Unluckiest player

Unluckiest player ever

  • Total voters
    65
George Turner

George Turner

Hall of Fame
Who is the unluckiest player ever, being denied far more wins by freak situations, such as injury or freaky strong competition?

Vilas; Great claycourter who just couldn't do anything against Borg. Had the game to win the French three or four times instead of once. To add insult to injury he never got to no.1 despite winning 145 matches and 16 titles in 1977 due to a BS ranking system.

Mecir; *the big cat* was a guy the top players disliked playing, often losing to his delightfully simple, touch based game. Unfortunately he was helpless against Lendl, losing two majors to him. Had to retire aged just 26 due to back injury. More than likely would have got a major eventually. Did win Olympic gold.

Seles; Got stabbed when she was dominating Graf; would never be the same again and Graf never had another meaningful rival. Later on in her career she would often receive abuse about her weight. Amazingly the nut who stabbed her received no punishment.

Henman; Unlucky because he become a source of derision for his heartbreaking Wimbledon losses. In reality he never really had the game to win it, comparing his serve to Sampras' tells you that. His best opportunity in 2001 was stopped by a rain delay when he almost had Goran beat. Unlucky Tim.

Roddick; The grass court Vilas. Blew everyone away at Wimbledon in his prime except you know who, who was in constant god mode. The 2009 loss was the worst of all and pretty much summed up Roddicks career. Best player only to win 1 major.

Coria; That 2004 French meltdown against a guy who hardly belonged on the same court as him. In 2005 played an epic Rome final against Nadal, again losing the lead in the fifth. Then the yips struck (i've personally struggled with that!) and he was finished through no fault of his own.

Del Potro; looked ready to make the big four a big five in 2009 after an epic USO win over Federer *sniff.* Sadly he's since spent half his career injured and battling just to play tennis. Despite this he can still beat anyone, without his injuries he would surely have won a few more majors.

Murray; Ringo Starr of tennis, He's faced Fedalovic in 10 of his 11 major finals and plenty of semi finals. Murray would have loved to face Pernfors, Lewis, Washington, Pioline, Schuttler, Clement, Gaudio or Anderson in a few of his finals instead. Even second tier guys like Berdych and Cilic would be nice.
 
Not including Seles', from the list it would be Del Potro.

Other names not mentioned would be guys like Muster, Haas and Hewitt who all had big time injury problems.
 
I don't usually like making the excuse for players when the other players are better but Murray getting the 2 most successful Australian Open players by far in open era history in all his slam finals is pretty rotten luck. Federer and Djokovic managed to get lesser players than Nadal in their French Open finals to win it. You'd think Murray would get a lesser player once with all the AO finals he has made.
 
killerboi2 said:
I don't usually like making the excuse for players when the other players are better but Murray getting the 2 most successful Australian Open players by far in open era history in all his slam finals is pretty rotten luck. Federer and Djokovic managed to get lesser players than Nadal in their French Open finals to win it. You'd think Murray would get a lesser player once with all the AO finals he has made.
Click to expand...

Murray's faced three players with double digit majors. No other era has ever had more than 1 player of that calibre. That's incredibly bad luck!
 
NatF said:
He's also had the benefit of a pretty lackluster second tier of players and no serious threat from the next generation ;)
Click to expand...

I'd say his second tier is on par with other second tiers. For Berdych, Ferrer and Tsonga the 90's had Phillopousis, Chang and Martin. None of those guys would be much threat to Murray.

The next gen do look pretty rubbish but Murrays body appears to be breaking down so he's not benefited from that. He's very unlucky! :p
 
killerboi2 said:
I don't usually like making the excuse for players when the other players are better but Murray getting the 2 most successful Australian Open players by far in open era history in all his slam finals is pretty rotten luck. Federer and Djokovic managed to get lesser players than Nadal in their French Open finals to win it. You'd think Murray would get a lesser player once with all the AO finals he has made.
Click to expand...

Sure Djokovic is amazing at AO, but when Mandy can't even take a break set off him (took just 1 break set in 5 meetings + 3 tiebreakers), that doesn't invite much sympathy. Meanwhile, Wawrinka took 7 sets off Djokovic in 3 AO meetings, of which 6 break sets.
 
