Better Career - Tim Henman vs Todd Martin

[johnny ballgame]

Henman:

High ranking #4
11 Singles Titles
Wimbledon - SF 4 times
US Open - SF 1 time
Roland Garros - SF 1 time
Aus Open - R16 3 times best result
I recall lots of Davis Cup, didn't check the results
4 Doubles Titles
5-3 head-to-head over Martin


Martin:

High ranking #4
8 Singles Titles
US Open -Finals 1 time, SF 2 times
Aus Open - Finals 1 time
Wimbledon - SF two times
Roland Garros - R16 1 time best result
I recall lots of Davis Cup, didn't check the results
5 Doubles Titles
3-5 head-to-head vs Henman

 

[Craig Sheppard]

I'd probably give the edge to Martin, at least in my perception--especially at the end of his career. He always seemed to be described as a dangerous player too. I can remember many more intense matches with him that were at such a high level. With Tim I can't say I really remember any over the top type matches. I'm not really a numbers guy much, but I feel like Todd takes it. Lest you think I'm a homer being American, I am a big fan of Henman and always rooted for him. But I think in this comparison, Marin takes it.

 

[johnny ballgame]

But I think in this comparison, Marin takes it.

It's a close call, I agree that maybe Martin was the better "big match" player. Two appearances in slam finals almost made me vote for Martin.

But I voted for Henman. I think perhaps he played at a high level for a tad longer than Martin did. But it's very close.

 

[West Coast Ace]

This is a good one. Very similar careers. I do give the edge to Henman - because he was the UK's only hope and that brought all kinds of added pressure with it. Martin was one of five US hopes - Sampras, Andre, Courier, Chang - easy to fly under the radar. But some of his night matches at the USO were incredibly fun to watch.

 

[Eviscerator]

. I do give the edge to Henman - because he was the UK's only hope and that brought all kinds of added pressure with it.

Actually that is the reason I'd give it to Martin, in that he never failed to live up to all those expectations. Henman always seemed to be a disappointment where Martin was always a hopeful.

I do understand your thinking though.

 

[Jack the Hack]

I give the edge to Martin for making two different Slam finals at the US Open and the Australian. Martin also should have been in the '96 Wimbledon final (and would have had a decent shot of winning against Krajicek), but he blew a 5-1 lead in the fifth set against MaliVai Washington in the semifinal. Also, let's not forget that he had a two sets to one lead over Agassi in the '99 US Open finals before losing in 5. Martin came a lot closer to winning a Slam than Henman (who's best chance was probably at the '01 Wimbledon where he was just a couple points away from beating Ivanisevic in the semifinal).

 

[Moose Malloy]

Going beyond stats, Martin was the better big match player imo, & big matches are all that matters as the years go by.

I don't think any match in Henman's career was as impressive as Martin pushing a peak Agassi to 5 sets in the '99 US Open final(he was actually up 2 sets to 1)

Its a shame the ATP doesn't have a way to look up a players overall record vs all the top 5/10 players they played in their career, I have a feeling Martin did quite well in this stat.

I only think of Henman as being a very good player at Wimbledon(yes he made the semis at the French & US, but those were anomalies, overall he was quite poor there)

While Martin was consistently good at 3 of the 4 majors.

 

[Rhino]

as much as I like Henmans game, slam finals are what people get remembered for unfortunately.

 

[West Coast Ace]

All good points. Timmy! did win a Master Series event (Paris).

 

[johnny ballgame]

All good points. Timmy! did win a Master Series event (Paris).

Indeed, Martin never won a Masters Series (or equivalent) in singles.

 

[Vector]

Todd Martin

______________________________________________

Translation - heycal is owned

 

[Moose Malloy]

^Chris Woodruff & Roberto Carretero won masters series. and Rios won 5. They really don't matter much in the big picture. I've never heard masters series stats recited when a player gets inducted into the hall of fame.

 

[johnny ballgame]

^Chris Woodruff & Roberto Carretero won masters series. and Rios won 5. They really don't matter much in the big picture. I've never heard masters series stats recited when a player gets inducted into the hall of fame.

You'll here it for Agassi's induction.

I get your point, but winning a Masters is no easy task. Henman went through Guga, Fed, and Roddick to win that title. A Masters Shield is just something to consider if anyone was on the fence about who to vote for.

 

[Moose Malloy]

You'll here it for Agassi's induction.

I bet you won't.

 

[sharp*shooter]

Tim henman Singles Record: 494 - 273
Tim henman doubles Record 88 - 81
Todd martin Singles Record: 411 - 234
Todd martin Doubles Record 100 - 85

Henman is better, and hasnt he finished in the top 10 for a decade? Say no more.

 

[stormholloway]

You'll here it for Agassi's induction.

I get your point, but winning a Masters is no easy task. Henman went through Guga, Fed, and Roddick to win that title. A Masters Shield is just something to consider if anyone was on the fence about who to vote for.

Agreed, but keep in mind, the Masters Series didn't even start until 1996 and wasn't even called Masters Series until 2000, so Todd Martin is at a slight disadvantage there.

These arguments are strange. I think it comes down to what style you like more or what country you live in. I like Henman's style, but I'm American and vote for Martin.

Also... I think the OP should have checked Davis Cup results... could've been a tie breaker and is certainly a potentially career defining platform.

