More Potential? Nadal Or Gasquet?

Beckerserve

Legend
Gasquet was massively hyped when he was a little boy for good reason and was the #1 junior in 2002, winning the FO and USO. Most people thought he would win multiple slams, the people criticizing posts from 2006 weren't watching tennis then and have no clue how much Gasquet was touted (by everyone, not just French media). Most people in 2002-2004 would have assumed Nadal would have had the inferior career to Gasquet, it was the prudent call at that time.

article-0-0CBD7F3B00000578-107_233x318.jpg


Young%20richard%20gasquet.jpg
Not me. Saw both close up back in 2003. I said to many Nadal would be better. Everyone ridiculed me. Just been whatsapping same people lol
 

dapchai

Legend
gasquet has definitely more potential than nadal. he has a very very complete game...

for the moment he still has some physical/mental weaknesses but he just needs a bit more time to really gather his potential...
some talented players also needed some time to be at the top ! ;)
The n-th time reading this I suddenly felt enlightened.
 

GhostOfNKDM

Hall of Fame
Everyone goes gaga over Gasquet’s backhand while ignoring that loopy junk of a forehand.

Watching match highlights it was so apparent that there is nothing on that wing to hurt a top player with.
 

NAS

Hall of Fame
Everyone goes gaga over Gasquet’s backhand while ignoring that loopy junk of a forehand.

Watching match highlights it was so apparent that there is nothing on that wing to hurt a top player with.
It's happens in every era, a flashy player always gets more attention, now don't go ahead see on this forum who is more hyped Med or Tsitsipas.
May be Tsitsipas have more success in future but Tsitsipas was hyped even before he won yec reason was his playingstyle
 

GhostOfNKDM

Hall of Fame
It's happens in every era, a flashy player always gets more attention, now don't go ahead see on this forum who is more hyped Med or Tsitsipas.
May be Tsitsipas have more success in future but Tsitsipas was hyped even before he won yec reason was his playingstyle

Tbf Tsits does have a good game and it isn’t just flash and neither has won a slam yet. So we’ll have to see...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NAS

NAS

Hall of Fame
Tbf Tsits does have a good game and it isn’t just flash and neither has won a slam yet. So we’ll have to see...
I was talking about time before 2019 yec , even after Med dream run Tsits was hyped more between my friends .
Agree he has a good game and he will end up winning a slam
 

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
It's happens in every era, a flashy player always gets more attention, now don't go ahead see on this forum who is more hyped Med or Tsitsipas.
May be Tsitsipas have more success in future but Tsitsipas was hyped even before he won yec reason was his playingstyle

He was the #1 junior in the world (2016). That will translate into some hype for a while. Then after turning pro he quickly reached the top 5. That will help solidify high expectations.
 
Last edited:

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
Most people in 2002-2004 would have assumed Nadal would have had the inferior career to Gasquet, it was the prudent call at that time.

I don't know about that. I recall hearing tons about Nadal who in 2003 alone beat Costa and Moya who were 2 of the best clay courters around. Nadal was already being discussed as an incredible talent.
 

onehandbh

G.O.A.T.
Gasquet still has a chance to win the 2022 French Open.

I think nadal is more athletic (the arms/stamina), but gasquet seems to have the better strokes....i remember when gasquet was playing federer in monte carlo and for the match point, gasquet hit a winning, backhand passing shot when federer was at the net and gasquet was around 4 feet behind the baseline. :mrgreen:
gasquet has definitely more potential than nadal. he has a very very complete game...

for the moment he still has some physical/mental weaknesses but he just needs a bit more time to really gather his potential...
some talented players also needed some time to be at the top ! ;)
Gasquet has more variety and is more of a complete player than Nadal, enough so that he had solid results on all surfaces including winning a title on grass. That said I think he has more potential to be a threat everywhere whereas Nadal, in some ways like Thomas Muster, has yet to figure out the grass. However, unlike Muster, Nadal seems to have the desire to learn how to play on grass and contend at Wimbledon.

Of the two I actually think Gasquet has the potential to be a top player for a longer period of time. As great as Nadal is his game is so physical and takes such a toll on his body that he's already had some serious injury trouble with his knee and ankle. In fact, Nike had to make a special shoe for him.

Still, Nadal will one day become number one but for how long is hard to guess. His mental fortitude is incredible. Gasquet will always be one step behind the elite until he gets his mental game down.
This question really comes down to, "Can Gasquet catch and pass Nadal in the GS's once Federer eventually declines?"

I think he can. The thing that helps Gasquet's case in this comparison is that with his complete game, he should just be coming fully into his own in a few years -- about when you'd expect Fed to start a decline. Furthermore, by that time, mileage will likely have rendered Nadal an afterthought on the pro tour.

Nadal will likely have a couple Frenches by then, so Gasquet will need to have a great career through his mid-late 20's to pass him, but his game is such that I think he can get there once the competition at the top thins out a bit.

