Nadia Petrova: Over or underachiever?

[soyizgood]

I feel she's both. Great serve, solid off both wings, excellent at the net. When she's playing her A game she's beaten the very best. On the other hand, she's had a grocery list of injuries. Not to mention she's naturally a big-boned woman so scrambling and playing defense are clear weaknesses. I feel she's great to watch when she's on her game, but oh-so frustrating when her nerves set in.

[soyizgood]

I put this in the wrong forum. Can someone correct this please?

[boredone3456]

Her biggest weakness is her mental state in big matches. She played horrible in both of her major SFs. 2005 was probably a huge missed opportunity. She was the highest seed left in the french SFs that year and than played her worst match of the tournament against Henin. She was never in it mentally at all and Henin smacked her silly. Had she won it would have been Pierce in the final and a very winnable match.

2010 was another blown chance. She beat the daylights out of Clijsters at the Aussie then knocked out Kuzzy (2 reigning slam champs) then couldn't keep it going against Henin. She would not have won the tourny..but coulda made the final. The french was a blown chance to...losing to an injured Dementieva in the QF.

She blew several chances to break through...mentally she just never has it. On paper though she has a ton of weapons and I think she may well be one of the best who never made a major final.

[Laurie]

Originally Posted by soyizgood

I put this in the wrong forum. Can someone correct this please?

You don't need to correct anything, just start a thread in the correct forum

I like Ptrova but I suppose not everyone can win. Her tempermant was her biggest enemy probably.

[soyizgood]

I voted both. I don't understand her and Dementieva. Petrova is still doing relatively well, but she'll find a way to trip herself up guaranteed. She's beaten the likes of Serena and Henin at Tier-1's, but also lost to nobodies at the majors. She's a very poor Davenport clone in that she's got the weapons, but lacks the mindset of a champion.

[NadalAgassi]

I laugh that anyone would ever consider her an overachiever. Seriously. At worst I could see some say she only did as well as she should have, but I would say she is definitely an underachiever. When you look at her play at her best, the 2004 U.S Open round of 16 vs Henin, the first 1.8 sets of the 2007 Australian Open vs Serena, her win over Henin on clay in 2006, the 2010 Australian Open vs Clijsters, she has way more talent and weaponary than many players with better careers. She should have probably won atleast 1 slam in the relatively weak era most of her prime came in, yet never even came remotedly close really (2 slam semis, was spanked with ease in both).

[monfed]

I think she would've been able to beat Serena in her prime,maybe even overpower her,though I'm sure Professor RalphAgassi would differ on the subject.

[Razoredge]

Originally Posted by monfed

I think she would've been able to beat Serena in her prime,maybe even overpower her,though I'm sure Professor RalphAgassi would differ on the subject.

Midget 5 ft 5 chick with a 1HBH overpowered Fraudrena from the baseline, I'm sure Petrova could've if she had the proper head.