[chuvack]

Two years ago no one would have surpised if all 6 of these once-promising young players would be members of today's Top 10. It's like a divine conspiracy.

 

[Shvedbarilescu]

There is not one reason. There are six different individual reasons for six different individual players.

It should also be mentioned that a) they are not the 1st ever young players to slump badly after good starts to the careers and they won't be the last either and b)some of the these players aren't done yet and have the best part of the careers ahead of them. As to predicting which of these players are finished and which aren't I can't do that. Each of these players fate still lies in their own hands, with the possible exception of Tatiana whose fate still depends on how well she can heal from her injuries.

 

[bobbynorwich]

Two years ago no one would have surprised if all 6 of these once-promising young players would be members of today's Top 10. It's like a divine conspiracy.

Maybe they're not in top 10 due to the weight of the professional circuit --- fame, commitments, money, schedule --- which can get to some people more than others.

Add Hantuchova to the list also.
.

 

[Volcana]

Two years ago no one would have surpised if all 6 of these once-promising young players would be members of today's Top 10. It's like a divine conspiracy.

If you asked me in 2007, I'd have said I'd be shocked of all six of those players were in the top ten.


Venus, Serena, Sharapova, Henin, Mauresmo had all won slams within the previous 18 months. We certainly didn't know Henin was going to retire, or Kim Clijsters or that Myskina wouldn't return.


And back then, we thought the 'Russian wave' was going to mean a lot of slam wins, not just a lot of players in the top twenty.


As for what happened to them, some combination of not enough talent, not enough skill, and not enough health. None of them never were as good as any of the current active multi-slam winners are right now. (I'm ot counting Davenport. I am counting Mauresmo.) But this is normal. Promising young players usually DON'T win slams. Mostly they don't get to the top ten. And if they do, it's later in their careers.


Welcome back to reality, I guess.

 

[DimaDinosaur]

Vaidisova is not surprising. She was just a bad looking ball machine. Svazay is just bad looking in general.

Mirza and Safarova have hope (i dunno what is wrong with safarova). Paszek is still young (burned out?) Golovin is too sexually charged. All that sex is gonna wreck her movement and ball toss. I dunno how she got the ankle injury, but i'm sure it's related to sex again....

 

[Fired]

Vaidisova is not surprising. She was just a bad looking ball machine. Svazay is just bad looking in general.

Mirza and Safarova have hope (i dunno what is wrong with safarova). Paszek is still young (burned out?) Golovin is too sexually charged. All that sex is gonna wreck her movement and ball toss. I dunno how she got the ankle injury, but i'm sure it's related to sex again....

:haha:Girl just wanna have fun.

 

[goldenlox]

Nicole is probably the only real top 10 type talent. But she's made some money and maybe isn't motivated enough.

 

[chuvack]

Add Hantuchova to the list also.

.

absolutely do NOT add Hantuchova, who is a marginal talent from an earlier generation, and it was clear already many years before that she lacked both the mobility and mental toughness to become a great player. But add maybe Peer who many expected more from.

 

[new-york]

the only collapse is Vaidisova, but she's young, there's still hope.

Tati is always injured.

Sania has been injured too, but she's coming back, and i love her but i'm not sure she'll do that much damage. I'd be satisfied with a top 20 appearance and some titles.

Safarova has a lot of potential.

 

[volta]

Tati is all about her injury :sad:

now Nicole , Pazsek and Lucie is all a MESS :fiery:

 

[chuvack]

Nicole is probably the only real top 10 type talent. But she's made some money and maybe isn't motivated enough.

how much Nicole made, maybe 2 million? She could have been the next 50 million dollar WTA superstar.

 

[Miss Amor]

Nicole - She seems to have lost all her motivation. All that publicity and money seems to have addled her passion for tennis

Pazek- She is still 18, she has a good chance of coming back and doing better. Hopefully she will.

Golovin - Same problem as Nicole, too much publicity, lack of motivation

Mirza - She never had a lot of potential to begin with. Just a ball bashing forehand and extreme hype. She had three lucky wins over the top 10 in the span of 4 years (Hingis on her comeback and off-form sveta), and a mickey-mouse title in her home country.

Safarova/Szavay - One season wonders?

 

[goldenlox]

how much Nicole made, maybe 2 million? She could have been the next 50 million dollar WTA superstar.

