PDA

View Full Version : If it was up to you, who would have won a slam?


@wright
02-25-2004, 10:49 AM
My choice would be Rios. His game is incredible to watch, plus I would have liked to see his reaction to winning. My guess is that he would have walked nonchalantly to his seat after the handshake and waited for the trophy presentation. Who knows, maybe he would have cried and smiled and kissed the trophy and all that, but it would have been a treat to see. Pioline would be my second choice.

gustavo33
02-25-2004, 11:25 AM
todd martin... because hes such a cool guy
and his matches are always fun to watch... hes got a lot of weapons

galain
02-25-2004, 12:12 PM
I would liked to have seen Leconte get that French Open he came so close to back in the day. That would have been well deserved.

In more recent times, it's hard to go past Pioline - he certainly had the game.

Shaolin
02-25-2004, 12:15 PM
Rios of course.

Yes, he would have nonchalantly walked over to get his trophy no doubt, after probably flipping off the Tournament Director, main sponsors and fans.

Kevin Patrick
02-25-2004, 12:52 PM
I still can't believe Rios never won a slam. Such incredible talent.
Plus personally, i like to see short guys do well in a sport that supposedly requires a lot of power to succeed(no body under 5'11 has won a slam since Chang in '89)
So now I kinda root for Grosjean or Coria to fill that void.

Shaolin, who's Koston?

Rabbit
02-25-2004, 12:58 PM
Todd Martin simply for being the nicest guy on the tour. He definetly shoudl have won the US Open. He's had some Connors-like epic battles there. His best, IMO was the win against Greg "Who?" Rusedski. I still remember Rusedski complaining to the chair when Martin took an injury time out in the 5th set. Anything for the "W", right Greggie?

Ben42
02-25-2004, 01:15 PM
Well I voted for Martin because he seems like a good guy and I like his game.

I wouldn't mind seeing Henman get a slam either though.

CBodom
02-25-2004, 01:23 PM
henman for me

poor chap has so much bloody pressure on his shoulders mate!

Max G.
02-25-2004, 01:36 PM
Todd Martin simply for being the nicest guy on the tour. He definetly shoudl have won the US Open. He's had some Connors-like epic battles there. His best, IMO was the win against Greg "Who?" Rusedski. I still remember Rusedski complaining to the chair when Martin took an injury time out in the 5th set. Anything for the "W", right Greggie?

I find this extremely amusing... if it was Greg who had taken an injury timeout in the fifth set, people would be complaining about his gamesmanship - taking a timeout in a critical moment, anything to win, right Greggie? And since it was Martin who took the timeout, you get down on Greg for complaining about it...

Shaolin
02-25-2004, 01:37 PM
Kevin,
Yeah GS champions under 5'11'' are hard to find. Check out how many there have been recently right at 5'11'' or 6' though, its crazy. Hewitt, Ferrero, Costa, Johansson, Agassi, Nalby (finalist)...

Also, Koston=Eric Koston, best skateboarder ever by far. Best style, way technical.

@wright
02-25-2004, 02:09 PM
What about Tony Hawk(thought I'd open up a can of worms...)? That is crazy about no slam winner under 5'11 since '89. I wonder how many have made it to the finals of a slam since then?

Kevin Patrick
02-25-2004, 02:40 PM
I'm also willing to bet that Chang, Rios, Coria, Grosjean are closer to 5'7 or 5'8 than 5'9. Rios is only short guy even close to winning a slam since Chang(reaching the finals of '98 Aussie)
Here's another crazy stat, I think when Chang won in '89 he was first guy in that height range to win a slam since Rosewall in the 70's.

Jonas
02-25-2004, 02:51 PM
All the players above are worthy to holders of a slam trophy. Of the bunch i liked the games of pioline and rios best. I would say henman has the best shot of the lot to get himself taken off of that list, but he will have a major up-hill battle. I will be rooting for him! I always thought corretja had a french open in him, but alas i was wrong>

Shaolin
02-25-2004, 03:42 PM
Awright--
There have been 13 5'11''/6'0 Grand Slam winners since 1989...

