do almagro and verdasco have more talent than ferrer?

D

dominikk1985

Legend
I just thought about this because I wrote about them in another thread. both have big serves and verdasco has one of the biggest FHs on tour. almagro on the other hand has probably the hardest one handed BH on tour and a pretty big FH too.

ferrer in comparison is shorter and has much less weapons albeit he moves better and is better at taking balls on the rise and handling and redirecting pace. his serve is also very solid for his height but nowhere near the weapon that the serve of the other two spaniards is.

why are almagro and verdasco doing worse than ferrer? aren't they actually more talented than ferrer?
 
Will, fitness , focus and character are talent.
If you put those on a scale , they weight more
than the forehand of Verdasco and Backhand from Almagro.
So to me Ferrer is more talented, that's why he has had
more success than the other two players.
 
Ferrer's ROS is just extraordinary and way above the other two on all surfaces (Almagro's return is disgraceful on hard court and grass for a guy only 6 feet tall). That's a big part of the modern game, as well as movement. Verdasco really should be doing better though.
 
It's not as simple as "Verdasco and Almagro hit more winners with their forehand/backhand, so they're more talented". Tennis talent is measured with so much more than just playing aggressively and painting lines. You have to take into account footwork, speed, intuition, mental toughness and stamina as well. And in every one of those categories Ferrer is miles above those two. He doesn't choose to not play aggressive because he's incapable of doing so, he does it because it wouldn't be the most effective way for him to maximize his game. Even if we're just talking about forehand and backhand, would you rather have a powerful forehand/backhand that breaks down often or a consistent one that you can rely on at all times? And even if we're talking about raw power, name me a 5'9 player that hits his groundstrokes harder than Ferrer.
 
Last edited:
People have this silly notion that Talent = Hitting a lot of winners.

Hitting a lot of winners is easy. If you are not too precise with your shots, it just means hitting a lot of UEs, like Gulbis does so often.

Talent = Ability to win. These guys make a living playing tennis. Do you think somebody more "talented" like Almagro wouldn't play the game a "less talented" player like Ferrer uses if he knew he could in order to win more tournaments and money? Well, I say you are naive (not to use some stronger words).

Now, some people are not talented at all, and they end up broadcasting or coaching other people. ;)
 
at a particular level it is very smart to paly the % ,but verdasco has huge potential

AUS 2009, if he played like that every time....
 
Forehand Of Doom said:
People have this silly notion that Talent = Hitting a lot of winners.

Hitting a lot of winners is easy. If you are not too precise with your shots, it just means hitting a lot of UEs, like Gulbis does so often.

Talent = Ability to win. These guys make a living playing tennis. Do you think somebody more "talented" like Almagro wouldn't play the game a "less talented" player like Ferrer uses if he knew he could in order to win more tournaments and money? Well, I say you are naive (not to use some stronger words).

Now, some people are not talented at all, and they end up broadcasting or coaching other people. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I really don't like to use the word talent. Fed has shotmaking talents, but today tennis is about speed, stamina, fitness. So, his talents don't help him win today, cuz tennis is different.

How do we even measure talent? Maybe Fed got lucky, so his coach taught him the correct technique.

People overuse this talent. Like it makes you feel better if you fail. I rather be a talentless hack who works hard and achieves something, than talented and lazy.

All top 100 have amazing talent. There is just no room for them to all be nr.1. We are talking about top 0,001% in the world here. Only here on TW those guys can be seen as failures.

Maybe there are some tennis geniuses in Africa. But they don't have conditions to succeed.

Talent is about luck. You can't control genes. Why do people think that if you have talent you are just entitled to everything. Talent has a downside. You aren't mentally tough or are lazy. So it evens out. Talent can be a curse.

What is more impressive? A genius who reaches nr.1 ranking? Or a guy who works 10 times more with limited talents, but reaches nr.10 ranking.

I really don't like this talent discrimination.
 
dominikk1985 said:
I just thought about this because I wrote about them in another thread. both have big serves and verdasco has one of the biggest FHs on tour. almagro on the other hand has probably the hardest one handed BH on tour and a pretty big FH too.

ferrer in comparison is shorter and has much less weapons albeit he moves better and is better at taking balls on the rise and handling and redirecting pace. his serve is also very solid for his height but nowhere near the weapon that the serve of the other two spaniards is.

why are almagro and verdasco doing worse than ferrer? aren't they actually more talented than ferrer?
Click to expand...

the world talent is often used out of context, I think all professionals have ability and they achieve excellence thru reps, constant practice, some things you can teach some you cant. physical gifts ( height, strength etc) don't determine success although they have some bearing. its hard work, you could argue that Verdasco, Almagro et al don't work as hard as Ferrer another comparison could be Wilander and Leconte, of the 2 Leconte was clearly the flashier, better(?) shot maker but compare his success to Wilanders...not, even, close.
 
jg153040 said:
Talent is about luck. You can't control genes. Why do people think that if you have talent you are just entitled to everything. Talent has a downside. You aren't mentally tough or are lazy. So it evens out. Talent can be a curse.