 

[Moose Malloy]

Agreed, but keep in mind, the Masters Series didn't even start until 1996 and wasn't even called Masters Series until 2000, so Todd Martin is at a slight disadvantage there.

no, they started in 1990(were called super 9) he lost a close final in montreal in '93 to pernfors after beating agassi & courier I think.

 

[Jack the Hack]

Tim henman Singles Record: 494 - 273
Tim henman doubles Record 88 - 81
Todd martin Singles Record: 411 - 234
Todd martin Doubles Record 100 - 85

Henman is better, and hasnt he finished in the top 10 for a decade? Say no more.

I don't know if career records prove much considering their winning percentage is pretty close (64.4% to 63.7%).

Also, according to the records, it looks like Henman did not finish in the top 10 for a decade. He was in the year end top 10 in '98, '00, '01, '02, and '04. Martin finished in the top 10 in '94 and '99.

Henman played longer than Martin and won more titles, but Martin soared higher in the big events. This is not an open and shut case. Who's life would you rather have had? Henman with his popularity in the UK (he has a hill named after him!) or Martin with his Slam finals? That's a tough one...

 

[Moose Malloy]

Who's life would you rather have had? Henman with his popularity in the UK (he has a hill named after him!) or Martin with his Slam finals? That's a tough one...

I would rather be Henman. Henman will make a lot more post retirement because of his fame in England. Todd Martin probably isn't famous enough to open a restaurant in Michigan.

 

[Dimonator133]

as much as I like Henmans game, slam finals are what people get remembered for unfortunately.

no, Slam WINS are what people get remembered for, just ask Petr Korda


(exception: pre-2001 Goran Ivanisevic)

 

[Jack the Hack]

Also... I think the OP should have checked Davis Cup results... could've been a tie breaker and is certainly a potentially career defining platform.

I took a few minutes to eyeball the Davis Cup records. I'm not sure if I've got this 100%, but it looks like this:

Henman: 28-8 in singles, 10-5 in doubles
Martin: 11-8 in singles, 5-6 in doubles

The problem with the Davis Cup comparison is that Martin played on some stacked US teams that included Sampras, Agassi, and Courier. He didn't have as many opportunities to play. Also, the US competed in the World Group during most of Martin's playing years, and he was on the team that won the 1995 Davis Cup championship. On the other hand, Henman has a much better winning percentage, but considering he was the best player for the UK, he got a lot of chances to play. Also, most of time, GBR was regulated to zonal competition because they weren't qualified for the World Group. This means that his wins are padded against such luminary tennis countries as Portugal, Ecuador, Ghana, and Egypt. Much like their Slam records, I would rather have a mediocre record in Davis Cup, but have been on a championship team... than have a stellar record and never have a chance at the cup.

 

[Warriorroger]

Not a close call at all. There is more than achievements. Henman has a better looking game than Martin IMO. He made some many people at Wimbledon, Britain warm up for tennis. He had so many classic matches against the game's giants at Wimbledon. Henman will remembered after he retires, his hill will hopefuly stay at Wimbledon.

 

[Moose Malloy]

You know, I think Henman is probably more famous in the US than Martin. Both are pretty obscure, unknown overall, but the coverage here of Henman's W runs did get a lot of air time here, probably more than anything Martin ever did. We're big on championship 'droughts' here(like the Red Sox, Cubs, White Sox, etc) so the whole Fred Perry being the last Brit to win Wimbledon got a lot of coverage here as well when Henman made a run.
Maybe Martin is more well-known/popular just among american tennis fans here, but I know a lot of casual(& that's a stretch) tennis fans who asked me about Henman over the years. I doubt they even heard of Todd Martin.

Henman: 28-8 in singles, 10-5 in doubles
Martin: 11-8 in singles, 5-6 in doubles

what were some of their biggest dc wins? I remember Martin substituting for an injured Agassi on the final day of the US vs Sweden SF in '95 & coming through over a much higher ranked Enqvist. He went nuts.

 

[johnny ballgame]

I bet you won't.

Maybe, maybe not. But it's irrelevant to Henman vs Martin. They will not be inducted into the Hall of Fame. They never won a slam. So in comparing the two players, it's relevant to talk about who won a Masters event and who did not.

 

[Jack the Hack]

what were some of their biggest dc wins? I remember Martin substituting for an injured Agassi on the final day of the US vs Sweden SF in '95 & coming through over a much higher ranked Enqvist. He went nuts.

I guess that was my point with the Davis Cup records...

Henman has more DC wins, but none of them were really that important. Martin, on the other hand, played a significant role on that Davis Cup championship team of 1995, which was the last time the US won the event.

As a player, I think I would rather have Martin's resume. However, if I could trade lives, I would probably rather have Henman's. No doubt he has more fame and admiration... and he has made more on-court and off-court money than Martin. (Henman leads career earnings $11.6 million to $8.2 million, plus he had to have had better off court endorsements.) Also, my wife thinks that when I was younger, I looked like a cross between Stefan Edberg and Henman, which she seems to think was mega attractive. So from an attractiveness standpoint, I guess Henman wins there also.

 

[BlackgirlX]

Todd Martin reached two grand slam finals so he trumps Henman in career achievements. Tim never reached a grand slam final.

 

[phoony]

Probably Martin eventhough i cant remember his games but he not that bored at all if comparing to Henman.