PDA

View Full Version : Who is the biggest underachiever in tennis?


mckyle.
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:31 AM
I was just wondering what all of you thought on the subject.

njnetswill
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:33 AM
For now on men's side: Safin

Women: Clijsters (only one GS?!)

In The Zone
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:34 AM
S.Kuznetsova.

She has the game, the power, and the technique to be # 1 and dominate but she always finds a way to fall apart when she needs to be tough.

BestShooterEver
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:36 AM
rios

mckyle.
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:37 AM
I guess I should say Women's Tennis ;)

Reuchlin
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:39 AM
Ana Kournikova, if she developed her game she'd have a career like JUJU.

polishprodigy
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:39 AM
Some people who I think should be WAY higher ranked then they really are:

*Tanja Ostertag
*Stephanie Dubois
*Claudine Schaul

GrafMariaPetraK
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:39 AM
S.Kuznetsova.

She has the game, the power, and the technique to be # 1 and dominate but she always finds a way to fall apart when she needs to be tough.

I agree

Orion
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:40 AM
Gabriela Sabatini. Semifinalist at the French at 15 years old, was in the top 10 at 16, stayed there for pretty much her entire career, won only one slam. She was the only player besides Seles who ever looked capable of beating Graf consistently, and when she didn't do it at big events, she fell apart. Too bad, that topspin one-handed backhand was the most gorgeous shot in tennis for a while.

GracefulVenus
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:41 AM
S.Kuznetsova.

She has the game, the power, and the technique to be # 1 and dominate but she always finds a way to fall apart when she needs to be tough.

Agreed! Kuznetsova is the biggest underachiever by far. She has a solid game, but crumbles when it matters most!

Sir Stefwhit
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:41 AM
Clijsters and Davenport come to mind first. Only because each of them were better than the amount of slams they each won. With Lindsay it's a little different because she steadily grew into a champion. She put a lot of work into it and maybe she never really believed she was as good as she really was. That's the only way to make sense of the way she would get so down on herself and self-destruct.

Clijster's single slam win is a crying shame and not at all indictive of her talents. She had every ingredient to be one the games greats, but instead will go down as one slam winner (probably the best one time slam winner of all time). So I guess I'd pick her.

Orion
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:42 AM
S.Kuznetsova.

She has the game, the power, and the technique to be # 1 and dominate but she always finds a way to fall apart when she needs to be tough.

I'd say she's currently the most underachieving, but it's a little premature to call a 21 year old the BIGGEST underachiever. Clijsters, Sabatini, etc. have the credentials for the GOAT of underachieving. I say we wait for Kuznetsova's career to be over (in 10+ years), and see what she's done then (hopefully 10+ slams!)

Sassy-Na
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:43 AM
Ana Kournikova, if she developed her game she'd have a career like JUJU.

omg :help:

Orion
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:43 AM
I'll also add that I once did some number crunching, and Kim Clijsters has some incredible stats that are consistent with several GOAT contenders (Navratilova, Graf, etc.), but lacks severely in the most important category: slams.

njnetswill
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:44 AM
What about Dokic. :tape:

Sprem :tape: :lol:

mckyle.
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:45 AM
I always think of Mary Pierce as a big underachiever. It's great to win 2 grand slams, but I always thought she could have won more. She always had injuries at the wrong time though.

CJ07
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:47 AM
Anna Kournikova. She was touted as the next Graf for a reason. She was so good at 16 and yet had so much room for improvement.

If she had Sharapova's mental strength, she be in the Top 5 right now.

mdterp01
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:48 AM
Poor Lindsay. That span when she beat Venus and Serena that summer when she was on the verge on retiring and really came back and had all those opportunities to win slams, not winning anymore was SO disappointing. Lindsay should have at least 6 or 7 slams. She was in such good position.

Derek.
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:49 AM
Daniela's an underachiever, IMO.

homogenius
Jun 25th, 2007, 01:51 AM
S.Kuznetsova.

She has the game, the power, and the technique to be # 1 and dominate but she always finds a way to fall apart when she needs to be tough.

She is also too inconsistant, has fitness issues sometimes and is far from being the best mentally.She is good but a lot of people seem to overrated her.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Jun 25th, 2007, 02:18 AM
Daniela's an underachiever, IMO.

