Most overrated player on tour currently?

[undecided]

At 20, Zverev won 2 masters (5 overall titles), finished 4th in the world and had 11 wins over top 10 players including 2 on Federer and 1 on Novak. FAA at 20, has only 2 wins over top 10 players (and both are against Tsitsipas).

He is young and can obviously improve a lot, but he is already falling behind. Teenage records are fine but kinda pointless if you cant keep up.

FAA had a mental edge on Tsitsi who at some point was contemplating whether he could ever beat FAA. Then he did.

 

[asifallasleep]

At 20, Zverev won 2 masters (5 overall titles), finished 4th in the world and had 11 wins over top 10 players including 2 on Federer and 1 on Novak. FAA at 20, has only 2 wins over top 10 players (and both are against Tsitsipas).

He is young and can obviously improve a lot, but he is already falling behind. Teenage records are fine but kinda pointless if you cant keep up.

At this point Zverev is a better player, which is also why he beats Felix. You've named one guy in Zverev. Overrated means that there are tons of guys at a similar age at present and in the past who at this point in their careers were doing substantially better. You've named one guy.

And at 20 you are already suggesting he's not keeping up? He's ranked 21 and that's based on performance.

I can think of 100's of guys who are far past 20 who've never even cracked the top 50.

I'm not sure where you are going with your line of thinking.

It's as if you think being ranked 21 and the age of 20 means nothing, or that it's a common occurrence. I'm a bit surprised that you are writing someone off who has accomplished so much at an early age.

I am by no means suggesting he is a lock for Masters tittles or Grand Slams or #1 rankings, but i certainly am not writing him off this soon or calling him overrated. Plenty of guys were picked to accomplish so much and fell short. Let's wait on Felix a bit.

 

[Fabresque]

Good:
Zverev (gotten better)
Medvedev (closest we’ve gotten to winning a slam besides Thiem)
Tsitsipas (pretty good dictating points now)
Sinner (great weapons)
Shapovalov (turning energy into winning)
Rublev (relentless machine)
Thiem (doing well outside clay now)

Not bad, but has problems:
ADM (lacks weapons)
FAA (mentality and wild forehand)
Berrettini (backhand issues)
Garin (surface dependence)
Ruud (surface dependence)
Humbert (inconsistent)
Kecmanovic (inconsistent)
Hurkacz (too slow)
T. Paul (technical problems)

Terrible:
Khachanov (gotten worse mentally)
Coric (shown nothing since 2017/2018)
Fritz (attitude and serve problems)
Norrie (no weapons)
Edmund (no backhand)
Vesely (waaaay too slow)

Tiafoe:
Tiafoe (do I need to explain?)

There’s the list of who’s good and who isn’t out of the “next gen” crop from the last 4-5 years.

 

[Heliath]

At this point Zverev is a better player, which is also why he beats Felix. You've named one guy in Zverev. Overrated means that there are tons of guys at a similar age at present and in the past who at this point in their careers were doing substantially better. You've named one guy.

And at 20 you are already suggesting he's not keeping up? He's ranked 21 and that's based on performance.

I can think of 100's of guys who are far past 20 who've never even cracked the top 50.

I'm not sure where you are going with your line of thinking.

It's as if you think being ranked 21 and the age of 20 means nothing, or that it's a common occurrence. I'm a bit surprised that you are writing someone off who has accomplished so much at an early age.

I am by no means suggesting he is a lock for Masters tittles or Grand Slams or #1 rankings, but i certainly am not writing him off this soon or calling him overrated. Plenty of guys were picked to accomplish so much and fell short. Let's wait on Felix a bit.

Overrated means that he isnt keeping up with the expectations people had on him, and with that definition I see why some people call him overrated.

Im not writing him off, but 2 years ago there were some expectations on FAA, and he hasnt fulfilled them (so far). Zero titles at 20 years of age isnt what people expected.

 

[asifallasleep]

Overrated means that he isnt keeping up with the expectations people had on him, and with that definition I see why some people call him overrated.

Im not writing him off, but 2 years ago there were some expectations on FAA, and he hasnt fulfilled them (so far). Zero titles at 20 years of age isnt what people expected.

Wait, so you are saying he's overrated based on the predictions of some tennis announcers and or former players? So you are saying you agreed with their projections and now YOU believe he's overrated because he didn't meet what they were saying?

I'd suggest that their predictions were overrated and not Felix. Did Felix say he agreed with those predictions?

