Dimitrov is not as talented as people say.

[MonkeyBoy]

Dimitrov's type of talent is overrated.

People seem to think:
flashiness = talent.
prudence, endurance = hard work.

That's why we have all this talk of Dimitrov-type players being immensely talented, and Ferrer-type players having little talent and just succeeding because of hard work.

This is a prosaic and impoverished understanding of talent. It is true that Dimitrov is immensely talented, but in my opinion a player like Kei Nishikori has even greater talent. The things Nishikori can do with a tennis ball are, in my judgement, much more exceptional and require a higher threshold of natural ability, even though they might be less 'flashy' and visceral.

 

[thomasferrett]

Dimitrov's type of talent is overrated.

People seem to think:
flashiness = talent.
prudence, endurance = hard work.

That's why we have all this talk of Dimitrov-type players being immensely talented, and Ferrer-type players having little talent and succeeding because of hard work.

This is a prosaic and impoverished understanding of talent. It is true that Dimitrov is immensely talented, but in my opinion a player like Kei Nishikori has even greater talent. The things Nishikori can do with a tennis ball are, in my judgement, much more exceptional and require a higher threshold of natural ability, even though they might be less 'flashy' and visceral.

Raonic is more naturally talented than either Dimitrov or Nishikori.

Being tall is a kind of 'genetic talent'. It's one of the most innate talents you can have.

Because of that height, Raonic can serve well, and has longer levers to crush groundstrokes with, so he is the most naturally talented out of the lot of them.

 

[West Coast Ace]

OP, you're entitled. But that's not the normal definition of athletic talent.

Compare volleying and come back and tell me KN is more talented.

I hate to do it - but aligning with @90's Clay. Dimitrov is extremely talented. Just struggles at times with strategy, shot selection, and figuring out the best way to impose his game on his opponent. He may figure it out, he may not. In which case he'll have a nice career, but not a great one.

I know the Fed comparisons aren't welcome (even by Dimitrov). But he too struggled early in his career. He'd blow people off the court in the 1st set, then lose matches. He figured it out. This year will be huge in determining if Dimitrov does.

 

[natalia]

OP, with all due respect : could you kindly get a life, please?

 

[jg153040]

What's this Dimitrov hate lately? I can't be because he beats top players, because he isn't a threat to top guys.

I know what it is, people are jealous, cuz he can get such a hot and accomplished high quality girlfriend.

You know why? Cuz girls don't like guys who need to put down champions to make themselves better.

Dimitrov doesn't do that.

 

[jg153040]

OP, with all due respect : could you kindly get a life, please?

Who says hating on Dimitrov is not a life? Everyone has a different career.

 

[West Coast Ace]

What's this Dimitrov hate lately? I can't be because he beats top players, because he isn't a threat to top guys.

I know what it is, people are jealous, cuz he can get such a hot and accomplished high quality girlfriend.

You know why? Cuz girls don't like guys who need to put down champions to make themselves better.

Dimitrov doesn't do that.

Agreed. They'd turn green with bitterness if they heard some of the things I know from his time spent here training.

Everyone who interacts with him says he's the humblest guy. And don't forget the act of kindness at Queens last yr.

Will he win a major or multiple? Who knows? If it was that easy everybody would have a trophy case. He appears to be putting in the work with Rasheed and his rankings have gone steadily up. Right now, Fed's a bad matchup for him. On the other hand, no one (Fed, Nadal, or Djokovic) beat down Murray at Wimbledon like he did. The scoreline didn't show how one-sided that match was.

 

[MonkeyBoy]

Rofl at the responses. Wasn't expecting this.

This isn't an attack on Dimitrov. The thread doesn't have much to do with Dimitrov actually. The point I'm trying to make is when dividing between nature and nurture people seem to think aesthetically pleasing aspects of ability in sport are talent-based, and the cruder, more functional aspects are labour-based. This isn't always true.

 

[jg153040]

Rofl at the responses. Wasn't expecting this.

This isn't an attack on Dimitrov. The thread doesn't have much to do with Dimitrov actually. The point I'm trying to make is when dividing between nature and nurture people seem to think aesthetically pleasing aspects of ability in sport are talent-based, and the cruder, more functional aspects are labour-based. This isn't always true.

