Is David Ferrer the greatest player to never win a major?

[Nadalgaenger]

The words “great” and “never win a major” do not belong in the same sentence.

“Best” is far more appropriate.

And I’d say that Nalbandian, Tsonga, and Zverev are all better (not “greater”)

 

[accidental]

Kyrgios. If you read the stuff some people here write about him and his 'talent'

 

[Phoenix1983]

As I have written before, Ferrer is not even the best Spanish-speaking man called David born in 1982 to have never won a slam.

 

[mmk]

Certainly the most tenacious

 

[Poisoned Slice]

No

 

[Steve0904]

His consistency complicates the matter because his peak was never that high compared to some other non slam winners.

Pretty much. He might be the most successful player never to win a major, but the best? Probably not. Depends on how you define it. Personally, because I didn't believe Ferrer was ever going to win a major (and wouldn't have done it even in other eras), I say "No" whenever this question comes up.

Players like Tsonga, Berdych, and Soderling in this era were more deserving of a major IMO. And not to mention the others from other eras.

 

[BGod]

Not even close. Rios and Nalbandian, as well as Mecir ahead of David.

Pretty much this.

I'm not hung up on Slam Finals as much as others might be but winning WTF is a good starting point.

Nalbandian & Davydenko pop up there but Nalbandian hands down is ahead. Mecir won the WCT when it was around plus made 2 Slam Finals and won 3 Masters.

Of course because of the Federer factor, I put Nalbandian at #1. Here's what you have to ask when talking about greatest Slam-less players, what was their opportunity? Flat out, I mean you can easily point to Roddick and say multiple Wimbledon champ if Federer ain't there and he had a hairline opportunity in 2009. Where do Nalbandian's opportunity's come in to play?

2003 US Open: Golden opportunity, golden choke. He was up 2-0 and match point in the 3rd and regardless of the fan yelling at 7-7 in the tiebreak there's no excuses losing such a match. Would have beat Juan.
2006 Australian: Another choke, up 2-0 against Baghdatis. Do I think he beats Federer in the Final? Yes I do, but we'll call it a toss-up.
2005 Australian: Forgotten epic match, Nalby down 0-2 comes back and loses 8-10 to Hewitt. Toss-up against Safin but he would have beaten Roddick to get to another Final.
2004 Australian: If this sounds like a broken record, keep in mind he was freshest for this Slam given his injury history. Still had mental edge on Roger, beat him, win it all.
2002 Wimbledon: Let's be clear, Nalbandian allowed two consecutive 2-0 leads drag into a 5th set before that final. That speaks more about him than his opponents so he doesn't win this against Hewitt or Henman.
2007 US Open: Laugh if you will but understand Nalby was up 2-1 against Ferrer and lost in a close tiebreak and then 5-7. Ferrer goes on to beat Nadal then folds against Novak in semifinal. It's not exactly insane.

So despite injuries, which really kept him back from winning at least 1, he still had 4 legitimate opportunities. One of those being a complete chokejob by him in 03, then the back to back Aussie Opens where it's 50/50.

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

Overall, I think Mecir and Nalbandian beat him. He is probably tied with Davydenko and Rios, maybe a little behind. Coria was probably the CLOSEST to not get a slam, Nalbandian the most talented, and Mecir the best overall career wise maybe.

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

Pretty much this.

I'm not hung up on Slam Finals as much as others might be but winning WTF is a good starting point.

Nalbandian & Davydenko pop up there but Nalbandian hands down is ahead. Mecir won the WCT when it was around plus made 2 Slam Finals and won 3 Masters.

Of course because of the Federer factor, I put Nalbandian at #1. Here's what you have to ask when talking about greatest Slam-less players, what was their opportunity? Flat out, I mean you can easily point to Roddick and say multiple Wimbledon champ if Federer ain't there and he had a hairline opportunity in 2009. Where do Nalbandian's opportunity's come in to play?

