Archive for Percy896's Tennis Forum This is a new tennis forum to discuss professional tennis, vote and create polls, and ask advice about equipment, fitness, or anything regarding tennis! Now with a new Fantasy Tennis League!
|
Benchwarmer1
|
Top 10 in 5-6 yearsso which players would you guys think would be on this list?
|
x.doublea
|
This means from 2000 to 2006.
Certainly:
Agassi, Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin (well, he has some bad years)
Less Noticably:
Ferrero, Nalbandian, Moya, Kuerten, Coria; (Haas would be here had it not been for his freek injury)
So, here are my rankings:
Terms of consistancy of these players (An advantage if you played more years):
1. Agassi (has been consistantly in the Top 10 until this year, was Number 1 a few times)
2. Federer (didn't at highest level until 2003)
3. Roddick (was consistantly 2nd best from 2004-early 2005)
3. Hewitt (the World's best rankingwise in 2001-2002)
5. Nalbandian (the World's greatest Top 10 fixture having done little besides the TMC)
6. Kuerten (reigned Roland Garros for three years)
7. Ferrero (was one of the best in 2002-2003 until exhaution struck)
8. Moya (top 10 from 2003-2005)
8. Coria (one of the top claycourters in 2003-2005; choker)
10. Safin (great at the AO, unpredictable anywhere else)
Terms of dominance at either a stetch of time or over a major:
1. Federer (Wimbledon, US Open, AO, 2003-2006)
2. Hewitt (2001-2002)
3. Agassi (AO, early part of seasons, especially 2003)
4. Kuerten (Roland Garros)
5. Safin (AO)
6. Roddick (fall 2003)
7. Ferrero (clay court season, 2002/3)
8. Coria (clay court season, 2004/5)
9. Nalbandian
10. Moya
I know it's biased....
|
PSALT
|
| x.doublea wrote: | This means from 2000 to 2006.
Certainly:
Agassi, Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin (well, he has some bad years)
Less Noticably:
Ferrero, Nalbandian, Moya, Kuerten, Coria; (Haas would be here had it not been for his freek injury)
So, here are my rankings:
Terms of consistancy of these players (An advantage if you played more years):
1. Agassi (has been consistantly in the Top 10 until this year, was Number 1 a few times)
2. Federer (didn't at highest level until 2003)
3. Roddick (was consistantly 2nd best from 2004-early 2005)
3. Hewitt (the World's best rankingwise in 2001-2002)
5. Nalbandian (the World's greatest Top 10 fixture having done little besides the TMC)
6. Kuerten (reigned Roland Garros for three years)
7. Ferrero (was one of the best in 2002-2003 until exhaution struck)
8. Moya (top 10 from 2003-2005)
8. Coria (one of the top claycourters in 2003-2005; choker)
10. Safin (great at the AO, unpredictable anywhere else)
Terms of dominance at either a stetch of time or over a major:
1. Federer (Wimbledon, US Open, AO, 2003-2006)
2. Hewitt (2001-2002)
3. Agassi (AO, early part of seasons, especially 2003)
4. Kuerten (Roland Garros)
5. Safin (AO)
6. Roddick (fall 2003)
7. Ferrero (clay court season, 2002/3)
8. Coria (clay court season, 2004/5)
9. Nalbandian
10. Moya
I know it's biased.... |
I took this topic to be who will be in the top ten in 5-6 years.
my list,
1. Nadal
2. Gasquet
3. Federer
4. Ancic
5. Djokovic
6. De Bakker
7. Blake
8. Cilic
9. Querrey ( can't say that one is impartial  )
10. Murray
1. Kuznetsova
2. Hingis
3. Sharapova
4. Mauresmo
5. Jackson
6. Golovin
7. Ivanovic
8. Vaidisova
9. Perry
10. Wozniacki
|
x.doublea
|
| PSALT wrote: | | x.doublea wrote: | This means from 2000 to 2006.
Certainly:
Agassi, Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin (well, he has some bad years)
Less Noticably:
Ferrero, Nalbandian, Moya, Kuerten, Coria; (Haas would be here had it not been for his freek injury)
So, here are my rankings:
Terms of consistancy of these players (An advantage if you played more years):
1. Agassi (has been consistantly in the Top 10 until this year, was Number 1 a few times)
2. Federer (didn't at highest level until 2003)
3. Roddick (was consistantly 2nd best from 2004-early 2005)
3. Hewitt (the World's best rankingwise in 2001-2002)
5. Nalbandian (the World's greatest Top 10 fixture having done little besides the TMC)
6. Kuerten (reigned Roland Garros for three years)
7. Ferrero (was one of the best in 2002-2003 until exhaution struck)
8. Moya (top 10 from 2003-2005)
8. Coria (one of the top claycourters in 2003-2005; choker)
10. Safin (great at the AO, unpredictable anywhere else)
Terms of dominance at either a stetch of time or over a major:
1. Federer (Wimbledon, US Open, AO, 2003-2006)
2. Hewitt (2001-2002)
3. Agassi (AO, early part of seasons, especially 2003)
4. Kuerten (Roland Garros)
5. Safin (AO)
6. Roddick (fall 2003)
7. Ferrero (clay court season, 2002/3)
8. Coria (clay court season, 2004/5)
9. Nalbandian
10. Moya
I know it's biased.... |
I took this topic to be who will be in the top ten in 5-6 years.
