Is Ruud the weakest no. 2 ever?

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Ruud is in elite company, but he’s never won a title above atp 250 and he’s 0-6 vs top 10 in slams.

Previous world no. 2s include Zverev, Medvedev, Federer, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Tommy Haas comes to mind as a weaker no. 2, but he at least won a masters 1000.

Is Ruud the weakest no. 2?

 

[3loudboys]

He's only 23 - he's got plenty of time to add to his CV.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Two slam final runner ups in the same season? I know this forum loves to hate him but winning 6 matches at a slam (twice in one year) is pretty good.

He also made the Miami Open final, Italian Open SF, Cincinnati SF all this year.

Zverev got to #3 in the world without ever making a slam SF. Ruud up to #2 with 2 slam finals, pretty decent.

 

[Kralingen]

Mr. Anett Kontaveit is still weaker.

like Ruud or not he has at least made multiple Slam finals.

 

[DSH]

Haas might have the highest peak of the two but the German couldn't turn his chances into wins either.
He couldn't even reach a GS final.
Ruud already has two and could add a few more, however, the Norwegian sooner rather than later will win titles in the 500 category and at least a couple of Masters 1000.

 

[lisea]

RUud is like Michael Chang and Nishikori. Good ball strikers and quick on their feet but no major weapons. I don’t see him beating Alcaraz Nadal Novak Zverev Medvedev Rublev ….

 

[Sampras-Bruguera 1993]

When he can’t even manage a masters title or a win over a top 10 or push teenagers who
Played a lot of tennis to 5 sets at least, yes he is

how can tiafoe push Carlos to 5 yet somehow Ruud who’s been in 2 slam finals this year can’t?
Ruud probably wouldn’t even have beat this poor playing version of Nadal at the open

 

[Deleted member 791948]

IF Ruud is weak, then Alcaraz is the weakest US Open champion ever, because he only beat Ruud by 5 points in a 4-set match
And if Ruud converts one of those Set Points, he wins the 3rd Set 7-5 and probably the title.

 

[I Am Finnish]

Yes lets be honest he is no real top 10 player


- Rune's mother

 

[JasonZ]

Haas might have the highest peak of the two but the German couldn't turn his chances into wins either.
He couldn't even reach a GS final.
Ruud already has two and could add a few more, however, the Norwegian sooner rather than later will win titles in the 500 category and at least a couple of Masters 1000.

haas definetely didnt have a higher peak than ruud. haas is super overrated here, worst # 2 ever

 

[President]

He is a weak #2, but the rankings are all screwed up because of Djokovic's (self inflicted) inability to play in 2 slams and 4 Masters tournaments, Wimbledon being stripped of points, Zverev getting injured, and Nadal barely playing tennis this year due to numerous different injuries.

 

[Oceans II]

Ppl should take current rankings with a grain of salt and everyone knows this. If there weren't player bans, points not awarded at certain tournaments, inconsistencies with covid ranking freezes, etc, you can take rankings seriously but then the rankings would probably be like 1 Djokovic 2 Medvedev 3 Nadal 4 Zverev and nobody would bat an eyelid.

Before someone says then therefore Djokovic doesn't deserve all those covid weeks at #1, he covered all the bases and was actually screwed out of a lot of weeks.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

Yes lets be honest he is no real top 10 player


- Rune's mother

'evilruud' is saddened by this post and this thread...

 

[DSH]

haas definetely didnt have a higher peak than ruud. haas is super overrated here, worst # 2 ever

I was saying this so as not to offend Federer's followers, that although the German player was a few years older than his idol, being a player with a classic style, like the Swiss player, he is highly appreciated here.

 

[Wander]

IF Ruud is weak, then Alcaraz is the weakest US Open champion ever, because he only beat Ruud by 5 points in a 4-set match
And if Ruud converts one of those Set Points, he wins the 3rd Set 7-5 and probably the title.

Probably the title seems a bit optimistic. 2 sets to 1 up and maybe Ruud has a 50% chance of stealing the match. Maybe. But Alcaraz in the end was pretty relentless and looked like he could've won even an another 5 setter.

But to answer OP's question, I don't think Ruud is the weakest #2 in history, but he's currently the weakest #2 in recent memory. But if he wins Masters 1000s in the future these kinds of threads quickly become completely obsolete.

 

[Hitman]

Well he has two slam finals to his,

and no shame in losing to the Clay GOAT in the RG final, and a clearly obvious ATG in the making in Alcaraz in USO final.

 

[Weekendhacker]

RUud is like Michael Chang and Nishikori. Good ball strikers and quick on their feet but no major weapons. I don’t see him beating Alcaraz Nadal Novak Zverev Medvedev Rublev ….

He can beat that mindless basher Rublev.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Ruud is in elite company, but he’s never won a title above atp 250 and he’s 0-6 vs top 10 in slams.

Previous world no. 2s include Zverev, Medvedev, Federer, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Tommy Haas comes to mind as a weaker no. 2, but he at least won a masters 1000.