2003 US Open: Golden opportunity, golden choke. He was up 2-0 and match point in the 3rd and regardless of the fan yelling at 7-7 in the tiebreak there's no excuses losing such a match. Would have beat Juan.
2006 Australian: Another choke, up 2-0 against Baghdatis. Do I think he beats Federer in the Final? Yes I do, but we'll call it a toss-up.
2005 Australian: Forgotten epic match, Nalby down 0-2 comes back and loses 8-10 to Hewitt. Toss-up against Safin but he would have beaten Roddick to get to another Final.
2004 Australian: If this sounds like a broken record, keep in mind he was freshest for this Slam given his injury history. Still had mental edge on Roger, beat him, win it all.
2002 Wimbledon: Let's be clear, Nalbandian allowed two consecutive 2-0 leads drag into a 5th set before that final. That speaks more about him than his opponents so he doesn't win this against Hewitt or Henman.
2007 US Open: Laugh if you will but understand Nalby was up 2-1 against Ferrer and lost in a close tiebreak and then 5-7. Ferrer goes on to beat Nadal then folds against Novak in semifinal. It's not exactly insane.

So despite injuries, which really kept him back from winning at least 1, he still had 4 legitimate opportunities. One of those being a complete chokejob by him in 03, then the back to back Aussie Opens where it's 50/50.

Im agreeing with you but here are some extra ones.

2006 French Open: This is not so out of the question as some might think. He was up a set and break against Federer in the SF. Had he been healthy he probably would have won. The final against Nadal would be extremely difficult but not totally impossible.

2004 French Open: He actually beats Guga in the QF's but loses to red hot Gaudio who never should have made it past the 2nd round in the first place. Had he won this, he actually had a chance against Coria in the final. This was his best chance OPPONENT WISE. But 2003 US Open his best overall.

2003 Australian Open: He lost against Schuttler but could have won that match in the QF going in. Then might beat Roddick in the SF but would meet Agassi. This is where it gets very shaky but I wouldn't say impossible.

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

I think Nalbandian is the best but take some looks at Davydenko.

2005 French Open: Was playing well having taken out Coria and Robredo. Was up 2-1 on Puerta in the SF and would have met Nadal in the SF. With how Nadal played Puerta, Davydenko might have had a chance.

2006 Australian Open: Played Federer in the QF's and had set points to go up 2-1 sets. If he had converted those, he probably would have won and Kiefer in the SF's would have been beatable. Baghdatis in the finals I say he would have beat.

2010 Australian Open: Was coming off as favorite and titles in Shanghai and the WTF the previous year and Doha 2010. He was up a set and a break against Federer and should have went up 2-0 sets to beat Federer. Then I think he would have beat Tsonga and Murray for sure. This one I think was his best chance.

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

But talking about Ferrer.

2013 French Open: Was playing pretty well the whole tournament but faced Rafa in the final, very tough and almost impossible. But Nadal had a extremely long match with Nole in the SF and it wasn't his best RG. So this was a fairly good chance.

2014 French Open: I think this was a good chance too. Maybe if he beat Rafa in the QF's after being up a set he could have beat Murray in the SF's and maybe Nole in the final.

 

[AlexanderTheGreat08]

Ferrer vs. the four ranked ahead of him for most of his days: 16-72 (22.22%)

Tsonga vs. those same players: 18-49 (36.73%)

Berdych vs. those same players 19-75 (25.33%)

We can conclude that Ferrer is simply a vulturing mug and no more. His bowing down to daddy Ned tonight was a rightful end to the career.

He’s still handsome and rich af

 

[AlexanderTheGreat08]

He would’ve won RG in the 90’s or early 2000s

 

[Purplemonster]

Not even close. Rios and Nalbandian, as well as Mecir ahead of David.

Way ahead

 

[buscemi]

Pretty much this.

I'm not hung up on Slam Finals as much as others might be but winning WTF is a good starting point.

Nalbandian & Davydenko pop up there but Nalbandian hands down is ahead. Mecir won the WCT when it was around plus made 2 Slam Finals and won 3 Masters

Corretja also has a WTF title as well as 2 Major finals, 2 Masters Series titles, and the #2 ranking.

