Originally Posted by slappano
What I meant was announcers always use that phrase about the "best player never to win a major" if he could only win his first then the second, third etc. would be easier. Just like winning your first tournament. Winning the first in anything seems to be the toughest hurdel. I am also talking about those "best to never win" type guys, NOT Pioline type guys. Pioline was a good player. No one thought of him as the greatest player not to win a major until he did so.
I said Pioline because I can't think of another guy right now who'd been in several Slam finals only to lose each time, which is where Lendl was in that match against Mac.
What he said was "you get the sense if this guy can just break through in a Slam final, he'll win a whole string of them." I've never personally heard a commentator say this. Lendl was in a unique situation. Having lost 3 Slam finals and having number 1 potential. Again, this is not a COMMON situation. Can't think of any other multiple slam winner who lost his first three slam finals.