Tennis' Greatest Disappointment: David Nalbandian

Sport is a cruel thing, and tennis is no exception. Some of the best of them end their careers with trophies and glory beyond all imagination. A few earn tennis apotheosis, and have their names forever etched in memory and eternity.

But there are also those who struggle and fight constantly, within and without of themselves, to reach these sorts of heights. Whats more, there are guys like this who have the abilities of your Federer and Nadal.

This is an appraisal of the efforts of one man, perhaps in vain, and perhaps now too late, to overcome the disdain in which his career has been held: David Nalbandian.

He is the one guy, I believe, who has always had the weapons to hang with the very best, and who have failed to do so, and for whom there might not be much more time.

Firstly, his disappointing career. David Nalbandian has always, perhaps intrigued the tennis world, because it has been, singularly, his inability to convert what would have been, for most other guys, terribly advantageous situations to any real advantage.

This is not talking within matches, although yes it has happened, but specifically in his career. Let us just think about one moment from recent history. 

In 2007, Nalbandian ended his season in perhaps the best form of his career. He had won two Masters series shields in a row, defeating, singularly, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the world Nos. 1 and 2, twice in a row, in two different tournaments.

He was dominating everyone. He had won, basically, a grand slams worth of ranking points. Nalbandian was within inches of a berth at the Masters Cup, where, one remembers, his greatest success had been in 2005, defeating Federer in five sets.

What is most appalling about this situation, however, is his reaction the next year. Entering the Australian as a favourite, with the eyes of the world drawn to the top half of the draw, where lay Federer, Djokovic, Nalbandian and Hewitt, he was quick to wilt, and was dismissed, fairly convincingly, in straight sets by Juan Carlos Ferrero, before the quarterfinals.

It is in this sort of situation that Nalbandian has found himself constantly: winning something out of the blue, and having to face the weight of expectation, from himself, and the tennis world. In some players, this has produced marvels. In Nalbandian we have only been distressed, as tennis fans of truly magnificent ballstriking. 

There is no doubt about Nalbandian's talent. Tennis writers have perhaps never quite written of the Argentine in the same breadth as, say, a Federer or Safin. Thats only, of course, because perhaps he has been overshadowed by those tennis colossi.

But on Nalbandian's best day, I might even have him play for my life. He can dominate and manoeuvre the ball so marvelously, not with Federer's touch and variety, but simply by his ability to approach the ball so early, and be aggressive, so quickly, from both wings.

He is not as adept a volleyer as the greatest volleyers, but he has certainly got enough natural feel to beat anyone. I think a match we should all cast our minds to, in terms of how dominant, really, Nalbandian can be at his very best, is his final against Nadal in Paris in 2007, where he won 6-4, 6-0.

Admittedly Nadal was probably jaded, but there was no doubt about Nalbandian's all-compassing, total victory. There, on that day, he crushed the Spaniard, who, incidentally, is now our world No. 1.

But time, I think, is running out for Nalbandian. He is not as old as old can be in tennis, being , but he is certainly at a stage in his career where, if he is to achieve the greatest glories in tennis, it's gonna have to be coming now.

Nalbandian's greatest weakness, I think, in testimony to tennis as, very largely, a mental sport, is mental weakness. He is mentally unfit.

Basically, he has been unable to last very long under the limelight, and has been unable to really give himself the drive to do something amazing.

There was something ominous that we saw that day on the Davis Cup final doubles rubber, with Nalbandian playing doubles against Lopez and Verdasco, where, having had 5-1 in the third, then 5-1 in the breaker, Argentina lost the set, match, and final.

Admittedly Nalbandian was playing doubles, and truly some of the errors were coming from Acasuso, but nothing, perhaps, speaks more about Nalbandian's career as a hobbler.

If we look back again to just this year's Australian Open, nothing is more traumatic, or distressing than to see a man who, perhaps above about the last four or five guys in the top ten should be seen in the quarters and semis of slams, dunked out by a Taiwanese wildcard in the second round. 

But, as I emphasized at the beginning, his career might be entering desperate times. Nalbandian, of course, lost his title in last year's Paris final, to Tsonga, playing not unsloppy tennis: the sort of tennis that brought him the title in the year before.

In the same tournament, he had humbled in straight sets Andy Murray, who was looking to emulate exactly his achievement in winning Madrid and Paris in the same year.

Murray noted of that match that it felt good knowing that the guy had to play his very best tennis to beat him, and even so on a 7-6, 6-2 scoreline.

The barbarians, to speak metaphorically, are now well and truly at the gates ... the gates which kept the older generation of Roddick, Federer, and Nalbandian in security with a certain acknowledged dignity and presence (such as has afforded them appearances in video games).

For these guys it is time to act, and do something to leave marks on their careers. Most urgently, I think, this applies to David Nalbandian.