PDA

View Full Version : Best player without a G.S


Pete Semper
04-21-2007, 06:33 AM
Who's your favorite player without a grand slam ?...im hesiting between Mecir (an another forgotten genious) or Leconte but my vote goes to Miloslav Mecir aka "the cat"...what's your ?

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 06:36 AM
Who's your favorite player without a grand slam ?...im hesiting between Mecir (an another forgotten genious) or Leconte but my vote goes to Miloslav Mecir aka "the cat"...what's your ?

Mecir, yes.

Condi

drakulie
04-21-2007, 06:53 AM
I would say Seles. She doesn't have a Wimbledon title.

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 06:55 AM
I would say Seles. She doesn't have a Wimbledon title.

Navratilova, Evert and Sampras don't have a Grand Slam either.

Condi

drakulie
04-21-2007, 07:00 AM
I'm just teasing Condi.

drakulie
04-21-2007, 07:00 AM
I would probably go with T. Martin.

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 07:07 AM
I would probably go with T. Martin.

Let me guess - you are American .... ?


Condi

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
04-21-2007, 07:08 AM
I would have to say Marcelo Rios.

Pete Semper
04-21-2007, 07:10 AM
My bad...I wanted to say "best player who has never won any tournament of the G.S !", vote now !

noeledmonds
04-21-2007, 07:43 AM
I would have to say Marcelo Rios.

Got to agree with this. Rios is the only ATP number one to have never won a singles grand slam.

In the womens game it has to be Pam Shriver (if we are talking about winning a singles slam of course).

rommil
04-21-2007, 07:47 AM
Agree with the Rios vote. And Petr Korda.

Voltron
04-21-2007, 07:49 AM
I would have to say Marcelo Rios.
I second that.

Shaolin
04-21-2007, 08:32 AM
Rios then Mecir

kingdaddy41788
04-21-2007, 08:49 AM
I would probably go with T. Martin.

As far as favorite player without a Grand Slam, I'd agree. Todd was always one of my favorites. When I was a juniors player (about 12 or so I think), he came to our tennis practice in Houston during the week of the River Oaks clay court tournament. He is an all around, generally nice guy and a gentleman.

Let me guess - you are American .... ?


Condi

As for you, Condi, many non-Americans love Todd Martin too. My friends from Australia love him too. He was always an honest player (overturning bad calls that went in his favor, etc.) and was a great serve & volley player. Why you would disrespect him and suggest that only Americans like him. And Condi, would it not be safe to assume that you're American too?

drakulie
04-21-2007, 10:35 AM
Let me guess - you are American .... ?


Condi

Yes, I am. I also stand by my opinion.

Martin was a great player who made the final of two slams (AO and US), losing to two legends along the way> Sampras and Agassi. This to me is a far greater achievement than Rios who only made the finals of one slam, and lost to a nobody like Korda in respects to players of the caliber of Sampras and Agassi.

He also made several semis, including Wimbledon, and was a member of a Winning Davis Cup team. What has Rios, who many have mentioned in this thread done that is greater?

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 11:25 AM
Got to agree with this. Rios is the only ATP number one to have never won a singles grand slam.

In the womens game it has to be Pam Shriver (if we are talking about winning a singles slam of course).


Shriver??
You must be kidding.

MJ Fernandez, Date, Dementieva come to mind.


Condi

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 11:26 AM
....
As for you, Condi, many non-Americans love Todd Martin too. My friends from Australia love him too. He was always an honest player (overturning bad calls that went in his favor, etc.) and was a great serve & volley player. Why you would disrespect him and suggest that only Americans like him. And Condi, would it not be safe to assume that you're American too?

I liked Martin. But Mecir was in a different league.

Of course I'm no American. Otherwise my English would be better.


Condi

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 11:29 AM
Yes, I am. I also stand by my opinion.

Martin was a great player who made the final of two slams (AO and US), losing to two legends along the way> Sampras and Agassi. This to me is a far greater achievement than Rios who only made the finals of one slam, and lost to a nobody like Korda in respects to players of the caliber of Sampras and Agassi.