my list,
1. Nadal
2. Gasquet
3. Federer
4. Ancic
5. Djokovic
6. De Bakker
7. Blake
8. Cilic
9. Querrey ( can't say that one is impartial )
10. Murray
1. Kuznetsova
2. Hingis
3. Sharapova
4. Mauresmo
5. Jackson
6. Golovin
7. Ivanovic
8. Vaidisova
9. Perry
10. Wozniacki |
You're right. I took the topic incorrectly. 
Here's my list:
1. Nadal
2. Gasquet
3. Ancic
4. Berdych
5. Murray
6. Almagro
7. Baghdatis
8. Djkovic
9. Young (Donald)
10. a Chinese
Federer would have retired by then.
My women's list will come later.
|
leftys_rock
|
Wow, in 6 years, Mauresmo will be 32 going on 33! Blake will also be the same age! Hingis will be 31! Wow, and still #2 in the world? I think she might slow down by then. I won't disagree that she won't be in the top 10, but I wouldn't think that high.
|
PSALT
|
| x.doublea wrote: | | PSALT wrote: | | x.doublea wrote: | This means from 2000 to 2006.
Certainly:
Agassi, Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin (well, he has some bad years)
Less Noticably:
Ferrero, Nalbandian, Moya, Kuerten, Coria; (Haas would be here had it not been for his freek injury)
So, here are my rankings:
Terms of consistancy of these players (An advantage if you played more years):
1. Agassi (has been consistantly in the Top 10 until this year, was Number 1 a few times)
2. Federer (didn't at highest level until 2003)
3. Roddick (was consistantly 2nd best from 2004-early 2005)
3. Hewitt (the World's best rankingwise in 2001-2002)
5. Nalbandian (the World's greatest Top 10 fixture having done little besides the TMC)
6. Kuerten (reigned Roland Garros for three years)
7. Ferrero (was one of the best in 2002-2003 until exhaution struck)
8. Moya (top 10 from 2003-2005)
8. Coria (one of the top claycourters in 2003-2005; choker)
10. Safin (great at the AO, unpredictable anywhere else)
Terms of dominance at either a stetch of time or over a major:
1. Federer (Wimbledon, US Open, AO, 2003-2006)
2. Hewitt (2001-2002)
3. Agassi (AO, early part of seasons, especially 2003)
4. Kuerten (Roland Garros)
5. Safin (AO)
6. Roddick (fall 2003)
7. Ferrero (clay court season, 2002/3)
8. Coria (clay court season, 2004/5)
9. Nalbandian
10. Moya
I know it's biased.... |
I took this topic to be who will be in the top ten in 5-6 years.
my list,
1. Nadal
2. Gasquet
3. Federer
4. Ancic
5. Djokovic
6. De Bakker
7. Blake
8. Cilic
9. Querrey ( can't say that one is impartial )
10. Murray
1. Kuznetsova
2. Hingis
3. Sharapova
4. Mauresmo
5. Jackson
6. Golovin
7. Ivanovic
8. Vaidisova
9. Perry
10. Wozniacki |
You're right. I took the topic incorrectly.
Here's my list:
1. Nadal
2. Gasquet
3. Ancic
4. Berdych
5. Murray
6. Almagro
7. Baghdatis
8. Djkovic
9. Young (Donald)
10. a Chinese
Federer would have retired by then.
My women's list will come later. |
crap, forgot about Berdych. knock Murray off and put Berdych at.....5
|
PSALT
|
| leftys_rock wrote: | | Wow, in 6 years, Mauresmo will be 32 going on 33! Blake will also be the same age! Hingis will be 31! Wow, and still #2 in the world? I think she might slow down by then. I won't disagree that she won't be in the top 10, but I wouldn't think that high. |
Mauresmo plays a game that she could keep playing into her 30's. I do think Blake will go the way of Agassi and become even more agressive in his 30's to stay in the top 10. While Hingis is quick her sense of the ball gets more balls bakc than anything, she will slow down a step but will pick up what her opponent will do as wel as ever. I think she will start coming to net more and become almost a serve and volleyer.
|
x.doublea
|
Here's my women's list:
1. Vaidisova
2. Ivanovic
3. Sharapova
4. Kuznetsova
5. a Chinese
6. Mirza
7. a Chinese
8. a Chinese
9. Jackson
10. Mauresmo
I'm serious about the Chinese. Some of the players, like the one who played Clijsters at Wimbledon, are immensely talented.
