems to fade out in the second week of a major. or when he was gona really break through and win some huge title he finds a way to lose.
I will give the ladies some love and point out Kournikova * must less a title*, Jankovic, Vaidisova and Ivanovic in there, but those last three are still young and will get many more chances.
I also have to agree with Nalbandian and . The US open seems to be the scene of the crime with those two. Also frenchman Cedric Pioline is up there, and the grand daddy of them all is Marcelo Rios.
I also, would have loved to have seen Younes El Aynaoui win a slam, such a fun character, I remember the 2003 Australian Open pretty fondly, when he beat Hewitt in 4, served brilliantly and his forehand was dynamite. Then he got screwed over by a line judge against Roddick and lost 21-19 in the final set.
Rios, Nalbandian & Haas
hard for me to say but i think it's blake. so talented and athletic but doesn't have the mental game.
Henman is not even close to wasting talent. In fact, he maximized his talent, and played above his level. He had average groundstrokes, above average volleys (compare his to edberg, Mac, Sampras), average serves and good but not great movement. His talent should've made him a top 15-25 but instead, he was consistently 5-10 for a good part of his career.
I hate to agree with you... I've been waiting for Blake to get his mental game together but it seems like a lost cause.
Blake win a grand slam and prove me wrong, please!!!
Why Jankovic? Didn't she play the most matches last year? Seems like a hard worker to me.
I would say Nalbandian and Davydenko.
I agree entirely.
She may seem like a hard worker, but from what she said is she didn't like practicing so she played a lot of matches. But if she can beef up her serve, curtail her schedule, she should be able to capture a grand slam title. Plus she just started working with Harold Solomon, so things might be looking up for her.
Davydenko is an overachiever imo. He grinds from the baseline, has at best an okay serve, and plays a gazillion tournaments a year. He doesn't have a deadly weapon per se and because he's not a big guy, he gets overwhelmed by big hitters Federer/Roddick/Blake.
Nalbandian is more a worthy candidate for underachiever. He doesn't work out in the off season, never puts together a consistent year, loaded with the best 2HBH and a top 10 forehand on the tour, and he gives top players like Federer headaches. He's not a tall guy, so he needs to stay in top shape. Unfortunately, he's suspect in that category.
I would add Malisse, in addition to all the names mentioned so far.
He is now 27, right? 6 years ago, he reached 4th round at French Open and semi-final at Wimbledon (beating Rudseski and krajicek and stretching Nalbandian to a 5 setter). Then he developed some kind of health problem(heart condition I heard) and then fallen out of radar.
Rios, Mecir, and Martin.
Henman, Mallise, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Rios
I agree with fastdunn.
Malisse is the GREATEST UNDERACHIEVER in the history of tennis. He has massive talent and except for some titles and a semi-final in a grandslam he has nothing. He could have been a steady top10 player.
nalbandian would be #1, but as everybody already mentioned henman and phillipousos (however you spell it) and coria (so close but so far away)
he should have one
i think he fell off the atp... doesnt he play challengers?
i second that, Marcelo did get to #1, but you have to win a slam man
I agree. He should have won RG. He's playing challengers but he's not doing well. Loosing 1st rounds at almost all of them.
Separate names with a comma.