PDA

View Full Version : which players have great game but no results?


siddharthrajpal
Jul 9th, 2010, 01:57 PM
first player that comes to my mind is agnes szavay and lisicki , who are the rest according to you?

Sammo
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:01 PM
Hantuchova

Aaron.
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:03 PM
Wozniacki

goldenlox
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:06 PM
Szavay definately is talented. Lisicki has been injured a lot. I think she needs more time.
If you watch early rounds of Tier IV's or 25k's, a lot of these girls can play.

Something holds them back. Either serve, movement, consistency.

Very tough to get out of that group into the top 50 or so

Vanity Bonfire
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:06 PM
Kuznetsova.

Sammo
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:07 PM
Wozniacki

:lol:

siddharthrajpal
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:07 PM
Wozniacki

:lol:

ElusiveChanteuse
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:09 PM
Petrova :(

Slutiana
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:09 PM
Kuznetsova.
:hug:


I'm going to go for Golovin, considering she has had literally no results for the last two years. Beat that!

Elwin.
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:11 PM
Szavay can only moonball nowadays. Nothing impressive about her.

Player that comes first to my mind is Petrova

Sammo
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:11 PM
Wozniacki

Her mentality has taken her to world number 2, but her game is :happy:

goldenlox
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:14 PM
Kuznetsova and Petrova have good results.
One was #2 and won 2 majors, and the other was #3 and in 2 slam SF's

But there are a lot of talented players who cant breakthru.
Look how long it took Pironkova to show her skills.
There a lot more like she was, floating around 70-700

Svetlana)))
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:22 PM
For me its Vesnina, she has a great game but has not won a single title yet, correct me if I'm wrong.

Mynarco
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:22 PM
Wozniacki

:o?

Baselinebasher
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:27 PM
Dementieva. Great player. Awesome to watch. Should have multiple slams by now if she weren't such a headcase.

madmax
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:27 PM
Wozniacki

well, when you think about it, she is yet to win any important title in her career...:lol:However, if I had to take a wild guess, reaching World Nr.2 ain't that bad for a player of her potential and talent:devil:

Sammo
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:28 PM
agree

Vanity Bonfire
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:32 PM
:hug:


I'm going to go for Golovin, considering she has had literally no results for the last two years. Beat that!

We all still pray for her return:tears:

Sammo
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:33 PM
Graf, she hasn't had results for the last 11 years :lol:

njnetswill
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:48 PM
This list could go on forever.

Kleybanova
Safarova
Parra Santonja
Ivanovic (:lol:)
Cirstea
Sprem
Dokic (although her game hasn't been the same in years)
Mirza
Krajicek
Larcher de Brito

Until recently, Rezai, Pironkova and MJMS would be on there too.


You also have former top juniors like Ksenia Milevskaya who have done NOTHING on the senior tour.

Volcana
Jul 9th, 2010, 02:49 PM
Kuznetsova and Petrova have good results.Kuznetsova has great results. Virtually every multi-slam winner from Open Era is in the Hall of Fame, except I think Mary Pierce, who may have been retired long enough to be eligible.

Petrova is my pick. She had almost physical ability as Kuznetsova.

iGOAT
Jul 9th, 2010, 03:03 PM
Lena, Ági :awww:.

Tsveti until Wimbledon.

slamchamp
Jul 9th, 2010, 03:05 PM
petkovic, petrova

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Jul 10th, 2010, 12:23 AM
Carla Suarez

Tennis Fool
Jul 10th, 2010, 12:30 AM
Szavay definately is talented. Lisicki has been injured a lot. I think she needs more time.
If you watch early rounds of Tier IV's or 25k's, a lot of these girls can play.

Something holds them back. Either serve, movement, consistency.

Very tough to get out of that group into the top 50 or so
I think height also can be a challenge. Two of the Czechs, Klara and Barbie, are under 5' 8" and I think this may be a hindrance for them. I think Martina Hingis would struggle if she were just coming on the scene now.

Katya Makarova has a great game and is also on the shorter side. Her best result ever was at Eastbourne, so we'll see where she goes...

Cakeisgood
Jul 10th, 2010, 06:09 AM
I agree with Vesnina. She's got a really pretty game but can't seem to hold it together.

Pops Maellard
Jul 10th, 2010, 06:29 AM
Suarez Navarro.