|
J-man
|
1. Nadal
2.Djokovic
3. Murray
4. Monfils
5. Anicic
6. Vliegen
7. DE BAKKER
8.Cilic
9. Blake
10. Querrey
7-10 is up for grabs really
And for the Women I can bet that there will be a Chinese in the TOP 10
|
Not_Even_Amateur
|
| PSALT wrote: | | leftys_rock wrote: | | Wow, in 6 years, Mauresmo will be 32 going on 33! Blake will also be the same age! Hingis will be 31! Wow, and still #2 in the world? I think she might slow down by then. I won't disagree that she won't be in the top 10, but I wouldn't think that high. |
Mauresmo plays a game that she could keep playing into her 30's. I do think Blake will go the way of Agassi and become even more agressive in his 30's to stay in the top 10. While Hingis is quick her sense of the ball gets more balls bakc than anything, she will slow down a step but will pick up what her opponent will do as wel as ever. I think she will start coming to net more and become almost a serve and volleyer. |
I think slow down did not mean in terms of running speed, more in less tournaments. Hingis at number 2 in 5/6 years time is ludicrous. Surely she will have retired by then?
|
J-man
|
I doubt Hingis would have been #2 in the World. But I don't think she would have retired by then. Her Genius at 30 something will still be affective. If she can compete with the power game as of now I think she can compete with at 5/6 years from now. The power game won't be much different.
|
PSALT
|
| Not_Even_Amateur wrote: | | PSALT wrote: | | leftys_rock wrote: | | Wow, in 6 years, Mauresmo will be 32 going on 33! Blake will also be the same age! Hingis will be 31! Wow, and still #2 in the world? I think she might slow down by then. I won't disagree that she won't be in the top 10, but I wouldn't think that high. |
Mauresmo plays a game that she could keep playing into her 30's. I do think Blake will go the way of Agassi and become even more agressive in his 30's to stay in the top 10. While Hingis is quick her sense of the ball gets more balls bakc than anything, she will slow down a step but will pick up what her opponent will do as wel as ever. I think she will start coming to net more and become almost a serve and volleyer. |
I think slow down did not mean in terms of running speed, more in less tournaments. Hingis at number 2 in 5/6 years time is ludicrous. Surely she will have retired by then? |
when I talked about her speed I was not responding to Leftys comment, I was describing her game by then, just an overview. she will only be 31, why would she have retired? tennis players can very easily go into their 30's. Agassi got to a USO final at an older age then Hingis would be in 6 years. Hinigs game is not a power game and is not based on foot speed, she could play the way she is now well into her 30's, barring serious injuries. hardly ludicrous. what direction is the womens game going, power. by then mst players on the WTA tour won't have sliced a ball in their life, Hingis' variety would be even more effective then it is now. tall, lanky power players vrs a small, relatively quick shotmaker, is is quite likely that those robots would go nuts over having to chase down drop shots, bend down to get slices, having Hingis get to net and beautifully knock off volleys, among other things.
|
J-man
|
Good point PSALT about how Hingis would get even more crafty
|
Tennis fan
|
Six years is a VERY LONG time. Most of the players will not be there, even if they are in their early 20s today. I am guessing that 8 out of 10 will be players that we never heard off.
Some of them even have a plan to not be there. Baghdatis said that he will be playing soccer at 27 (he is 21 now) Nadal said that he has a 5-year plan. Only arrogant Federer said that will play till he is old and blue becuase he is the greatest ever and will have to surpass Sampras etc.
So why don't we change the question question to:
"Who will be the Top 10 in 2-3 years?"
|
leftys_rock
|
Is it arrogant to play until you are "old and blue"? Agassi did, Connors did, Bjorkman is doing it right now, and is it arrogant to want to surpass Sampras? I'm quite sure that many players wish to do so. Of course, only a select few may do so, but is it wrong wishing to surpass Sampras and to be the best ever? I don't think tennis players starting out go out thinking "Oh, by the end of my career, I want to be the 345th greatest tennis player ever." They go out wanting to be the best tennis player ever. I'm sure Nadal wants to be the greatest ever, i'm sure Baghdatis wants to, everybody wants to be the best ever. However, some are more motivated than others and strive for better.
|
Tennis fan
|
Oh no! I did not say this out of disrespect of the older guys. Nor there is anything wrong in wanting to surpass Sampras.
I said "arrogant Federer" becuase he is just that!! 
|
x.doublea
|
His drive is great, but it's his words that sort os stick out (to me). Stuff like, "not just because I always win" or "I didn't think he would have made the second week" is just uncalled for. He is arrogant.
|
leftys_rock
|
| Tennis fan wrote: | Oh no! I did not say this out of disrespect of the older guys. Nor there is anything worng in wanting to surpass Sampras.