There is no proof aesthetics is talent based. It could be that those guys had great technical coaches.

 

[MonkeyBoy]

There is no proof aesthetics is talent based. It could be that those guys had great technical coaches.

Exactly. It could be Dimitrov's abilities are not innate, but the result of hard work and good coaching. Ferrer could well be a naturally more talented player than Dimitrov. People assume the inverse because there is a prejudice that stylishness = talent.

 

[jg153040]

Exactly. It could be Dimitrov's abilities are not innate, but the result of hard work and good coaching. Ferrer could well be a naturally more talented player than Dimitrov. People assume the inverse because there is a prejudice that stylishness = talent.

Yeah. Also mental toughness and work ethics and great fitness is also talent.

Being tall is also having more talent for serving.

I think winning is talent . Winning is quite good indicator of overall talent.
Why are people against results not being a great indicator of talent?

I also don't listen to people here. I only listen top scientists and people who have documented world class success in their field.

Besides it's impossible to measure talent.

 

[merwy]

What's this Dimitrov hate lately? I can't be because he beats top players, because he isn't a threat to top guys.

I know what it is, people are jealous, cuz he can get such a hot and accomplished high quality girlfriend.

You know why? Cuz girls don't like guys who need to put down champions to make themselves better.

Dimitrov doesn't do that.

Yes, surely that's it. :roll: Every type of criticism that you receive in your life is not because people want to point out what you're doing wrong, but it's because.. they are jealous of your girlfriend.. Yeah that's it. You're not doing a sh1t job at what you do, everyone is just jealous of your girlfriend.

 

[Midaso240]

Yes, surely that's it. :roll: Every type of criticism that you receive in your life is not because people want to point out what you're doing wrong, but it's because.. they are jealous of your girlfriend.. Yeah that's it. You're not doing a sh1t job at what you do, everyone is just jealous of your girlfriend.

It's OK to criticize his tennis,but people hate him as a player,as a person,why? He's always come across as a nice guy,humble...

 

[Rubens]

I doubt he comes across as a humble guy. He seems to try very hard to be flashy. Just an impression I get, and it's not a very positive one.

 

[chjtennis]

Dimitrov may hit his peak around 25. He is not as great a talent as the current big 4, but he is very talented. Being no. 11 in this era is not easy. He's talented, just not as talented as a lot of people believed he was. He may reach to no.1 at some stage during his career and win multiple slams, but won't be as dominant. I'd say 2-4 slams with some weeks at no. 1.

 

[counterloop]

What a ridiculous statement to make about Dimitrov and I'm not even a fan of his. You guys have to stop trying to compare everybody to Federer, Nadal, Djokovic.

 

[President]

What a ridiculous statement to make about Dimitrov and I'm not even a fan of his. You guys have to stop trying to compare everybody to Federer, Nadal, Djokovic.

What is so ridiculous? The OP just said that he is very talented, but not as talented as people think. That is the truth IMO. He could still win slams and be the best of his generation of course.

 

[West Coast Ace]

I doubt he comes across as a humble guy.

You do realize off court behavior can be completely different. Take Roddick, who IMHO was an embarrassment to the US with his tantrums and complaining. I've never heard anyone say a bad word about him off court. Great guy - risked his own well-being to get people out of a hotel in Rome that caught on fire. Smart, funny.

And trying to hit trick shots that big of an offense?

I know people who deal with Dimitrov when he's in town; and they deal with many pros who train in LA. He's by far the nicest. But believe what you want.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

You don't know jack sh*t.

Quit posting here , please. I'll even pay you, just disappear you biased hack, you.

At least make an argument instead of attempting to bully anyone with a differing opinion on a forum created to discuss opinions.

 

[RF-18]

Quit posting here , please. I'll even pay you, just disappear you biased hack, you.

At least make an argument instead of attempting to bully anyone with a differing opinion on a forum created to discuss opinions.

I have to agree on that. But not with the disappear thing.