Also, were these predictions specific in saying he would begin accomplishing all these things before he turned 22? #1 ranking, multiple Grand Slams titles, etc.

 

[Heliath]

Wait, so you are saying he's overrated based on the predictions of some tennis announcers and or former players? So you are saying you agreed with their projections and now YOU believe he's overrated because he didn't meet what they were saying?

I'd suggest that their predictions were overrated and not Felix. Did Felix say he agreed with those predictions?

Also, were these predictions specific in saying he would begin accomplishing all these things before he turned 22? #1 ranking, multiple Grand Slams titles, etc.

Yes, being overrated or underrated ALWAYS depends on the predictions and people rating the player. How on earth do you think being overrated/underrated works?

Calling someone overrated means that you disagree in the majority of people view's on a certain player, and you actually rate him lower.

Im sure FFA's expectations some years ago included winning at least 1 ATP 250 at 20 years of age.

 

[zuluzazu]

They have done better by displaying a higher level of play...

What or who decides higher level of play?

 

[asifallasleep]

Yes, being overrated or underrated ALWAYS depends on the predictions and people rating the player. How on earth do you think being overrated/underrated works?

Calling someone overrated means that you disagree in the majority of people view's on a certain player, and you actually rate him lower.

Im sure FFA's expectations some years ago included winning at least 1 ATP 250 at 20 years of age.

I know what the definition is. The point is why are YOU saying he's overrated? Did YOU predict these great things for him? Or are you blaming Felix for the Overrated predictions by some "experts"?

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

What or who decides higher level of play?

*rolls eyes* Judgment call, but surely you don't think it's all fiction and there's no difference to be seen between any matches.

 

[Sorry_to_tell_you_mate]

Zverev by far.

 

[RS]

What or who decides higher level of play?

Nobody this is the truth.

 

[thomasferrett]

Rublev is overrated. He tries to spank that forehand as hard as he can but because he only weighs 80kg, it's a feather-light shot.

Sinner and Thiem are also overrated - no major weapons in their arsenal.

Dan Evans is possibly the least talented player to ever grace the top 100.

Then there is Tsitsipas who is basically a worse version of Gasquet.

 

[BackhandDTL]

On this forum, easily Federer.

in the real world, RBA

 

[bluetrain4]

Good:
Zverev (gotten better)
Medvedev (closest we’ve gotten to winning a slam besides Thiem)
Tsitsipas (pretty good dictating points now)
Sinner (great weapons)
Shapovalov (turning energy into winning)
Rublev (relentless machine)
Thiem (doing well outside clay now)

Not bad, but has problems:
ADM (lacks weapons)
FAA (mentality and wild forehand)
Berrettini (backhand issues)
Garin (surface dependence)
Ruud (surface dependence)
Humbert (inconsistent)
Kecmanovic (inconsistent)
Hurkacz (too slow)
T. Paul (technical problems)

Terrible:
Khachanov (gotten worse mentally)
Coric (shown nothing since 2017/2018)
Fritz (attitude and serve problems)
Norrie (no weapons)
Edmund (no backhand)
Vesely (waaaay too slow)

Tiafoe:
Tiafoe (do I need to explain?)

There’s the list of who’s good and who isn’t out of the “next gen” crop from the last 4-5 years.

Actually, yes, explain Tiafoe. I mean, why not merely "terrible"? Even if he's in his own category why? - you indicated the reasons for everyone else.

 

[Yugram]

My choice is Auger Aliassime. I don’t think this guy is even a Masters-winning material, let alone Slams, #1s...

Don’t know how can anyone see Djokovic/Federer/Nadal in him.

Checks out.

 

[TheNachoMan]

Checks out.

Bageled by post prime Cilic. LOL

 

[Third Serve]

Bageled by post prime Cilic. LOL

tbh getting bageled by any version of Cilic is already disgusting

 

[TheNachoMan]

tbh getting bageled by any version of Cilic is already disgusting

At least USO 2014 Cilic would’ve been understandable at the very least

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Kyrgios. People think he could win slams if he had the right attitude, but I think that judgement makes not much sense. Attitude is an important attribute to a great player, and saying if he had better attitude he'd win, is, in my opinion, something like saying World No. 150 could win a slam if he had the right amount of talent. World No. 150 hasn't. Kyrgios hasn't the right attitude, so no point in saying "he'd win if...". He'll never win 7 best-of-5-matches in a row.

does anyone actually rate him that highly now though?