I said "arrogant Federer" becuase he is just that!! |
I'm sorry, I thought you said that as those actions were arrogant. My apologies.
|
dav6789
|
Most people have put all the up and comers in their top 10 lists for the next 5-6 years. I still think Federer, Nadal, Hewitt (maybe), Blake (if he is still playing), Ancic (potentially number 1) and even Davydenko will be there. From now they can only improve. I don't think every new player will be there. Cilic hasen't even done anything. Right now, the only ones are Baghdatis and Nadal. Berdych, Gasquet and Murray follow on.
|
x.doublea
|
I honestly think Federer will be out in four-five years. I really question his durability in the long run.
|
J-man
|
| dav6789 wrote: | | Most people have put all the up and comers in their top 10 lists for the next 5-6 years. I still think Federer, Nadal, Hewitt (maybe), Blake (if he is still playing), Ancic (potentially number 1) and even Davydenko will be there. From now they can only improve. I don't think every new player will be there. Cilic hasen't even done anything. Right now, the only ones are Baghdatis and Nadal. Berdych, Gasquet and Murray follow on. |
Yes true Cilic has done anything. But he has proved he can hit with the Pro's. He pushed Nalbandian at one of the warm up caly court tournments ealier this year. Alot better than what Donald Young has done.
Another Player that I forgot to add is Scoville Jenkins. Played Roddick at 2004 USopen.
|
PSALT
|
| J-man wrote: | | dav6789 wrote: | | Most people have put all the up and comers in their top 10 lists for the next 5-6 years. I still think Federer, Nadal, Hewitt (maybe), Blake (if he is still playing), Ancic (potentially number 1) and even Davydenko will be there. From now they can only improve. I don't think every new player will be there. Cilic hasen't even done anything. Right now, the only ones are Baghdatis and Nadal. Berdych, Gasquet and Murray follow on. |
Yes true Cilic has done anything. But he has proved he can hit with the Pro's. He pushed Nalbandian at one of the warm up caly court tournments ealier this year. Alot better than what Donald Young has done.
Another Player that I forgot to add is Scoville Jenkins. Played Roddick at 2004 USopen. |
I hate Jenkins game, it is beyond ugly. if he can get to #1 though I will like him, Americans need something! 
|
x.doublea
|
Jenkins is a hot prospect as well...he sort of challenged Nadal last year at the US Open.
|
dav6789
|
Jenkins has only won 3 matches and will be 20 in September. He hasen't been inside the top 200. I highly doubt he will be in the top 10 with Baghdatis, Gasquet, Murray etc. considering how little he has achieved compared to them and that he is older than most of them. A strong US Open last year is the only thing that has made him a 'name'. The year before, he lost 6-0 6-2 6-2 to Roddick.
|
J-man
|
He could be a late bloomer.
|
dav6789
|
| J-man wrote: | | He could be a late bloomer. |
Yes, but so could all the other teenagers ranked below 200.
|
J-man
|
Also a good point
|
x.doublea
|
I think he has some potential. He can very well become a solid player, maybe Top 20. Top 10 would be borderline....
|
Tennis fan
|
| leftys_rock wrote: | | Tennis fan wrote: | Oh no! I did not say this out of disrespect of the older guys. Nor there is anything worng in wanting to surpass Sampras.
I said "arrogant Federer" becuase he is just that!! |
I'm sorry, I thought you said that as those actions were arrogant. My apologies. |
Hey! no reason to apologize! 
Besides, if we start doing that, then we will expect NEA and PSALT to apologise to one another... which we all know will never happen!! 
|
Tennis fan
|
The top 10 in 6 years will have at least 8 players that we have never heard of today.
Look at today's top 10 and tell me where these players were 6 years ago.
|
leftys_rock
|
| Tennis fan wrote: | | leftys_rock wrote: | | Tennis fan wrote: | Oh no! I did not say this out of disrespect of the older guys. Nor there is anything worng in wanting to surpass Sampras.
I said "arrogant Federer" becuase he is just that!! |
I'm sorry, I thought you said that as those actions were arrogant. My apologies. |
Hey! no reason to apologize!
Besides, if we start doing that, then we will expect NEA and PSALT to apologise to one another... which we all know will never happen!! |
Quite. How many a disagreement have they had over the last year or so? I can just imagine it.
|
x.doublea
|
I think most of their 'conflicts' were more based on inflicting opinions rather than personal attacks, though, (besides their Fantasy tennis rivalry ), so I see no need in them apologizing!
|
beachjm
|
Very hard to say 'cause a lot can happen in 5-6 yrs but I'd imagine guys like Nadal, Gasquet, Monfils, Berdych, Baghdatis, Murray, Djokovic would all be up there in the rankings. Hopefully, an American or two but who knows with the state of US tennis right now.
On the women's side, I really don't care as much. I think Vaidisova has the potential to be very good (read: much better than the one hit wonder so far, Sharapova). Probably a lot of Russians, Chinese, and as of now few if any Americans.
|
J-man
|
| beachjm wrote: | Very hard to say 'cause a lot can happen in 5-6 yrs but I'd imagine guys like Nadal, Gasquet, Monfils, Berdych, Baghdatis, Murray, Djokovic would all be up there in the rankings. Hopefully, an American or two but who knows with the state of US tennis right now.
