weakest slam winner of the last 20 years

[dominikk1985]

What do you think? who was the weakest male slam winner of the last 20 years.

[Limpinhitter]

The last Slam winner was 43 years ago!

[OriginalHockeytowner]

Roddick will be going on that list soon

[Dave M]

Moya? Former world on.1 and a consistent player over many years?
I'd say Korda...........I think

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Dave M

Moya? Former world on.1 and a consistent player over many years?
I'd say Korda...........I think

Johansson and, in 1968, Australian ( Non) Open winner Bill Bowrey.This one, probably the most surprising champion of a major ever.

[Laurie]

I would probably pick Gaudio considering the almost comical circumstances he beat Coria at the French final in 2004.

[Satsuma Florida]

Korda gets my vote. Especially since he was caught doping up or something a while after the win.

[rafafan20]

Muster never got out of the first round @ Wimbledon and really did nothing notable on hard court.

[rafafan20]

Originally Posted by OriginalHockeytowner

Roddick will be going on that list soon

I'd tend to agree with you but 3 Wimbledon finals would suggest otherwise.

[boredone3456]

Any of Gaudio, Johansson or Korda...but I'd lean in favor of Gaudio, Coria should have won that match for sure, at Johansson and Korda somewhat earned theirs, Gaudios was a huge amount of luck.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by rafafan20

I'd tend to agree with you but 3 Wimbledon finals would suggest otherwise.

He will go out as an all time loser...like Fred Stolle, 3 times in a row beaten finalist at Wimbledon ( but he won 2 slams to Roddick´s single one...)

[Crazy man]

Originally Posted by OriginalHockeytowner

Roddick will be going on that list soon

No. I don't see how anyone could think Gaudio or Johansson are better players than Roddick.

Originally Posted by kiki

He will go out as an all time loser...like Fred Stolle, 3 times in a row beaten finalist at Wimbledon ( but he won 2 slams to Roddick´s single one...)

How is that being a loser? He won a slam, four runners up to a very tough matchup and has won a truckload of titles and has won DC. Strong showings across AO, W and US as well as ending in the top 10 for god knows how many years. With what? A huge serve and a huge forehand with not much else (although his forehand went when Gilbert did). Roddick in some ways did better than guys who had a lot more game. Definately not a loser, only a troll or an idiot would think like that.


How many ATP titles have you won by the way?

[FD3S]

Originally Posted by kiki

He will go out as an all time loser...like Fred Stolle, 3 times in a row beaten finalist at Wimbledon ( but he won 2 slams to Roddick´s single one...)

Seriously? A lot of current tour players would be beyond ecstatic if they could accomplish as much as Roddick has.

[FEDERERNADAL13]

I know for a fact that Federer is the worst 16 slam winner in the last 20 years

[westside]

Definitely Guadio.

Though his backhand is an amazing shot.

[BTURNER]

Christine O'Neal 1978 unseeded Australian open winner.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by OriginalHockeytowner

Roddick will be going on that list soon

No. Don't agree with this. Just because he only won one doesn't mean he should be considered a weak slam winner.

[woodrow1029]

Korda.
Gaudio second place.

[Sentinel]

I'd pick Nadal. Crumbled against the Serbian Armada.

[elpolaco84]

Korda
Johanson
Gaudio