What is more impressive? A genius who reaches nr.1 ranking? Or a guy who works 10 times more with limited talents, but reaches nr.10 ranking.

I really don't like this talent discrimination.
Click to expand...
Good points. Also, I think people equate talent to technique, specifically technique which is conducive to agressive tennis.

But technique can be a product of natural talent or an endless amount of practice, regarding your comments of natural talent vs hard work. In reality, I think top tennis players need to have both (natural talent to begin with, and a strong work ethic to develop and sustain it).

You are right though that ultimately hard work can be more valuable than raw talent, because in the end you can control how much hard work you put into it, whereas raw talent is more luck based on DNA, like you said.
 
tennis playa said:
the world talent is often used out of context, I think all professionals have ability and they achieve excellence thru reps, constant practice, some things you can teach some you cant. physical gifts ( height, strength etc) don't determine success although they have some bearing. its hard work, you could argue that Verdasco, Almagro et al don't work as hard as Ferrer another comparison could be Wilander and Leconte, of the 2 Leconte was clearly the flashier, better(?) shot maker but compare his success to Wilanders...not, even, close.
Click to expand...

BTW I read that wilander wasn't even a very hard worker but had good genetics for endurance so that he could play for hours without getting tired while for example lendl had to work very hard for his stamina.
 
verdasco yes...but ferrer is just so sound mentally...he could be down a set and a break and still give everything he's got...t he other two would just go for broke and give the match away
 
Verdasco is amazing--he has all the tools. I was happy for him when he won that doubles title. He deserved that and hopefully it will give him a morale boost.

Ferrer actually has a very good forehand. I think in terms of overall effectiveness his forehand is definitely better than Almagro's.
 
They have more natural talent, yes, but Ferrer vastly exceeds both Verdasco and Almagro when it comes to mental strength, endurance, overall fitness, and sheer consistency, and those are imperative ingredients to success in today's game.

Verdasco is one of the most talented players on tour when he is up and running, but unfortunately, he's pretty careless on the court. He was exhibiting some impeccable tennis at Wimbledon this year and found himself two sets up against Murray and still managed to lose. Strangely enough, he didn't seem to care that much either.
 
If they have, I just don't see it.

I don't see anything special that they have over Ferrer.

Ferrer has amazing footwork and technique, almost never breaks down. He is also mentally tougher and fitter.

Not to mention his results are incredible.
 
Talent:

Almagro/Verdasco >> Ferrer.

Mental Strength and Consistency:

Ferrer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Almagro/Verdasco.
 
President said:
Ferrer's ROS is just extraordinary and way above the other two on all surfaces (Almagro's return is disgraceful on hard court and grass for a guy only 6 feet tall). That's a big part of the modern game, as well as movement. Verdasco really should be doing better though.
Click to expand...

Great point. Ferrer's stats on return of serve are extraordinary, putting him up there with the best returners in the open era. Pretty much explains his success - probably more important than the mental qualities that people talk more about.
 
I think people discount Ferrer's talent, because his obvious strengths are fitness and mental toughness. But as Nadal said after the Paris Masters loss: ''I was slow. Always I was a little bit late on the ball. So against a player like David, he's quick and he plays inside the court, and he puts pressure on you all the time, you are dead, no?''

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ferrer-beats-nadal-faces-djokovic-203804727--ten.html

You don't play inside the baseline against the top player in the world unless you have extraordinary hands. Almagro might have more talent than any of them, but it only lasts a set. It is too bad he never could break through against the top 10, because he has the offensive firepower (similar to Wawrinka maybe) to be in the top 5. Verdasco is also a lot of fun to watch -- one of my favorites.
 
jg153040 said:
If they have, I just don't see it.

I don't see anything special that they have over Ferrer.

Ferrer has amazing footwork and technique, almost never breaks down. He is also mentally tougher and fitter.

Not to mention his results are incredible.
Click to expand...


well almagro and verdasco have both served at 140 mph. verdasco can hit 100 mph FH and almagro can hit big of both wings.

they both definitely have more power than ferrer.