 

[King No1e]

1. Rios
2. Mecir
3. Ferrer
4. Haas
5. Soderling
6. Nalbandian
7. Corretja

 

[King No1e]

I think Nalbandian is the best but take some looks at Davydenko.

2005 French Open: Was playing well having taken out Coria and Robredo. Was up 2-1 on Puerta in the SF and would have met Nadal in the SF. With how Nadal played Puerta, Davydenko might have had a chance.

2006 Australian Open: Played Federer in the QF's and had set points to go up 2-1 sets. If he had converted those, he probably would have won and Kiefer in the SF's would have been beatable. Baghdatis in the finals I say he would have beat.

2010 Australian Open: Was coming off as favorite and titles in Shanghai and the WTF the previous year and Doha 2010. He was up a set and a break against Federer and should have went up 2-0 sets to beat Federer. Then I think he would have beat Tsonga and Murray for sure. This one I think was his best chance.

For AO10, if you wanna talk about scenarios: If Djokovic pulled out the 1st set against Tsonga there's no stopping him. He got sick in the 4th set

Then again, that match was how his gluten intolerance was discovered. So scratch that

 

[Midaso240]

The words “great” and “never win a major” do not belong in the same sentence.

“Best” is far more appropriate.

And I’d say that Nalbandian, Tsonga, and Zverev are all better (not “greater”)

Zverev? LMAO,you might as well throw the guy in your profile in as well,at least he's been to the semifinal stage of slams a couple of times unlike the overhyped Z

 

[insideguy]

Not a bad debate. Although I don't know much about the guys back in the conners, Mac, Borg era or even a little beyond that. I am sure there were some good players back then that never broke through.

 

[sanak]

Nalbandian and davydenko from recent times were better. I would even say Tsonga and Berdych.

Here's the little not much known thing. For all the big 4, tough era talks, Ferrer was way too lucky with his Major draws. He hardly ever met fedalovic in slams (never met fed). Even soderling and delpotro who had less playing time met the big 3 more often. Let that sink.

I like daveed though. It's amazing to see his fight and grit..

 

[sanak]

Best match David ever played imo was that Barcelona 2012 final against Nadal. He had Nadal on ropes. The scoreline doesn't indicate how close Nadal was to losing that match. Mind you this was against a very very good Nadal on clay.

Two of the best Bo3 matches I can remember are that Barcelona final and Doha final between Nadal and davydenko (2010?).

 

[TheAverageFedererFan]

For AO10, if you wanna talk about scenarios: If Djokovic pulled out the 1st set against Tsonga there's no stopping him. He got sick in the 4th set

Then again, that match was how his gluten intolerance was discovered. So scratch that

Very true. But Davydenko still might have won. But Nole would give a spuer hard match.

 

[Mugu]

Maybe the greatest in achievement but not in talent - I'd give that to Nalbandian

or Rios

 

[RF-18]

Not even close. Rios and Nalbandian, as well as Mecir ahead of David.

BUt why?

Shouldn't we go after achievements or we changing tune now?

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

BUt why?

Shouldn't we go after achievements or we changing tune now?

Each one of them won multiple "big titles" while David won just one.

 

[King No1e]

Very true. But Davydenko still might have won. But Nole would give a spuer hard match.

Nah, Davydenko was good, but not at Djokovic's level. Especially at AO.

Heck, even Federer may have lost to Djokovic if it came to that

 

[Devilito]

Todd Martin
Cédric Pioline
Mark Philippoussis
Tim Henman

 

[Smurph]

I apologize if this has been mentioned earlier, but I am curious as to whether David ever quit smoking? I had forgotten that he was an occasional smoker and that really surprised me.

I will miss him. thanks David.

 

[King No1e]

I apologize if this has been mentioned earlier, but I am curious as to whether David ever quit smoking? I had forgotten that he was an occasional smoker and that really surprised me.

I will miss him. thanks David.

Smoking? The guy just didn't give a f*ck. What a badass.

We'll all miss him when he hangs it up next year