He also made several semis, including Wimbledon, and was a member of a Winning Davis Cup team. What has Rios, who many have mentioned in this thread done that is greater?


I don't remember Rios.
But I have watched Mecir on tape. How he humiliated Edberg and Wilander.
When Mecir was on he was unbeatable. Sadly he was a head-case. And a back injured ended his career far too soon.

Condi

EZRA
04-21-2007, 11:31 AM
Agree with the Rios vote. And Petr Korda.
I think Korda won the aussie open..

My vote goes to Todd Martin as well.. (I'm not American). Another vote to Cedric Pioline.

The Gorilla
04-21-2007, 11:41 AM
pioline .

Moose Malloy
04-21-2007, 12:08 PM
Mecir has the best career winning % of any slam finalist that didn't win a slam in the last 20 years.

When you look at Mecir's record, he had some far more impressive wins than Rios, Martin, etc. In some matches, he completely destroyed some of the best players of his time, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, Wilander, Connors, McEnroe. I wouldn't be surprised if he has more wins over former or current #1s than any other non-slam winner.

He made at least the semis in all 4 slams. The only players in the open era to do that & not win a slam are Mecir, Okker, & Nalbandian!

Here are the win%'s of all the slamless players of the last 20 years that played at least 2 slam finals(& including Rios, Nalbandian, Coria)

Mecir-68
Rios-67
Coria-67
Nalbandian-66
Martin-64
Corretja-61
Philippoussis-61
Pioline-55

and here is how some of the 1-2 slam winners of that time fared:
Chang-68
Stich-68
Kafelnikov-67
Gomez-66
Ferrero-66
Moya-65
Rafter-65
Krajicek-65
Safin-64
Ivanisevic-64
Cash-62
Gaudio-60
Costa-59
Johansson-56

suwanee4712
04-21-2007, 12:37 PM
For the women, Sukova reached 4 grand slam finals without winning. Mary Jo Fernandez reached 3 without a win. Andrea Jaeger almost certainly would've won a grand slam had she not had such a bad shoulder injury. Rosie Casals had grand slam potential but was always in King's shadow. And Shriver had the US Open r/u finish and at least 6 grand slam semi finishes that I can think of off the top of my head. She was a threat on grass at least. Much of the talk going into the 1988 Australian was that she was the popular darkhorse pick to win that tournament.

vkartikv
04-21-2007, 12:38 PM
Tommy Haas

Moose Malloy
04-21-2007, 12:49 PM
Much of the talk going into the 1988 Australian was that she was the popular darkhorse pick to win that tournament.

I hope that's a joke, I have some early round matches from the '88 AO on tape, Drysdale, Stolle, & Carillo all said that tournament wasn't a question of who would win, but how many games/sets Graf would lose in winning the thing. All 3 said they would be more surprised if Graf didn't win the Calendar Grand Slam in '88, than if she did.

BTW, I really hope this thread doesn't get hijacked by you know who, like every other thread in this section seems to, but I guess I'm not helping matters with this post.

Mr. Sean
04-21-2007, 12:56 PM
Pete Sampras.

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 01:25 PM
For the women, Sukova reached 4 grand slam finals without winning. Mary Jo Fernandez reached 3 without a win. Andrea Jaeger almost certainly would've won a grand slam had she not had such a bad shoulder injury. Rosie Casals had grand slam potential but was always in King's shadow. And Shriver had the US Open r/u finish and at least 6 grand slam semi finishes that I can think of off the top of my head. She was a threat on grass at least. Much of the talk going into the 1988 Australian was that she was the popular darkhorse pick to win that tournament.

I don't think so. Graf was the #1 seed at AO 88.

Condi

Condoleezza
04-21-2007, 01:28 PM
I hope that's a joke, I have some early round matches from the '88 AO on tape, Drysdale, Stolle, & Carillo all said that tournament wasn't a question of who would win, but how many games/sets Graf would lose in winning the thing. All 3 said they would be more surprised if Graf didn't win the Calendar Grand Slam in '88, than if she did.

BTW, I really hope this thread doesn't get hijacked by you know who, like every other thread in this section seems to, but I guess I'm not helping matters with this post.

