What former player's status on GOAT and ATG lists would be changed most by adding one particular win to their resume?

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
For example - if Lendl wins one Wimbledon - gives him a career Slam and 9 Slams - sort of puts him on his own level on GOAT/ATG lists away from Connors and Agassi (I know some already rank him higher, but I feel that win would put him on a different tier).

Lendl is just one example. Who's legacy and ranking would be changed the most with one additional tournament win, and which tournament? Doesn't have to be someone at the top of GOAT/ATG rankings obviously - could be someone going from 4 to 5 Slams, for example.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
For example - if Lendl wins one Wimbledon - gives him a career Slam and 9 Slams - sort of puts him on his own level on GOAT/ATG lists away from Connors and Agassi (I know some already rank him higher, but I feel that win would put him on a different tier).

Lendl is just one example. Who's legacy and ranking would be changed the most with one additional tournament win, and which tournament? Doesn't have to be someone at the top of GOAT/ATG rankings obviously - could be someone going from 4 to 5 Slams, for example.
Give Rosewall or Gonzales just one Wimbledon singles title, and they have a huge itch scratched in their resume.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Hall of Fame
Borg with a US Open in 81 against Mac would be massive. It would not only destroy the haters argument that he retired to run away from an opponent he felt he could not beat but would add even more “what if” to his career (basically giving him a CGS back then).
 

Xavier G

Hall of Fame
I think something like this for the following players.

Connors: Wimbledon 1977 final vs Borg when he lost a close five-setter. He never did get a win over Bjorn on the Wimby grass and this win would have strengthened Jimmy's hold on the no.1 spot at the time.

Borg: One of the US Open finals he lost. Maybe 1980 would be the most important, considering he lost a five setter to Mac who was seriously challenging him for no.1 status.

McEnroe: The French Open 1984. He was cruising to victory in the final in his best year ever, but lost his composure and allowed Ivan to get back into the match.

Lendl: One of the two Wimbledon finals he lost in 1986 and 1987, though he never came particularly close to winning either. Wimbledon is the biggest most prestigious title imo and even more so back then. Really, any of the Wimbledons from 1986-1990 when he reached the latter stages would be the most important, imo.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Hall of Fame
I think something like this for the following players.

Connors: Wimbledon 1977 final vs Borg when he lost a close five-setter. He never did get a win over Bjorn on the Wimby grass and this win would have strengthened Jimmy's hold on the no.1 spot at the time.

Borg: One of the US Open finals he lost. Maybe 1980 would be the most important, considering he lost a five setter to Mac who was seriously challenging him for no.1 status.

McEnroe: The French Open 1984. He was cruising to victory in the final in his best year ever, but lost his composure and allowed Ivan to get back into the match.

Lendl: One of the two Wimbledon finals he lost in 1986 and 1987, though he never came particularly close to winning either. Wimbledon is the biggest most prestigious title imo and even more so back then. Really, any of the Wimbledons from 1986-1990 when he reached the latter stages would be the most important, imo.
Slightly disagree about Borg. A win in 81 would have been even better all things being equal. If he had won in 80 he would still have lost both slam matches in 81 before he retired, so people would still have seen it as a passing of the torch and Borg running away from him. With 81 it would mean that he basically retired with a win against Mac.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Slightly disagree about Borg. A win in 81 would have been even better all things being equal. If he had won in 80 he would still have lost both slam matches in 81 before he retired, so people would still have seen it as a passing of the torch and Borg running away from him. With 81 it would mean that he basically retired with a win against Mac.
Although Borg had won a h2h series against Mac in 1981...Borg really had nothing more to prove.

I hate to say this, but not winning on the new artificial surface of the U.S. Open does not hurt anyone's reputation in my book.
 

Xavier G

Hall of Fame
Slightly disagree about Borg. A win in 81 would have been even better all things being equal. If he had won in 80 he would still have lost both slam matches in 81 before he retired, so people would still have seen it as a passing of the torch and Borg running away from him. With 81 it would mean that he basically retired with a win against Mac.
Main reasons I prefer 1980 is Borg took it to five sets in a better match and if he'd won, he could have travelled to Australia for the final leg of the Grand Slam that year. In 1981, McEnroe had already dethroned him at Wimbledon.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Hall of Fame
Although Borg had won a h2h series against Mac in 1981...Borg really had nothing more to prove.

I hate to say this, but not winning on the new artificial surface of the U.S. Open does not hurt anyone's reputation in my book.
This is true and I fully agree with you. People who know tennis also know that Borg had nothing to prove and did not run away. Most people however do not know about the H2H series. You can hear it also in this forum that many still think Mac was the reason that Borg retired. I also agree that Borg proved with three finals out of four attempts that he could play in US Open HC (he was not like Sampras at the French). However, a win in his last match against his main rival Mac would have killed any hater arguments and would have boosted his reputation even more.
 

BGod

Legend
Roger again at either 08 Wimbledon or 09 USO. Could have retired in after 12 and be firmly GOAT.