 

[Rubens]

You do realize off court behavior can be completely different. Take Roddick, who IMHO was an embarrassment to the US with his tantrums and complaining. I've never heard anyone say a bad word about him off court. Great guy - risked his own well-being to get people out of a hotel in Rome that caught on fire. Smart, funny.

And trying to hit trick shots that big of an offense?

I know people who deal with Dimitrov when he's in town; and they deal with many pros who train in LA. He's by far the nicest. But believe what you want.

I was talking about the impression that the general public could have of him. But maybe I'm the only one who gets this impression. As for off court behavior, it's a completely different topic. Most of the people who watch tennis have never met him, and never will. They may get the wrong impression of him, perhaps unfairly, but that's life. I'm sure he's not losing any sleep over it.

 

[Nostradamus]

Dimitrov's type of talent is overrated.

People seem to think:
flashiness = talent.
prudence, endurance = hard work.

That's why we have all this talk of Dimitrov-type players being immensely talented, and Ferrer-type players having little talent and just succeeding because of hard work.

This is a prosaic and impoverished understanding of talent. It is true that Dimitrov is immensely talented, but in my opinion a player like Kei Nishikori has even greater talent. The things Nishikori can do with a tennis ball are, in my judgement, much more exceptional and require a higher threshold of natural ability, even though they might be less 'flashy' and visceral.

He is not as talented as Federer. and people want him to be. and that is where the problem and confusion comes in

 

[jg153040]

Yes, surely that's it. :roll: Every type of criticism that you receive in your life is not because people want to point out what you're doing wrong, but it's because.. they are jealous of your girlfriend.. Yeah that's it. You're not doing a sh1t job at what you do, everyone is just jealous of your girlfriend.

No, it's not just that. It's also his looks and his success.

It can't be based on reality, because you can't say anyone who is in top 100 is doing a bad job. So, it must be something else.

 

[okdude1992]

Dimitrov's type of talent is overrated.

People seem to think:
flashiness = talent.
prudence, endurance = hard work.

That's why we have all this talk of Dimitrov-type players being immensely talented, and Ferrer-type players having little talent and just succeeding because of hard work.

This is a prosaic and impoverished understanding of talent. It is true that Dimitrov is immensely talented, but in my opinion a player like Kei Nishikori has even greater talent. The things Nishikori can do with a tennis ball are, in my judgement, much more exceptional and require a higher threshold of natural ability, even though they might be less 'flashy' and visceral.

I tend to agree with you that the bolded is a gross oversimplification .
Someone on this board said it best, along the lines of "talented is how we describe our favorite players, and not the ones we don't like"

 

[okdude1992]

Quit posting here , please. I'll even pay you, just disappear you biased hack, you.

At least make an argument instead of attempting to bully anyone with a differing opinion on a forum created to discuss opinions.

Russel does have a truly bad habit of that. Your first 2 lines were a bit harsh

 

[jg153040]

He is not as talented as Federer. and people want him to be. and that is where the problem and confusion comes in

I would respond to you, but according to your nickname, you already know what I'm gonna say, so what would be the point.

 

[cc0509]

Agreed. They'd turn green with bitterness if they heard some of the things I know from his time spent here training.

Everyone who interacts with him says he's the humblest guy. And don't forget the act of kindness at Queens last yr.

Will he win a major or multiple? Who knows? If it was that easy everybody would have a trophy case. He appears to be putting in the work with Rasheed and his rankings have gone steadily up. Right now, Fed's a bad matchup for him. On the other hand, no one (Fed, Nadal, or Djokovic) beat down Murray at Wimbledon like he did. The scoreline didn't show how one-sided that match was.

I am not even a big Murray fan but it is obvious that Murray was not himself in that W match vs Dimitrov. There were rumblings in the press after the match that something was amiss in the Murray camp and something happened before that match behind the scenes which put Murray off his game. We know now that there was indeed strife in the Murray camp because two of his key people are gone. It should not be used as an excuse for Murray's loss that day because if you go on court you are fit to play but IMO there is no way a fully mentally and physically fit Murray loses to Dimitrov at Wimbledon.

