UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
Discuss..
Is it safe to say that Thiem is the best ever w/o a Slam title while Nishikori is the best ever w/o a Big title?
- Thread starter UnforcedTerror
- Start date
Discuss..
Mediterranean Might
Professional
I have to mention my man Ferrer here.
I think Thiem will have a much, much better career by the end, but Ferrer accomplished a good amount for having no big weapons and consistently dealing with a prime Big 4.
I think Thiem will have a much, much better career by the end, but Ferrer accomplished a good amount for having no big weapons and consistently dealing with a prime Big 4.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Thiem is already a much better player than Nishikori. Not even close.
TheGhostOfAgassi
Talk Tennis Guru
Nishikori overrated in these matters!
Thiem is a much better player than Kei.
Thiem is a much better player than Kei.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Ferrer was a figther with a solid baseline game, but Thiem has always been a better player. Thiem simply has a much higher peak level than Ferrer on any surface.
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
The thread is not about who's the better player between the both of them.
Do you think Thiem is the best ever without a Slam title? If no, who is it in your opinion?
Do you think Nishikori is the best ever without a Big title? If no, who is it in your opinion?
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
,
Last edited:
lud
Hall of Fame
Nalbandian,Rios,Mecir,Corretja,Davydenko were better as players than Thiem.
Thiem achieve much better GS results even now(he is only 27). Thiem has great weapons,almost no weakness in his game. His problem is tennis IQ. He almost never has plan B or even C when things not going his way. I think he will win eventually in the future.
Kafelnikov was better player than Nishikori is.
Thiem achieve much better GS results even now(he is only 27). Thiem has great weapons,almost no weakness in his game. His problem is tennis IQ. He almost never has plan B or even C when things not going his way. I think he will win eventually in the future.
Kafelnikov was better player than Nishikori is.
I don’t think he would of Grass with a 5-6 record at Wimbledon and when they met on HC Ferrer destroyed Thiem when he was old. I agree that Thiem’s peak level is a good bit higher though but still would only put him level with Ferrer now
Sport
G.O.A.T.
In your dreams maybe. No, they weren't. None of them reached a higher peak level on any surface than Thiem on clay. Thiem also pushed the AO GOAT to 5 sets in an AO final, pushed Nadal to 5 at the USO in 2018 and defeated Djokovic in the ATP finals, meaning he is also a dangerous rival on hard. Plus, Thiem has 3 GS finals, more than any of those you mention.
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Ferrer was owned by Djokovic at the AO, while Thiem pushed Novak to 5 in an AO final. Thiem also has a much higher clay level than Ferrer. Thiem is simply a superior player than Ferrer.
Last edited:
Players with 2 Major finals and no Majors:
Of these players, I think Corretja and Mecir are the most accomplished:
Nalbandian reached 1 Major final but won WTF, 2 Masters Series titles, 11 total titles, and reached #4.
Davdyenko reached no Major finals but won WTF, 3 Masters Series titles, 21 total titles, and reached #3.
Thiem is currently at 3 Major finals, 1 Masters Series title, 16 total titles, and reached #4.
I think Thiem is probably currently behind Corretja, Mecir, Nalbandian, and Davydenko, but he's getting closer.
Miloslav Mecir, Alex Corretja, Mark Philippoussis, Kevin Curren, Robin Soderling, Kevin Anderson, Cedric Pioline, Todd Martin, and Steven Denton
Of these players, I think Corretja and Mecir are the most accomplished:
Corretja: WTF title (beating Sampras in the SF), 2 Masters series titles (clay and hard), 17 total titles, and reached #2.
Mecir: WCT Finals title, won the Lipton when it was 128 players/BO5 every round, Olympic Gold, 11 total titles, and reached #4.
Nalbandian reached 1 Major final but won WTF, 2 Masters Series titles, 11 total titles, and reached #4.
Davdyenko reached no Major finals but won WTF, 3 Masters Series titles, 21 total titles, and reached #3.
Thiem is currently at 3 Major finals, 1 Masters Series title, 16 total titles, and reached #4.
I think Thiem is probably currently behind Corretja, Mecir, Nalbandian, and Davydenko, but he's getting closer.
lud
Hall of Fame
Sure. I was saying that Kafelnikov is best without Masters title.