Rosewall said:
I think people discount Ferrer's talent, because his obvious strengths are fitness and mental toughness. But as Nadal said after the Paris Masters loss: ''I was slow. Always I was a little bit late on the ball. So against a player like David, he's quick and he plays inside the court, and he puts pressure on you all the time, you are dead, no?''

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ferrer-beats-nadal-faces-djokovic-203804727--ten.html

You don't play inside the baseline against the top player in the world unless you have extraordinary hands. Almagro might have more talent than any of them, but it only lasts a set. It is too bad he never could break through against the top 10, because he has the offensive firepower (similar to Wawrinka maybe) to be in the top 5. Verdasco is also a lot of fun to watch -- one of my favorites.
Click to expand...

yes his early striking is very underrated. this is also one of the reasons for his improvement. they always talk about his running and grinding but he is actually very good at stepping inside the baseline and taking the ball early. he also hits very good angles. because of that it is very tiring to play against him he makes much bigger hitters run a ton of miles and not just staying back and returning balls. his game is more offensive than it looks.

you can push him back if you hit a very good ball like nole or nadal but if you only hit one ball too short he will step inside the baseline and make you run left and right and left and right.

but in terms of pure power however almagro and verdasco are stronger than ferrer.
 
Last edited:
bump this thread because of the AO results.

verdasco lost another second round match and almagro didn't even participate while their older and less talented countrymen robredo and ferrer are still going strong.

really disapointing career by verdasco in the last years.
 
Ferrer's talents are often overlooked and some are intangible. To me being gifted of mind is talent, being fast is talent, great timing on the return is talent. The difference in the top tiers of tennis are more mental. I think you can also develop a strong mind but it's better if it comes naturally. Including solid nerves.
 
mbm0912 said:
Don't know about talent, but Almagro or Verdasco would be a much more entertaining World #3.
Click to expand...

Yeah in a world without Ferrer (and Almagro and Verdasco filling in Ferrer's) place - when those two they would invariably get upset by numerous players, at least that gives the players who upset them a chance to play the Big Four, instead of being ground down by Ferrer, who, in turn gets ground down by the Big Four.

Ferrer simply makes tennis boring. He is like a good-match-preventer.

Respect for his hard work, but I would find tennis more fun to watch without him around.
 
dominikk1985 said:
BTW I read that wilander wasn't even a very hard worker but had good genetics for endurance so that he could play for hours without getting tired while for example lendl had to work very hard for his stamina.
Click to expand...

I believe that's true - at least I remember Lendl dedicating himself to his fitness. And McEnroe saying that Lendl has less talent in all of his body than Mc had in his little finger
 
West Coast Ace said:
Even at the pro level there's something to be said about keeping the ball in play, instead of going for a hero shot and forcing your opponent to win.
Click to expand...

Yes, +, as others have mentioned, Ferrer is a mental giant compared to these two (remember last years AO match between Almagro and Ferrer? O.M.G!) Part of that is probably also part of his DNA as much as his physical gifts and limitations are.

Moreover - his RoS is really, really great. It's easily top-5 on tour. Is Almagro's serve top-5 on tour? Close but not quite. Is Verdasco's forehand? On his good days, yes. Normally, probably not.
Edit. Ferrer's RoS is not just really, really great. The only player above him in the past 24 years, who didn't play a very disproportionate amount of matches on clay, is Rafa. That's right - he's above Agassi, Djoko, Murray and so on (though they are quite a bit above him and Nadal on hard).
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Matchfacts/Matchfacts-List.aspx?c=9&s=0&y=0

Finally, we live in a tennis era, where you cannot make it to the very top unless you have top-top defense. Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are all defined even more by their amazing defense than by their amazing offense. And even Federer was one of the best defenders at his peak. Ferrer is in that category too, the other's aren't
 
Last edited:
tennis_hack said:
Yeah in a world without Ferrer (and Almagro and Verdasco filling in Ferrer's) place - when those two they would invariably get upset by numerous players, at least that gives the players who upset them a chance to play the Big Four, instead of being ground down by Ferrer, who, in turn gets ground down by the Big Four.

Ferrer simply makes tennis boring. He is like a good-match-preventer.