4 at AO: Agassi (3), Johansson(1)

4 at RG: Muster(1), AA (1), Costa(1), JCF (1)

2 at W: AA (1), Hewitt(1)

3 at US: AA (2), Hewitt (1)

I was going to make a separate post about this but too lazy I guess. It seems 5'11'' to 6'1'' is the optimal height for tennis, just based on slam results.

About the Tony Hawk vs Koston thing, thats a bigger difference than comparing Mixed clay court doubles to Hardcourt singles. Actually there isnt a big enough gap in tennis to compare. Comparing Willie Renshaw to Federer maybe?

Hawk is good on vert (ramp skating) and innovated alot on that surface, but modern skating is street skating, and Hawk has contributed about as much to street skating as Agassi has to serve & volley tennis. Koston owns modern street skating, although there are millions of new kids trying to next best, like Paul Rodriguez who just signed a million dollar deal with Nike.

Kevin Patrick
02-25-2004, 03:52 PM
Shaolin,
don't mean to be nit-picky, but the atp's website lists Ferrero at 6'0

Shaolin
02-25-2004, 03:55 PM
Kevin--I stated in my list above 5'11''/6'0'', because I was taking into account JCF...

Vanja Ljubibratic
02-25-2004, 04:01 PM
I'd like to see Henman finally win Wimbledon. This is the one tournament that he wants the most, and he's shown a lot of guts, heart, and desire in his persuit of the title. The ENTIRE country of Great Britain also always gets behind him. I don't think there is any other player playing at his home slam that gets more support than Henman at Wimbledon. I think that he'll do some damage this year. I don't see him winning, but if he gets lucky with a good seeding like he's had in the past, he could get to the SF again definitely. I'll really be pulling for him at Wimbledon.

Kevin Patrick
02-25-2004, 04:10 PM
Sorry Shaolin, I must have glossed over that part. But all the other players you mentioned are 5'11, right? Its funny, but certain hights seem to be popular on tour(i.e. I think 6'0 is not very common, but 6'1 is, ditto with 5'8 & 5'9)
Its like the NBA sometimes with the rounding up.

Hyperstate
02-25-2004, 06:16 PM
Rios! followed by Henman. Although one of my mates, a Brit, says with long suffering that Henman has a tendency to "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory" :roll:

sarpmas
02-25-2004, 06:37 PM
"snatch defeat from the jaws of victory"! LMAO! This is hilarious!! I too, hope Henman can finally win Wimbledon.

PureCarlosMoyaDrive
02-25-2004, 06:39 PM
Rios all the way. One of the most talented players ever. Second choice would be Pioline so I could see his amazing shots.

ZhuangCorp
02-25-2004, 07:12 PM
Yes i agree with Shaolin,
5'11-6'1 is the optimal height for tennis. Anything over 6'1
has too long arms, and wilder/longer strokes and probably won't be as consistent. Also, the taller players have much more difficulty moving their legs. Anything below 5'11 seems to have harder time hitting the ball as well, as well as problems with reach on high bouncing balls, although footwork seems to be better/quicker.

sseemiller
02-25-2004, 07:46 PM
Todd Martin, definitely.

@wright
02-25-2004, 07:56 PM
I think Rios had the most effective serve for a short man, he could swing that puppy out wide and put the point away with his next shot. That was his bread and butter play, and it was almost as effective as the guys who serve big bombs .

magiset
02-25-2004, 08:14 PM
Santoro :D. Also Roddick, I feel bad he just can not win one on his own :evil: .

Rabbit
02-26-2004, 02:55 AM
I find this extremely amusing... if it was Greg who had taken an injury timeout in the fifth set, people would be complaining about his gamesmanship - taking a timeout in a critical moment, anything to win, right Greggie? And since it was Martin who took the timeout, you get down on Greg for complaining about it...


Difference being, Todd Martin would never complain about Greggie taking an injury timeout in the 5th.

irishbanger
02-26-2004, 05:31 AM
I'm 5'10", and stood next to Agassi at last years Scottsdale tournament and he was exactly my heigth. Always take at least an inch off the media guide numbers.

@wright
02-26-2004, 06:11 AM
I had a feeling Todd Martin would be a sentimental favorite, but Timmy is kind of a surprise for me, I think of him as one of the least likely out of these guys to win a big one.

nyu
02-26-2004, 07:01 AM
Everybody's forgetting Clement! He's no taller than 5'8(heard he's as short as 5'6) and he made it the Australian Open finals.

