In the past 20 years, who had the toughest draw to win their first slam?

[feetofclay]

Federer was not in his prime this USO.

Neither was Nadal. How can someone who has recently returned from an injury layoff and who has sustained a stomach tear, be considered to be in prime condition. No one can know whether Nadal playing at his best would have beaten Del Potro as he was playing that day, but I am convinced it would have been closer than it was. It would have been interesting to see what Del Potro had left in the tank if he had had to play 5 hard sets the day before his final.

 

[lawrence]

gonna have to say chang, but part of my decision is based on the fact he was 17 lol

 

[35ft6]

EDIT: Rereading your post, its a fair point that none of Courier's opponents had won the French before. But still that is a VERY difficult draw from beginning to end in order to win your first slam.

I'm not saying what he did wasn't impressive, just not as impressive as some if not all of the other first Slam wins in the poll.

It's not on the list but I might place Becker's win at Wimbledon in 1985 as the most impressive first Slam win. Winning Wimbledon when the grass was so super fast at the age of 17 is just insane. Just the nature of grass court tennis, back then at least, it was so much about racket skills, the kind of things that young players usually don't possess. A lot more impressive than Borg, Wilander, Nadal, and Chang's wins at Roland Garros on clay, a surface that better rewards attributes of youth.

edit: I just noticed it says past 20 years....

 

[drwood]

I'm not saying what he did wasn't impressive, just not as impressive as some if not all of the other first Slam wins in the poll.

It's not on the list but I might place Becker's win at Wimbledon in 1985 as the most impressive first Slam win. Winning Wimbledon when the grass was so super fast at the age of 17 is just insane. Just the nature of grass court tennis, back then at least, it was so much about racket skills, the kind of things that young players usually don't possess. A lot more impressive than Borg, Wilander, Nadal, and Chang's wins at Roland Garros on clay, a surface that better rewards attributes of youth.

edit: I just noticed it says past 20 years....

Becker's win was impressive, but he didn't have to face great players on grass...he almost lost to Mayotte for goodness sakes. McEnroe and Connors (the 2 best grass courters at that time) were both beaten by Curren (losing only 13 games total in those 2 matches!!) who Becker beat in the final, and Lendl was beaten by Leconte who Becker. Impressive, but not nearly as impressive as Chang, who (at a younger age) beat the undisputed #1 (Lendl) and prime Edberg, as well as prime Chesnokov and preprime Sampras. The 1989 French and 85 Wimbledon draws for Chang and Becker respectively aren't even close in difficulty IMO.

And yeah, I said within the past 20 years, b/c the poll only allowed for 10 choices -- not enough room to include Wilander's 1982 French, Becker's 85 Wimbledon, Noah's 83 French, or ever Edberg's 85 Australian.

 

[Telepatic]

If you're well enough to play (and make a slam SF), you're well enough to lose without making excuses. Period.

Of course, I completely agree, no excuse to Nadal but its still lame to stand out hes "prime" in poll, (making discredit to other players in this poll like their opponents werent prime (like fed '08-'09 for an example) plus somewhat hyping Delpos win), especially when we (after all) all knew for his rustiness, minor injury and of course low expectations in the first place and Im not that much fan of Nadal, just saying..

 

[World Beater]

toughest was such a relative term.

i would say most impressive was kuerten..he sorta came out of nowhere and won the french!

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

what about goran at wimbledon 2001 ?...

 

[Fedfan1234]

I think Kuerten and this is why. Pretty much all of the players had to face 2 very good players and the rest was easy. Kuerten had to face 3.

Chang (89 French) -- Sampras, Lendl, Chesnokov and Edberg

Sampras pre prime on clay, that is pretty easy.
Chesnokov 1 time semi-finalist, otherwise nothing.
Lendl was good and so was Edberg

Sampras (90 US Open) -- Muster, Lendl, McEnroe, and Agassi

Muster not that good on HC best is QF at USO.
Mcenroe past his prime for a very long time.
Lendl was good as well as Agassi.