Pops Maellard
Jul 10th, 2010, 06:30 AM
Wozniacki
Good one. She's the biggest overachiever in tennis history. :happy:

toxina90
Jul 10th, 2010, 10:11 AM
My entire signature, (bar Kim/Francesca ;)) especially Julia :hysteric:

Kworb
Jul 10th, 2010, 10:15 AM
Karatantcheva

Hashim.
Jul 10th, 2010, 10:19 AM
Julia Vakulenko:sad:

Joe.
Jul 10th, 2010, 10:26 AM
Petrova.
RG '06 was hers to win. If she hadn't have got injured who knows what she could've achieved.

MyskinaManiac
Jul 10th, 2010, 01:00 PM
Vesnina.

Rafito.
Jul 10th, 2010, 01:06 PM
Lisicki, Just if it wasnt for her injuries :sobbing:

frenchie
Jul 10th, 2010, 01:10 PM
Definitely Kournikova

rockstar
Jul 10th, 2010, 01:11 PM
schiavone
























jk :p

wildemu
Jul 10th, 2010, 01:57 PM
mirjana lucic

SVK
Jul 10th, 2010, 02:05 PM
Gehrlein + many many ITF players..some ITF matches are much better as WTA´s

For example Spears - Ditty in some American ITF was one of the best this year in womens circuit

babuska6
Jul 10th, 2010, 02:57 PM
Hantuchova. She has beautiful game,great baseline shots and she has almost won many important matches in her career,but finally she lost them because she is such a headcase. Without her head and mental problem she could be regular Top 10 player.

Renaissance
Jul 10th, 2010, 03:14 PM
Polona Hercog has a great variety like Srebotnik used to.
Great serve good variety but lack of agressivity.I would BE disappointed if she makes a career a la Srebotnik;

Acinolbaj
Jul 10th, 2010, 03:16 PM
Hantuchova for me. Beautiful gracious game. But Dani, you are such a headcase.

LUVMIRZA
Jul 10th, 2010, 03:17 PM
Wozniacki

u r definitely rude:lol:

LUVMIRZA
Jul 10th, 2010, 03:26 PM
Sabine Lisciki:o

Volcana
Jul 10th, 2010, 03:30 PM
'no results'

The answers in this thread, mine included, turn 'no results' in to 'the results I fantasized that player would have.

Hantuchova, has won two titles that every tennis fan on the planet knows about, she's been ranked in the top five, and she's having a decade long professional career. That's a whole lot more than 'no results'. Petrova, the player I named, nine titles, including two Tier I's. The player with a serious game, and no results, is Kournikova, of course. But imagine if she had a coach like Carlos Rodriguez, and a willingness to cheat.

égalité
Jul 10th, 2010, 04:09 PM
Romina Oprandi :tears:

gmak
Jul 10th, 2010, 04:17 PM
Nadia :sad: she's had a good career but she really should've made at least one slam final until now :shrug:

also Julia Vakulenko should've won titles if not for those injuries :sad:

$uricate
Jul 10th, 2010, 04:19 PM
I'm gonna have to abide by the rules and name my fave ;)

I think she belongs in this thread though. In 2005 how many people saw her as a huge upcoming talent? She had great results and took the top players to the brink (Henin in Charleston, Davenport in FO)

I know the Peng of today is not nearly as aggressive but you would think her added consistency would only make her better :shrug:

She has never won a title or been past round 3 of a slam :sad:

Xian
Jul 11th, 2010, 11:35 AM
Romina Oprandi :tears:

ouch Oprandis game is just horrible

hdfb
Jul 11th, 2010, 11:50 AM
CSN, Safarova

shega
Jul 11th, 2010, 01:28 PM
Safarova comes to mind. Once upon a time in Paris she was scaring me with how good she played. I always thought Tati and her beautiful technique plus that amazing forehand could've gotten her to a least ONE GS semi

Freakan
Jul 11th, 2010, 01:57 PM
Groth

fouc
Jul 11th, 2010, 03:44 PM
Deja Kitchiner :worship:

Sean.
Jul 11th, 2010, 03:52 PM
The obvious ones have already been mentioned: Petrova, Kournikova, Safarova.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Jul 11th, 2010, 04:01 PM
Schnyder and Na Li (they have decent results but given how much talent they have, they should have achieved much more.