Yes, most probably this ATPKid will start to whine about how much Seles would have won without this horrible stabbing very soon ...

Condi

CEvertFan
04-21-2007, 01:35 PM
Agree with the Rios vote. And Petr Korda.

Petr Korda won the Australian Open in 1998.


I would have to say Pam Shriver or M.J. Fernandez or Helena Sukova for the women and Todd Martin or Miloslav Mecir for the men. I discount Rios even though he was briefly #1 because he was here and gone quicker than you could blink.

rommil
04-21-2007, 01:35 PM
I think Korda won the aussie open..

My vote goes to Todd Martin as well.. (I'm not American). Another vote to Cedric Pioline.

Sorry man my bad. The Korda match that stuck to my mind was that US Open win over Sampras and then he didn't play his next match because he was sick or something.

suwanee4712
04-21-2007, 11:01 PM
I hope that's a joke, I have some early round matches from the '88 AO on tape, Drysdale, Stolle, & Carillo all said that tournament wasn't a question of who would win, but how many games/sets Graf would lose in winning the thing. All 3 said they would be more surprised if Graf didn't win the Calendar Grand Slam in '88, than if she did.

BTW, I really hope this thread doesn't get hijacked by you know who, like every other thread in this section seems to, but I guess I'm not helping matters with this post.


Nope, that's not a joke. Pre-tournament Shriver got a lot of publicity because of the strong year that she had in 1987, particularly the latter half. But if I remember correctly, Shriver lost in the 4th round.

Remember the term "darkhorse" does not mean the favorite. It means a popular surprise pick.

Fedfan4life
04-21-2007, 11:06 PM
Tommy Haas...... its unfortunate that once he was 2nd in the world then plagued with injuries.

Mad iX
04-21-2007, 11:40 PM
Yup, Tommy Haas for me as well. His triumph over Fed at the AusOpen a few years back was quite memorable.
Also, Pioline and Nalbandian.

tenniko
04-22-2007, 11:43 PM
Haas
Rios
Nalbandian
Philippoussis (Grass)
Coria (Clay)

...it's hard to say who was the BEST player not to win a GS trophy. Any Top 5 or 10 when they were on fire would've been good enough to seriously contend (finalist, maybe? i.e. Marcos and Gonzales), and sometimes when lucky run away with the title (i.e. Johansson and Gaudio).

OrangeOne
04-22-2007, 11:50 PM
Men: Philippoussis - His body has let him down too often.

Women: Huber - ran into a Seles on a Warpath in the AO final, also lost a 5 setter to Graf in the end-of-year champs once.

Eddie Brock
04-25-2007, 06:43 AM
Definitely Todd Martin. He should have won that 1999 US Open final against Agassi, but they called his winner out that would have put him back on serve in the 4th. He made it to a ton of semifinals and finals and was always in every match. He played Sampras, Agassi, Courier, and Chang over and over in semis and finals. If he had been able to beat them he would have a lot more titles.

I don't know of any other player that never won a slam who came so close and did so well consistently. He also had injury problems, so that was a factor as well.

Its not just Americans that like him, everyone does.

N23
04-26-2007, 07:07 AM
Miloslav Mecir, Todd Martin

Helena Sukova, Anke Huber

OrangeOne
04-26-2007, 07:13 AM
Miloslav Mecir, Todd Martin

Helena Sukova, Anke Huber

Hmmm, Mecir & Sukova... a fan of the Czech players? :) (I was a Lendl & Martina fan in the day....)

Agreed that Martin is up there, and very agreed on Anke Huber. I was a big fan, she played an nice attacking game... (and ok, she was dead-cute too ;)).

OrangeOne
04-26-2007, 07:18 AM
Its not just Americans that like him, everyone does.


Yeah - ignore the troll who alluded earlier that only Americans like him, she is just a troll.

I'm an Aussie and everyone here enjoyed watching him and seeing him have a go. That said, I still think Mark Philippoussis is, well, maybe not the better player, but the player who should have got a slam more than Todd. Todd was always solid, but didn't really have the mega-weapons and movement to hurt the very very big guys. Mark, on the other hand, on the right day, could smash anyone off the court. But his mind, and his very frail body... well yeah, it seems unlikely now that he'll ever get one....