Bhagi Katbamna
02-26-2004, 08:54 AM
Tim Mayotte
Todd Martin

jmckinney
02-26-2004, 09:09 AM
I would love to see Henman win Wimbledon, could you imagine the chaos that would break out in all of England. I wish that Rios had won a slam. Flipper sucks and doesn't deserve a slam. Pioline would have been nice to win one also, he was an extremely talented player.

BreakPoint
02-26-2004, 11:21 AM
I haven't seen all that many Rios matches before, but am I the only one that doesn't feel Rios' game is as spectacular as many here make it out to be? I was actually surprised a few years back when he attained the number one ranking, albeit only breifly. To me, he just looked like any other steady baseliner. Please enlighten me as to what is so special about Rios and what is this "talent" that so many of you speak of?

BTW, I voted for Martin just because I think the big guy deserves it for all the hard work he's put in throughout his career, for dealing with a multitude of injuries, and for fighting his way through all those 5-set matches (has anyone played more 5-setters in their career, other than Chang?), especially the one he should have won against Agassi at the '99 U.S. Open final after being up 2 sets to 1.

BreakPoint
02-26-2004, 11:33 AM
Lots of players under 6' won Grand Slams in the '70's and '80's, though.

Both McEnroe and Borg are 5' 11". Connors is 5' 9" or 5' 10" at the most. Vilas is about 5' 10" or 5' 11". Kriek is about 5' 9". And how tall is Wilander? About 5' 10"?

Then came guys like Lendl, Becker, Edberg, and Sampras.

Times have changed.

@wright
02-26-2004, 12:16 PM
BP, have you seen a good Rios match? When he was feeling pretty he could beat up on anyone. His bread and butter was the lefty serve waaaaay out wide and a winner down the line. For a short guy, his serve was incredible. He could hit amazing angles on groundies at the toughest times. He also did this so artistically, it almost seemed like he was playing a different sport at times, it seemed so effortless.

BreakPoint
02-26-2004, 01:23 PM
Thanks, @wright. I guess I never paid much attention to his matches. I knew I was missing something. All I can remember is that my gf used to say he looked like a scrungy, homeless guy.

From your description, he sounds like he has a similar game to Arazi. Arazi is so talented that he makes amazing shots from all areas of the courts, uses every kind of spin, and makes it all look so natural and effortless. How does Rios' game compare to that of Arazi's?

@wright
02-26-2004, 01:27 PM
I would say Rios has a similar game to Arazi, but Rios at his best would blow Arazi's best off the court IMO. BP, to sum it all up, Rios is the only guy that has ever made me want to be a short, stocky South American with a ponytail.

BreakPoint
02-26-2004, 01:46 PM
BTW, Arazi also came to mind, not only because of his and Rios' seemingly natural talent for the game, but coincidently, they're also both short and left-handed.

Even so, I think I'd still prefer to be tall and strong, like Safin. I mean, look at the babes he attracts.

@wright
02-26-2004, 01:50 PM
Safin is one of my favorites to watch right now. He hits the ball so clean.

Hyperstate
02-27-2004, 12:43 AM
I've seen Rios at his best and it was a joy to watch that man hit his shots. Great angles and pace. IMO, if Rios rates as 100%, Arazi will be 75% at most.

BTW, Henman stands a reaaallly good chance of winning Wimby if he can get past the semis and face either Roddick or FedEx in the final! Players he has an edge over. FedEx is still my current fav player tho.

Morpheus
02-27-2004, 04:01 PM
I'd like to see Anna K win one and only one. No wins except for Wimbledon. That would be just right.

As for a Slam, I'd go for Todd Martin. He's an old guy and he's a good sport. You gotta like that...

Drop Shot 11
06-23-2009, 07:05 AM
I voted Henman, because I think he let the British crowd and fans down since he never won Wimbledon. If he won the slam, I think he'd be a hero to them.

galactico
06-23-2009, 07:56 AM
noone

people don't win slams because they don't deserve tham. PERIOD

Commando Tennis Shorts
06-23-2009, 08:02 AM
This thread is kind of ridiculous. Whoever wins Slams deserves to have won them, so why would you take anything away from them? Also, it's not up to you and me; it's up to the players and circumstances.