Six Feet Under
Jul 11th, 2010, 04:27 PM
Definately Schnyder and Safarova

I personally think Kuznetsova has done extremly well with her results :shrug:

.Andrew.
Jul 11th, 2010, 05:57 PM
I'm gonna have to abide by the rules and name my fave ;)

I think she belongs in this thread though. In 2005 how many people saw her as a huge upcoming talent? She had great results and took the top players to the brink (Henin in Charleston, Davenport in FO)

I know the Peng of today is not nearly as aggressive but you would think her added consistency would only make her better :shrug:

She has never won a title or been past round 3 of a slam :sad:

This. I completely forgot about Shuai, as talented as she is, because she's been overshadowed by her compatriots Li and Zheng. Let's not forget that she was the only girl to beat Clijsters in her hot streak during the USO Series in 05. Kim had lots of good words about Shuai after the match.

fufuqifuqishahah
Jul 11th, 2010, 06:47 PM
This. I completely forgot about Shuai, as talented as she is, because she's been overshadowed by her compatriots Li and Zheng. Let's not forget that she was the only girl to beat Clijsters in her hot streak during the USO Series in 05. Kim had lots of good words about Shuai after the match.

maybe tahts part of why shuai is sucking?

too much expectation and pressure now.

Jose.
Jul 11th, 2010, 06:55 PM
Peng
Safarova
Sprem
Goerges
Lisicki
Michelle :sad:
Vaidisova :sobbing:

EDIT: Shvedova :(

Richie's
Jul 11th, 2010, 07:09 PM
1. Daniela for 10 years now.
2. Dementieva in GS's.
3. Kirilenko
4. Czech left handed Queens Iveta and Lucie
5. Cibulkova on clay.

edificio
Jul 11th, 2010, 10:05 PM
Petrova! Safarova, to a lesser degree.

swim4life227
Jul 11th, 2010, 10:47 PM
I'd say Daniela because she always seems to be in most of her matches but she always finds a way to lose.

Dementevia because she hasn't won a slam, and is on a terrible losing streak in GS Semis.

Petrova for never making a GS final.

Kournikova for never even winning a single's title.

I would have said Vera because less than 2 years ago she had never even won anything higher than a Tier 3.

Priscilla.
Jul 11th, 2010, 10:51 PM
Gisela Dulko

LightWarrior
Jul 11th, 2010, 11:03 PM
1/ Dementieva
2/ Hantuchova

Tennisstar86
Jul 11th, 2010, 11:32 PM
No results? OR results lower than what they SHOULD have. I think all the girls on tour have SOME results, but coming to mind those who should have better results based on THEIR game:

Venus: should have more than 7 slams
Clijsters: should have more than 2 slams
Davenport: should have more than 3 slams
Dementieva: should have won at least 1 slam by now
Kournikova: should have a title
Hantuchova: probably the most underacheiving imo...

Li NA: I'm not sure a few years ago I thought her results should be better, but she seems to have turned it around....may be a little too late though....

Note: I would have said Serena should have more from the 04-07 days but shes won a few slams lately that she shouldnt have so I'd say her slam count is about right, though she SHOULD have more titles in general...

dybbuk
Jul 11th, 2010, 11:47 PM
Of course Hantuchova keeps keeping mentioned. Fact is, a Slam SF and two Tier I's is a really great career for her. :shrug: She's perpetually overrated on TF.

Hardiansf
Jul 12th, 2010, 12:00 AM
Bondarenko, both of them.
Petrova. If only she could always play like she beat Kim and Venus at Slams... she should be in the Top 5
Ivanovic, since she won her Slam
Chakvetadze, since she got robed

Tennisstar86
Jul 12th, 2010, 12:03 AM
Of course Hantuchova keeps keeping mentioned. Fact is, a Slam SF and two Tier I's is a really great career for her. :shrug: She's perpetually overrated on TF.

Shes got a great game. The fact that she has 2 tier I and a slam SF shows she should have greater results. Aside from those all shes got is one other title... I'm not sayin she should have a slam, but she should definately have a lot more titles.

Mightymirza
Jul 12th, 2010, 12:05 AM
szavay has a QF :shrug: at a slam..

Dodoboy.
Jul 12th, 2010, 12:11 AM
Peng, Petkovic, Lisicki,

Sammo
Jul 12th, 2010, 01:19 AM
1. Daniela for 10 years now.
2. Dementieva in GS's.
3. Kirilenko
4. Czech left handed Queens Iveta and Lucie
5. Cibulkova on clay.