George Turner said:
I'd say his second tier is on par with other second tiers. For Berdych, Ferrer and Tsonga the 90's had Phillopousis, Chang and Martin. None of those guys would be much threat to Murray.

The next gen do look pretty rubbish but Murrays body appears to be breaking down so he's not benefited from that. He's very unlucky! :p
Click to expand...

Murray benefited from in in at least 2015-2016 when most of those guys should have been hitting their strides (Federer did as well mind you). Let's not forget that the Big 3 have had their share of injuries over the years, Murray has rarely had to compete with all three of them at a high level - it's not like Djokovic was actually playing well in the finals of Wimbledon 2013 or the USO 2012 either :p Murray is well worthy of his three majors but I don't think he's particularly unlucky when he's played some real stinkers in slam finals.

Not sure Philippoussis was consistent enough to be a second tier in the 90's, he and Chang were definitely better players than Berdych, Ferrer and Tsonga though.
 
Seles wins this hands down.

A few other ladies I would have put in the poll

Suzanne Lenglen: became ill shortly after turning pro, eventually died of Leukemia in 1939
Tracy Austin: Career cut horribly short due to injuries and a car crash
Maureen Connolly: Tennis career ended at the age of 19, the year after winning the calendar year slam, due to a horse riding accident. Sadly this wasn't the end of her bad luck, she would die of cancer in 1969 at just 34 years old.

All of those make guys like Coria not seem very unlucky at all.
 
God dammit not another Murray thread. If we're talking about non-injury related bad luck Lendl should be on here too. He'd have won double digit slams if born 5+ years later.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Sure Djokovic is amazing at AO, but when Mandy can't even take a break set off him (took just 1 break set in 5 meetings + 3 tiebreakers), that doesn't invite much sympathy. Meanwhile, Wawrinka took 7 sets off Djokovic in 3 AO meetings, of which 6 break sets.
Click to expand...

Yeah he should have done better in every final definitely. Still, it's a strange situation where he has made final that many times and gotten the 2 most successful players at that event by a clear margin in every one of them.
 
NatF said:
Murray benefited from in in at least 2015-2016 when most of those guys should have been hitting their strides (Federer did as well mind you). Let's not forget that the Big 3 have had their share of injuries over the years, Murray has rarely had to compete with all three of them at a high level - it's not like Djokovic was actually playing well in the finals of Wimbledon 2013 or the USO 2012 either :p Murray is well worthy of his three majors but I don't think he's particularly unlucky when he's played some real stinkers in slam finals.

Not sure Philippoussis was consistent enough to be a second tier in the 90's, he and Chang were definitely better players than Berdych, Ferrer and Tsonga though.
Click to expand...

Murrays record in those finals resembles Agassi vs Sampras at the US, Becker vs Sampras at Wimbledon, or Fed vs Nadal at the French. When one player is just that little bit better than the other on a particular surface it doesn't often go 5 sets. Murray has been unlucky to not face a weaker opponent occasionally, thats the bad luck of being in the fedalovic era!

Phillopousis was more talented than Ferrer/Berdych but that didn't mean he had consistency, never got higher than eighth in the world! Chang is the 90's Ferrer. i don't see them as any better than todays nearly men.

Different perspectives :)
 
George Turner said:
Murray's faced three players with double digit majors. No other era has ever had more than 1 player of that calibre. That's incredibly bad luck!
Click to expand...
The 60s had that. Laver, Emerson, and Rosewall are all ATG's who go right up there with the Big 3. So guys like Tony Roche were swept away in the current. Roche would have definitely won more than 1 Roland Garros title if he hadn't lost so many finals to those 3.
 
killerboi2 said:
Yeah he should have done better in every final definitely. Still, it's a strange situation where he has made final that many times and gotten the 2 most successful players at that event by a clear margin in every one of them.
Click to expand...
Djokovic vs Murray at AO is the same as Federer vs Nadal at RG. One guy has a season ticket to the title and the second best guy keeps getting denied.
 
King No1e said:
Djokovic vs Murray at AO is the same as Federer vs Nadal at RG. One guy has a season ticket to the title and the second best guy keeps getting denied.
Click to expand...
It is known

If Soderling had not gotten the massive mono, he would have reached an AO final to lose to Murray after beating Djokovic one day.

Come to think of it.

Soderling deserves a mention.
 
