Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by ESP#1, Jan 12, 2009.
Will Gasquet ever win a slam?
Explain why or why not
I hope he does...
Hopefully he does, he needs to believe he can win first though.
Nope. He's in the category with Nalbandian, Brydch, etc... as players with the game to win a slam, but not the head. Gasquet is one of the biggest headcases on tour. He might win something big, but not a slam. Not a chance in hell.
He might pull out a Thomas Johansson type thing.
well he's made it to a semi and he's still quite young, and he clearly has the talent, so I don't think it's impossible.
but he hasn't proven he can do it, not even close. this year will be big for Gasquet.
if he did, it would have to be W or USO.
i don't have a lot of faith in gasquet after last year, he absolutely tanked while he should be in the prime of his career. i agree that he doesn't have the head to win a slam. on a related note, does anyone else hate the way he wears his hat?
Why does everyone insist that Gasquet is much more talented than his results indicate? He has an inferior forehand, mediocre serve, and mediocre movement. Nalbandian has reached a slam final and the semis of every major. Nalbandian was robbed of a slam victory in the 2003 USO. Nalbandian had that spectacular TMC final with Federer in 2005. Nalbandian destroyed Fed and Nadal at the end of 2007. Nalbandian has the achievements to backup claims of his talent. Gasquet has done nothing of the sort since joining the tour. Having a flashy backhand and not much else doesn't make you talented.
No, IMO he has neither the technique (though he has a great BH, the rest of his game isn't spectacular) neither the mentality for winning a GS.
i love gasquet so i hope he does win a slam....<3
oh but it doesss. his backhand, when he's playing well, is the best on tour when it comes to impossible angles-- that means he has talent. he also has beautiful touch.
his forehand is suspect, but when he's playing well he keeps it deep enough to work the point to a place where he can put the ball away easily or rips a BH winner out of nowhere.
I agree that he doesn't have the results of Nalby, but no one said he does.
It's hard to defend Gasquet's always elusive talent after his 08 season, but if you don't think he's an extremely talented player (albeit wasted talent) then I guess we just differ on what talent in tennis is.
I don't think so. He has neither the stamina nor the mentality. (sorry, that wasn't an answer to tacou's post but to the OP's question)
He will be lucky to ever make the semis of a slam again. He is being left in the dust by Tsonga, Monfils, and Simon who will IMO all have better careers than him. No he doesnt really have the game. His game is only a great backhand, and not much else. That is before even getting into his sucky mental game, his suspect physical strength and conditioning, and his general lack of strategic awareness.
It took by the match of his life to barely beat a choking/slightly off form Roddick one time in a slam quarterfinal on his best surface, which he was still very near losing in straight sets. That is pretty much the ceiling of his potential.
welll even if you didn't mean to I agree, his stamina has always been questionable
and I don't know what would happen if he made a final, I could see him crumbling. I'd expect it, actually.
Nope.. No way
If by some miracle he ever makes a slam final (and it would be a miracle) he will likely have had a great draw to get there and then get overpowered by whoever he plays in the final which will almost certainly be a much stronger player with a much bigger game than he has. He wont have the chance to crumble since he would likely be brutally overpowered and outplayed by someone expected to do so to him.
I mean if you want to start a poll about Nalbandian no one will stop you, i am huge Nalbandian fan and i agree he is one of the most talented guys on tour,but i didnt ask about nalbandian, i do however disagree when you say gasquet has mediocre movement, not only is he fast but his footwork is great, his serve is heavily underestimated also, he also has great touch at net, the forehand can be a liability i agree but it can improve, i would agree that his biggest issue would have to be his head, the question is can he get his head together for enough time to win him a slam
I love people like you who can tell the future.
Gasquet has tons of talent and all of his many faults have been listed, but he's so young still and could turn these parts of his game around.
though I personally think it's unlikely (though I am a fan) I know Gasquet has the game to win a slam.
I have been calling the future on Gasquet for 3 years now and have been dead on on pretty much everything. His making 1 slam semi isnt being wrong as I said back then he might make a semifinal or two in his career with a good draw and a spurt of form. He might be young in a sense but no longer so young in a sense. Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, range in ages from a week older to 3 years younger than him so he isnt this young guy with all the time on his hands. His peers or even younger players have already left him in the dust and are still improving too even if he finally starts to improve again, with a horde of similiarly young players to Del Potro coming up from behind too. I certainly dont profess to know the future on everything, only the very obvious things such as Gasquet's limited (relatively to the hype by some) potential.
Gasquet does not have the "game" to do it. What does he have to win a slam except a great backhand. That isnt enough on its own. His forehand isnt even a top 50 forehand probably and that is the most important shot in the mens game. His serve and return of serve are not top 30 and those are the next most important shots in the current mens game. It is amazing he has been able to squeeze as much out of mostly just a great backhand as he has, even with a weak mental game and suspect physicality to boot.
No, no, no, and no. Why? Because he does not have the mental fortitude.
nor the forehand, nor the serve, nor the fitness.
What is his forehand grip? it almost looks contental(sp?). However I think its totally his mind that lets him down.
I dont think so, I could be wrong, but the guy should be hitting full stride by this point in his career and so far has not shown the match toughness to win a slam.
How can he not have the game? He wouldve beat andy murray at wimbledon had he not choked when serving for the match, when he lost in the semi to federer he had played a 5 setter against a rod the night before and he still gave fed all he could handle in that first set before fading out, he just beat tsonga a few days ago, he barely ever loses in straight sets, he finds a way to play a brilliant set or two then his level goes down, how can you explain this high level if it is not "game" or talent
I understand the argument of him not having the mental fortitude but to say he lacks talent is absurd
Murray up to now is not considered a formidable grass court player at all, and that Wimbledon meeting was before Murray took his game up another two levels from where it had been up to and including Wimbledon. Remember Nadal made Murray look like a junior player in the following round. I wouldnt say nearly beating Murray at Wimbledon at that point is anything to crow about.
