The Pablo Cuevas appreciation club

The Unknown

Semi-Pro
220px-Pablo_Cuevas_(19210577826).jpg


8 singles titles, 12 doubles titles, including a French Open doubles titles and Rome Masters doubles title, Pablo has just achieved a career high singles ranking of 20 and is currently 12th in the race to London this year.

Although renowned as a clay court specialist, Cuevas was recently a runner up on the grass at Nottingham in a tournament where he showed very strong mental resolve in overcoming Daniel Evans, Marcos Baghdatis and Gilles Muller in three sets, in which he had to break back and/or come from behind in the breaker in the third set of each match.

Although he had a poor showing at Wimbledon, Pablo had another strong showing recently by making the final of Hamburg.

Other season highlights include titles in Brazil (where he overcame Nadal in the semis) and a title at Sao Paulo.

Whilst Cuevas doesnt have any major weapons, or great physical presence, he is solid at the net, has a decent backhand, an understated service game. But its his consistency and mental resolve this is most admirable, and personally this is a big reason behind him being one of my favourite players.

Give it up for Pablo Cuevas!!!
 
Last edited:

Arti

Professional
I can not say that I have. But I appreciate having heard of him, so I thought I belonged.
Yea absolutely you do! Just saying that watching him is really a pleasure. His huge lock out donde and down the line backhand is killer on clay. Best Nadal earlier this year en route to to two clay titles in a row.
 

TupeloDanger

Professional
Cuevas is only top 20 because of a weak era :eek::eek::eek:
While this is certainly true, it doesn't necessarily make him less awesome.

Feli Lopez is my absolute favorite active player to watch, but I concede that his rating is drastically inflated. He just plays such a simple, efficient game that he's been able to hold on into his mid 30's -- after most of the rest of the tennis boom era talent has retired, so now he's only competing against kids culled from much smaller, depleted modern talent pools. You don't hit career highs in your mid 30's in a stocked talent pool.

Happy for him, though. And for Cuevas. (Both one handers, natch.)
 

Arti

Professional
Unlike the earlier years where Federer was racking up grandslams against GOAT contenders like Philippoussis and Bagdhatis, and where tennis powerhouses like the great Sjeng Schalken were hovering around 20 in the world.
lol thank you for this
 

The Unknown

Semi-Pro
While this is certainly true, it doesn't necessarily make him less awesome.

Feli Lopez is my absolute favorite active player to watch, but I concede that his rating is drastically inflated. He just plays such a simple, efficient game that he's been able to hold on into his mid 30's -- after most of the rest of the tennis boom era talent has retired, so now he's only competing against kids culled from much smaller, depleted modern talent pools. You don't hit career highs in your mid 30's in a stocked talent pool.

Happy for him, though. And for Cuevas. (Both one handers, natch.)

Unfortunately for Lopez he is playing in the wrong era. He would have dominated back in the 70's. How he has done so well with almost literally no backhand is incredible.

If everything went back to wooden rackets he would be up there for sure.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
First thing that comes to mind when someone mentions "Pablo Cuevas", is his tank against Nadal at Rio 2015. I appreciate watching his aesthetic game when his head is screwed on.
 

Arti

Professional
First thing that comes to mind when someone mentions "Pablo Cuevas", is his tank against Nadal at Rio 2015. I appreciate watching his aesthetic game when his head is screwed on.
True, cuevas has ranked and even faked passing out during a match before. He said he ruined his watch from falling backwards and pretending to pass out.
 

TupeloDanger

Professional
Unfortunately for Lopez he is playing in the wrong era. He would have dominated back in the 70's. How he has done so well with almost literally no backhand is incredible.

If everything went back to wooden rackets he would be up there for sure.
I can not endorse this message. The versatility and general awesomeness of a quality slice backhand is totally underrated by the denizens of this fine forum.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
I can not endorse this message. The versatility and general awesomeness of a quality slice backhand is totally underrated by the denizens of this fine forum.
Yah. The slice backhand fits perfectly with his game style. Not to mention he doesn't produce many errors of that side either. His big left serve is a wonderful weapon, and the forehand isn't too shabby either. He is so different from the players of today. He can give them fits at times. A big serving lefty Spaniard with a great net game? What?
 

The Unknown

Semi-Pro
I can not endorse this message. The versatility and general awesomeness of a quality slice backhand is totally underrated by the denizens of this fine forum.

To be more specific I meant a topspin drive backhand. He doesn't really have one, and it hurts him. Big time.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster

Arti

Professional
Can't say I do I'm afraid. My Spanish is extremely limited to numbers up to 100, your typical greetings and various animals. This video helped me big time there.

oh wow cool. he does say a few numbers during the video when talking about the scores of some of the matches before the pass out. His accent even threw me off at 1st and Spanish is my first language so...
 