On the other hand, I hear as well that Dimitrov is a very nice and upstanding guy off court. Nobody is talking about whether or not he is a nice guy. The issue is whether he has been overhyped or not and whether he is or will be a slam contender. We all know he has talent but many players do.

 

[Laurie]

Tennis has changed.

Going back to the early 1990s, and then the early noughties, I have seen these arguments play out (though of course no real social media back then like now).

So in the very early 1990s people were asking if Sampras and Agassi were overrated because they were seen to be very talented but were not winning as much. The solid player Courier consolidated while those two were finding their way.

Then back in 2001 and 2002, Federer was getting a lot of stick (younger Fed fans may find that hard to believe), and in some quarters written off as a flash in the pan, especially after losing to Ancic in first round of 2002 Wimbledon. And I still recall the match he tanked in 2002 Dubai when David Mercer was going beserk in the commentary and said Federer should "hold his head in shame". Well Federer found his feet well in the end.

In regard to Dimitrov? I happen to think we have been kind on him, he has not received as much criticism as perhaps he should have.

I have a feeling that players like Amelie Mauresmo and Andy Murray have moved the goal posts. They won the real big tournaments at the age of 25 and 26 and it almost like the new 21. They were both criticised for not manifesting their talent. Dimnitrov is now seen as a player who has two to three years to come into his own. In reality if he is that talented he should have been winning big tournaments a year or two ago.

Perhaps he is just not as dedicated as he should be. His decision making on court is not the best, I haven't seen him play live as yet but what would concern me is that he doesn't appear to have big natural power on the forehand side, needs to work on that, as well as many other areas.

 

[Russeljones]

Tennis has changed.

Going back to the early 1990s, and then the early noughties, I have seen these arguments play out (though of course no real social media back then like now).

So in the very early 1990s people were asking if Sampras and Agassi were overrated because they were seen to be very talented but were not winning as much. The solid player Courier consolidated while those two were finding their way.

Then back in 2001 and 2002, Federer was getting a lot of stick (younger Fed fans may find that hard to believe), and in some quarters written off as a flash in the pan, especially after losing to Ancic in first round of 2002 Wimbledon. And I still recall the match he tanked in 2002 Dubai when David Mercer was going beserk in the commentary and said Federer should "hold his head in shame". Well Federer found his feet well in the end.

In regard to Dimitrov? I happen to think we have been kind on him, he has not received as much criticism as perhaps he should have.

I have a feeling that players like Amelie Mauresmo and Andy Murray have moved the goal posts. They won the real big tournaments at the age of 25 and 26 and it almost like the new 21. They were both criticised for not manifesting their talent. Dimnitrov is now seen as a player who has two to three years to come into his own. In reality if he is that talented he should have been winning big tournaments a year or two ago.

Perhaps he is just not as dedicated as he should be. His decision making on court is not the best, I haven't seen him play live as yet but what would concern me is that he doesn't appear to have big natural power on the forehand side, needs to work on that, as well as many other areas.

Great post, as always.

 

[Gonzalito17]

He's super talented, he just hasn't been able to win a big event yet in this super super ultra competitive era.he does not have to win a major to prove his phenomenal talent. Neither did Rios Santoro Arazi Blake Coria etc.

 

[Backspin1183]

He's talented but so are several others. If he wants to win the big titles he needs to beat the top dogs in the big matches. As great and talented as Federer is even at 33-34, losing to him 2-6, 2-6 in a semi final shouldn't be acceptable for someone like Dimitrov.

 

[Sysyphus]

Why are some so mad at people calling guys like Dimitrov talented? By most common definitions of "talent" he obviously has one of the most striking ones on tour.

Yes, surely that's it. :roll: Every type of criticism that you receive in your life is not because people want to point out what you're doing wrong, but it's because.. they are jealous of your girlfriend.. Yeah that's it. You're not doing a sh1t job at what you do, everyone is just jealous of your girlfriend.

With regards to Dimitrov? So a guy who is ranked among the 11 best in the world at what he does, is reputed to be very humble and easy going, is very popular and successful and has a hot GF should probably just listen to the hyperbole flack from posters on TTW, because it surely can't be motivated by jealousy. Nope :roll:

 

[zep]

A case of style over substance.