Courier (91 French) -- Ferreira, Todd Martin, Edberg, Stich, and Agassi

Ferreira Not that good on clay 4th round best RG result.
Todd Martin not that good on clay 4th round best RG result.
Stich one time RG finalist but still not his best surface.
Edberg clay not his best surface 1 time RG finalist.
Agassi was good on clay but not his best surface.

Agassi (92 Wimbledon) -- Becker, McEnroe, Ivanisevic

Mcenroe WAY past his prime.
Becker not at his best anymore, but not that bad.
Ivanisevic was good at the time although he did have to wait a long time for his first and only Wimbledon slam.

Kuerten (97 French) -- Muster, Medvedev, Kafelnikov, Bruguera

Muster good on clay and won RG in 95.
Kafalnikov good on clay and won RG in 96.
Medvedev not that good but still 1 time RG finalist.
Bruguera good on clay won it in 93 and 94.

Safin (00 USO) -- Ferrero, Todd Martin, and Sampras

Ferrero not bad on HC but not his best surface either.
Todd Martin wasn't bad but not the best player around.
Sampras was still a very good player.

Hewitt (01 USO) -- Haas, Roddick, Kafelnikov and Sampras

Haas not bad but not that good either.
Roddick pre prime but still a good player.
Kafelnikov past his prime I think but still good.
Sampras was still a good player.

Djokovic (08 Aus) -- Hewitt, Ferrer, Federer and Tsonga

Hewit past his prime.
Ferrer not a bad player, but not that good either.
Federer good win.
Tsonga this final his only good result as of now, don't think he is that good.

Del Potro (09 USO) -- Ferrero, prime Nadal and prime Federer

Ferrero past his prime and not his best Surface.
Nadal not his best surface, SF best result which probably will not change in the near future.
Federer not in his prime, but still a good win.

 

[mtr1]

Agassi. He beat 3 Wimbledon champions on grass, which much faster than it is today. McEnroe and Becker were still threats on grass, and Goran proved to a very consistant grass court player. It took until 2002 for another baseliner to win Wimbledon, on much slower grass.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

fcp remix? may i ask what that avatar means?

 

[Andres]

Ivanisevic 2001:

R1: Jonsson
R2: Moya
R3: Roddick
R4: Rusedski
QF: Safin
SF: Henman
F: Rafter

Gaudio 2004:
R1: Cañas
R2: Novak
R3: Enqvist
R4: Andreev
QF: Hewitt
SF: Nalbandian
F: Coria

 

[Baikalic]

I'm going with chang, but I'd like to suggest Ivanesevic had a pretty tough draw to finally get Wimbledon on the 4th final try.

Moya, Roddick, Safin, Henman, Rafter 6–3, 3–6, 6–3, 2–6, 9–7 in 2001 is looks very tough to me.

what about goran at wimbledon 2001 ?...

Ivanisevic 2001:

R1: Jonsson
R2: Moya
R3: Roddick
R4: Rusedski
QF: Safin
SF: Henman
F: Rafter

i said it first! .

 

[Deleted member 21996]

I don't have an avatar.

if you mean username - it's my favourite song and it is by 'fall of troy'

i was joking about the hewitt draw BTW, i'm not mad. It was the easiest draw ever

the question was because fcp is the initials of my footbal team (soccer) i i was thiking you could be form my country

 

[T1000]

Safin, Djokovic, and Del Potro had easy draws compared to everyone else. Change one of them to Ivensavic

 

[Andres]

i said it first! .

I didn't read the thread at all before posting. I already knew my answer, but it's nice to see people agreeing with me

 

[TheMagicianOfPrecision]

Brilliant thread drwood, i voted Agassi 1992 Wimbledon, for him, with his style of play,his history with Wimbledon, to beat 3 of the greatest Wimbledon-players ever was just extraordinary!
Del Potro winning USO this year is my no 2.

 

[Cyan]

Kuerten, of course.

 

[drwood]

Brilliant thread drwood, i voted Agassi 1992 Wimbledon, for him, with his style of play,his history with Wimbledon, to beat 3 of the greatest Wimbledon-players ever was just extraordinary!
Del Potro winning USO this year is my no 2.