King No1e said:
The 60s had that. Laver, Emerson, and Rosewall are all ATG's who go right up there with the Big 3. So guys like Tony Roche were swept away in the current. Roche would have definitely won more than 1 Roland Garros title if he hadn't lost so many finals to those 3.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the sentiment e.g. trying to do justice to the older greats but this is really off base :D For one Emerson isn't in the same sentence as Laver or Rosewall, he won all his majors when the best players in the world were absent. Secondly Roche excelled on clay in the amateur era but once the Open Era arrived it was grass not clay that Laver and Rosewall denied him on.
 
killerboi2 said:
I don't usually like making the excuse for players when the other players are better but Murray getting the 2 most successful Australian Open players by far in open era history in all his slam finals is pretty rotten luck. Federer and Djokovic managed to get lesser players than Nadal in their French Open finals to win it. You'd think Murray would get a lesser player once with all the AO finals he has made.
Click to expand...
Except that for Federer to get a non-big 3 opponent in the final only Djokovic and Nadal would have to get knocked out. For Murray all 3 of Djokovic, Federer, Nadal would have to lose earlier. The odds are way lower because even if, say, Federer and Djokovic lose early you'd expect Nadal to take advantage.
 
NatF said:
I appreciate the sentiment e.g. trying to do justice to the older greats but this is really off base :D For one Emerson isn't in the same sentence as Laver or Rosewall, he won all his majors when the best players in the world were absent. Secondly Roche excelled on clay in the amateur era but once the Open Era arrived it was grass not clay that Laver and Rosewall denied him on.
Click to expand...
You're right about Roche and grass surface, but point still stands that he was like the Andy Murray of that era. Plus even if Emerson dominated a weak era, he has 12 GS and is one of the best ever.
In fact I would even go so far as to say Laver and Rosewall combined were greater than Federer and Nadal combined
 
Red Rick said:
It is known

If Soderling had not gotten the massive mono, he would have reached an AO final to lose to Murray after beating Djokovic one day.

Come to think of it.

Soderling deserves a mention.
Click to expand...
Soderling was even more unlucky than Del Potro. Robin proved that he could hang with the big 4 for the first two years of the Dominance Era (2010/2011). He was #4 for World Championship 2010, ahead of Murray. Del Potro got a few comebacks and 1 GS to his name. Soderling never got either.
 
King No1e said:
You're right about Roche and grass surface, but point still stands that he was like the Andy Murray of that era. Plus even if Emerson dominated a weak era, he has 12 GS and is one of the best ever.
In fact I would even go so far as to say Laver and Rosewall combined were greater than Federer and Nadal combined
Click to expand...

Nadal brings the average down unfortunately :( ;)

In all seriousness I rate both Federer and Nadal above Rosewall, and Federer above Laver. But the 60's guys were great.

Emerson isn't one of the best ever though, would probably be Jim Courier level a best in a combined field.
 
NatF said:
Nadal brings the average down unfortunately :( ;)

In all seriousness I rate both Federer and Nadal above Rosewall, and Federer above Laver. But the 60's guys were great.

Emerson isn't one of the best ever though, would probably be Jim Courier level a best in a combined field.
Click to expand...
In terms of achievements though Emerson is in an all-time great. Maybe if he didn't have such weak competition he wouldn't, but it is how it is.
In my opinion I would rate Laver as #1, then Federer, then Connors, then Rosewall, then Nadal.
 
King No1e said:
In terms of achievements though Emerson is in an all-time great. Maybe if he didn't have such weak competition he wouldn't, but it is how it is.
In my opinion I would rate Laver as #1, then Federer, then Connors, then Rosewall, then Nadal.
Click to expand...

Amateur achievements can't be taken at face value when compared to today. You can call him an ATG but the reality is he was never the best player in the world.
 
NatF said:
He's also had the benefit of a pretty lackluster second tier of players and no serious threat from the next generation ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, but ALL the top players have benefited from that. Murray had to try and contend with not one, not two but THREE double-digit Slam winning ATGs! Utterly unprecedented and utterly unlucky! :cool:
 
King No1e said:
Soderling was even more unlucky than Del Potro. Robin proved that he could hang with the big 4 for the first two years of the Dominance Era (2010/2011). He was #4 for World Championship 2010, ahead of Murray. Del Potro got a few comebacks and 1 GS to his name. Soderling never got either.
Click to expand...
Soderling didn't beat any of the Big 4 in 2011. His prime/peak was 2009-2010. And he was stopped by Fedal in 6 of the 8 majors contested in those 2 years. Underrated player. He was denied more times by Fedal than Djokovic and Murray were in 2009-2010, which speaks volumes.