 

[Dave1982]

Why are some so mad at people calling guys like Dimitrov talented? By most common definitions of "talent" he obviously has one of the most striking ones on tour.



With regards to Dimitrov? So a guy who is ranked among the 11 best in the world at what he does, is reputed to be very humble and easy going, is very popular and successful and has a hot GF should probably just listen to the hyperbole flack from posters on TTW, because it surely can't be motivated by jealousy. Nope :roll:

Hahaha gold....couldn't agree more, I mean what more does the man have to do to get the respect of this forum...then again you haven't made it on here until there's numerous h2h or GOAT debates in your honor!

Either way what would people consider a pass mark to be for Dimitrov this year?

Personally I'd like to see him make a couple of 1000 Finals, at least 1 Slam SF & at least QF in 2 Slams. I accept that might sound weak but the biggest thing for Dimitrov is going to be establishing a level of consistency & regularly putting himself in a position to win the big tournaments...if he's able to do this then good things will inevitably start to happen.

 

[Rubens]

A case of style over substance.

Exactly! It's not that he's a mediocre player, but his showiness is a huge mismatch with his results. I don't think it makes people hate him, but it's not winning him any points either.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

Dimitrov's type of talent is overrated.

People seem to think:
flashiness = talent.
prudence, endurance = hard work.

That's why we have all this talk of Dimitrov-type players being immensely talented, and Ferrer-type players having little talent and just succeeding because of hard work.

This is a prosaic and impoverished understanding of talent. It is true that Dimitrov is immensely talented, but in my opinion a player like Kei Nishikori has even greater talent. The things Nishikori can do with a tennis ball are, in my judgement, much more exceptional and require a higher threshold of natural ability, even though they might be less 'flashy' and visceral.

stick to grammar studies as your understanding of tennis seems quite poor!

 

[stephenbbb]

folks let's stick to the title.

more talented than him are both young aussies: Groth and Kyrgios.

and we should differentiate between tennis talent and strategy talent, which can produce wins without any flashiness like Gilbert. Dimi and and the two above are all very low in the strategy metric. Anacone I am afraid will waste this year for Dimi and be fired by september. He should have hired Gilbert or Rafter .

 

[bobombom]

Rofl at the responses. Wasn't expecting this.

This isn't an attack on Dimitrov. The thread doesn't have much to do with Dimitrov actually. The point I'm trying to make is when dividing between nature and nurture people seem to think aesthetically pleasing aspects of ability in sport are talent-based, and the cruder, more functional aspects are labour-based. This isn't always true.

OP, I don't have any problem with the discussion at hand, but the way you titled your thread is in contention with this post. The way people are responding is likely more related to how you titled the thread as opposed to the content of your initial post.

That being said, I do think dimitrov is talented, and he does have some pretty strokes, but I think his problems are more related to his game plan. He relies too much on his physical aptitude, which is a form of "talent," but game sense is also "talent," and I think he lacks some of that sometimes.

 

[Gonzalito17]

Is Annacone still working with Dimitrov? Or did Dimitrov end that?

 

[Russeljones]

Is Annacone still working with Dimitrov? Or did Dimitrov end that?

I don't think they went beyond those couple of days. A trial maybe?

 

[The Green Mile]

I hate the nickname Baby Federer, and I have heard that he does too. One reason why people say he is not as talented as hyped up to be, is because of that nickname. The only similarities I see between them is a nice looking OHB and the usual flashy shots. I think people were just trying to look for the next big thing after Federer, and they picked Dimitrov to fill the spot. He is very talented, but I am not sure how far he will go. I am not liking were his game is going either.

 

[jm1980]

folks let's stick to the title.

more talented than him are both young aussies: Groth and Kyrgios.

Is Groth a "young" aussie? He's only a couple of months younger than Djokovic.

 

[jm1980]

I hate the nickname Baby Federer, and I have heard that he does too.

He only has himself to blame because of the Federer impersonation routine that was his game.

He's moved away from it since his early years, but the nickname stuck.