No way , She has 2 TIER I in her belt

trufanjay
Jun 25th, 2007, 02:23 AM
I guess Clijsters

ichigo
Jun 25th, 2007, 02:26 AM
men's tour: safin. safin. safin.

women's tour: kournikova. and probably golovin.

homogenius
Jun 25th, 2007, 02:28 AM
Pierce (then on different levels : Serena, Kournikova, Seles, Schnyder...)

AcesHigh
Jun 25th, 2007, 02:30 AM
Definitely Clijsters.
Kuznetsova is only wat? 21?

LudwigDvorak
Jun 25th, 2007, 02:31 AM
Mary Pierce, Gabriela Sabatani, Patty Schnyder, Anna Kournikova, Kim Clijsters, Elena Dementieva, Mary Joe Fernandez, Andrea Jaeger, who am I missing?

I think the most disappointing to me is Mary Pierce. She really could have been the GOAT and I mean that with all my heart. And I don't buy into Serena underachieving. To some extent, yes, but she's ending with more than 10 slams for a reason. Maybe for someone of her caliber it might be, but she'll at least have more than Seles. And you can't really say Seles underachieved after what happened...

blumaroo
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:11 AM
No brainer. Clijsters ofcourse.

LindsayRulz
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:20 AM
Clijsters and Davenport. Kuznetsova is all but underarchived! She's 21 and she has a slam!

partbrit
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:21 AM
If you're including former players, I'd say Clijsters and Sabatini tie for first place (their achivements are very similar, too). Of current players, I'd have to go with Schnyder, followed closely by Dementieva.

Other players I think under-achieve are Pennetta and Stosur.

BuTtErFrEnA
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:28 AM
clijsters, davenport

cartmancop
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:38 AM
Kournikova- Someone who began watching tennis post 2001 or so wouldn't believe it probably ;) , but she had the ability to be great...If she had just gotten one title and the media had gotten off of her back about her lack of singles success (despite the fact she made the top 10, etc.) she could have developed her game into something great.

Pierce-her reason is injuries, nothing she really could do to help that :sad:

Clijsters- 'lesser' players have more slams, Kim just didn't seem to have what it takes to be the best she could be...I don't think anyone thought she would only win one slam when she showed such promise early in her career...

Kuznetsova has time to get it together, but I agree she does have the complete game to do great things on all surfaces.

pwayne
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:53 AM
Nadia Petrova. She should have more Tier I titles and one Slam but she is a mental case.

partbrit
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:55 AM
Wow. I'm so tired I can't think--Petrova should definitely be on my list. In fact, now that I think about it, I would consider her the biggest underachiever among current players.

Jakeev
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:56 AM
Francesca Schiavone. She has the game and talent to have won tournaments but her sudden seeming lack of desire to work hard on court and injury woes have held her back.

Her season in the Fall of 05 was her best ever and she rode that wave for a year after that. Bummer to see her decline and because of that we don't get to enjoy her on tv.

Andy.
Jun 25th, 2007, 03:56 AM
Mary Pierce had the game to blow anyone off the court and could have won many more titles and slams. So I would say she is an underachiever

Wayn77
Jun 25th, 2007, 04:04 AM
Tennis GB

Bruno71
Jun 25th, 2007, 04:05 AM
Brie. She should be winning a few games here & there.

rgarros
Jun 25th, 2007, 05:38 AM
nadia and dementieva. both should have slams by now but probably never will.

switz
Jun 25th, 2007, 05:46 AM
Definitely Mary considering how good she is at her best.

It is all relative though. Injuries and bad fortunes are a reality of life that athletes are susceptible to like any other person (even more than most)

There is pretty much an endless list of players who have significant reasons for underachieving but i view it more as just the hand life dealt them rather than excuse for not getting the most out of themselves.

égalité
Jun 25th, 2007, 05:52 AM
Schnyder like whoa. If you look closely at her career, you can see a few AO and RG titles flying right over her head.

Keadz
Jun 25th, 2007, 06:43 AM
Schnyder.....how many chances does she need! She has the game, and proves about once a year against a top player(serena this year) that she can still win and play fantastic tennis, but then she just plays average top 20 tennis for the rest of the year, she really should have had at least 2 grand slams by now.

Davenport, obviously could have done much more.

Kim, probably could have done much more if she continued, but from her career so far, probably should have won a lot more than one grandslam.

