Any Players Deliberately Underachieving?

ctoth666

Banned
I have thought about this before and I wanted to open it up to the board. We all know of cases of players wilting under pressure, but what are your thoughts on players who are deliberately underachieving? And who might they be? What I mean is, players who may not want the notoriety that being particularly successful would bring them? I think, honestly, that Murray is a bit of an example of this. I think his slip after winning Wimbledon last year has been partially due to him cowering away from the spotlight and wanting the pressure off of him. Any thoughts?
 

jdubbs

Hall of Fame
I looked in the dictionary for "underachiever" and it had a picture of Bernard Tomic.
And I think its deliberate, he just can't handle the pressure.
 
I have thought about this before and I wanted to open it up to the board. We all know of cases of players wilting under pressure, but what are your thoughts on players who are deliberately underachieving? And who might they be? What I mean is, players who may not want the notoriety that being particularly successful would bring them? I think, honestly, that Murray is a bit of an example of this. I think his slip after winning Wimbledon last year has been partially due to him cowering away from the spotlight and wanting the pressure off of him. Any thoughts?
I don't think any truly competitive players would deliberately underachieve. Why? Because truly competitive pros always want to win.

If any players are deliberately underachieving, it doesn't matter. They weren't going to be much better anyways with that attitude.
 

harryz

Professional
Interesting thread

i've wondered the same about some guys like Tsonga and Monfils, not to mention Sam Querrey, Donald Young and others who have ability and work hard but can't seem to break through..

I recall reading that Sampras felt lost at 19 after winning the US Open in '90, and it took him 3 years or so to deal with the attention. Like Murray, he may be a bit too introverted for it.

Harry
 

octogon

Hall of Fame
That she plays for the money, not to win Slams.
It's possible that Aggie is just being pragmatic and realises, as consistent as she's been, that she doesn't really have the game/weapons to win a slam, unless she gets really, really lucky against a weaponless opponent in a slam final. And she's only made it to one slam final anyway. She's consistent top 6 material, but unlikely slam champion material. She doesn't seem to have any delusions of grandeur about her game.

If the opportunity presents itself for her to win a slam again, I doubt she won't try really hard to win it.
 

octogon

Hall of Fame
i have no issue with this.

hardware and titles are fine and good, but money is inevitable and lasting.


I'd rather be Kournikova than Lindsay Davenport
Money, even lots of it, can easily run out though.

In most countries, being a Grand Slam champion means you are probably set for life, in terms of opportunities to make money through sponsors or commentating or whatever.

Look at Goran Ivanisevic.....he's beeen eating off his lone Wimbledon win for 15 years. Treated like a god in his country, always offered media and commentating jobs by the British media during Wimbledon. It;s a lot easier for former grand slam champs to make a good living after Tennis is over, than those who never won slams (though there are exceptions of course).
 

Russeljones

G.O.A.T.
Money, even lots of it, can easily run out though.

In most countries, being a Grand Slam champion means you are probably set for life, in terms of opportunities to make money through sponsors or commentating or whatever.

Look at Goran Ivanisevic.....he's beeen eating off his lone Wimbledon win for 15 years. Treated like a god in his country, always offered media and commentating jobs by the British media during Wimbledon. It;s a lot easier for former grand slam champs to make a good living after Tennis is over, than those who never won slams (though there are exceptions of course).
Just a small footnote. Goran would have been treated the same at home, even without a Wimbledon trophy.
 
i have no issue with this.

hardware and titles are fine and good, but money is inevitable and lasting.


I'd rather be Kournikova than Lindsay Davenport
This couldn't be further from the truth. Money, especially in tennis, is far from inevitable. Kournikova has money because she got all those endorsements for her looks and she was also a pretty good player. Also, money is also NOT lasting. Are you kidding me? Your name on a Slam trophy lasts forever, not money.

Besides, terrible example. Davenport has made over $22 million and is 4th all time in career earnings! Kournikova has made a bit over $3.5 million. Davenport won championships and made a lot of money. I'd rather be Davenport.

All around very odd post. Literally couldn't be further from the truth.
 