Also, what criteria are we using? If we're talking about who deserved to win one, that list already exists, in the form of everyone who has won a Slam. If we're going with most likable, that has nothing to do with whether someone should have won a slam.

jamesblakefan#1
06-23-2009, 08:08 AM
James Blake.

But I agree, the people that win slams, win them b/c they deserved them. It's unfortunate James wasn't good enough to win one so far, more than likely ever.

lambielspins
06-23-2009, 08:19 AM
The people on that list that I feel deserved a slam were Todd Martin, Corretja, and Mecir. Would have liked to see Martin get 1 Wimbledon or U.S Open. Would have liked to see Corretja get 1 French. Would have liked to have seen Mecir maybe win that 88 Wimbledon he almost beat Edberg in the semis at, or 1 of his smackdowns at the hands of Lendl turn into a win. Pioline a huge NOOOOO! Pioline reaching 2 slam finals was an embarassment and a giant hole to the 90s addicts bolstering of the supposably amazing 90s field. The guy didnt even win a title until he was like 27. Flipper reaching 2 slam finals was fine, but I am more than ok with him not winning one all the same. Rios, no, a huge flake and highly overrated.

IvanAndreevich
06-23-2009, 09:13 AM
Nalby all the way

Serendipitous
06-23-2009, 09:29 AM
Ernests Gulbis

Max G.
06-23-2009, 09:48 AM
Way to bring back a thread that hadn't had a post in *over five years*.

Also, I voted "other". If it was up to me, just like that - I would have won a slam by now.

galactico
06-23-2009, 12:46 PM
nalbandian is overrated, players like roddick and gaudio are much better; they have a slam

joeri888
06-23-2009, 12:54 PM
Tim Henman and Sjeng Schalken. David Nalbandian would have been cool too but I want him to earn it by working hard and living up to his talent

egn
06-23-2009, 01:11 PM
Mecir..can't believe he has so few votes..truly a pleasure to watch.
Rios was an *** and I could not stand his attitude.

theduh
06-23-2009, 01:25 PM
Coria, if he'd one that match FO finals againts Gaudio I recon he's still on tour playing.

Todd Woodbridge, he's one underrated singles player, his game is very suited on grass. Too bad he had to play against some of the great grass courter during that era.

GameSampras
06-23-2009, 02:01 PM
I figured Rios would have grabbed a French Open or two yes. He was a hell of a player when he wanted to be

hewittboy
06-23-2009, 02:21 PM
I figured Rios would have grabbed a French Open or two yes. He was a hell of a player when he wanted to be

Which was only 5% of the time and never when it really mattered. Heck he didnt even want to be a hell of a player when he played some 30 year old man in his 2nd ever slam final and instead prefered to tank a slam final vs a pedestrian opponent in front of millions around the world watching.

Dark Victory
06-23-2009, 02:43 PM
Rios.

The guy had exceptional, elite level ability. And a GS would've elevated him more.

Plus, Rios is/was colorful and not boring. Almost everyone on that list is bland.

GameSampras
06-23-2009, 02:47 PM
How about Michael Stich? Trememdously talented

thalivest
06-23-2009, 02:50 PM
I voted Mecir. Pioline more votes than Mecir is a crime even on a wish list.

thalivest
06-23-2009, 02:50 PM
How about Michael Stich? Trememdously talented

Stich won Wimbledon in 1991.

woodrow1029
06-23-2009, 02:51 PM
How about Michael Stich? Trememdously talented
Stich did win a slam

GameSampras
06-23-2009, 02:51 PM
Stich won Wimbledon in 1991.

Ahhh yea thats right.. Well he should have won more. He had too much talent not to

thalivest
06-23-2009, 02:52 PM
Ahhh yea thats right.. Well he should have won more. He had too much talent not to

I agree. I wish he had won that 96 French final over Kafelnikov. If he played the same kind of tennis he did vs Muster and Rosset in the semis YK would have had no shot but nerves got the best of him as usual in a big match. He also could have performed better in the 94 U.S Open final vs Agassi than he did, although he still probably would have lost since AA was on fire that tournament.