Thanks, Magician . I forgot about Ivanisevic 01 Wimbledon (and Stich 91 Wimbledon) until the poll was complete...couldn't change it then .

Thinking of doing another thread about this topic looking at slams prior to 1989...

 

[drwood]

My new thread examining this topic to cover the years 1968 through 1988 is now up:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=290631

Please visit and weigh in with your thoughts! Thank you.

 

[Blinkism]

No surprise that Kuerten is winning this poll

But Del Potro, really? Ferrero is a non-factor in Delpo's slam win this year, Juan Carlos is wayyyyy past his prime. Nadal was not 100%, and Federer fell short of giving his 100% effort in the 5th set.

Del Potro played great but

Kuerten's first FO > Del Potro's first USO

On paper, though, Del Potro had the tougher first slam - in reality, Nadal was not at his best (and on his least successful slam) and Federer fell short of his dominant game that we've come to know from 2004-2007

 

[Galactico who loves A-rod]

No surprise that Kuerten is winning this poll

But Del Potro, really? Ferrero is a non-factor in Delpo's slam win this year, Juan Carlos is wayyyyy past his prime. Nadal was not 100%, and Federer fell short of giving his 100% effort in the 5th set.

Del Potro played great but

Kuerten's first FO > Del Potro's first USO

On paper, though, Del Potro had the tougher first slam - in reality, Nadal was not at his best (and on his least successful slam) and Federer fell short of his dominant game that we've come to know from 2004-2007

British commentotors (john lloyd, rusedski) said that ferrero is playing his best tennis ever - but the likes of murray are way better.

 

[Blinkism]

British commentotors (john lloyd, rusedski) said that ferrero is playing his best tennis ever - but the likes of murray are way better.

That's SO surprising, considering Murray beat Ferrero like 3 times this year.

Ferrero playing his best tennis EVER + Murray beating Ferrero = More delusion from the British Media

 

[Galactico who loves A-rod]

The thing about us brits is that we (except for me) overhype murray saying that he will win a slam each year.

Not only will murray claim the #1 spot this year, he will win wimbledon and probably the US open. No, he will never win a slam, he's not good enough.

 

[Feña14]

The thing about us brits is that we (except for me) overhype murray saying that he will win a slam each year.

Not only will murray claim the #1 spot this year, he will win wimbledon and probably the US open. No, he will never win a slam, he's not good enough.

Hows that high horse of yours?

 

[President of Serve/Volley]

Andre Agassi simply due to his baseline play where it was a S/V game at that time.

 

[All-rounder]

Kuerten 10 char

 

[big bang]

Agassi wimby 92.. to beat Becker, Mac and Goran on fast grass then you deserve respect

 

[SuperDuy]

roddicks 04

 

[boredone3456]

Tough Choice between Agassi 1992 or Goran 2001...both were pretty hard draws.

 

[The_Steak]

Chang by a mile.

He's a 17 year old kid.

 

[NamRanger]

Agassi 92 was the best draw Agassi could have possibly asked for to win Wimbledon. If he got stuck into the bracket of death down bottom there's no way he wins. The 92 draw was pretty easy considering...



A. Agassi owned Becker from this point on. I think he went on a 10-1 streak against Becker from 92 on. Total H2H was 10-4. Becker is no slouch, but he's probably the guy Agassi would have preferred to face.


B. Goran pulled his annual Wimbledon choke against a far inferior grass opponent. He should have won nearly every set in this entire match, and still managed to lose it.


C. Most of the seeded players in Agassi's section of the draw actually got knocked out by the qualie dude and McEnroe (who was well outside of his prime at this time). Agassi went through a qualifier and old man McEnroe. Come on now. Really?



D. Outside of Becker (whom Agassi owned) and Goran (who really did choke in the final), he beat up on everyone he was supposed to. If he gets stuck in the bottom half of the draw with Edberg, Stich, Sampras, and Lendl, I HIGHLY doubt Agassi makes it to the final let alone win it.




By no means was it easy, but based on the draw, Agassi lucked out alot. He faced maybe one really good grasscourt player (whom Agassi totally owned) before the final, and he got an opponent who was even mentally weaker than young Andre Agassi.