Molik, if she had started playing better before she was 25 she would have gotten much further, also if she hadn't got injured she would have won a couple more tournaments and possibly a grandslam semi of final.

Hingis, if she hadn't gotten injured, and she wasn't so stubborn to add a bit more power to her game she could have had a lot more success.

Then Mauresmo, Kuznetsova, Kournikova, Dementiava Pierce are the others.

Orion
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:07 AM
OMG, forgot about Schnyder! In '98, when she reached the quarters at the French and the US Open, I thought she was going to be a world #1, win a handful of slams, etc. That's why it's so stunning that she has reached 1 slam semi, total, in her career.

SM
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:08 AM
Dokic she should be a GOAT contender :(

SM
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:10 AM
it will be a while before we see a 16 year old destroy the no1 on centre court at wimbeldon with such feorcity..having a seemingly complete game with great touch (volleys, drop shots), a nice serve, and groundstrokes that could not miss the lines...sigh..

switz
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:12 AM
Patty has certainly wasted chances to win slams but her career has been destined for constant disappointment because she's never resolved so many issues in her private life.

If her game was allowed to naturally develop from her extremely talented teenage stage i'm sure she would have been a top 8 player her whole career with some extended stays in the top 5 considering how injury free she has managed to remain. such a shame that so many people on this board don't know what Patty used to be like and what she could have been :sad:

she's still had a very good career though considering she's been living in a soap opera for the last 8 years.

switz
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:14 AM
Chanda is one of the most classic cases as well. She had the most all round game in 96/97 but the wrist injury just killed her. Once again a remarkable achieved to get back to the top 10 on 3 seperate occasions after sustaining 3 career threatening injuries.

Hashim.
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:30 AM
kim should have won more...kuzi,kournikova..on n on

:inlove:
Jun 25th, 2007, 07:43 AM
Mirjana Lucic.

Michael_21
Jun 25th, 2007, 08:45 AM
i think Elena Dementieva could achieve alot more than what she has especcially if she can some how fix the serve up

Medina
Jun 25th, 2007, 08:48 AM
Patty so bad, look at her she has the ability and potential to win a slam.

She needs to develop her game, and take the pressure, and not have one of her hissy fits again. SHes had a great carrer but she should of got a final or won a slam by now

saki
Jun 25th, 2007, 08:50 AM
I'm currently watching last year's Wimbledon mixed doubles final - from Wimbledon Live - and it reminds me of just how talented Vera Zvonareva is. Her main issue has been injuries but, in singles, it's also been shot selection, IMO. There's no big weakness in her game, she just doesn't always put it together. A good coach and a good therapist could put her in the top 5, I reckon.

Chandafan
Jun 25th, 2007, 08:53 AM
I totally agree with Switz. Chanda has always had a complete game (especially the forehand). She was really progressing 95-96. In 2002 I really thought she had a chance to win the US Open, but I don't think she's tough enough in important situations like a Serena. Besides Chanda I would say Kim.

Hingie
Jun 25th, 2007, 09:22 AM
Definitely Hingis. With her talent, the girl should at least have 10 Slams by now!

I agree with another poster, in that she has been stubborn but not because she didn't want to add power, sometimes she was just unwilling to adapt her game when she was losing and at times, her lack of confidence resulted in surprising losses.

Another player who had every shot in the book but just was never able to pull it together in singles was Natasha Zvereva. I don't think she ever committed herself 100% to singles play and the training involved, but she certainly had court craft.

rockstar
Jun 25th, 2007, 09:47 AM
davenport. she deserved more slams :(

a little of daniela too, cos she's shown us what she's capable of in 2002, and was like even touted as the next big thing.

DemWilliamsGulls
Jun 25th, 2007, 09:50 AM
I've gotta go with Kournikova...for her to be as popular as she is...she's accomplished absolutely nothing...at least in her singles career.

sharapovarulz1
Jun 25th, 2007, 10:12 AM
I'm currently watching last year's Wimbledon mixed doubles final - from Wimbledon Live - and it reminds me of just how talented Vera Zvonareva is. Her main issue has been injuries but, in singles, it's also been shot selection, IMO. There's no big weakness in her game, she just doesn't always put it together. A good coach and a good therapist could put her in the top 5, I reckon.

Yes i agree deffo Vera Zvonareva for me :)

HTE
Jun 25th, 2007, 10:14 AM
Hantuchova.