He retired too soon after Wimbledon 97 also. He was still playing well when he could stay healthy.

DarthMaul
06-23-2009, 02:56 PM
Henman

10 chars

Cenc
06-23-2009, 11:01 PM
henman :P
he deserved one wimby

Cesc Fabregas
06-23-2009, 11:06 PM
Henman.

1o char

malakas
06-24-2009, 12:50 AM
wow!This thread is old!!!

Well..for starters..me,if it was up to me,I would have won a slam by now!:p

Mecir from the list.
Also Nalbandian.

joeri888
06-24-2009, 01:05 AM
wow!This thread is old!!!

Well..for starters..me,if it was up to me,I would have won a slam by now!:p

Mecir from the list.
Also Nalbandian.

Marcos Baghdatis? He was 2 sets away!

Underhand
06-24-2009, 01:35 AM
Donald Young.

malakas
06-24-2009, 01:42 AM
Marcos Baghdatis? He was 2 sets away!

Imo,from the current players Nalbandian deserves it much more,and it's such a big shame he hasn't won one with his talent.
Marcos will win one anyway :p hehe

joeri888
06-24-2009, 03:57 AM
Imo,from the current players Nalbandian deserves it much more,and it's such a big shame he hasn't won one with his talent.
Marcos will win one anyway :p hehe

Hmm, I would disagree with deserving. i think a guy with less talent who just misses something to do it, deserves it much more than a guy with a ton of talent who never shows up. Roddick for instance deserves a second Grandslam IMO, Hewitt deserves one more as well. Nalbandian is an underachiever, who digged his own grave. I love his game, but he deserves little success because he's not always willing to give 100% for it.

Gorecki
06-24-2009, 04:05 AM
The people on that list that I feel deserved a slam were Todd Martin, Corretja, and Mecir. Would have liked to see Martin get 1 Wimbledon or U.S Open. Would have liked to see Corretja get 1 French. Would have liked to have seen Mecir maybe win that 88 Wimbledon he almost beat Edberg in the semis at, or 1 of his smackdowns at the hands of Lendl turn into a win. Pioline a huge NOOOOO! Pioline reaching 2 slam finals was an embarassment and a giant hole to the 90s addicts bolstering of the supposably amazing 90s field. The guy didnt even win a title until he was like 27. Flipper reaching 2 slam finals was fine, but I am more than ok with him not winning one all the same. Rios, no, a huge flake and highly overrated.

and this is the guy that claims to know a lot about tennis...

boredone3456
06-24-2009, 09:36 AM
For me the 3 that I really feel should have won a slam would have to be Henman, Nalbandian and Haas. Henman I really wish he had won a Wimby...he made so many semi's and several times lost to an on fire player who would eventually win. all the hometown pressure and everything I felt really bad when he retired without one. Nalbandian was talented back a while ago and its sad he never fully stepped it up enough to win one. Haas, immensely talented...hurt repeatedly by injuries. I wish they had all managed to get one. I'll throw in Rios I guess....mainly so he will have justified holding the top spot in the eyes of many.

Drop Shot 11
06-24-2009, 12:18 PM
Gulbis will win a slam.

malakas
06-24-2009, 12:19 PM
Hmm, I would disagree with deserving. i think a guy with less talent who just misses something to do it, deserves it much more than a guy with a ton of talent who never shows up. Roddick for instance deserves a second Grandslam IMO, Hewitt deserves one more as well. Nalbandian is an underachiever, who digged his own grave. I love his game, but he deserves little success because he's not always willing to give 100% for it.

by this logic,noone deserves a slam..because they missed something and didn't get it in the first place.:/ but this is hypothetical and wishfull thinking about our own preferences.

Commando Tennis Shorts
06-24-2009, 01:19 PM
Those deserving to win slams have won slams. That's how tennis works. Speculating hypotheticals is both useless and kind of ridiculous.

Plus, if it was up to you who won slams and didn't, winning slams wouldn't mean anything to the players, because it wouldn't be due to hard work; it would be due to the whim of some guy on a message board.

Madhoshi22
06-24-2009, 01:28 PM
Fabrice Santoro.