Daniela for 10 years? I don't think she was ready to get results in 2000
And Kirilenko... meh

Sammo
Jul 12th, 2010, 01:21 AM
Shes got a great game. The fact that she has 2 tier I and a slam SF shows she should have greater results. Aside from those all shes got is one other title... I'm not sayin she should have a slam, but she should definately have a lot more titles.

Daniela should have at least 8 titles more :o

faboozadoo15
Jul 12th, 2010, 01:48 AM
Szavay, Lisicki, Kournikova, Lucic, Sprem.

Umberella
Jul 12th, 2010, 02:36 AM
Dani, because she is stupid. I'll never get over her 6-0 2-0 lead over Ana in a Grand Slam semifinal that she somehow ended up losing. Such a typical match for her... If she wasn't such a headcase, she could have done a lot more damage than just 3 titles over so many years.

Also Groth has had some pretty good runs in the last 2 grand slams, and from what I saw when I watched her at Wimbledon, she really has game! Maybe she just performs well under that pressure, but I think she has a lot of ability that deserves some decent results.

Safina also deserved a Grand Slam i reckon. If Serena could win 3 GS and still only be number 2, that just shows how consistently well Dinara must have played over the entire year. Then to not win at least one GS was unfortunate.

zvonarevarulz
Jul 12th, 2010, 03:20 AM
Sprem. Big time.

zvonarevarulz
Jul 12th, 2010, 03:21 AM
Oh and someone should start a "which players have no game but great results" thread:lol:

Mana
Jul 12th, 2010, 03:32 AM
Kathrin Worle comes to mind.

Mana
Jul 12th, 2010, 03:33 AM
Katya Bychkova as well.

Tenis Srbija
Jul 12th, 2010, 04:03 AM
Hantuchova. She has beautiful game,great baseline shots and she has almost won many important matches in her career,but finally she lost them because she is such a headcase. Without her head and mental problem she could be regular Top 10 player.

That would be one interesting player :cool:

Nefertiti
Jul 12th, 2010, 05:33 AM
Dementieva, so weird she hasn't won any slams.

Wiggly
Jul 12th, 2010, 05:41 AM
Without 2003, Daniela's could've gained even more confidence and actually never leave the top ten instead of sucking for about 2 years and struggling between #20 and #15 for another 2 years.

Could've made quite a few SFs and Fs showing in GS during that time.

As for Benesova, with her game and talent, her best GS-results should be better than three 3Rs. Should've won a massive bunch of MM clay Titles too.

But a lot depends on draw and both have been unlucky.

monmonito
Jul 12th, 2010, 07:28 AM
Daniela will prove that your wrong...:)

sorry i love her so much...

skanky~skanketta
Jul 12th, 2010, 08:29 AM
Lucie Safarova. I truly expected her to be a regular feature in the top 10 and to challenge for slams. God knows what happened. She has a great game. Solid serve, ok movement, powerful strokes off both wings and she can volley a little bit.

Similar to Tamira Paszek. Yes, her serve was useless, but she had some nice, flowing strokes and pretty good movement. Maybe she wasn't really the slam type, but she should have been a solid top 40 player at least!

And then we have Sorana Cirstea. Its baffling how she gets trounced so much with the gorgeous game that she has. Sigh.

Sander.
Jul 12th, 2010, 08:29 AM
Kvitova

skanky~skanketta
Jul 12th, 2010, 08:33 AM
Dementieva, so weird she hasn't won any slams. Not really if you think about it. Her game is easy to read. Everything will go cross court, especially the backhand. That said, I still want her to win one.

shoparound
Jul 12th, 2010, 08:35 AM
Not really if you think about it. Her game is easy to read. Everything will go cross court, especially the backhand. That said, I still want her to win one.

Same goes for Hantuchova (in terms of being easy to read).

But I do Dementieva has enough to win a slam, just never got up there.
Are youngsters Robson and De Brito at this stage right now?

skanky~skanketta
Jul 12th, 2010, 08:57 AM
Same goes for Hantuchova (in terms of being easy to read).

But I do Dementieva has enough to win a slam, just never got up there.
Are youngsters Robson and De Brito at this stage right now? True, but Hantuchova does go down the line a lot. In her case, besides her head, I think she lost a lot of tournaments simply because she did not really use all her weapons properly. She has some amazing volleys but she avoids the net like a cat does water. In other words, she has decent variety but does not bother with them.