Official 2012 prediction:
Nadal (retired) - 2 slams
Gasquet (active) - 3 slams
Gasquet, All The Way.
I think Gasquet has more potential to unlock than Rafa has. I think Nadal has reach his maximum but Gasquet can work on so many parts of his game and therefore play much better tennis than he is doing now.
LOL,,, does this mean you got whipped by a D1 girl recently and you are jealous ?????
Pretty sure this is still a thing. I'm a lifetime member and I got a gift last year at the US Open.
I am currently working through the 1920s books below, which are frankly a bit of a mixed bag (Helen Wills and Crawley’s efforts being the most interesting):

The one real highlight is Charles Hierons himself:
“I play the ball thus and then I. Drink. Your. Milkshake.”
Shovel show as part of your workout. The last time it snowed at lot when I visited my parents, I shoveled their driveway and made a massive snowball. It must have weighed over 350 lbs. Was tough rolling it up a slight incline. Great workout.
I'm curious about opinions on which D1 college coaches (or D1 assistant coaches) are particularly good at player development. It's easy enough to look up stats and see which teams win the most, rank highest, etc, but I'm more interested in coaches who really put a lot of thought and effort into bringing out the best in their players. Thanks!

EDITING TO ADD: I mean developing players who may want to go pro (and have the skillset to do so).
I've watched a lot of slow motion videos of the best servers, and can say the serve is not like a shotput. Shotputs are heavy; tennis racquets are not heavy. Because shotputs are heavy they can't be launched with a throwing motion. Tennis racquets can be accelerated with a throwing motion.

Excellent servers using the pinpoint stance (Ivanisevic, Krajicek) prove that loading the back leg isn't important when hitting a world class serve.

If we need to make analogies, a football quarterback throwing a deep pass is a better description of a serve motion than a shotputter.
Yeah, driving here is bad for the soul. It brings out alpha tendencies in me that I didn't know I had, like I get super aggressive with guys who are driving slow (which is not a crime at all). I don't yell at them, just get comically obsessed with overtaking them. I reflect on it and laugh at myself but I can't help get into that mode again when I am back in traffic. The positive aspect of it is driving in these conditions has made me so good at controlling the car I could absolutely gig as an Uber driver if I ever lost my cushy white collar job.
I'm 5'11.5 so I round to 6.
 

USO

Banned
I think nadal is more athletic (the arms/stamina), but gasquet seems to have the better strokes....i remember when gasquet was playing federer in monte carlo and for the match point, gasquet hit a winning, backhand passing shot when federer was at the net and gasquet was around 4 feet behind the baseline. :mrgreen:

Wow what an old thread… I am surprised that Internet existed back then… 8-B
 

Pablo1989

Hall of Fame
gasquet has definitely more potential than nadal. he has a very very complete game...

for the moment he still has some physical/mental weaknesses but he just needs a bit more time to really gather his potential...
some talented players also needed some time to be at the top ! ;)
LOL
 

BillKid

Hall of Fame
Honestly Gasquet had a nice career.
Of course expectations were higher than what he could achieve but he still deserves respect.
Beautiful game, especially OHBH, nice guy, unfortunately not enough physically and mentally strong.
Yesterday I took a look at the highlights of his match against Nadal. Although Nadal was too strong for him, it seems that it was a pleasant match with a lot of beautiful points.
 
Last edited:

Druss

Hall of Fame
I’ve always liked Gasquet, but having seen him play last night against Rafa, I couldn’t help but cringe. The guy seemed old and a spent force. I’m afraid good ole Richard should seriously start considering retirement.
 

Daniel Andrade

Hall of Fame
Gasquet was massively hyped when he was a little boy for good reason and was the #1 junior in 2002, winning the FO and USO. Most people thought he would win multiple slams, the people criticizing posts from 2006 weren't watching tennis then and have no clue how much Gasquet was touted (by everyone, not just French media). Most people in 2002-2004 would have assumed Nadal would have had the inferior career to Gasquet, it was the prudent call at that time.

article-0-0CBD7F3B00000578-107_233x318.jpg


Young%20richard%20gasquet.jpg
But this post was made in 2006 when Nadal had already won a GS and a master 1000...
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
I think nadal is more athletic (the arms/stamina), but gasquet seems to have the better strokes....i remember when gasquet was playing federer in monte carlo and for the match point, gasquet hit a winning, backhand passing shot when federer was at the net and gasquet was around 4 feet behind the baseline. :mrgreen:

The Gasquet forehand is not better.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
I kinda' feel like this FAA vs Sinner thread is going to turn out similar to this one in about 10 or 15 years...

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/faa-v-sinner.682596/#post-14756583

Could be. Although let's be honest, unlike the heydays of the big 3 when they were making mincemeat of the rest of the Tour, not one of the players post-Djokovic has shown the ability to completely shut down an event where the big 3 aren't featured.

Picking Alcaraz at any M1000 today (end of 2023) is still riskier than it was to pick Rafa in Miami for much of his career.
 
Top