That means either 7 consecutive Wimbledons or all 4 Slams. You also have residual outcomes like does Fed lose 09 AO if he wins 08 Wimbledon? Does he get upset at 10 Wimbledon or choke USO? What about 2011 Wimbledon and USO?
 

DMP

Professional
Hoad - if he beats Rosewall in the 1956 US final he achieves the Grand Slam. With all the usual caveats about it being amateur it would still be seen as a big plus to his resume.

Serena if she had won any of the recent finals she has lost. Then she would have equaled Margaret Court's record.

Both events probably given much bigger emphasis than they should because very few people care enough, or know enough, about tennis history to put player's achievements into any sort of realistic perspective.
 

timnz

Legend
I think something like this for the following players.

Connors: Wimbledon 1977 final vs Borg when he lost a close five-setter. He never did get a win over Bjorn on the Wimby grass and this win would have strengthened Jimmy's hold on the no.1 spot at the time.

Borg: One of the US Open finals he lost. Maybe 1980 would be the most important, considering he lost a five setter to Mac who was seriously challenging him for no.1 status.

McEnroe: The French Open 1984. He was cruising to victory in the final in his best year ever, but lost his composure and allowed Ivan to get back into the match.

Lendl: One of the two Wimbledon finals he lost in 1986 and 1987, though he never came particularly close to winning either. Wimbledon is the biggest most prestigious title imo and even more so back then. Really, any of the Wimbledons from 1986-1990 when he reached the latter stages would be the most important, imo.
Actually I think Lendl’s chances for winning Wimbledon were better in 1989. He was leading Becker in the semis. If he won that match he would play Edberg who wasn’t playing as well as in 88 or 90
 

jrepac

Hall of Fame
Borg at the US, Connors at FO, Lendl at W surely would have upped the reps a bit more. Rosewall at W as well. How about Becker at FO? He would have had all 4 on his CV then.
 

2ndServe

Hall of Fame
Lesson learned

don't do stupid stuff to turn a crowd of 10000+ people against you

Mcenroe in 1984 cruising and did something to ignite the crowd against him

Hingis French Open against Graf, Graf had the chink in the armor there and Hingis was rolling. She kept complain over 1 line call. Crowd went against her and Graf comes of out. This drastically, along with Seles stabbing changed her career as she mentally wasn't dominate for awhile. Hingis career was never the same after this, but it's so long ago this is what I remembered.
 

Xavier G

Hall of Fame
Actually I think Lendl’s chances for winning Wimbledon were better in 1989. He was leading Becker in the semis. If he won that match he would play Edberg who wasn’t playing as well as in 88 or 90
Any of those years would have done for Ivan.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Hoad - if he beats Rosewall in the 1956 US final he achieves the Grand Slam. With all the usual caveats about it being amateur it would still be seen as a big plus to his resume.

Serena if she had won any of the recent finals she has lost. Then she would have equaled Margaret Court's record.

Both events probably given much bigger emphasis than they should because very few people care enough, or know enough, about tennis history to put player's achievements into any sort of realistic perspective.
Hoad was not physically able to win the GS in 1956, his back gave out right after Wimbledon, he had to take time off and he avoided grass preparation for

Forest Hills. And really you had Gonzales, Sedgman, Trabert, Segura all as pros in 1956.

If I were compiling a list of top grass wins for Hoad, the 3 amateur GS titles would be below about 6 of his pro grass wins, all of which boasted strong opposition.
 

urban

Legend
No excuses for Hoad in 1956, please. He won Hamburg after Wim (no bad back) lost to old Patty at Munich 6-1, 6-0, 2-6, 5-7, 4-6 (no bad back), and reached the final at Forest Hills. Maybe his serve was a bit affected by the strong wind at the final, but he certainly was not injured, because he won the doubles later and a week later Toronto over Davidson in for sets. Maybe after Toronto he had a loss of form, losing some fnals in Australia.
 

Come Awwn!

New User
Andre Agassi, US Open 1995. But more from what winning that match would have meant to Andre personally than simply adding one US Open title and a victory over his biggest rival. The fallout from losing that match had such a massive effect on Andre both as a competitor and a person that it is impossible to say how is career (and life) would have turned out if he had been the victor. I don't know if his career would have been better, worse but I am pretty confident it would have been very different.

The following US Open final could have had a pretty significant impact on Michael Chang's career as well. A win there moves Chang from the one-time GS winner to multi-slam winner category and possibly vaults him to the number one ranking. Chang could then go from not even in the conversation to honorable mention status, probably not too far off from Hewitt.
 

BTURNER

Legend
I know this does not answer the question posed, but then we already have plenty of posts that stray a little to the left or right. Evert needed one more
Wimbledon, but more important she needed to beat a very specific player to do it and she needed it to be at a specific time in their careers, and then her career and legacy look very different. She desperately needed to beat Navratilova on Centre court between 1982-1988 and walk away with her fourth. No other opponent does the same thing, and no other time frame does either. Even a victory over a Court or a King in the 70's fails to accomplish this. The victory itself was tantalizingly close so damn often.
she had three setters in 1985, 1987, and 1988 and with the quality of her play in 1986, I don't doubt that, had she prevailed in that semi, Martina would have been in another absorbing dangerous tussle. Of course in the later two, she earns herself only the same scenario she found in 1988 Aussie. She's not going to beat Graf in 1988 after Graf has found her full grass game and confidence from winning three majors, but I give Evert better odds than other distinguished posters, here, should she reach her 11th? final vs a woman who had never gone past the fourth round before and only a month prior won her first major.