Is Ruud the weakest no. 2?

Ruud's career is far from over, so the comparison is pointless.

He may have another decade of being a top 10-30 player. Plenty of time to surpass Haas who is by far the weakest no 2.

 

[dkmura]

I think Ruud will be a formidable #2 as he continues learning and refining his game. No doubt he will take a long rest after this USO, but his capacity for work is amazing. Once he establishes in his own mind that he belongs at the top, he'll be a contender for any tournament he enters.

 

[Milanez82]

Ruud is in elite company, but he’s never won a title above atp 250 and he’s 0-6 vs top 10 in slams.

Previous world no. 2s include Zverev, Medvedev, Federer, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Tommy Haas comes to mind as a weaker no. 2, but he at least won a masters 1000.

Is Ruud the weakest no. 2?

Ruud with 2 slam finals is miles ahead of Haas

 

[Spin Diesel]

I can‘t understand how people can underestimate a player so much, only because he doesn‘t have the most flashy strokes.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I can‘t understand how people can underestimate a player so much, only because he doesn‘t have the most flashy strokes.

If he had half of Fognini's bitchiness or 10% of Rosol's nastiness he'd have 50 million fans by now.

 

[Rattie]

Ruud is in elite company, but he’s never won a title above atp 250 and he’s 0-6 vs top 10 in slams.

Previous world no. 2s include Zverev, Medvedev, Federer, Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Tommy Haas comes to mind as a weaker no. 2, but he at least won a masters 1000.

Is Ruud the weakest no. 2?

No I don’t think so. Lendl played 4 GS finals before he won one, as did Murray. Casper has improved a lot this year making two GS finals and has plenty of time to improve even more. He’s reached five finals this year, and deserves his #2 spot.

 

[mike danny]

haas definetely didnt have a higher peak than ruud. haas is super overrated here, worst # 2 ever

Ruud has yet to beat a Big 3 member or even win a set against them

 

[mahatma]

I think we all should be happy that #1 now is a solid next gen. Medvedev while he had the #1 ranking, didn't seem to be ATG.

Ruud will be a top 5-10 all his career.

 

[mike danny]

Ruud with 2 slam finals is miles ahead of Haas

I would've fancied Haas's chances against the likes of Khachanov and old Cilic.

 

[sportsfan1]

Ruud has been having a spaniard problem in his finals.

 

[mike danny]

Gotta love people hyping up Ruud now after trashing guys like Nalby and Davy many years ago.

 

[Thriller]

Is Ruud the weakest no. 2?

No. The answer is Tommy Haas. (Weakest era)
As for Ruud, he has barely started and he has already had a much better career than the weakest era (2002 - 2007) world's worst no. 3 managed in its entirety.

 

[80s New Wave]

Where would he be ranked if we included the normal points from Wimbledon? Probably need to also assume Medvedev would have won 2 or 3 matches there.

 

[Thriller]

Gotta love people hyping up Ruud now after trashing guys like Nalby and Davy many years ago.

Sorry, when did either of those two weakest era doofuses make 2 slam finals at all, nevermind in one year? Yep. Thought not.

 

[Keizer]

Sorry, when did either of those two weakest era doofuses make 2 slam finals in one year? Yep. Thought not.

Call me back when Ruud is 6-5 against Nadal. Or is beating Nadal no longer an achievement?

 

[mike danny]

Call me back when Ruud is 6-5 against Nadal. Or is beating Nadal no longer an achievement?

Call me when Ruud even wins a set against the Big 3.

 

[Thriller]

Call me back when Ruud is 6-5 against Nadal. Or is beating Nadal no longer an achievement?

6-5 against baby Nadal who was a terrible hardcourt player despite being Kryptonite for Federer? I used to cringe at him standing 200 metres behind the baseline, with the worst serve in the top 100, hitting loopy topspin, and expecting to run everything down on a hardcourt. The boy didn't have a clue what he was doing. If Davydenko was half as good as Ruud it should have been 11-0.
Nadal is a totally different hardcourt beast now.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

If Davydenko was half as good as Ruud

 

[ChaelAZ]

No

 

[Keizer]

6-5 against baby Nadal who was a terrible hardcourt player despite being Kryptonite for Federer? I used to cringe at him standing 200 metres behind the line and expecting to run everything down on a hardcourt. The boy didn't have a clue what he was doing. If Davydenko was half as good as Ruud it would have been 11-0.
Nadal is a different beast now.

Ah yes. The same Nadal who won 2 HC Masters in 2005, won IW and reached the final of Bercy in 2007, won Canada and reached the final of Miami in 2008. Must be a crap player to win all those M1000s on Hard. How many has Ruud won?

 

[Thriller]

Ah yes. The same Nadal who won 2 HC Masters in 2005, won IW and reached the final of Bercy in 2007, won Canada and reached the final of Miami in 2008. Must be a crap player to win all those M1000s on Hard. How many has Ruud won?