A shame mono ended his career when he was only 27 years old. Would have been interesting having him in the mix post 2011.
 
Mainad said:
Yes, but ALL the top players have benefited from that. Murray had to try and contend with not one, not two but THREE double-digit Slam winning ATGs! Utterly unprecedented and utterly unlucky! :cool:
Click to expand...
Murray and his coach had one thing in common: they both had really tough competition during their careers.
 
Seles is the obvious choice although the word 'tragedy' springs to mind in her case rather than mere 'bad luck'. She is in an entirely different class to the others on the list so I confined my choice to merely unlucky players. For me, it was a toss-up between Roddick and Del Potro but finally decided that Delpo's series of wrist surgeries coming so soon after he won his 1st (and, to date, only) Slam was wretchedly unlucky and probably derailed a real potential for making it to the very top!

Think Kvitova should have been added to the list. The long-term effects of her damaged hand due to an assult from an intruder have yet to fully play out and may have permanently interrupted her progress as a player.
 
mike danny said:
Soderling didn't beat any of the Big 4 in 2011. His prime/peak was 2009-2010. And he was stopped by Fedal in 6 of the 8 majors contested in those 2 years. Underrated player. He was denied more times by Fedal than Djokovic and Murray were in 2009-2010, which speaks volumes.

A shame mono ended his career when he was only 27 years old. Would have been interesting having him in the mix post 2011.
Click to expand...
Your stats are true, but I think Soderling will only be remembered for RG 2009 and 2010. He played good tennis to reach these finals, but the outcome of both finals was NID.
 
Ricky Vol said:
Your stats are true, but I think Soderling will only be remembered for RG 2009 and 2010. He played good tennis to reach these finals, but the outcome of both finals was NID.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he wasn't a tough slam final opponent. If only he had played better in those matches.
 
George Turner said:
Murray's faced three players with double digit majors. No other era has ever had more than 1 player of that calibre. That's incredibly bad luck!
Click to expand...

It's more bad timing than luck. After all, if you asked me who would regularly make finals in slam events, it would likely be those players that happen to be the better ones...
 
Seles by far. That must've been a horrifying event to see for many tennis fans. :(

Other unlucky players include Muster, Lendl, Hewitt, etc.
 
mike danny said:
Soderling didn't beat any of the Big 4 in 2011. His prime/peak was 2009-2010. And he was stopped by Fedal in 6 of the 8 majors contested in those 2 years. Underrated player. He was denied more times by Fedal than Djokovic and Murray were in 2009-2010, which speaks volumes.

A shame mono ended his career when he was only 27 years old. Would have been interesting having him in the mix post 2011.
Click to expand...
What? Soderling wasn't already declining in 2011. He was just rising higher and higher. Granted he didn't beat any B4, but in 2011 he was securing his spot as a top 5 perennial. His loss to Tomic at Wimbledon then cut it short. His win at RG09 was supposed to be his breakthrough, but unfortunately it ended up being his most notable achievement. It's like Andy Murray abruptly ending his career in 2009; his 08USO final would have been his greatest achievement instead of his first big one.
 
Seles was going to be the GOAT until that maniac stabbed her, its not just unlucky, its way more than just "unlucky"

Plain unlucky though, I would say Murray. Kinda stuck in a bad time period when he has to compete with the arguably three greatest players of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Adman
(UOAT) Unluckiest player of all times?
2 3
Replies
140
Views
4K
Deleted member 765728
D
T
Is Tommy Haas the unluckiest player of his generation?
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
Deleted member 307496
D
S
Unluckiest Player ever at a Grand Slam is ....Becker
Replies
42
Views
4K
Camilio Pascual
C
M
Is Murray the unluckiest player ever
4 5 6
Replies
270
Views
7K
RS
RS
lud
Luckiest and unluckiest players of all time?
2
Replies
75
Views
4K
racquetreligion
racquetreligion
Back
Top