Best Clay-Courter to Never Win Roland Garros 1990-2009

[flying24]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Try watching his clay court matches in 2003-2004. His talent was unbelievable.

I have watched him and he is still insanely overrated. Yes he has some nice touch and a nice backhand. However his forehand is just ok, his serve is weak, and he does not have the physically or mental strength to really hang in with the big boys, even on clay. He is a talented lightweight with nice feel, great speed, and alot of saavy and guile how to play on clay, but not someone with the weapons or abilities to really beat the best. When he played Ferrero when Ferrero was still at his best he was destroyed. He only started doing well vs Ferrero in 2004 when Ferrero collapsed with injuries and illness. He was also outplayed by Federer when they played on the surface, even before Federer was playing his best tennis on clay yet.

The idea he was ever going to win the French in any year other than 2004 is laughable for starters. He had zero chance vs Ferrero in 2003, it would have been a mugging like the Monte Carlo final. As it was he couldnt even get a set off journeyman Verkerk in the semis. In 2005 he had no chance vs Nadal or probably even Federer. As it was he couldnt beat a pre prime Davydenko in the round of 16. His 3 best years ever at the French he lost to Verkerk, Gaudio, and a pre prime Davydenko, making the final only once with none of Federer, Nadal, or Ferrero ever in his potential path to that final. As it is 2004 is probably the only year in history he would have had a chance to win the French in his prime.

He was lucky to peak on clay sort of in between Kuerten and Ferrero and before Federer and Nadal, with the exception of Ferrero in 2003, Federer in 2005, and an 18 year old pre prime Nadal in 2005. Even vs that shallow field mostly depleted of all the greater clay courters who owned him, he achieved very little with only 2 Masters titles and 1 French Open runner up.

[boredone3456]

I would have to go with Corretja. Not only did he have the numbers, he had them against a very tough clay court field. People probably remember Coria more as he was a more recent player, but as Flying said Coria's game, despite some clay fluidity, was not as all around or deadly on the surface as Corretja.

[Michael Bluth]

Exactly. And Coria's MS titles on clay came against weak opponents in Calleri and Schuettler.

To me, Corretja was the most consistent of the four, as evidenced by his five consecutive quarterfinal or better finishes from 98-02 and the two finals. He also lost a tough four-setter with Costa in 02 in the semis; if he had won that match, he would have had his best chance at the title ever against a choking, unfit Ferrero.

[Michael Bluth]

Forgot to write the second part of my post:

I would choose Medvedev because I feel his peak level was the highest even if Corretja was the most consistent.

[vive le beau jeu !]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Has any other tennis player ended their career without a slam and yet got within 1 point of winning a slam during their career? Coria has to live with that.

good point. he is the only one in this situation in the open era, and possibly in the whole tennis history.

interestingly, a player, john bromwich, lost 2 slam finals having held match point(s) [1 in AO 1947, 3 in W 1948].
but he also won 2 AO [1939, 1946] !