Best player without GS and M1000 is probably Nishikori. Gonzalez,Blake,Verdasco, are another worth mentioning.
lud
Hall of Fame
Enqvist accomplished more than Mecir. 1 GS Final , 3 M 1000 , Reached 4 and 17 titles overall. He is always overlooked at best without GS lists. True,kind of underachiever at GS,still quite a solid career.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Is Thiem the only player without a Slam title and 3 Slam finals?
Technology Ruined Tennis
Hall of Fame
What about Nishi's shower-aided Bronze medal? Since I was told that Olympic gold = Slam, then a bronze is worth a masters.
Silver is a masters. Bronze is the equivalent of Halle or Acapulco.
stringertom
Bionic Poster
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Mecir was by far the better player than Thiem and about 100 times more interesting to watch. A beautiful, effortless game.The best ever to never win one? Nah that would be Mecir. Such a travesty.
OldschoolKIaus
Hall of Fame
Let's wait til both players are Finnish.
danglarND2010
Rookie
Rios should be mentioned as well, the guy was number 1, reached a final(although reached the semis only once), won the grand slam cup and 5 masters titles, its a pretty impressive career. Either rios or corretja is the most accomplished player without a slam, thiem IMO didn't win enough yet to pass them(only 1 masters, although his 3 slam finals definitely put him close to them) but he will pass them and win majors.
I don't know a lot of players who were top players for as long as nishikori and never won a big title, so I think he has this in the bag.
I don't know a lot of players who were top players for as long as nishikori and never won a big title, so I think he has this in the bag.
It’s been top heavy from 2004 but the difference is that the top then was only Federer and later Fedal
Don't know why we'd exclude Corretja:
-Corretja reached #2 (Nalbandian #3, Mecir #4);
-Corretja had 17 titles (Nalbandian and Mecir had 11);
-Corretja and Mecir reached 2 Major finals (Nalbandian reached 1);
-Corretja and Nalbandian won WTF; Mecir won the WCT Finals & the Olympics;
-Mecir won 3 Masters Series equivalents; Corretja and Nalbandian won 2
So, Corretja stacks up pretty well.
Nishikori has won 403 matches while Martin won 411 and Verdasco has won 550. I think they all have a good case, as does Fernando González (370 wins; 11 titles).
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Nishikori had many injury trouble, a fact most fans prefer to ignore because it's so easy to dismiss other people's suffering while sitting on a comfy sofa in front of a TV.
"He was injured, so what? It's his fault... I'm not interested in injured players, only those that are on my TV screen. Next!"
"He was injured, so what? It's his fault... I'm not interested in injured players, only those that are on my TV screen. Next!"
Thiem and Mecir are two of the better players without a Slam, definitely.
Mecir won a WCT Dallas Finals and an Olympic singles gold medal. Thiem lost in the ATP Tour Finals finale.To date, I would say Mecir is more accomplished. I think Thiem might win a Slam yet though.
As for Nishikori, he's in the mix for best w/o a "Big" title along with the likes of Ferrer.
Mecir won a WCT Dallas Finals and an Olympic singles gold medal. Thiem lost in the ATP Tour Finals finale.To date, I would say Mecir is more accomplished. I think Thiem might win a Slam yet though.
As for Nishikori, he's in the mix for best w/o a "Big" title along with the likes of Ferrer.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
For now he pretty much is.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Ferrer does have a big title.
BHud
Hall of Fame
So you can lose an Olympic tournament and it is the equivalent of winning a masters? WTF? Sounds like the trophy generation at it again
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
I think Corretja is generally rated lower than Mecir and Nalbandian because most of his success was on clay, whereas they were all surface threats.
I agree in terms of raw stats, he’s up there.
mental midget
Hall of Fame
True at Majors, but consider these numbers:
Corretja: 5 hard titles (including Indian Wells); 2 carpet titles (including WTF)
Nalbandian: 5 hard court titles (including Madrid & Paris); 2 carpet titles (including WTF)
Mecir: 4 hard court titles (including the Lipton, Indian Wells, and the Olympics); 2 carpet titles (including the WCT Finals)
And while it's true that Mecir & Nalbandian were better on grass than Corretja, they only combined for 1 grass title (Mecir in Sydney in 1987), and Corretja did have that 5 set win over Sampras on grass in Davis Cup.
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Good point. Forgot about him.
IowaGuy
Hall of Fame
Nalbandian reaching at least SF in all 4 GS is worth mentioning. Great player on all surfaces, unlike Thiem who has yet to get past R4 at Wimbledon (his game not suited for fast courts).
Thiem higher level on clay, probably even with Nalbandian on hardcourt, and Nalbandian greater on grass.