In his loss to Federer in the Wimbledon semis he was outclassed like he has been outclassed everytime he played Federer since his lone win first time they ever played on clay. Since then if Roger plays decent he always wins in straight, if Gasquet is playing lights out and Roger is really off than Richard occasionaly sneaks out a set.
Tsonga is the most erratic player in the top 10 by a long ways. Do you want me to make a list of the players who have beaten him even worse than Gasquet. Extreme highs and extreme lows, can lose to anyone in the top 150 on many given days, and also beat anyone in the top 5 on a given day.
Nothing you say is proof of Gasquet having the extraodinary talent needed to win a slam. They just show he is a pretty good player who can have good moments. There are atleast 50 guys capable of the things you listed over a 3 year span, so as a usually top 20 player he should be able to as well in a 3 year span.
I disagree, its the way he loses matches, he doesnt "sneak out" a set, he plays at a high level and then seems to drop off, then his whole body language seems negative. I also wouldnt say hes been outclassed in every match theyve played(federer), off the top of my head i remember halle and toronto were very close matches,
no, guys these days are overpowering him and are bringing there best tennis. Fed is fighting, but there is a slew of younger guys coming that will be competators. I think his time to shine is gone.-sorry
Good point, he is gonna have to show alot of heart to have a chance to hang with this new blood, something he might not have
gasquet's talent is kind of overrated imo.
he has a nice bh for slower surfaces but on faster surfaces, his longwind up makes him retreat 20ft behind the baseline and forces him to moonball.
gasquet has a nice bh but its not a lethal match winning shot like federer's fh or nadal's fh...nalbandian's bh roddick's serve etc
No. And neither will his hitting/training partner tsonga, as long as they're spending their off-time in romanian strip clubs... NO.
Dude, wth, that was almost a year ago.
Funny you say that because his backhand clearly works best on grass. No other player in the world hits as many bh winners on grass as he does.
Do you have overall stats to prove this? Yeah he hit a ton of backhand winners vs Roddick who EVERYONE hits a ton of baseline winners against, even very low ranked players in lopsided losses do this vs Roddick most times. In his first round loss to Federer at Wimbledon a few years ago he had 5 winners the whole match, so obviously not much on anything, including the backhand.
dude, he had 4 aces alone. 5 winners overall? What are you smoking sir?
I have seen everyone of his matches from both 2007 and 2008 Wimbledon's and on average he hits most backhand winners of any player including Federer, Murray, etc.
He also hit alot of winners against andy murray last year, and against federer in halle and toronto in 06 (same year of that wimbe you refered to) and he also hit alot of winners indoors which is also a fast surface, point being the man has a backhand on any surface, is his backhand better than feds forehand? no way but you cant deny the man has a great backhand
In the Canadian Open final with Federer, Roger had almost double the unforced errors of Gasquet and still won pretty easily despite it being 3 sets so it is obvious who was dictating player and had by far more winners. Anyway I am not going to keep arguing since I know Gasquet fans will never be convinced. Go ahead and continue your delusions while Gasquet continues to remain outside the top 10, slamless, and dropping down the pecking order even among French players.
Agree. Gasquet have much to improve to even have a chance at a slam, how unfortunate :-|
I say no. Stands to far back and doesn't have the grinder mentality. He's like a shot-maker that got confused about where to stand on the court. Tremendous all-court game, he just doesn't utilize it. If he continues to play the way he does, I say he has a 1 in 20 chance of winning a slam. If he learns to step in and take the ball earlier, 1 in 5.
he has already won a slam: the french open mixed doubles. what more could he possibly want
You clearly are just pulling some of these numbers out of you arse. His serve is not top 30? Then why the heck he was in top 10 in most categories on serve the last two years? Do you even check match facts on atp website? Last year he averaged something like 9 or 10 aces per match and that was far more than players like Djokovic, Murray, etc. His first serve win percentage was higher last year than Murray had (even though Murray had far far better year overall)
Most of his return of serve stats were top 10 in 2007 and top 20 in 2008.
Seriously, you should really check facts before making stupid and biased opinion of yours public. It is one thing to say you don't think he will ever win a slam and it is another to make things up and post here.
Have you seen that match? Many of those unforced errors by fed had alot to do with fed not being able to handle gasquet spin off both wings and that was mainly in the first set, second set fed changed his game plan and started attcking the net putting pressure on gasquet.
The momentum changed when gasquet blew 3 break points the first game of the second set and lost his head and stop doing what was working so the man has the talent, i also dont think fed had more winners than gasquet, one more thing how do you win pretty easily when you lose the first set 6-2 and in the second and third set your forced to save numerous break points? doesnt really seem like any easy match ive ever had
pay that dude no mind, he is the same guy who said that donald young was going to be number 1 in the world this year,
Gasquet is a huge bust. He will never come close to winning a slam. Funny to read a few of the Gasquet fanatics come to his defense. Makes for good entertainment value.
Surprisingly NO. Mentality and physically weak than his strong opponent.
His best chance would be WImbledon
although watching him at the medibank international today he looks as if he's beefed up his serve a bit...lot of aces and higher speeds
He is talented, but I don't think he'll ever win a slam.
He's got a shot if he stays in the top 20. I'll give him that. Any player in the top 20 would have a shot in a slam. AO for example, is one slam that a lot of things could happen.
Yes, yes and yes, Why? Because he certainly has the weapons needed and he wants it.
Yup, a lot of people forget his 2004(2005?) victory in mixed doubles.
Separate names with a comma.