 

[Deleted member 744492]

Thiem. Yes, he won the USO - with Novak disqualified and Fedal not even playing the event. He also needed some serious choking from Zverev in order to win the title. Other than that, he was supposed to be the second best player on clay - he has zero results to back this up. He's now 27 and given his playing style, I don't think he'll have the playing longevity of the big 3. I wouldn't be surprised if he starts declining soon and I don't see him winning another slam.

Dimitrov, aka Babyfed... His WTF win has an asterisk, even more so than Thiem's USO title. The guy is going for the hotshots and stuff, but that's basically all he can do. He started out as a Federer impersonator, and that's pretty much the story of his career. Never had the game, consistency and mentallity to be a true top player. He was hyped for years and years as the next big thing, even though he always had huge flaws in his game - serve, backhand, not to mention his mentality. I can hardly think of anyone more overrated and overhyped in the past decade.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

The chances to get an indoor event (pure randomly chosen) are small, to get a grass event the chances are ridiculous. 9 out of 10 times the venue would be held outdoors HC or clay, and taking that into account it would be completely dumb to chose Federer over Nadal if you want to maximize survival chances.

On the other hand, if also the opponent was chosen randomly, the chances that Federer would get Nadal or Djokovic are also small. In his prime I would say he was the least vulnerable against opponents other than them and on every surface even clay wouldn’t really loose to lesser players. With Rafa, if you have the bad luck to get grass or indoor hard he suddenly becomes vulnerable against all kinds of mediocre players. With Djokovic there is always the chance of strange defeats against Stanimal, Murray, Chung, Nishikori, certain Next genders or that he hits a line woman and gets disqualified.

 

[-snake-]

FAA and Thiem.

 

[ballamaz]

Not sure what the question is asking. Who does not deserve their place on the tour? Who does not deserve their ranking?

 

[Subway Tennis]

Thiem’s lack of any big clay titles is truly interesting. If we look at 2017-2019 clay Masters and exclude tournaments where Nadal was in good form, then Thiem had Rome 17, Madrid 18, MC19, Madrid 19 Open for him. Not that many opportunities, really. But he should have capitalised on Madrid in 19, imo.

It may end up being a similar situation to Stan. An amazingly good clay player whose count of big clay titles is smaller than you'd expect, even factoring in the dominance of nadal.

 

[Heliath]

On the other hand, if also the opponent was chosen randomly, the chances that Federer would get Nadal or Djokovic are also small. In his prime I would say he was the least vulnerable against opponents other than them and on every surface even clay wouldn’t really loose to lesser players. With Rafa, if you have the bad luck to get grass or indoor hard he suddenly becomes vulnerable against all kinds of mediocre players. With Djokovic there is always the chance of strange defeats against Stanimal, Murray, Chung, Nishikori, certain Next genders or that he hits a line woman and gets disqualified.

If you take Federer and Djokovic out ot the equation (small chances for them to be the opponents) then, why would Nadal be vulnerable in grass? Im taking him at his prime, when he played 5 Wimbledon finals in a row and only lost to Fed and Novak.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

If you take Federer and Djokovic out ot the equation (small chances for them to be the opponents) then, why would Nadal be vulnerable in grass? Im taking him at his prime, when he played 5 Wimbledon finals in a row and only lost to Fed and Novak.

Even during those years he had some strange five setters against mugs in early rounds.

 

[Nole_King]

No Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, thanks.

So kind of you for including Federer in the exclusion list.

 

[Rafa4GOAT]

Politely Disagree. Not sure beating Rafa in the fourth round of Wimby at 18 puts you in any other category. Not sure there is a player on tour who has come close to beating all of the big three in their first match up.

"His game except serve is pretty below average" -- ...if that was the case Isner, karlovic, raonic etc would have as much success against the top guys as he does. When he is focused his ground game is way way wayyyy above that of other big servers.

It's pretty clear that if he put his head down, worked on fitness / his game, that he would play better. Top 3 server on tour with an underrated forehand, great touch, and most importantly; plays better the bigger the stakes.

Saying he will /won't win a slam is a different question as to whether a player is over/under-rated and I think you're getting them confused purely because I added a category of players who I don't think will ever win one.

Not happening bud

 

[Zoid]

Not happening bud

That's another argument - not the point of my posts.

 

[Deleted member 771911]

Tsitsipas.

 

[tennisbuck]

It’s always recency bias. So right now Rublev. Last year Medvedev.

 

[Damotuky]

My choice is Auger Aliassime. I don’t think this guy is even a Masters-winning material, let alone Slams, #1s...