In Dementieva's case, well, she reminds me of Agassi in some ways. She presses and presses and there's really not much the opponent can do about it. But the top players are top players for a reason, which is why she usually loses to them. When she misses, it's usually by a small margin. A lot of people have said that an improved serve would take her places but I beg to differ. IMO, her game has been based around the fact that her serve sucks (sucked?). What really kills her though, is the lack of variety when it comes to choices of where to hit the ball and her return. She only ever has one way of returning the ball. Unlike Justine or Mauresmo, she cant block or slice it back. She can only drive it at full force. Plus, her strokes lack topspin. The great thing however is that she's been very consistent in the last few years.

fouc
Jul 12th, 2010, 03:18 PM
Sprem. Big time.

Really? She hits the ball very hard but has no game whatsoever :shrug:

Lacrish
Jul 12th, 2010, 03:36 PM
would say Petkovic and Safarova
both of them have good ability,but erratic play and mental weakness are really stumbling blocky on thier way to success.
they still have time,if they can overcome that,then greater achievements will be obtained by them

PushWoz
Jul 12th, 2010, 04:30 PM
Caroline Wozniacki!
Great game but no GS yet >.<

Baselinebasher
Jul 12th, 2010, 04:45 PM
Caroline Wozniacki!
Great game but no GS yet >.<

I hope that's a joke. Passive game, no forehand. Bad serve and below average movement. I am having trouble seeing her great game. She's called female Murray on ATP forums, which is giving her way too much credit.

faboozadoo15
Jul 12th, 2010, 06:04 PM
I hope that's a joke. Passive game, no forehand. Bad serve and below average movement. I am having trouble seeing her great game. She's called female Murray on ATP forums, which is giving her way too much credit.

On the WTA, she has a very reliable, above average serve. Below average movement? You must be joking. She's one of the best movers and retrievers on tour.

I'm not saying I like her, but your assessment is off.

Setsuna.
Jul 12th, 2010, 06:11 PM
Yaroslava Shevdova !
She so talented but she too inconsistend.

Oermi
Jul 12th, 2010, 07:07 PM
Patty Schnyder :sobbing:

Rex59
Jul 12th, 2010, 08:43 PM
Martic. Needs time and weight.

Sammy Stones
Jul 12th, 2010, 09:18 PM
Patty Schnyder :sobbing:

definitely.

OsloErik
Jul 12th, 2010, 09:49 PM
To be honest, virtually every player has results that make sense compared to their ability. A few punch above their weight for a while, but very, very few punch so far below their weight that it's head scratching.

The two examples you've given are perfect: Szavay has gorgeous strokes, but as Corswandt and I have discussed she has other problems with flexibility of movement (similar to Azarenka, if I were to get tangential). Lisicki has a great serve and forehand, but her return game is hit-or-miss (think Vaidisova without the mental implosions).

There are, of course, players with great promise who have their careers shortened by injury (Golovin being the latest in a long, proud history). But that's not quite the same as a player displaying greatness and simply not winning anything important.

Here's a mind-boggling stat for you: Helena Sukova, frequently considered the "greatest" woman never to win a grand slam, reached 4 slam finals and won only 10 titles in her career. That's a very, very small number for a player who reached roughly 20 slam quarterfinals in 10 years. Or for ANYONE who reached 4 slam finals spaced a decade apart.

Mr.Sharapova
Jul 12th, 2010, 10:14 PM
Kuznetsova,Yeah she has two slams but with the kind of game the has she should have more !!

OsloErik
Jul 12th, 2010, 10:16 PM
Kuznetsova,Yeah she has two slams but with the kind of game the has she should have more !!

I'd add that the slam count isn't the issue; she has just 12 titles in her career! How many other 2+ slam players have such paltry title counts? Capriati doesn't have many titles (14, I believe), but she also missed a big chunk of her career and won her slams closer together than Kuznetsova did.

Mr.Sharapova
Jul 12th, 2010, 10:22 PM
I'd add that the slam count isn't the issue; she has just 12 titles in her career! How many other 2+ slam players have such paltry title counts? Capriati doesn't have many titles (14, I believe), but she also missed a big chunk of her career and won her slams closer together than Kuznetsova did.