Have you any idea how weak that era was? Here's a clue:

 

[Keizer]

Have you any idea how weak that era was? Here's a clue:

Ah, so grandslam winning Baby Novak in 2008 was worse than Ruud too? He was facing the same competition on HC and you said Nadal sucked then, so that only leaves Federer.

 

[Krish872007]

He did make 2 Slam Finals on 2 different surfaces so I wouldn't say he is "weak" - actually a very solid player with a good forehand. Showed some great tennis at times yesterday despite folding in the most important moments

It's true he only reached this position due to circumstances specific to this year and was pretty much "allowed" into these finals but let's see what he does in 2023. He has been at least consistent enough to keep reaching back end of tournaments

 

[Thriller]

Ah, so grandslam winning Baby Novak in 2008 was worse than Ruud too? He was facing the same competition on HC and you said Nadal sucked then, so that only leaves Federer.

a) Baby Novak was a much better hardcourt player than baby Nadal.
b) Baby Novak appeared at the end of the weak era. The emergence of Djokovic and Murray was pivotal to shuffling the weakest era trash out of the top 10.

 

[Keizer]

a) Baby Novak was a much better hardcourt player than baby Nadal.
b) Baby Novak appeared at the end of the weak era. The emergence of Djokovic and Murray was pivotal to shuffling the trash out of the top 10.

LOL. Ok, so how do you explain Davydenko being 6-0 vs Nadal on Hard between 2008 and 2011 (after the end of the weak era as you define it). Or is the Nadal that won AO in 2009 and USO in 2010 crap on Hard too?

 

[Thriller]

LOL. Ok, so how do you explain Davydenko being 6-0 vs Nadal on Hard between 2008 and 2011 (after the end of the weak era as you define it). Or is the Nadal that won AO in 2009 and USO in 2010 crap on Hard too?

Nadal is not a natural hardcourt player. It took him ages to become the player who would eventually win 4 US Opens.
AO2009, Federer was a mental midget, he'd been losing hardcourt matches that he should have won in his sleep against Nadal since Dubai 2006. Is there anyone out there who understands how Nadal won that match other than by being extremely stubborn?
As Davydenko, Blake, Nalbandian etc ... hopeless halfwit players proved, Federer should have been routining Nadal on hardcourts every single time but he was a mental muppet against the Spaniard.

So during the period you described, Nadal was an improving hardcourt player with occasional great wins and also some serious lapses until he figured out his HC game. But 2022 hardcourt Ruud, Tiafoe, Alcaraz, Sinner etc would have destroyed that Nadal every single time.

 

[BGod]

For any one time I think you can find a weaker #2 than a 2 time Slsm finalist.

For career worst #2? Well here's the short-list:

Korda
Corretja
Norman

With Korda it basically boils down to his steroid use and beating Rios in the Final, but he also held the Stuttgart Masters. Corretja got it winning WTF and holding a Slam Final and Masters Final. Norman also had a Slam Final, Masters Title and another Slam Semi. All very close to be honest. But as one can see only Ruud technically holds no title above 250 and lowest point total (adjusted) due to Wimbledon points and cancelled tournaments.

I mean, personally I could argue Norman being the worst if seeing WTF>Masters and not downgrading Korda. Then comparing Norman to Ruud I mean, he's only 1 level down with a Slam SF vs. Final while winning a Masters vs. Final. But given the rankings climate Ruud has to slide for that.


So answer is yes, he's the worst #2 at this moment.

 

[Rattie]

Where would he be ranked if we included the normal points from Wimbledon? Probably need to also assume Medvedev would have won 2 or 3 matches there.

Did those sums yesterday if you’re interested.

If you add Wimbledon points to current rankings to the top 20 players…

I’ve seen a number of posts recently relating to players losing out on points they would have earned at WB22, so thought it might be interesting to see what those points would have looked like added to their current totals. Obviously Medvedev, Rublev and Khachanov didn’t even have that chance...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

 

[D.Nalby12]

He is irrelevant. Doesn't deserve so much attention.

 

[BeatlesFan]

RUud is like Michael Chang and Nishikori. Good ball strikers and quick on their feet but no major weapons.

Chang won 34 tournaments in his career and was without doubt the fastest tennis player in the OE. His speed was a devastating weapon.

 

[junior74]

Wawrinka never got higher than #3 in the three year stretch when he won 3 slams. Eras sure are different.

 

[80s New Wave]

Did those sums yesterday if you’re interested.

If you add Wimbledon points to current rankings to the top 20 players…

I’ve seen a number of posts recently relating to players losing out on points they would have earned at WB22, so thought it might be interesting to see what those points would have looked like added to their current totals. Obviously Medvedev, Rublev and Khachanov didn’t even have that chance...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Thanks, since ruud lost I assume he would be #3 behind Nadal then correct?

 

[Rattie]

Thanks, since ruud lost I assume he would be #3 behind Nadal then correct?

He would had WB points been awarded.