Last edited:

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Obviously Fed is deliberately underachieving to make Nadal look better. It wouldn't have looked good if he won 20 slams and Nadal only 8.
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
Radwanska. Davenport called it.
Really on what basis?

Radwanska is small and has no power even for WTA tour, so some losses can be explained by this and some other by being mentally weaker or injured.

Deliberately is a bit harsh in her case, making tennis career from Polish background with no infrastructure and government support is not easy.
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
That she plays for the money, not to win Slams.
Yes VERY logical :), since GS pay LEAST when you win, especially when Kudos from winning GS as a first Polish player ever are included.

Mental weakness maybe?

On purpose underachieve at GSs because you play for money?

I need more explanation.
 

90's Clay

Banned
I dont think its a matter of deliberately underachieving but more or less they are all content just to show up and get the appearance and be on TV.


There is LITTLE desire (or really incentive for that matter) to truly improve your game when you can live a normal life as far as money goes by just showing up

They are definitely being lazy deliberately
 
Last edited:

andrewski

Semi-Pro
i've wondered the same about some guys like Tsonga and Monfils, not to mention Sam Querrey, Donald Young and others who have ability and work hard but can't seem to break through..
Harry
Even if true about not breaking through, why do you think it is that they deliberately underachieve?

You sound like some dentists and accountants in my tennis club in UK, who thought that Tim Henmann underachieved although these w****rs never made top 10K in their profession.

There are only so many spots at the top of global sport like tennis.

Small margins for someone like Tsonga decide that he is not up to even Murray's standard but most people on TT would point to technical and mental deficiencies.

I saw Donald Young in Wimby when he was a junior playing match on outside courts and I was amazed how poor his 2nd serve was.

Maybe that is better explanation for his underachievement than "deliberately" tanking?
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
Safin has been fined for not trying, that as close as anything for official identification of underachieving.
Listen, can you read?

OP was about "deliberately underachieving".

Just because Safin liked to have a time in bed with nice babes and some drinks instead time on court with his coach, it does not mean he underachieved on purpose.

His character made him focus on other stuff...
 

ctoth666

Banned
This was a serious thread. I think it's worth considering that certain pro's aren't taking that next step for whatever reason. Players that come to mind, for me, are some of the French players. Also, possibly, Berdych, or Davydenko.
 

OTMPut

Hall of Fame
Does everyone who work a job is working to become a CEO? Does everyone who attends college is working to get an A in every test they take?

If not, should we chastise them?

I reckon pretty much everyone in TT is an underachiever in some sort.
 

PMChambers

Hall of Fame
Listen, can you read?

OP was about "deliberately underachieving".

Just because Safin liked to have a time in bed with nice babes and some drinks instead time on court with his coach, it does not mean he underachieved on purpose.

His character made him focus on other stuff...
I can read well, turning up to a tournament and making no attempt to play resulting in a fine for lack of sportsmanship is a deliberate attempt to underachieve. If he just played poorly because he was shagged out or fat or just not capable then he would not have been fined. He was identified as deliberately not attempting to play by the referee. Can't get any more deliberate than to be actively identified and fined for it.
 

zam88

Professional
This couldn't be further from the truth. Money, especially in tennis, is far from inevitable. Kournikova has money because she got all those endorsements for her looks and she was also a pretty good player. Also, money is also NOT lasting. Are you kidding me? Your name on a Slam trophy lasts forever, not money.

Besides, terrible example. Davenport has made over $22 million and is 4th all time in career earnings! Kournikova has made a bit over $3.5 million. Davenport won championships and made a lot of money. I'd rather be Davenport.

All around very odd post. Literally couldn't be further from the truth.

Sorry my autocorrect screwed me.. I meant the money is "investable" meaning it can in turn keep making you more money.

I didn't realize Davenport made that much.. that's great.

But I bet Kournikova made a LOT more money with her modelling career.
 

Chico

Banned
Sure, now when Djokovic is winning and is #1, that is only because other players are "intentionally underachieving".

What a ridiculous thought and a way to undermine Djokovic once more here. Why so much hate? I will never understand.
 
Top