Murray: Rios is best player never to win a Slam.

[Mainad]

On a CNN interview I watched tonight, he had to face a quick-question-and-answer session at the end. When asked who he thought was the best player never to win a Slam, he immediately replied: Marcelo Rios.

(On the other hand, when he was asked a few years ago what he thought about Murray, Rios replied: I am not impressed.)

He was also asked how many Slams he thought he would win. He replied: About 3.

[90's Clay]

He was much more talented then Murray.. He and Nalbandian should have had a 4-5 slams anyways.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

He was much more talented then Murray.. He and Nalbandian should have had a 4-5 slams anyways.

But they didn't. In the end, it's what you do with your talent that counts. Murray has done much more with his.

[Legend of Borg]

Originally Posted by Mainad

But they didn't. In the end, it's what you do with your talent that counts. Murray has done much more with his.

lol you sound so mad right now.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by Legend of Borg

lol you sound so mad right now.

Not at all. Just trying to point out a few facts (as always).

[Tshooter]

Originally Posted by Legend of Borg

lol you sound so mad right now.

I think that's called "projecting."

[Gonzalito17]

Marat Safin said in that new book about Rios that Rios "had the talent to win ten grand slams."

[Headshotterer]

Rios was never in contention because he is short like Ferrer 5'9

[cork_screw]

I mentioned Rios when a thread was started and everyone had murray's name. People need to look up stuff that isn't from your generation. Most people probably weren't alive during some presidential terms, yet they feel like they know all their policies based on what biases are floating around.

[tistrapukcipeht]

Originally Posted by Mainad

But they didn't. In the end, it's what you do with your talent that counts. Murray has done much more with his.

Exactly, the most important is a grand slam, if they didn't win they're not the same place with Murray, even with more talent than Murray.

[timnz]

Originally Posted by Headshotterer

Rios was never in contention because he is short like Ferrer 5'9

But could hit serves over 130mph when he wanted to. (I know this to be a fact).

Really for him, height was never an issue. What held him back was that we was frequently injured. The year that he had the least injuries was 1998 - when he got to number 1.

[tacou]

I've heard a lot about Rios and from what I've seen he had talent, but the dude reached 4 quarter finals and 1 final in majors...not very impressive.

[roundiesee]

I think every one on tour knew how good Rios was in his heyday; I think even Federer once said his favourite player to watch was Rios.

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

He was much more talented then Murray.. He and Nalbandian should have had a 4-5 slams anyways.

Rios was a royal headcase. I remember watching him when he ascended to #1 and he destroyed Agassi in the Miami final, I was really impressed, he looked like an Agassi with better foot speed and a slightly better serve. However around the same time when it came to big matches in slams he flopped like a fish out of water. Absolute pathetic virtual tank of the Australian Open final to Korda. A lackluster effort in losing to Moya at the French. Then a complete tank vs Larsson at the U.S Open. He did have to deal with alot of injuries but his attitude was terrible and he never had the will or heart of a champion.

He wouldnt have had the toughest era to win slams in either. 1998-2002 was mostly weaker than even the Federer era.

[90's Clay]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Rios was a royal headcase. I remember watching him when he ascended to #1 and he destroyed Agassi in the Miami final, I was really impressed, he looked like an Agassi with better foot speed and a slightly better serve. However around the same time when it came to big matches in slams he flopped like a fish out of water. Absolute pathetic virtual tank of the Australian Open final to Korda. A lackluster effort in losing to Moya at the French. Then a complete tank vs Larsson at the U.S Open. He did have to deal with alot of injuries but his attitude was terrible and he never had the will or heart of a champion.

He wouldnt have had the toughest era to win slams in either. 1998-2002 was mostly weaker than even the Federer era.

It was sad his career came to that.. But he showed especially against in Miami in that match you're alluding to just how much crazy talent he truly had.. And he showed it a few other times.. I believe it was Safin who said Rios had the talent to be a double digit slam winner.

Rios (on his game and not head casing it) was one of the better players I saw from a pure ability standpoint in the last two years..

When people say who should have had a ton of slams, I got Rios' name right in there with guys like Safin, Nalbandian, Stich and Muster and a few others. These were some of those most pure talented players Ive seen..

But it of course there is more to tennis then just talent and ability.. Very few can bring it all together both mentally and physically and keep their focus and continuing their wanting to improve

[tennisMVP]

Rios vs Agassi was extremely entertaining, in their 3 meetings-

2002 ATP Masters Series Miami
FL, U.S.A. Hard S Agassi, Andre
6-7(7), 6-4 RET

1998 Grand Slam Cup
Germany Hard F Rios, Marcelo
6-4, 2-6, 7-6, 5-7, 6-3

1998 ATP Masters Series Miami
FL, U.S.A. Hard F Rios, Marcelo
7-5, 6-3, 6-4

[Legend of Borg]

Originally Posted by Tshooter

I think that's called "projecting."

Pesky Freudians and their pseudoscience.

Shoo!

[pvaudio]

Originally Posted by timnz

But could hit serves over 130mph when he wanted to. (I know this to be a fact).

Really for him, height was never an issue. What held him back was that we was frequently injured. The year that he had the least injuries was 1998 - when he got to number 1.

No, what held him back was that he was a ******bag who took his talent for granted.

[syke]

Is winning a grand slam more than being No. 1.
Being No. 1 means you were the best player on the planet over that period of time. Winning a grand slam but only playing 2nd or 3rd fiddle to someone else throughout your career, to me just says you were never the best.

what do you guys think?

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by timnz

Really for him, height was never an issue. What held him back was that we was frequently injured. The year that he had the least injuries was 1998 - when he got to number 1.

And the fact he was, for long stretches, one of the worst slackers in tennis history coupled with being borderline uncoachable.

His coach even told me - right next to the court when Rios was practising - that he was going to move on because Rios didn't adopting anything he ever suggested - he *apparently* just like to have someone there to tell him he was doing fine.