Don’t know how can anyone see Djokovic/Federer/Nadal in him.

I completely agree. He has no power. If you give him no pace, he flails away and overswings.

 

[asifallasleep]

So wait, tennis pros receive their rankings based on results/performance. So what is this overrated thing you guys are on about? Has someone been awarded their ranking not based on actual results? Do tell? Also curious as to what some of you are ranked. 'JOKE'

Heck, what are you rated? 3.0? 3.5? Maybe some 4.0's. Clearly you have no idea of what it takes to reach the level these guys are at; and here you are bashing guys in the top 20.
Hilarious. Even bashing guys in the top 100 is ridiculous. Now go get your pint of ice cream and turn on your tele.

"Yeah that Tsitsipas is so terrible". "Rublev is no good" = and you lot meanwhile can't even win a 3.0 tournament at the local high school!!!

 

[davced1]

Verdasco. His forehand is both his strength and weakness. It can be so good but usually breaks down at the most important moments.

 

[davced1]

So wait, tennis pros receive their rankings based on results/performance. So what is this overrated thing you guys are on about? Has someone been awarded their ranking not based on actual results? Do tell? Also curious as to what some of you are ranked. 'JOKE'

Heck, what are you rated? 3.0? 3.5? Maybe some 4.0's. Clearly you have no idea of what it takes to reach the level these guys are at; and here you are bashing guys in the top 20.
Hilarious. Even bashing guys in the top 100 is ridiculous. Now go get your pint of ice cream and turn on your tele.

"Yeah that Tsitsipas is so terrible". "Rublev is no good" = and you lot meanwhile can't even win a 3.0 tournament at the local high school!!!

In a sense they are all overrated because when you think about it all they really do is hit a ball over a net. It’s not important at all in the bigger picture. Btw what is your rating? I will go enjoy my ice cream now.

 

[Benben245]

tie between Zverev and Murray

 

[EllieK]

Tsitsipas, kyrgios. Must be a Greek thing

 

[Fabresque]

Actually, yes, explain Tiafoe. I mean, why not merely "terrible"? Even if he's in his own category why? - you indicated the reasons for everyone else.

Just saw this, but okay.

Technical issues, lacks a significant, consistent weapon, lacks a big serve which pockets him free points, lacks a net/touch game, and the USO capitulation proved he’s mentally awful. Never seen such a spineless performance in my life. He was hyped up because he once upon a time pushed Federer on a few occasions, but is that really the expectation? Anybody that’s fast with a flicker of consistency can push Federer, ie Millman. Tiafoe is nothing special.

 

[Mainad]

Berrettini is certainly the most overrated in the Top Ten. I don't even know why he is still there?

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

No Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, thanks.

I would think of Felix Auger Aliassime, Stefanos Tsitsipas and Dominic Thiem, sir.

 

[Mainad]

tie between Zverev and Murray

Murray has been struggling with injuries for the last 3 years and can barely play so who's been overrating him this season?

 

[Nadal_King]

Andrey Rublev

 

[Third Serve]

Berrettini is certainly the most overrated in the Top Ten. I don't even know why he is still there?

Does anyone really overrate Berrettini tho?

 

[D.Nalby12]

Rublev enters in list for me.

 

[Mainad]

Does anyone really overrate Berrettini tho?

The ATP rankings for starters.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Honestly if Zverev fixes his serve he could be an improved version of Novak. Ultron T1000

I realize you said that as a joke, but levity aside:

Zverev will never get remotely close to anything Novak’s achieved on a tennis court. He’s not as talented, focused, driven or anywhere near as good. Borg, Safin and Boris were all great enough to chase babes 24/7 and still win slams. Zverev ain’t anywhere near that league and will pay the price as his career unfolds.

 

[BeatlesFan]

tbh getting bageled by any version of Cilic is already disgusting

In fairness, Cilic's two weeks at the USO in 2014 was amazing. His level there was on par with Stanimal's peaks at a couple of slams.

 

[daggerman]

Just saw this, but okay.

Technical issues, lacks a significant, consistent weapon, lacks a big serve which pockets him free points, lacks a net/touch game, and the USO capitulation proved he’s mentally awful. Never seen such a spineless performance in my life.

Are we watching the same Tiafoe? His touch at net is actually really solid imo.

 

[Sudacafan]

It used to be Shapovalov. Now it would be Auger Aliassime.
Oh, look! They have something in common.

 

[Wander]

Medvedev. He’s done almost nothing since USO 2019

This pick aged like milk. Unbeaten since, lol.