 

[MonkeyBoy]

stick to grammar studies as your understanding of tennis seems quite poor!

I debated long and hard about whether to use prosaic or impoverished. Ultimately I opted for both. I rule.

OP, I don't have any problem with the discussion at hand, but the way you titled your thread is in contention with this post. The way people are responding is likely more related to how you titled the thread as opposed to the content of your initial post.

Yes I see that. I was just using Dimitrov as an example. Even so though, I think his potential is overrated as there's a prejudice to overate the potential of Dimitrov-style players.

 

[DerekNoleFam1]

Baby Fed just needs one major breakthrough, and his confidence will be up.
His best chance is probably Wimbledon.
He was overwhelmed by senior Fed in Brisbane, but that can happen to anybody when he is on song.
Still predict he will win a Major or two.

 

[FreeBird]

Baby Fed just needs one major breakthrough, and his confidence will be up.

You can insert any random player there. Fir every player, this is true.

 

[West Coast Ace]

I am not even a big Murray fan but it is obvious that Murray was not himself in that W match vs Dimitrov.....

Oh, brother. Here come the excuses. Cry me a river. So @Mainad got to you. That's sad. He got smoked!

With regards to Dimitrov? So a guy who is ranked among the 11 best in the world at what he does, is reputed to be very humble and easy going, is very popular and successful and has a hot GF should probably just listen to the hyperbole flack from posters on TTW, because it surely can't be motivated by jealousy. Nope :roll:

Well said. Very premature to write him off. He's been making steady progress (yeah, 0-3 against Fed, plenty of company there including Djokovic who started 0-4). And as one person said: one major - or maybe even M1000 title, and he could take off.

 

[cc0509]

Oh, brother. Here come the excuses. Cry me a river. So @Mainad got to you. That's sad. He got smoked!

Mainad did not get to me at all. Murray was clearly off in that match vs Dimitrov and the press talked about there being some sort of problem in his camp right before the match. Google it. Murray was in great form at W prior to that Dimitrov match and I honestly thought he had a chance of winning the tournament at that point. No way Dimitrov would beat a 100% Murray at W. He is not good enough for that.

And as far as excuses, there is nobody who makes more excuses for a player than Dimitrov's fans. He could be 39 years old and people will still be breaking out the "give him time" excuses. Long before Dimitrov's current age, Murray was winning Masters 1000 events and beating players like Federer, Djokovic and Nadal. This kid Dimitrov is a top ten player who will probably have a Gasquet type career. He should have been doing a lot more by now. But I know the excuses will keep on coming for God knows how long. :-?

 

[Steve0904]

It is premature to write off Dimitrov completely IMO. Is he winning at the age that Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic did? No, but that doesn't mean people should feel good about bashing him. They don't all turn out like those 3. All we know now is that he won't be anywhere near Federer in comparison, so as it turns out he was overhyped, but only because he was compared to arguably the greatest player in history.

Right now it looks like Raonic and Nishikori are the better players from that generation, but sports, especially tennis are not in some sort of freeze frame.

And as I've said before, as much as Raonic and Nishikori look better, they haven't won anything yet either. One is improving, but will always have limitations, and one is injured a lot. Dimitrov obviously has his own problems, but I'm simply saying that neither has ran away from the other to any great extent.

Neither of the 3 have proven anything significant against the field. No slams and no masters, and another thing that I think most people are missing is that Federer played great in Brisbane, and Dimitrov is a great match up for him.

I don't think we can be sure yet that Dimitrov's game has regressed based on one meeting with Fed in 2015. In contrast, he had a sitter to go up 2 sets on Nadal last year at the AO and should've taken his Wimbledon SF with Djokovic to 5 sets. But, I will say that the one thing I always noticed about Dimitrov is his weak 2nd serve. He DF's way too much, and it's not great even when he doesn't DF. And of course we all know about his early career chokes when serving for sets and matches especially against good players. He's gotten better, but he has a long way to go. Not unlike the other 2 I would say. It just looks like he has the farthest to go out of the 3 of them now.

 

[Starbuckingham]

He has the talent of hitting the ball nicely.

He doesn't have the talent of putting it all together yet.