 

[1970CRBase]

Stich only ever won 2 sets against Agassi in 6 matches. He was much worse than Becker against Agassi. His game fitted right into Agassi's.

After the 1990 ATP Championship RR match, which was played on carpet, and which score was 7-6 4-6 7-6, Edberg would never beat Agassi again. Agassi beat him in the final in 4 sets & won their next 4 matches. Agassi was basically the anti serve-volleyer of the 90's. Of those three; Stich, Edberg and Becker, Becker at least won one match against Agassi after 1990 - that was at 1995 Wim. And that was after 8 straight losses in a row, of which 5 in were straight sets.

As for Lendl, he aged fast after 1990. He still had good moments, but his injuries were taking over. After 89 US, Agassi bageled him in Toronto and straight setted him in New Haven.

In 1992, I'd reckon Goran was far more fearsome than Pete on fast grass. In those days, it was Goran (and his aces) who was feared on grass, not Pete.

 

[Michael Bluth]

I don't think that it was necessarily the toughest, but this one should definitely be on the list: Muster at Roland Garros in 95.

From the second round on:

Pioline, C.Costa, Medvedev, A. Costa, Kafelnikov, Chang.

Definitely tougher than some of the ones on the list.

 

[Tony48]

On paper, though, Del Potro had the tougher first slam - in reality, Nadal was not at his best (and on his least successful slam) and Federer fell short of his dominant game that we've come to know from 2004-2007

Kafelnikov not his best and neither was Bruguera.

See how easy (and stupid) that was?

 

[NamRanger]

Stich only ever won 2 sets against Agassi in 6 matches. He was much worse than Becker against Agassi. His game fitted right into Agassi's.

After the 1990 ATP Championship RR match, which was played on carpet, and which score was 7-6 4-6 7-6, Edberg would never beat Agassi again. Agassi beat him in the final in 4 sets & won their next 4 matches. Agassi was basically the anti serve-volleyer of the 90's. Of those three; Stich, Edberg and Becker, Becker at least won one match against Agassi after 1990 - that was at 1995 Wim. And that was after 8 straight losses in a row, of which 5 in were straight sets.

As for Lendl, he aged fast after 1990. He still had good moments, but his injuries were taking over. After 89 US, Agassi bageled him in Toronto and straight setted him in New Haven.

In 1992, I'd reckon Goran was far more fearsome than Pete on fast grass. In those days, it was Goran (and his aces) who was feared on grass, not Pete.

I think Pete could have taken it to Agassi on grass in 1992, Lendl probably could have beaten him given their past history, and Courier might have had a good shot had he not had a bad day at the office against the qualifier.

 

[McBrat]

Goran's Wimbledon '01 draw was probably the most difficult.

From this list it would be Chang in '89 - though, technically, his win came in the past 21 years.

While being the most difficult draw, it was also the most impressive win. He had quite a few things going against him in that tournament - age, form, fitness... on clay! It would make a pretty good movie as well.

 

[boredone3456]

Changs 1989 is really marked by the way he beat Edberg in the final (returning from way inside the baseline, counterpunching, moonballing and a variety of gamesmanship type shots). But the draw to get there...ehhh.. Sampras in 1989 on clay is not that impressive to me, Sampras at the French period is not really that impressive and especially not in 1989. Lendl...I'll agree that was a big win for Chang, Lendl was a force to be reckoned with at the French in the late 80's and was tough for most anybody to beat there. Chesnokov...he was good on clay and 1989 was probably his best year but still he is not exactly a big name of the time and not that big an opponent to brag about beating. Edberg was injured in the final so Chang took advantage...but Edberg on clay again, like Sampras, not that tough, that was his only French Open final and he was a much stronger player on faster surfaces. Clay was probably Edberg's worst surface. Given Chang's age vs the experience of 2 of his opponents yeah maybe...but overall compared to others on that list..not that tough.

 

[Kemitak]

I voted Courier, but now that I think about it, Martin wasn't a great mover, and Edberg and Stich, though great players, weren't the greatest on clay. I'd be afraid to play Ferreira at any tournament no matter who I was.