There's a lot of work, and a lot of aches and pains to get that extra money.
It's not like turning on a light switch

 

[AcesHigh]

I think Vaidisova is vastly overrated and Golovin is too but only in this forum. I didn't think Mirza, Paszek, Safarova or Szavay were top 10 fixtures anyway.

 

[AnnaK_4ever]

Paszek and Mirza in top-10? :haha:

You've got to be kidding...

 

[Volcana]

But seriously folks ...

First of all, injuries can take anybody down. Venus Williams post-2004 isn't the physical player she was before her ab injury. Amelie Mauresmo re-built her whole body and game to compensate for a chronic back injury. So maybe you're just being impatient. As for my opinions ....


Vaidisova - She's 19 yrs old. Sex + money + fame + lack of discipline

Mirza - Learn to so something besides hit the ball hard. Although the way she was greeted at the airport after winning the mixed at OZ makes you wonder if her fans think she's under-achieving.

Sarafova - Had a horrible 2008. No idea why. Physical tools are there.

Paszek - She only played her first slam in 2007. Why would I have expected her to be top ten by now?

Szavay - No clue.

Golovin - I never thought she was that good. No 'future slam winner' good, but I did expect her to at least have been in the top ten by now. However, this is a case where injuries seem to have taken chunks out of her career. May 2008, she played on the challengers tour, and lost to #129 Maret Ani. She played, and lost, a WTA match the next week, and no one has heard from her since (except as a swimsuit model).

 

[chuvack]

Paszek and Mirza in top-10? :haha:

You've got to be kidding...

NOW, you laugh. But were you laughing already in the autumn of 2006?

 

[AnnaK_4ever]

NOW, you laugh. But were you laughing already in the autumn of 2006?

The crazy idea of Mirza had Paszek being top-10 has never visited my mind. Never.

 

[pwayne]

Nicole - She seems to have lost all her motivation. All that publicity and money seems to have addled her passion for tennis

Pazek- She is still 18, she has a good chance of coming back and doing better. Hopefully she will.

Golovin - Same problem as Nicole, too much publicity, lack of motivation

Mirza - She never had a lot of potential to begin with. Just a ball bashing forehand and extreme hype. She had three lucky wins over the top 10 in the span of 4 years (Hingis on her comeback and off-form sveta), and a mickey-mouse title in her home country.

Safarova/Szavay - One season wonders?

Nicole: Agree as her concentration is on Radek Stepanek

Tamira: She will do well if she gets Lari coaching her again

Tatiana: Would add injuries to the list.

Sania: She was slowed by injuries for a better part of 2 years but after she did good against Venus at 2005 Stanford, the hype machine went in overdrive.

Lucie: Yes. She has underachieved for her talent just like her boyfriend, Tomas Berdych.

Agnes: Yes. She had a good stretch from 2007 Palermo to 2007 Beijing.

 

[No.Brains.Atoll]

I don't think you can write off any of them. Some players, no matter how talented or how much promise they show, take longer to develop than others. Look at Schnyder. I remember back when she was being hyped as a future star, then the reports of all sorts of attitude problems, strange diets, etc. and honestly, she's played her best tennis very late in her career, after getting her head sorted out. Mauresmo was talented, but did not fulfil her potential until 2006, when she was in her mid 20's. Henin herself really only became a great player within the last few years of her career.

Right now, Wozniacki, Cibulkova, Cornet, Radwanska are having more success, but IMHO none of them have the weapons or specialness in their game to make them lasting fixtures at or near the top of the game. Vaidisova has a huge game, "ballbasher" or not, and if she gets her attitude sorted out, she will be an elite player eventually. Paszek has the groundstrokes to compete with anybody. If she ever manages to improve her serve, she will be top ten for sure. Having four different coaches in the last year can't have helped her development as a player. If she stays with one for awhile, she will improve dramatically. Mirza is probably a Top 20 player but has never shown consistency to go much beyond that. Golovin has a nice game, good forehand, good serve, and could hang around the top ten if she ever got--and stayed--healthy. But there's time yet for that. These players are all young. Some of you act like if you haven't won a major or reached #1 by 15 you're over the hill. In reality, it's only a very small number of players who ever win majors or peak as players before they are in their 20s.