Tommy Haas and his potential

[jeffmccrae]

I was a big fan of Tommy Haas when he played, partly since I like to support the underdog, but I also liked his playing style. I know he wasnt the most talented or explosive player, but he was nice to watch and had a good all around game, besides his mental shortcomings and injury proneness.

The question I would like to ask some of you familiar with that era is what is his potential if he did not have such an injury prone career. Was he a possible/probable slam winner? He did end 2002 at #3 during his peak but 2002 was a pretty weak year, and even that year he only came relatively close to a slam once, the 2002 Australian Open, and even there could not even beat a subpar Safin in the semis, and someone like Tomas Johansson ends up winning the event instead. It would have been interesting to see if he were good enough to emerge into a contender as the game got stronger and the likes of Roddick, Ferrero, young Nadal, and of course Federer all rose, and Hewitt, Agassi, and Safin stayed strong a few more years.

He likely makes the US Open final in 2002 if it were not for a resurgent Sampras, and Sampras's near escape against Rusedski. He was basically a lock to beat Roddick and Schalken that event. 2001 he also had a good shot if he had gotten past his round of 16 with Hewitt. Maybe the U.S Open was his best shot in future years, but it would be a lot harder as the years following were a lot stronger with a much stronger Roddick and Federer.

 

[jasonbrown]

He should have won the Australian Open in 2002. That was probably his only ever chance of a slam regardless. Nice player, not a big enough weapon, or mental toughness.

 

[fundrazer]

I do think the main issue for Haas was the lack of weapons. He really had to construct his points, didn't really get too many freebies or easy 1-2 serve + forehand style points. Obviously he's a bit of a headcase too (definitely watch the clip from his match against Davydenko if you've never seen it).

With that said, I remember being kind of wowed by his backhand down the line in that 2002 match with Safin. I've only seen the highlights from the match, but I really was impressed with how he hits that shot.

 

[Cashman]

I think he definitely had the potential to achieve more than he did. By 2002 he had developed a bit of a reputation as an underachiever, getting a lot of great wins but not really converting them into titles. You sort of had the feeling that he was going to break through soon. Then he had a ton of bad luck and basically didn't play until 2004. Trying to coming back after 18 months off, right when Federer was winning everything, really put him on a hiding to nothing.

Had he stayed on tour, I really feel like he could have won something big in late 2002 or 2003. But he still would have been steamrolled like everyone else from 2004 onwards.

People really forget how much Federer upturned the tennis world. If you had told me in 2002 that Haas, Grosjean, Robredo and Blake would fail to accrue a single GS Final between them (and Nalbandian only one), I'd have laughed you out of the room. Ditto for Hewitt disappearing. They were all much better players than their records show.

 

[Cashman]

He did end 2002 at #3 during his peak but 2002 was a pretty weak year, and even that year he only came relatively close to a slam once, the 2002 Australian Open

That doesn't really tell the whole story, though. He got as high as #2 in May, then in June his parents were in a severe motorcycle accident that put his father into a coma. He had to skip the grass season to care for them, and when he came back for the summer hardcourts he was a completely different player. He was on and off the tour for the rest of the year looking after their rehab, then in December his injured shoulder (which he'd been nursing all season) finally went, and he spent a year and a half on the sidelines.

Most people thought that AO final was the start of big things for him, and they probably would have been right if fate hadn't intervened.