Imo Svetlana is a complete player,the only thing she lacks about is her mental ability to overcome opponents when the situations get tough!!
I hope she finds her form again and she plays well again:angel:

Shepster
Jul 12th, 2010, 11:10 PM
I think there's a difference between no results and results that aren't as good as their potential. Certain players mentioned could have won every final they ever got to and people would still call them underachievers given their potential/ability. I'd be reluctant to mention anyone who's won a tier I on this, and certainly not a slam winner.

There's also the question of "great game" - there are certain players who when they're on are amazing but they're on so seldom it's almost moot. I'll take Zakopalova, she's won what, 2 titles, both below Tier II level, never been to a final above Tier III level, never been top 20 and only got to the 2nd week of a slam for the first time at Wimbledon this year - she ticks every box for no results. Most importantly though when she's in a swashbuckling mood she can be absolutely breathtaking.

Beat
Jul 13th, 2010, 07:20 AM
"no results", as the thread title says, is a bit harsh, but i just translate it as "underwhelming" ...

Nadia :sad: she's had a good career but she really should've made at least one slam final until now :shrug:

also Julia Vakulenko should've won titles if not for those injuries :sad:

agree on both accounts. i certainly expected petrova to reach a slam final before zvonareva.

vakulenko was destined for great things ... nothing happened. you know something went wrong when your most famous moment is ending clijsters' (1st) career ...

kournikova could be another pick.

Beat
Jul 13th, 2010, 07:21 AM
I hope that's a joke. Passive game, no forehand. Bad serve and below average movement. I am having trouble seeing her great game. She's called female Murray on ATP forums, which is giving her way too much credit.

that's quite a silly thing to say.

Navratil
Jul 13th, 2010, 01:28 PM
Bacsinsky

Navratil
Jul 13th, 2010, 01:28 PM
Dokic, Stevenson... - all the struggeling former top-players

Corswandt
Jul 15th, 2010, 11:04 AM
Other than the players whose careers were hampered or even destroyed by injuries, and who probably were already mentioned upthread, I'd like to add:

Razzano before she won those two WTA tournaments in late 2007 and had that patch of consistently good results in the first half of 2009 would be the perfect example of a player with lots of game/potential but no results.

Other than that, there's always those players who clearly have game, but who happen to be extremely poor match players (in the sense that they struggle to win games and sets, since they play every point the same way, regardless of its relevance), such as Manasieva or Lapushchenkova. Dzehalevich has much more game than her ranking would suggest; she does everything well, and I can't understand why she remains stuck in the #150-200 ranking limbo. She lacks a kill shot from the baseline, granted, but so does nearly every single Generation Sucker.

Domachowska might be included in the "poor match player" category given that she's able to play flashy top 30 tennis but is maddeningly point-by-point inconsistent, but what she lacks are basic point-building skills.

Corswandt
Jul 15th, 2010, 11:04 AM
And BTW anyone who says "Niculescu" has earned a place on my ignore list.

Pops Maellard
Jul 15th, 2010, 11:14 AM
Caroline Wozniacki!
Great game but no GS yet >.<
http://drownedinsound.com/images/49041.gif

Shaun:::
Jul 15th, 2010, 11:18 AM
Caroline Wozniacki!
Great game but no GS yet >.<

:help:

nadalftw
Jul 15th, 2010, 05:06 PM
Petrova

GreenGrass
Jul 15th, 2010, 05:08 PM
Dementieva. Great player. Awesome to watch. Should have multiple slams by now if she weren't such a headcase.

so true :sad:

Six Feet Under
Jul 15th, 2010, 05:25 PM
Groth too she has soo much game.

OsloErik
Jul 15th, 2010, 10:01 PM
Groth too she has soo much game.

She's a young 23, I think she got her pro start a little late, and she just had two very encouraging slam results. I have a feeling she'll make the top 20 at some point in the next two years.

OsloErik
Jul 15th, 2010, 10:04 PM
Other than the players whose careers were hampered or even destroyed by injuries, and who probably were already mentioned upthread, I'd like to add:

Razzano before she won those two WTA tournaments in late 2007 and had that patch of consistently good results in the first half of 2009 would be the perfect example of a player with lots of game/potential but no results.

Domachowska might be included in the "poor match player" category given that she's able to play flashy top 30 tennis but is maddeningly point-by-point inconsistent, but what she lacks are basic point-building skills.

Those were two players I was just thinking of. Domachowska has just brutally poor game/set construction skills. She can build a lovely point, but she just fails at putting together a good series of points into a game or a set.