Who among these 3 over achieved and who under achieved?
First tell me about the bigger over achiever among the 3 and then the bigger under achiever
Give me reasons too
- tennis_kenLv 41 decade agoFavorite Answer
In the beginning of that era of those rising American stars I believed everyone thought at the time that Andre Agassi and Jim Courier would have emerged the most victorious from the bunch. While Jim did went on to win two Australian Open tiles and two French Open titles, I still felt he could have achieved so much more. He definitely had the game that should have atleast won him one Wimbledon and for sure a couple US Open titles. But I still believed he achieved everything he was meant to achieve even though the argument can be made that he did under achieve a little.
Lleyton Hewitt - it's hard to say because comparing his career is like comparing every other great player of his generation where a lot was expected of them which they then failed to fulfilled. Hewitt is a great player in his own right and I remember people saying that this is the guy who will next dominate the game, and for a while there, he did just that.
But this is my point. I can't say he under achieved because that would be implying that he wasn't a great player, which he in fact is. The problem is Hewitt, much like every other great player of his generation, came about at a time when the tennis world met it's most dominant and consistent player of all time. i.e. Roger Federer. Therefore it is difficult to say that Hewitt or Roddick or Safin, failed miserably in fulfilling all that was expected of them. Because I believe they all just came about during an era where there was this one guy who dominated like no other player has before, so for the rest of the field, it is just pure damn bad luck.
Yvegeny Kafelnikov - while consistently ranked in the top 10 for much of his career, I never really saw him as a multiple Grand Slam champion, former number one, and Olympic Gold medalist, which he all went on to accomplish throughout his career. I always felt that Sampras blew a perfect opportunity in 1996 when he allowed Kafelnikov to take him down in the semifinals at the French Open. Even though at the time I knew Kafelnikov would have won that match I just always felt that this was Pete's best opportunity and final chance he would get to win the French. And as history will write itself I was right about that.
Also I always felt that Kafelnikov benefited a lot from having to play easy opponents in the finals of the two majors he won. Just my thoughts. LOL So I would say he definitely over achieved!!!
The biggest over achiever is Yevgeny Kafelnikov while the biggest under achiever is: "no one from that list". Jim achieved everything he could have hoped for i.e. multiple Grand slam glory, world number status, advancing to the finals of all four majors in his career. While Hewitt is one of those great players that unfortunately came around at a time in tennis when there was a much great player who knew how to dominate everyone and every tournament. You can't blame Hewitt for that.
- _A_YAHOO_USERLv 61 decade ago
great question,I always thought about it
All were world no.1
1-Jim Courier -biggest under achiever done well on all surfaces
won Aus and French,finalist at US open, Wimbledon
good on all surfaces
2-Lleyton Hewitt- " " "- has done well on grass,Wimbledon,Queens,and US open
has been OZ open finalist
3-Kafelnikov- " " "- has done well on hard, Aussie open
and clay,decent on grass
in that order