Top 5 Most Athletic yet Underachieving Players

[nikdom]

As the title suggests, what's your list of Top 5 male and female players that are/were gifted physically but least capitalized on it?

I'm still thinking through this myself, but two are popping in my head right now - Monfils and Stosur

 

[papertank]

Monfils is the biggest one for sure.

Tsonga another.

 

[True Fanerer]

Hard to imagine anyone other than Monfils being at the top of this list

 

[nikdom]

Safin belong in this list you think?

I mean he did win a couple of slams...

 

[FCarmo]

Sam Groth

 

[True Fanerer]

Yeah I mean if you want to include slam winners then I guess he would qualify for this list. He was certainly capable of more.

 

[nikdom]

Soderling

 

[skaj]

Gael Monfils
Marcelo Rios
Miloslav Mecir
Francesca Schiavone
Elena Dementieva

 

[Bobby Jr]

Sam Groth

Groth isn't particularly athletic in his tennis performance really. He was pretty cumbersome for a start. Being a big guy with bigger arm muscles than most of your peers doesn't make you "athletic" in a sporting sense. The athletic results are what makes you athletic - speed, strength (where it's needed - i.e. not the arms), stamina...

It's also for this reason Stosur doesn't really pop to mind for me either for the WTA.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

Nishikori and Ferrer seem worth suggesting.

 

[Zebrev]

Me.

 

[heninfan99]

Monfils is the biggest one for sure.

Tsonga another.

Recently I've started to think they haven't under-achieved. They were never gonna be better than Fed or Nadal or Djoker. In other words, it makes perfect sense they don't have slams.

 

[George Turner]

Stosur is a gym rat. That does not make her really talented athletically, it just means she spends more time at the gym and less time playing tennis than other players.

Grass is the surface where technical skill is far more important than athletic ability. Stosurs shocking record on grass exposes the limitations of her approach. Monfils also has a terrible record on grass.

 

[Adm]

I will write only for male players, female gets too complicated by default (since we have to take into consideration who has a normal cycle or not, if they are in medication for not having a cycle, etc etc).

1. David Ferrer (credit to him though for being for so long consistently in the top 10, even top5)
2. Tsonga (these athletic skills and so poor results, really pitty, he needed support from a different coaching team)
3. Monfils (pitty, makes things too complicated)
4. Andy Murray (for his hard work, and so skillful coaches around him (I mean his old time true scotish team) he brought very poor results, he should have done better against Federer at this age, Nadal with his injuries, Djokovic with his tandrums. He spends too much time reading the british press, and commenting "politically correct" crap. I wish he had Lendl 10 years earlier and man him up sooner.
5. Kei Nishikori & Dimitrov (would expect more from both)

Federer and Nadal are certainly some of the All Time Best but afterall these 6 ATHLETIC guys should have done better. I mean if they continue like they do now, they kill keep loosing from Federer and Nadal even when Federer reaches 50 years old.

That does not underestimate Federer if he beats them when he is 50, but definetely underestimate these 6 guys.

 

[skaj]

Recently I've started to think they haven't under-achieved. They were never gonna be better than Fed or Nadal or Djoker. In other words, it makes perfect sense they don't have slams.

if they had the dedication and mentality of those 3, they would certainly had wins against them in GSs. so in that sense they did not use what they had to achieve what they could.

 

[TheMaestro1990]

Monfils, the athleticism of a NBA player (btw, I think such physicque will be the future of tennis in some 20, 30 years) and still hasn't amounted to anything close to what we hoped for.

 

[RF-18]

Dimitrov has not been mentioned here so I say him. Amazing athlete

Edit: Or maybe you mean athletic as in looks and muscles?

 

[heninfan99]

if they had the dedication and mentality of those 3, they would certainly had wins against them in GSs. so in that sense they did not use what they had to achieve what they could.

Nah, brah. Live in the real world.

 

[stingstang]

Monfils is the biggest one for sure..

Monfils is ripped but I've seen him get gassed in plenty of long matches. I don't think his cardio level is that great.

 

[Shaolin]

1-5. Monfils

 

[BHServe]

I would say Dimitrov is the guy with pretty much ideal combination of height, agility, quickness and stamina, basically the whole physical package. Monfils is another one, but I think stamina has let him down at least on a few occasions. Tsonga maybe as well, but I’ve always considered him a little too heavy built.