Mikael
04-26-2007, 07:25 AM
With only 8 singles titles Todd Martin wasn't solid enough on the ATP Tour to be called the best non-GS winner. Pioline is even worse with 5 titles, but IIRC he made many finals before winning his first title. Rios and Enqvist, among others, have way more titles (18 and 19) and also more Masters Series shields I believe.

OrangeOne
04-26-2007, 07:38 AM
With only 8 singles titles Todd Martin wasn't solid enough on the ATP Tour to be called the best non-GS winner. Pioline is even worse with 5 titles, but IIRC he made many finals before winning his first title. Rios and Enqvist, among others, have way more titles (18 and 19) and also more Masters Series shields I believe.

Hmm, on this basis, Philippoussis has 11 titles, and his two GS finals are on different surfaces (W & UO). He also has at least one MS, and also a Queens (which should be a masters! :)).

bluetrain4
04-26-2007, 07:41 AM
I'd agree with Mecir. Too bad the two finals he did make, he got absolutely killed by Lendl. He was great to watch.

Henri Leconte - so talented, such vareity, a true shot maker, but lacked the consistency (as so many do)

Marcelo Rios - other have said what needed to be said.

Cedric Pioline - another Frenchman who was so fun to watch. A tremendous athlete with good variety and flair. Miss that style.

Todd Martin - Nice guy, classic serve and volley style.

Phillipousis - had the weapons (at least for fast courts), if not the movement.

Amos Mansdorf - kidding (though he was a decent player).

OrangeOne
04-26-2007, 07:54 AM
I'd agree with Mecir. Too bad the two finals he did make, he got absolutely killed by Lendl. He was great to watch.


I once heard Lendl talk about beating him, he said he knew how, that he just had to play 'not very pretty' tennis (I'm paraphrasing here). From memory he said if he fed Mecir pace or gave him width, Mecir would use the pace and also create angles. Again, from memory, Lendl therefore gave him a lot of medium pace balls up the middle, and waited for the mistake or the opportunity.

Mikael
04-26-2007, 07:55 AM
Hmm, on this basis, Philippoussis has 11 titles, and his two GS finals are on different surfaces (W & UO). He also has at least one MS, and also a Queens (which should be a masters! :)).

Yep, you're right, Philipoussis is also a good choice for the list. Better than Martin and Pioline anyway, in my opinion.

z-money
04-26-2007, 10:52 AM
Haas
Rios
Nalbandian
Philippoussis (Grass)
Coria (Clay)

...it's hard to say who was the BEST player not to win a GS trophy. Any Top 5 or 10 when they were on fire would've been good enough to seriously contend (finalist, maybe? i.e. Marcos and Gonzales), and sometimes when lucky run away with the title (i.e. Johansson and Gaudio).

i agree. if it not for fed. i dont think anyone else in the world would have stoped philippoussis io '03. coria was on track to untill he..... well i dont know what you call that. rios was talented. nalbadian if he could have closed out roddick in 03 may have won the US. but i do love haas too. martin got close a few times but i dont think he would ever of had to ability to overcome a sampras in the late rounds of a major

Pete Semper
04-27-2007, 05:06 AM
Surprised no one have mentioned Andrei Medvedev ! David Wheaton was a good pick as well (for Wimbledon or US Open).

caulcano
04-27-2007, 05:25 AM
I'd vote for Phillipousis.

suwanee4712
04-27-2007, 10:13 AM
I once heard Lendl talk about beating him, he said he knew how, that he just had to play 'not very pretty' tennis (I'm paraphrasing here). From memory he said if he fed Mecir pace or gave him width, Mecir would use the pace and also create angles. Again, from memory, Lendl therefore gave him a lot of medium pace balls up the middle, and waited for the mistake or the opportunity.