On the women's side, I really don't care as much. I think Vaidisova has the potential to be very good (read: much better than the one hit wonder so far, Sharapova). Probably a lot of Russians, Chinese, and as of now few if any Americans. |
Amen
|
Adie
|
Men
1. Nadal
2. Blake
3. Gasquet
4. Ancic
5. Murray
6. Monfils
7. Djokovic
8. Querrey
9. Vliegen
10. Berdych
Women
1. Vaidisova
2.Sharapova
3. Kuznetsova
4. Ivanovic
5. Golovin
6. Jackson
7. Kirilenko
8.Mirza
9. Hanchchova
10. Wozniacki
|
PSALT
|
| Adie wrote: | Men
1. Nadal
2. Blake
3. Gasquet
4. Ancic
5. Murray
6. Monfils
7. Djokovic
8. Querrey
9. Vliegen
10. Berdych
Women
1. Vaidisova
2.Sharapova
3. Kuznetsova
4. Ivanovic
5. Golovin
6. Jackson
7. Kirilenko
8.Mirza
9. Hanchchova
10. Wozniacki |
Blake will not be No.2 in 5 years. His strength is tracking balls down as being quick enough to run around his backhand to hit the winner, in 5 years he will be 31 and will lose that. He will be forced to go the path of Agassi in his later years, I think he will be in the top 10, but he simply does not have the talent that Andre had to play a dominating game without footspeed. Andre had a natural ability to take the ball early and dominate people, yet he hardly moved from the center of the court, Blake will not be able to do that as well as Agassi did.
|
Adie
|
I am just hopeful that James can provide some late excitement in his career. It is a stab in the dark I know. 
|
J-man
|
| Adie wrote: | Men
1. Nadal
2. Blake
3. Gasquet
4. Ancic
5. Murray
6. Monfils
7. Djokovic
8. Querrey
9. Vliegen
10. Berdych
Women
1. Vaidisova
2.Sharapova
3. Kuznetsova
4. Ivanovic
5. Golovin
6. Jackson
7. Kirilenko
8.Mirza
9. Hanchchova
10. Wozniacki |
I can't see Blake at #2 in 5-6 years. He just doesn't have the mind set or at times game. I think he will never win a GS in his carreer. But he will be very consistant. But at the age of 31 it's tough.
|
Adie
|
It is high hopes from a fellow American, but I do think he will win a slam one of these days.
|
J-man
|
I wish him the best too. But it is a tough task that I personally don't think he will accomplish.
|
Adie
|
Than I hope Sam Querrey can be up there. There has to be an American in the Top 3 in 5 years. 
|
J-man
|
Sam can really hit the ball. He makes some stupid errors but in a couple of years time he will as fit as a fiddle
|
Adie
|
I hope so. We need an American to be at the top for a good period of time.
|
Hannah The Banana
|
Men
1. Nadal-Of course
2. Gasquet
3. Ancic
4. Murray
5. Djokovic
6. Querrey
7. Berdych
8. De Bakker
9. Lopez
10. Young
Women
1. Vaidisova
2. Golovin
3. Sharapova
4. Kirilenko
5. Ivanovic
6. Mirza
7. Jackson
8. Glatch
9. Perry
10. Wozniacki
|
leftys_rock
|
| Hannah The Banana wrote: | Men
1. Nadal-Of course
2. Gasquet
3. Ancic
4. Murray
5. Djokovic
6. Querrey
7. Berdych
8. De Bakker
9. Lopez
10. Young
Women
1. Vaidisova
2. Golovin
3. Sharapova
4. Kirilenko
5. Ivanovic
6. Mirza
7. Jackson
8. Glatch
9. Perry
10. Wozniacki |
I really don't think that Young will ever be top 20 now. He just seems overhyped and etc. And in 5-6 years, Fed will still be "only" 30, and his game doesn't require a lot of stress at all, so I strongly believe he will still be top 10 if not top 5 at that time.
For the women, I have a hard time believing that Kirilenko will be in the top 10. She really needs to work on the mental aspect of her game, and she really needs some wins right now. She currently has a Hingis style game without the brains. Golovin is kind of like Hewitt, lacks in size and power, but is very fast and surprises you with how well they play. During the time when Hewitt was doing well, it was a "weak" time in men's tennis, and somebody like him could do well. I'm not sure if that will ever occur in women's tennis and how somebody with that style of game could cope with the current power game, but I see a couple slams for her, but I dont' know if she'll ever get as high as 2 in the world.
|
Hannah The Banana
|
Donald Young may mature in the future. I really think him playing ATP tournaments really hurt him at such an early age. He was not ready.