Others (or at least major part of the underachieving/not-that-succesful players) are missing AT LEAST one key ingredient, whether it is quickness/speed, agility, ideal height or something else.

 

[chicagodude]

Recently I've started to think they haven't under-achieved. They were never gonna be better than Fed or Nadal or Djoker. In other words, it makes perfect sense they don't have slams.

I definitely consider Monfils an underachiever, he has few tournaments and only 1 500 level tourney.
Tsonga to me has actually had a very nice career, including 2 MS wins and a GS final. Wouldn't consider him an underachiever really.

As for the OP question: for the ATP definitely Monfils, Rios is a good one too, and Dimitrov so far.
For the WTA it's harder, until this year I would've said Stephens.

Now, I'd say Wozniaki to some extent and then Kirilenko, Bouchard, Lisicki, who are all quite athletic (note that by athletic I don't mean muscular alone).

 

[heninfan99]

I definitely consider Monfils an underachiever, he has few tournaments and only 1 500 level tourney.
Tsonga to me has actually had a very nice career, including 2 MS wins and a GS final. Wouldn't consider him an underachiever really.

As for the OP question: for the ATP definitely Monfils, Rios is a good one too, and Dimitrov so far.
For the WTA it's harder, until this year I would've said Stephens.

Now, I'd say Wozniaki to some extent and then Kirilenko, Bouchard, Lisicki, who are all quite athletic (note that by athletic I don't mean muscular alone).

Disagree. Rios reached #1 and should have won a slam but unfortunately he played a steroid cheat.
Rios is a manlet and his achievement are great for his era and size.

And Monfils, the ATP is very objective, he's made 13 million in prize money, that seems about right to me for this abilities.

 

[nikdom]

I will write only for male players, female gets too complicated by default (since we have to take into consideration who has a normal cycle or not, if they are in medication for not having a cycle, etc etc).

1. David Ferrer (credit to him though for being for so long consistently in the top 10, even top5)
2. Tsonga (these athletic skills and so poor results, really pitty, he needed support from a different coaching team)
3. Monfils (pitty, makes things too complicated)
4. Andy Murray (for his hard work, and so skillful coaches around him (I mean his old time true scotish team) he brought very poor results, he should have done better against Federer at this age, Nadal with his injuries, Djokovic with his tandrums. He spends too much time reading the british press, and commenting "politically correct" crap. I wish he had Lendl 10 years earlier and man him up sooner.
5. Kei Nishikori & Dimitrov (would expect more from both)

Federer and Nadal are certainly some of the All Time Best but afterall these 6 ATHLETIC guys should have done better. I mean if they continue like they do now, they kill keep loosing from Federer and Nadal even when Federer reaches 50 years old.

That does not underestimate Federer if he beats them when he is 50, but definetely underestimate these 6 guys.

I like this list. I don't think Nishikori is gifted athletically though. He has good tennis skills but not a physical talent.

Same with Dimitrov to an extent.

Verdasco might be another candidate.

 

[TennisLBC]

Nishikori and Ferrer seem worth suggesting.

Nice call!

Edit...after some thought, it's a bit harsh given the era these guys are playing in.

 

[skaj]

Nah, brah. Live in the real world.

after your well articulated answer, full of arguments, I will definitely change my mind on this one ))

 

[skaj]

Disagree. Rios reached #1 and should have won a slam but unfortunately he played a steroid cheat.
Rios is a manlet and his achievement are great for his era and size.

And Monfils, the ATP is very objective, he's made 13 million in prize money, that seems about right to me for this abilities.

Rios was not only a great athlete but an amazing ball striker/shot maker and one of the smartest, most talented players ever - a major underachiever.

Monfils could have won 113 milion, if he was to have the right mentality - super fast, super strong, probably the best athlete ever, killer serve, great hands, he had everything one needs for achieving greatness.

 

[skaj]

Monfils is ripped but I've seen him get gassed in plenty of long matches. I don't think his cardio level is that great.

I am not sure if this happens because of his natural abilities, cardio level depends a lot on how well you are prepared for the match, tournament.