Originally Posted by President
How on earth do you come to that conclusion? Henman has 6 GS SF which is very good, but only 1 Masters title (and in Paris, at that). Davydenko has 3 Masters. Henman has 11 titles, Davydenko has 21. Davydenko made 4 GS semis, losing to Federer in 3 of them and a doper (Puerta) in the other one. To top it all off, Davydenko has a WTF title which outstrips anything Henman ever did in his career.
I agree with you that Davydenko was the better overall player. His results in non-Slam tournaments were far superior and he achieved a higher ranking than Henman.
But in Slams, Henman clearly has the advantage. 6 semi-finals beats 4. That is why I think Henman has to be called the best player never to reach a final simply because he was a semi-finalist in Slams more times than anybody else.