Has anyone ever seen their 1987 French semi? If you can't sleep at night watch this match. ;)

I liked watching both Mecir and Lendl play. Just not against each other.

kiki
04-04-2011, 01:42 PM
Mecir, most likely.I´d also give some honours to Nikki Pilic and Zeljko Franulovic, back at the beginning of the 70´s.

rainingaces
04-04-2011, 01:52 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-b4ebGZTZc

kiki
04-04-2011, 02:27 PM
Hozelu,Nusslein,Kovacs

Ludwig von Mises
04-04-2011, 06:03 PM
Who's your favorite player without a grand slam ?...im hesiting between Mecir (an another forgotten genious) or Leconte but my vote goes to Miloslav Mecir aka "the cat"...what's your ?

You are right on, for me- Leconte, followed very closely by Mecir, then Rios, then Phillipoussis (although he could blow all these dudes off the court if healthy and mentally ready).

winebarrel
04-04-2011, 08:43 PM
I loved watching Mecir play, he was unique. I couldn't split between him and Phillipousis though, his raw power was a treat to watch live.

My 4 favourite layers to watch of all time that did win grand slams singles events were:

1. Pat Cash
2. Yannick Noah
3. Pat Rafter
4. John McEnroe

They were all so athletic and played attacking serve volley tennis, sadly you don't see much of that these days.

dominikk1985
04-05-2011, 02:35 AM
leconte might be a good case. also todd martin.

Henman I don't think. he had a super exquisite technique but he just lacked the power for his style.
henmans FLAT serves averaged about 190 KPH (118 MPH) or a little less. that is about serena williams serve:D.
of course power is not everything, but it is a huge advantage if can can serve some aces out of a mess.
henman always was in big trouble if he was down in a game because he had to do complicated volleys all the time.

If you look at the few s&v players of the 00s you see that they all could serve in exess of 230 KPH (142 MPH) (karlovic, dent, myrni). they had a much easier time if the opponent had a break point because they could always serve a couple of aces.

henmans weakness was his serve which was nice but not a bomb. not good if you are a s&v player.

Datacipher
04-05-2011, 03:42 AM
leconte might be a good case. also todd martin.

Henman I don't think. he had a super exquisite technique but he just lacked the power for his style.
henmans FLAT serves averaged about 190 KPH (118 MPH) or a little less. that is about serena williams serve:D.
r.

When Henman was younger, his serve speed was roughly comparable to Roger Federer's. He usually got well into the 115-125mph with a flat serve (depending on radar), about what Roger would have gotten. Having said that, it was a very flat serve.

His speed did seem to drop-off a bit towards the end, I don't know if that was due to strategy, injury, mechanics change, or a combination of them.

chippy17
04-05-2011, 04:48 AM
Rusedski??

dominikk1985
04-05-2011, 05:38 AM
Rusedski??

I would say ruesedski was just a serve. He played s&v but his volleying skills where not great. kinda like ivo and dent. he was helped by the fast courts of the 90s. he he played on the slow courts from today (since about 2002) he would have won much less.

I would not call the style of ivo, ruesedski or dent a true s&v. I would rather call that hammer away and hope for an ace, service winner or easy putaway volley because the opponent is just able to scramble it back through the middle often.

Mustard
04-05-2011, 05:54 AM
Miloslav Mecir. On his day, he was absolutely deadly. Wilander found that out more than most.

chippy17
04-05-2011, 06:30 AM
I would say ruesedski was just a serve. He played s&v but his volleying skills where not great. kinda like ivo and dent. he was helped by the fast courts of the 90s. he he played on the slow courts from today (since about 2002) he would have won much less.

I would not call the style of ivo, ruesedski or dent a true s&v. I would rather call that hammer away and hope for an ace, service winner or easy putaway volley because the opponent is just able to scramble it back through the middle often.

well 15 career singles titles, 27 finals, got to the 4R of the French and at least he got to the US Open final unlike Henman (and actually won a grass court tournament) and unlike Murray actually won a set in the final!

I think people are a bit unfair on Rusedski, certainly in the UK he is overshadowed by Henman and now Murray...

chippy17
04-05-2011, 06:52 AM
I'd agree with Mecir. Too bad the two finals he did make, he got absolutely killed by Lendl. He was great to watch.

Henri Leconte - so talented, such vareity, a true shot maker, but lacked the consistency (as so many do)

Marcelo Rios - other have said what needed to be said.