Respect for his hard work, but I would find tennis more fun to watch without him around.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. "Place holder" was the term I was thinking earlier to describe the current no.3
 
dominikk1985 said:
well almagro and verdasco have both served at 140 mph. verdasco can hit 100 mph FH and almagro can hit big of both wings.

they both definitely have more power than ferrer.



yes his early striking is very underrated. this is also one of the reasons for his improvement. they always talk about his running and grinding but he is actually very good at stepping inside the baseline and taking the ball early. he also hits very good angles. because of that it is very tiring to play against him he makes much bigger hitters run a ton of miles and not just staying back and returning balls. his game is more offensive than it looks.

you can push him back if you hit a very good ball like nole or nadal but if you only hit one ball too short he will step inside the baseline and make you run left and right and left and right.

but in terms of pure power however almagro and verdasco are stronger than ferrer.
Click to expand...

yes, but power isn't everything. Watch him play Delpo and see who's doing most of the dictating. Hint: it's (normally) not the guy, with the tour's biggest forehand.
 
heninfan99 said:
Ferrer's talents are often overlooked and some are intangible. To me being gifted of mind is talent, being fast is talent, great timing on the return is talent. The difference in the top tiers of tennis are more mental. I think you can also develop a strong mind but it's better if it comes naturally. Including solid nerves.
Click to expand...

exactly my thoughts.
 
Ferrer does what he needs to do to get the job done without going beyond himself.

If there was a contest where you were given $100 and you needed to turn as much profit as you could by buying and selling a merchandise. Where others would try to profit off big ticket items like electronics, Ferrer would probably try to take all that money buy a bunch of widgets and sell it to manufacturing plants and make a huge profit off something seemingly small insignificant and cheap. Nothing extravagant just simple but effective. He knows what he can do and he makes the most out of his opportunities.
 
Last edited:
Chanwan said:
Yes, +, as others have mentioned, Ferrer is a mental giant compared to these two (remember last years AO match between Almagro and Ferrer? O.M.G!) Part of that is probably also part of his DNA as much as his physical gifts and limitations are.

Moreover - his RoS is really, really great. It's easily top-5 on tour. Is Almagro's serve top-5 on tour? Close but not quite. Is Verdasco's forehand? On his good days, yes. Normally, probably not.

Finally, we live in a tennis era, where you cannot make it to the very top unless you have top-top defense. Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are all defined even more by their amazing defense than by their amazing offense. And even Federer was one of the best defenders at his peak. Ferrer is in that category too, the other's aren't
Click to expand...

this is certainly an important point. many players occasionally play well but being able to do it every single day is a rare quality. ferrer is not as good as nadal or djokovic but his strokes never break down, he is able to play his A game almost every single day.

still I think that verdasco and almagro theoretically have at least the same potential as ferrer (although almagro is not really the best mover but he has big time power).
 
dominikk1985 said:
this is certainly an important point. many players occasionally play well but being able to do it every single day is a rare quality. ferrer is not as good as nadal or djokovic but his strokes never break down, he is able to play his A game almost every single day.

still I think that verdasco and almagro theoretically have at least the same potential as ferrer (although almagro is not really the best mover but he has big time power).
Click to expand...

They do and they don't. I think you underestimate how much the mental part is also about talent. And when you think of a top-20 player, who's a headcase, I bet you, Almagro is not low on anyone's list.
Moreover - there's a tendency to value the big and flashy players over the grinders, who get it done. Ferrer has maxed out his talent. But what got him up to 6-3 in the world for the last 4 years was that he improved his hold game to the point where it was even better than Almagro's in 2012.
When you then consider that his return game is about 10 % better than Almagro's (who's very mediocre in this department), you see while one is getting to slam quarters, semis and even the occasional final and the other is - well - Almagro.

p.s. That said, Ferrer hasn't quite been his normal, steady self since the clay season imo. It wouldn't surprise me too much, if he actually loses to a player with more power this very night (well, night for me). He's playing Chardy in a couple of hours and that match can imo go either way.
 
Last edited:
Hi everybody!

Totally off topic but some dude in another forum asked me if I know who's AGUT. He was referring to Nadal obviously. What the h....?
 
Almagro is good ball striker. He has a strong forehand and backhand, and a good serve for his height, but nothing else. Terrible movement, net game, mental strength.

Verdasco has nothing between his ears. If he had more belief and discipline, it'd be a different story.

Ferrer may have less flashy groundstrokes but outclasses those two in every other category.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tennis_hack
Almagro has a worse H2H against FERRER than Nadal
Replies
15
Views
2K
SLD76
SLD76
T
Your expectations for Almagro for 2016 and beyond?
Replies
8
Views
508
Noleberic123
Noleberic123
R
Was Almagro a wasted talent ?
Replies
2
Views
423
GhostOfNKDM
GhostOfNKDM
Halba
Ruud is similar to Ferrer
Replies
47
Views
2K
a10best
a10best
RF-18
Fernando Verdasco - what the hell happened to such a talent?
Replies
29
Views
5K
thrust
T
Back
Top