As for Golovin that is just a hope pick for me. I really like her.
|
J-man
|
Golovin will be in the Top 10. Donald Young has a chance. It's that he wasn't ready physically and mentally when he entered in ATP tournments. Give him a couple more years and he can make a bigger impact.
|
x.doublea
|
| J-man wrote: | | Golovin will be in the Top 10. Donald Young has a chance. It's that he wasn't ready physically and mentally when he entered in ATP tournments. Give him a couple more years and he can make a bigger impact. |
If he wants to, he should (has he already?) stop receiving the WCs... definitely pushes your self-esteem to a low point.
|
Benchwarmer1
|
| leftys_rock wrote: |
I really don't think that Young will ever be top 20 now. He just seems overhyped and etc. And in 5-6 years, Fed will still be "only" 30, and his game doesn't require a lot of stress at all, so I strongly believe he will still be top 10 if not top 5 at that time.
For the women, I have a hard time believing that Kirilenko will be in the top 10. She really needs to work on the mental aspect of her game, and she really needs some wins right now. She currently has a Hingis style game without the brains. Golovin is kind of like Hewitt, lacks in size and power, but is very fast and surprises you with how well they play. During the time when Hewitt was doing well, it was a "weak" time in men's tennis, and somebody like him could do well. I'm not sure if that will ever occur in women's tennis and how somebody with that style of game could cope with the current power game, but I see a couple slams for her, but I dont' know if she'll ever get as high as 2 in the world. |
well, the same can be said about Gasquet in the men's game. people are always saying "oh gasquet is gonna be the next safin" in terms of the mental aspect of the game and accomplishments, and they are always referring to that one time he hit someone in the eye with the racquet, well, i think both will be in the top 10. i'm guessing kirilenko is gonna be on the lower side of the top 10, but i see a lot of talent in both players. we all saw the US open, and we all know Gasquet needs to get a little more fit otherwise he has the shotmaking ability to have great success in the ATP, Kirilenko is inconsistent although that can be fixed over time, along with her mental game
....of course i am a little biased since they are my favorite players 
|
leftys_rock
|
| Benchwarmer1 wrote: | | leftys_rock wrote: |
I really don't think that Young will ever be top 20 now. He just seems overhyped and etc. And in 5-6 years, Fed will still be "only" 30, and his game doesn't require a lot of stress at all, so I strongly believe he will still be top 10 if not top 5 at that time.
For the women, I have a hard time believing that Kirilenko will be in the top 10. She really needs to work on the mental aspect of her game, and she really needs some wins right now. She currently has a Hingis style game without the brains. Golovin is kind of like Hewitt, lacks in size and power, but is very fast and surprises you with how well they play. During the time when Hewitt was doing well, it was a "weak" time in men's tennis, and somebody like him could do well. I'm not sure if that will ever occur in women's tennis and how somebody with that style of game could cope with the current power game, but I see a couple slams for her, but I dont' know if she'll ever get as high as 2 in the world. |
well, the same can be said about Gasquet in the men's game. people are always saying "oh gasquet is gonna be the next safin" in terms of the mental aspect of the game and accomplishments, and they are always referring to that one time he hit someone in the eye with the racquet, well, i think both will be in the top 10. i'm guessing kirilenko is gonna be on the lower side of the top 10, but i see a lot of talent in both players. we all saw the US open, and we all know Gasquet needs to get a little more fit otherwise he has the shotmaking ability to have great success in the ATP, Kirilenko is inconsistent although that can be fixed over time, along with her mental game
....of course i am a little biased since they are my favorite players |
She can, but Nigel Sears has his hands full.
|
Benchwarmer1
|
but hey, she's still very young 19 i suppose
|
PSALT
|
| Benchwarmer1 wrote: | | leftys_rock wrote: |
I really don't think that Young will ever be top 20 now. He just seems overhyped and etc. And in 5-6 years, Fed will still be "only" 30, and his game doesn't require a lot of stress at all, so I strongly believe he will still be top 10 if not top 5 at that time.
For the women, I have a hard time believing that Kirilenko will be in the top 10. She really needs to work on the mental aspect of her game, and she really needs some wins right now. She currently has a Hingis style game without the brains. Golovin is kind of like Hewitt, lacks in size and power, but is very fast and surprises you with how well they play. During the time when Hewitt was doing well, it was a "weak" time in men's tennis, and somebody like him could do well. I'm not sure if that will ever occur in women's tennis and how somebody with that style of game could cope with the current power game, but I see a couple slams for her, but I dont' know if she'll ever get as high as 2 in the world. |
well, the same can be said about Gasquet in the men's game. people are always saying "oh gasquet is gonna be the next safin" in terms of the mental aspect of the game and accomplishments, and they are always referring to that one time he hit someone in the eye with the racquet, well, i think both will be in the top 10. i'm guessing kirilenko is gonna be on the lower side of the top 10, but i see a lot of talent in both players. we all saw the US open, and we all know Gasquet needs to get a little more fit otherwise he has the shotmaking ability to have great success in the ATP, Kirilenko is inconsistent although that can be fixed over time, along with her mental game
....of course i am a little biased since they are my favorite players |
Gasquet has a great chance for No.1, I actually think he has a better game than Federer. Gasquet's backhand and forehand are very good, while Federer depends more on a great forehand, and a backhand that compliments it.
