I would say Kriek, but I consider the Australian Open to have only started sometime from 1985-1988, before that disregarding all the obvious "joke slam" only based winners (aka the kriek types), while not totally disregarding but slightly diminishing even the worthy ones (aka not kriek types) who won vs depleted competition, so with that said I go with Kafelnikov the weakest of the real 2 slam winners.
From best to worst:
1. Smith- arguably player to beat in 71 and 72.
2. Nastase- most talented by far.
3. Safin- due to sheer level of play in 2 wins.
4. Hewitt- hard to rank any higher considering he probably would be 0 slam winner if he didnt peak in transitional era, hard to rank any lower considering he is a 2 time year end #1 and 2 time WTF winner as well, and made people like Kafelnikov his slave.
5. Rafter- won 2 slams at tail end of Sampras era, beating some good players. Late bloomer, remained a major factor and threat for majors until retirement.
6. Bruguera- very good clay specialist, but not alot of Clay Masters for a 2 time RG winner. Virtual non entity on any other surface.
7. Kafelnikov- somehow slipped through the cracks to win 2 majors, was never seen as a major factor or threat in the mens game even in his prime.
8. Kriek- Australian Open as it once was.
Last edited by NadalAgassi : 11-24-2012 at 08:14 AM.