Cedric Pioline - another Frenchman who was so fun to watch. A tremendous athlete with good variety and flair. Miss that style.

Todd Martin - Nice guy, classic serve and volley style.

Phillipousis - had the weapons (at least for fast courts), if not the movement.

Amos Mansdorf - kidding (though he was a decent player).

Laconte was a lovely player, I always thought of him as perhaps liking a bit of cheap French wine a bit too often...

heathcliff
04-05-2011, 09:13 AM
i´d go with mecir because he won other big tournaments - with his wooden racket!

Jonas
04-05-2011, 09:47 AM
For me it's Rios (easily)

While he only made 1 slam final...he won a large number of masters series titles and other titles in general.
Tons of talent, great to watch and of course.....got to #1 in the world.

I know he's probably really rich and enjoying his life (he's still real young), but sooner or later he's going to hate himself for squandering his God given game. I know he was injured a lot, but some of that could probably be attributed to be being out of shape and just not giving mazimum effort.

Rios was like a left handed Agassi, but with:
Better movement
better athleticism
more power
Huge (lefty) Serve
more variety

A true waste of talent.

jrepac
04-05-2011, 09:54 AM
I think Korda won the aussie open..

My vote goes to Todd Martin as well.. (I'm not American). Another vote to Cedric Pioline.

Korda won the AO then got slammed with a drug ban sometime after that.

I'd say Martin, Mecir, Leconte. Pernfors as well. Correjta, definitely.

From today's crew, I keep thinking about Nalbandian.

On the ladies side, Shriver and MJ Fernandez, assuredly.

Shriver, if not for the giants of Martina and Chris in front of her, could have won a slam on grass or hard.

sphinx780
04-05-2011, 11:03 AM
Martin was the first that came to mind to me but that was also the era I grew up following tennis in.

I can't say I'd give the nod to Rios...there were many wasted talents and he was something special but I don't classify greatness with the guys who are chalk full of talent but can't put it together between the ears. The consistency over the course of a career and the mental strength to stay in there day in and day out was definitely lacking in his case.

JoelDali
04-05-2011, 11:30 AM
Gimblestob, Annacone, Murray.

Mustard
04-06-2011, 06:50 AM
Korda won the AO then got slammed with a drug ban sometime after that.

Korda took a drugs test after his 1998 Australian Open win, and it was negative. He tested positive after his 1998 Wimbledon quarter final loss to Henman. The positive test was made public in December 1998.

jrepac
04-06-2011, 06:59 AM
Gimblestob, Annacone, Murray.

Gimelstob???? No way and I am from NJ!

staxor
04-07-2011, 10:39 PM
Mario Ancic

Tommy Haas

Chace
04-08-2011, 03:41 AM
My vote is for Haas.

JoelDali
04-08-2011, 03:43 AM
Leif Shiras, Chris Fowler, Geico Caveman #2

heathcliff
04-08-2011, 02:34 PM
Leif Shiras, Chris Fowler, Geico Caveman #2

todd witsken, broderick ****, sammy giamalva jr.

heathcliff
04-08-2011, 02:35 PM
todd witsken, broderick ****, sammy giamalva jr.

broderick ****

heathcliff
04-08-2011, 02:38 PM
broderick ****

broderick d.y.k.e
...sorry!

hoodjem
04-08-2011, 03:22 PM
Gimblestob, Annacone, Murray.Gimelstob!!!

You're pulling our legs!?

BTURNER
04-08-2011, 04:34 PM
Korda won the AO then got slammed with a drug ban sometime after that.

I'd say Martin, Mecir, Leconte. Pernfors as well. Correjta, definitely.

From today's crew, I keep thinking about Nalbandian.

On the ladies side, Shriver and MJ Fernandez, assuredly.

Shriver, if not for the giants of Martina and Chris in front of her, could have won a slam on grass or hard.

Sukova is more worthy of a major than Shriver, but I submit both, along with Garrison or mone of the Maleevas would have won one or two had either Evert or Navratilova not played depending on surface. . When two GOAT contenders vie for majors simulatainiously , who else gets any experience or confidence in the big matches, and then to have Graf follow, well 1.5 generations of might-of-been's shrivel on the vine. Then critics say there was no depth.