A don't think Kirilenko will get to the top 10, she doesn't have the game. There is nothing special about her.
|
leftys_rock
|
| Benchwarmer1 wrote: | | but hey, she's still very young 19 i suppose |
She could be a late bloomer for all we know, but she has a lot of work to do. Other young players are making advances and she hasn't.
And since when did Dinara Safina pop into the top 10?
|
Benchwarmer1
|
| PSALT wrote: | | Benchwarmer1 wrote: | | leftys_rock wrote: |
I really don't think that Young will ever be top 20 now. He just seems overhyped and etc. And in 5-6 years, Fed will still be "only" 30, and his game doesn't require a lot of stress at all, so I strongly believe he will still be top 10 if not top 5 at that time.
For the women, I have a hard time believing that Kirilenko will be in the top 10. She really needs to work on the mental aspect of her game, and she really needs some wins right now. She currently has a Hingis style game without the brains. Golovin is kind of like Hewitt, lacks in size and power, but is very fast and surprises you with how well they play. During the time when Hewitt was doing well, it was a "weak" time in men's tennis, and somebody like him could do well. I'm not sure if that will ever occur in women's tennis and how somebody with that style of game could cope with the current power game, but I see a couple slams for her, but I dont' know if she'll ever get as high as 2 in the world. |
well, the same can be said about Gasquet in the men's game. people are always saying "oh gasquet is gonna be the next safin" in terms of the mental aspect of the game and accomplishments, and they are always referring to that one time he hit someone in the eye with the racquet, well, i think both will be in the top 10. i'm guessing kirilenko is gonna be on the lower side of the top 10, but i see a lot of talent in both players. we all saw the US open, and we all know Gasquet needs to get a little more fit otherwise he has the shotmaking ability to have great success in the ATP, Kirilenko is inconsistent although that can be fixed over time, along with her mental game
....of course i am a little biased since they are my favorite players |
Gasquet has a great chance for No.1, I actually think he has a better game than Federer. Gasquet's backhand and forehand are very good, while Federer depends more on a great forehand, and a backhand that compliments it.
A don't think Kirilenko will get to the top 10, she doesn't have the game. There is nothing special about her. |
i love watching his BH, although his FH isn't the greatest looking it gets the job done
|
J-man
|
| x.doublea wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | Golovin will be in the Top 10. Donald Young has a chance. It's that he wasn't ready physically and mentally when he entered in ATP tournments. Give him a couple more years and he can make a bigger impact. |
If he wants to, he should (has he already?) stop receiving the WCs... definitely pushes your self-esteem to a low point. |
But I don't think it does push his self-esteen to a low point. Sure it is alittle fustrating but he plays those matches with the right mind set. I know I am being naive
|
PSALT
|
| J-man wrote: | | x.doublea wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | Golovin will be in the Top 10. Donald Young has a chance. It's that he wasn't ready physically and mentally when he entered in ATP tournments. Give him a couple more years and he can make a bigger impact. |
If he wants to, he should (has he already?) stop receiving the WCs... definitely pushes your self-esteem to a low point. |
But I don't think it does push his self-esteen to a low point. Sure it is alittle fustrating but he plays those matches with the right mind set. I know I am being naive |
being double bagled by someone who in turn is double bagaled by Blake in the next round hurts your confidence no matter what he says. you can have a great mindset, but always losing will get you down on yourself.
|
J-man
|
Always losing in the pros. But that isn't the case in the Juniors, is it? He knows he's not ready for the pros. He just wants to get his feet wet. To see where he needs to imporve. It's a learning expeerince for him when he takes the WC. He's not expecting to win
|
PSALT
|
| J-man wrote: | | Always losing in the pros. But that isn't the case in the Juniors, is it? He knows he's not ready for the pros. He just wants to get his feet wet. To see where he needs to imporve. It's a learning expeerince for him when he takes the WC. He's not expecting to win |
sorry, but I think his "It's just a great experience" excuse is crap. He's past the point of just seeing what it is like, what else is there to gain? He knows what it's like, but keeps losing time after time. A few matches is one thing, yes, that would be a good way to learn what he will be up against, but no matter what you are Donald say, losing again and again (more than not losing handily) will put get you to doubt yourself.
|
J-man
|
Perhaps he likes to see every once in awhile where he is. Maybe he improves on something in Juniors and likes to take a WC to see how it compares. Plus there is also money involved when taking a WC. Though this doesn't really have anything to do with his mental aspect
|
Benchwarmer1
|
i've never seen him play, who would he be compared to in the ATP?