TupeloDanger

Professional
Unlike the earlier years when Federer was racking up grandslams against GOAT contenders like Philippoussis and Bagdhatis, and when tennis powerhouses like the great Sjeng Schalken were hovering around 20 in the world.
Psst. There was tennis even before Federer. Put down your Pokemon app and look at a history book.
 

Arti

Professional
Psst. There was tennis even before Federer. Put down your Pokemon app and look at a history book.
The point is though that every 3 or so years there goes a dominant player to stay for a while. Sometimes we get 2 or more of these ATM contenders at a time. This has been the case since the days of Laver, Borg-McEnroe, Sampras-Agassi, and Federer-Nadal, now we see Murray-Djokovic. Every era looks weak because of the dominate few at the top with God-given talent. If this forum was around when Muster won the french then the weak era threads would have been rampant. Same thing for when Agassi was making slam finals in his 30's.
 

TupeloDanger

Professional
The point is though that every 3 or so years there goes a dominant player to stay for a while. Sometimes we get 2 or more of these ATM contenders at a time. This has been the case since the days of Laver, Borg-McEnroe, Sampras-Agassi, and Federer-Nadal, now we see Murray-Djokovic. Every era looks weak because of the dominate few at the top with God-given talent. If this forum was around when Muster won the french then the weak era threads would have been rampant. Same thing for when Agassi was making slam finals in his 30's.
This has definitively NOT always been the case.

During the period starting with the late 70's, and continuing through the late 90's, (aka: the era when the children of the tennis boom grew up and had to compete with one another), starting with the dominance of Borg and ending with that of Sampras, you have enormous overlap and simultaneous high ranking among players who accumulated 14, 11, 8, 8, 8, 7, 7, 6, 6, 4, and 3 slams. And several more with 2.

NONE stayed particularly relevant into their 30's until the thread ran out on the children of the boom. Agassi was the last guy standing, which is why he held on until his mid 30's. Connors hung around, but he certainly wasn't slam relevant as an old man, nor attaining career bests.

When an era is strong, you have lots of strong players, and you have lots of amazing young talent coming up and making sure the greybeards don't hang around past their expiration dates...much less attain career-high accolades as they approach retirement. The tops of the rankings will contain a few declining ex-greats, a few hot new up and comers, and a bunch of guys at their mid-career peaks who are all talented enough to crush each other any given match. That doesn't happen any longer.

People "argue" this, but it isn't really an argument. It's demographic fact.
 

BorgCash

Legend
I support Pablo. Like his style on court, no emotions, great serve and backhand. Watched him on several tournaments, got his towel after doubles at BNP Paribas Masters in Bercy, Paris in 2014.
 

amorys90

Professional
Don't you guys think that Spanish speaking countries (Spain/most of South America/some of Carribean) produce many great clay courters with one handed backhands. I normally don't like watching clay matches but they have nice style and combine consistency with creativity. This group includes: Cuevas, Lopez, Almagro, Zeballos, Burgos, Berlocq, L. Mayer, N. Kicker...
 

Arti

Professional
This has definitively NOT always been the case.

During the period starting with the late 70's, and continuing through the late 90's, (aka: the era when the children of the tennis boom grew up and had to compete with one another), starting with the dominance of Borg and ending with that of Sampras, you have enormous overlap and simultaneous high ranking among players who accumulated 14, 11, 8, 8, 8, 7, 7, 6, 6, 4, and 3 slams. And several more with 2.

NONE stayed particularly relevant into their 30's until the thread ran out on the children of the boom. Agassi was the last guy standing, which is why he held on until his mid 30's. Connors hung around, but he certainly wasn't slam relevant as an old man, nor attaining career bests.

When an era is strong, you have lots of strong players, and you have lots of amazing young talent coming up and making sure the greybeards don't hang around past their expiration dates...much less attain career-high accolades as they approach retirement. The tops of the rankings will contain a few declining ex-greats, a few hot new up and comers, and a bunch of guys at their mid-career peaks who are all talented enough to crush each other any given match. That doesn't happen any longer.

People "argue" this, but it isn't really an argument. It's demographic fact.
Oh well, I guess we just have to wait and see what comes next. Maybe we are in the transitional era. All the theories make really interesting discussions on TT. Anyway we all appreciate Pablo Cuevas right?
 

TupeloDanger

Professional
But seriously though, Cuevas and era aside, let's all put away the Pokemon.

Bored three year olds gave this stuff up a decade and a half ago.
 
Top