NadalAgassi
04-08-2011, 07:57 PM
Best women not to win a slam is a hard one for me. I definitely dont think it is Fernandez though. Look at her records vs the top players. She never beat Graf or Seles except for one win over 15 year old Seles (where she was gifted 3 points in the final set tiebreak by a deluded or half asleep chair umpire so it was basically a cheated win), and never beat Navratilova or Evert even in their old age. And all her matches with young Hingis were very one sided defeats. Anything above Sanchez level opponent she cant even compete.

I dont think it is Shriver either to be honest. I dont think Pam would have won a slam in most eras. Most likely she would be a Majoli or Myskina like fluke if she did (in saying that I am believing she would be nowhere near the perrenial 4th ranked she was in most eras). And had she been in an era where 3 of the 4 slams werent on grass she would be dead in the water.

So that leaves Sukova or Dementieva most likely. I really think it is one of them. Dementieva though failed to win a slam in what for awhile was a strong period for womens tennis but later on turned into a weak period. And played rather poorly in both her slam finals showing she couldnt handle the occasion.

So that leaves Sukova. She is my choice. She beat Navratilova at her peak in a slam semi, she made 4 slam finals, had some success (even if minor in some cases) vs all the great champions she faced except Graf, and she had the weapons to win a slam. She sort of was a crossover between the Navratilova-Evert era and the first extreme period of Graf dominance. Both periods did not leave her quite enough space to win a slam as she failed to do the Navratilova-Evert double kill twice, taking one but not the other, and Graf was always her biggest kryptonite of all so she was an unmovable barrier for poor Helena.

dominikk1985
04-11-2011, 12:02 PM
Dementieva would be a good choice with the ladies I think.

definitely one of the best baseliners ever. could take the ball early, hit it hard of both wings and rarely missed. similar to seles in that regard but maybe even faster legs.

She had maybe the worst service in history though. her second serve was so bad I couldn't believe it. I mean having an insecure 2nd serve is one thing. and having a slow easy putaway throw in serve is another thing. but having a weak serve AND hitting double digit double faults (how can you miss 65 mph serves?) is quite rare.

that was truely a club level serve. she couldn't even toss the ball straight (maybe her biggest problem). That shows how good her groundgame was.

li0scc0
04-11-2011, 12:05 PM
Women's side, clearly Dementieva.
Men's side, not as easy to choose.

Djokolate
04-11-2011, 12:09 PM
JoelDali.
Isn't it obvious.

kiki
04-11-2011, 12:59 PM
In the open era women´s field,at least until the 1990´s, I´d say Rosie Casals and, specially, Andrea Jaeger.Sukova would be a solid third.

Limpinhitter
06-10-2011, 07:40 AM
I don't know if Dennis Ralston has been mentioned in this thread, but, I would have to put him at or near the top of my list. He was big, a great shotmaker with classic, text book strokes. He was the top ranked American for 3 consecutive years in the 60's, He lost the 66' Wimbledon singles final to Manuel Santana, won 5 major doubles titles, and was inducted in to the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1987. He was also considered the best Davis Cup captain the U.S. ever had. His weakness was that there were too many expectations that he would be the next great American after Gonzales, and he was too hard on himself.

timnz
06-10-2011, 09:30 PM
Mecir won the WCT finals (over McEnroe) - which was nearly a major.....If he had won it in the 1970's I think it could count as a major.

Wuornos
06-13-2011, 01:49 AM
For my money

Men's Singles I would go with Andy Murray. He has achieved three finals when the standard in the men's game is very high.

Women's Singles I would go for Helena Suková the standard of her tennis in 1986 was at a level which would have normally have easily won a major singles title.

Tim

gpt
06-13-2011, 02:10 AM
For my money
Women's Singles I would go for Helena Suková the standard of her tennis in 1986 was at a level which would have normally have easily won a major singles title.

Tim

Agreed re Sukova
Agree as far as physical ability goes with Murray.
He has a game that should win majors but his mental approach is not so good. What is it with players yelling and complaining to their entourage in the stands these days? Murray does this so often and his body language is really bad when he is tight. He needs to take ownership of his prospects himself.
That first set in the semi (quarter?) he played against Nadal at the AO was some of the highest standard tennis before Nadal retired midway through.