|
J-man
|
| PSALT wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | Always losing in the pros. But that isn't the case in the Juniors, is it? He knows he's not ready for the pros. He just wants to get his feet wet. To see where he needs to imporve. It's a learning expeerince for him when he takes the WC. He's not expecting to win |
sorry, but I think his "It's just a great experience" excuse is crap. He's past the point of just seeing what it is like, what else is there to gain? He knows what it's like, but keeps losing time after time. A few matches is one thing, yes, that would be a good way to learn what he will be up against, but no matter what you are Donald say, losing again and again (more than not losing handily) will put get you to doubt yourself. |
I didn't say it was a great experince. It's a learning experince. Losing isn't great unless your learning something and I think that's what he is doing and what he is doing. Learning. Learing what he can do better, learnign on how to deal with the crowd, learning on how he can manage himself better. He can then take this and work on it and use it in his junior matches
|
x.doublea
|
Here's a little video on him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szM-gXfuKAA
|
J-man
|
Thanks for the video X.doublea. You see him hit but it's not a real match and you don't get a good feel for his hitting.
|
Benchwarmer1
|
| J-man wrote: | | PSALT wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | Always losing in the pros. But that isn't the case in the Juniors, is it? He knows he's not ready for the pros. He just wants to get his feet wet. To see where he needs to imporve. It's a learning expeerince for him when he takes the WC. He's not expecting to win |
sorry, but I think his "It's just a great experience" excuse is crap. He's past the point of just seeing what it is like, what else is there to gain? He knows what it's like, but keeps losing time after time. A few matches is one thing, yes, that would be a good way to learn what he will be up against, but no matter what you are Donald say, losing again and again (more than not losing handily) will put get you to doubt yourself. |
I didn't say it was a great experince. It's a learning experince. Losing isn't great unless your learning something and I think that's what he is doing and what he is doing. Learning. Learing what he can do better, learnign on how to deal with the crowd, learning on how he can manage himself better. He can then take this and work on it and use it in his junior matches |
how old is he now?
|
leftys_rock
|
17 or something. Around that.
|
Benchwarmer1
|
alright thanks, so how does young play?
|
PSALT
|
| J-man wrote: | | PSALT wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | Always losing in the pros. But that isn't the case in the Juniors, is it? He knows he's not ready for the pros. He just wants to get his feet wet. To see where he needs to imporve. It's a learning expeerince for him when he takes the WC. He's not expecting to win |
sorry, but I think his "It's just a great experience" excuse is crap. He's past the point of just seeing what it is like, what else is there to gain? He knows what it's like, but keeps losing time after time. A few matches is one thing, yes, that would be a good way to learn what he will be up against, but no matter what you are Donald say, losing again and again (more than not losing handily) will put get you to doubt yourself. |
I didn't say it was a great experince. It's a learning experince. Losing isn't great unless your learning something and I think that's what he is doing and what he is doing. Learning. Learing what he can do better, learnign on how to deal with the crowd, learning on how he can manage himself better. He can then take this and work on it and use it in his junior matches |
Once again, what is he learning from being straight setted? It's not like he is challenging top players, what does he learn from losing to nobody's? Please answer that. He knows what it's like to play in a main draw, he learned that long ago, now accepting WCs into main draws that he will lose in the first round of doesn't help him in any way. He is clearly not ready for this, so why keep wasting his time playing these matches? At this point it has nothing to do with his game itself, he simply has not developed enough to play in these events, he cannot work on that. His body is not ready, he is wasting his time, and using up spots in draws of people who can get better results than him.
|
J-man
|
| PSALT wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | PSALT wrote: | | J-man wrote: | | Always losing in the pros. But that isn't the case in the Juniors, is it? He knows he's not ready for the pros. He just wants to get his feet wet. To see where he needs to imporve. It's a learning expeerince for him when he takes the WC. He's not expecting to win |
sorry, but I think his "It's just a great experience" excuse is crap. He's past the point of just seeing what it is like, what else is there to gain? He knows what it's like, but keeps losing time after time. A few matches is one thing, yes, that would be a good way to learn what he will be up against, but no matter what you are Donald say, losing again and again (more than not losing handily) will put get you to doubt yourself. |
I didn't say it was a great experince. It's a learning experince. Losing isn't great unless your learning something and I think that's what he is doing and what he is doing. Learning. Learing what he can do better, learnign on how to deal with the crowd, learning on how he can manage himself better. He can then take this and work on it and use it in his junior matches |
Once again, what is he learning from being straight setted? It's not like he is challenging top players, what does he learn from losing to nobody's? Please answer that. He knows what it's like to play in a main draw, he learned that long ago, now accepting WCs into main draws that he will lose in the first round of doesn't help him in any way. He is clearly not ready for this, so why keep wasting his time playing these matches? At this point it has nothing to do with his game itself, he simply has not developed enough to play in these events, he cannot work on that. His body is not ready, he is wasting his time, and using up spots in draws of people who can get better results than him. |
I do agree I don't think his body is ready.
|
|
|
|