Wuornos
06-13-2011, 02:16 AM
Agreed re Sukova
Agree as far as physical ability goes with Murray.
He has a game that should win majors but his mental approach is not so good. What is it with players yelling and complaining to their entourage in the stands these days? Murray does this so often and his body language is really bad when he is tight. He needs to take ownership of his prospects himself.
That first set in the semi (quarter?) he played against Nadal at the AO was some of the highest standard tennis before Nadal retired midway through.

Yes I agree completely. Murray's mental aproach is not all it should be and this is the area where he can possibly make significant progress in his game.

Tim

Setmatch45
06-13-2011, 07:48 AM
James Blake

Sneezy
06-13-2011, 03:44 PM
For Mens Singles-David Nalbandian. How could he beat Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic in the same tournment, but not pull it together for 7 matches.


Womens Singles- Elena Dementieva. It'll always come down to that serve.

beernutz
06-13-2011, 07:54 PM
Davydenko has 4 GS semi appearances.

suwanee4712
06-14-2011, 04:48 AM
For my money

Men's Singles I would go with Andy Murray. He has achieved three finals when the standard in the men's game is very high.

Women's Singles I would go for Helena Suková the standard of her tennis in 1986 was at a level which would have normally have easily won a major singles title.

Tim

Agree on Sukova. At the time I thought Helena might still win a major. But in hindsight it almost looks like Helena put everything she had into 1986. She followed it up with a somewhat disappointing 1987 and her singles career went downhill from there.

Her resurgence in 1993 was nice to see. But even then she wasn't serving nearly as big as she used to, and she opted to loop her groundstrokes with more topspin to stay in points instead of really trying to penetrate like she did in 1986.

Limpinhitter
06-14-2011, 06:53 PM
I don't know if Dennis Ralston has been mentioned in this thread, but, I would have to put him at or near the top of my list. He was big, a great shotmaker with classic, text book strokes. He was the top ranked American for 3 consecutive years in the 60's, He lost the 66' Wimbledon singles final to Manuel Santana, won 5 major doubles titles, and was inducted in to the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1987. He was also considered the best Davis Cup captain the U.S. ever had. His weakness was that there were too many expectations that he would be the next great American after Gonzales, and he was too hard on himself.

No love for Dennis Ralston?

Paul Murphy
06-17-2011, 03:46 AM
Mecir.
Dementieva.

egn
06-17-2011, 10:34 AM
Coria.
Sukova.

Shaolin
06-17-2011, 10:41 AM
For Mens Singles-David Nalbandian. How could he beat Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic in the same tournment, but not pull it together for 7 matches.

Donuts, that's why.

1970CRBase
06-17-2011, 11:41 AM
Dementieva would be a good choice with the ladies I think.

definitely one of the best baseliners ever. could take the ball early, hit it hard of both wings and rarely missed. similar to seles in that regard but maybe even faster legs.

She had maybe the worst service in history though. her second serve was so bad I couldn't believe it. I mean having an insecure 2nd serve is one thing. and having a slow easy putaway throw in serve is another thing. but having a weak serve AND hitting double digit double faults (how can you miss 65 mph serves?) is quite rare.

that was truely a club level serve. she couldn't even toss the ball straight (maybe her biggest problem). That shows how good her groundgame was.


She had a shoulder injury early in her career, destroyed her serve trying to adjust to it.

ED in 1999 or so, I thought she was one of the prospects for a slam winner and possible no 1. She came close, if it weren't for that.

egn
06-17-2011, 11:56 AM
She had a shoulder injury early in her career, destroyed her serve trying to adjust to it.

ED in 1999 or so, I thought she was one of the prospects for a slam winner and possible no 1. She came close, if it weren't for that.

Agreed something most have forgotten or never knew. She was always afraid to hurt it again and ruin her career. For playing with no serve she did quite amazing. Imagine if she had a better serve..

mtr1
06-17-2011, 01:41 PM
Tim Henman or Mansour Bahrami