Four Wimbledons and even one victory over a Martina on Centre Court when Martina has reached her zenith as an athlete and competitor, makes a world of difference in how Evert is perceived in the record books and the GOAT ledger. Chris does not surpass her because its just one out of a lot of consecutive losses at the US Open and Wimbledon, but people stop calling her a winner on clay, and consigning her to 'more consistent' as a door prize. It becomes little harder to ignore that grass record and game that left her the sport's perennial maid of honor and always second or third best player on grass. When you are playing in the era of Court, King, Goolagong and Martina...it somehow seems so unfair to leave it at that.

What she did in grass court majors over 19 years, would have been seen as remarkable by itself for a baseliner in that era, but for that damn woman with the bionic arm and the quickest sprint in tennis heretofore.
 
Last edited:

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
1984 French Open. This loss hurts a lot for Mac. He was 42-0 heading into that match. If Mac holds the 2 set lead(including 4-2 lead in the 4th set), then he has a great shot at having the best season ever. That also gives him 8 slam titles, along with the insane season. This match allows McEnroe to leapfrog a few players in the rankings.

Even with that loss to Lendl, Mac started out 62-1 for the year. 1984 is definitely a woulda coulda shoulda year. Even as it sits today, his 82-3 record in 1984 is the best winning pct in history.

This loss stinks big time. This one still hurts a ton as a fan.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
No excuses for Hoad in 1956, please. He won Hamburg after Wim (no bad back) lost to old Patty at Munich 6-1, 6-0, 2-6, 5-7, 4-6 (no bad back), and reached the final at Forest Hills. Maybe his serve was a bit affected by the strong wind at the final, but he certainly was not injured, because he won the doubles later and a week later Toronto over Davidson in for sets. Maybe after Toronto he had a loss of form, losing some fnals in Australia.
He chose to play on clay at Hamburg and Toronto, rather than grass in U.S. at Newport. Newport was the principal preparation for Forest Hills.
Clay is different, you can trade groundies, which is less stressful on the back than S&V on grass.

Hoad was confined to bed right after Wimbledon with back pain, and cancelled his flight to the U.S., buying a ticket on the Queen Mary, which would be less stressful on his back.
Again in December, he spent the two days prior to the Davis Cup final in bed with back pain.

No, it was real and reduced his playing level after Wimbledon. He was put into a body cast for 6 weeks in early 1957.
 
Last edited:

pat200

Semi-Pro
Graf: French open 89 F, or French open 92 F. If she won either of these, there would be no doubt about who the real GOAT is, especially the 89 Final, which would have made it 9 slams in a row and 2 consecutive calendar year slams.
 

suwanee4712

Professional
Had Mandlikova beaten Evert in the 81 Wimbledon final she would've won 3 slams in a row heading into New York. Surely then she would've gotten a better seeding at the Open than fifth.

Perhaps the 86 Wimbledon might've been more impactful making Hana the player to have given Martina her last two losses there.

Either way, a Wimbledon title would've completed the career slam, only the fourth woman in the Open Era to do so. I think this would have put Hana somewhere between 10-12 in ATG list.

If not Wimbledon, then another French title would've solidified her reputation as a great clay court player. The French was her most consistent slam making the semis or better 5 times and only failing to reach her seeding once between 1979 and 1987 (85 French L to Kohde in QF).
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Federer - 2008 WI (7 straight WI titles and 3 straight finals wins vs Rafa) or 2009 USO (6 straight USOs and possible Rog Slam)

Nadal - 2017 AO or 2018 WI (could’ve put one of Fedovic away for good in the slam race with one of these two wins)

Djokovic - 2014 AO (6 straight AOs) or 2015 RG (CYGS)

Sampras - 1995 AO (could’ve had a 3-slam season; lack of a 3-slam season is what initially pushed him behind the big three all time imo)

Borg - 1980 US (his closest call at in NYC; given how insignificant the AO was then, Borg would’ve essentially won the CYGS and the career slam, which would likely place him over Sampras all time even if he were to still retire at 25)

Lendl - 1987 WI (career slam and 3-slam season; would’ve put him in Borg/Sampras territory all time)

McEnroe - 1984 RG (easy choice here. This choke ruined his perfect ‘84 season, chance for 3 slams in one year on all surfaces, woke up Lendl, and was clearly never the same beast after this one)

Connors - 1977 WI (would’ve ended Borg’s streak while putting himself in rare territory with 5 USOs and 3 WIs)

Edberg - 1989 RG (lost his best chance at the career slam to a 17 year old in 5 sets)

Murray - 2012 WI (3 Wimbledon’s alone would’ve put him in ATG territory)
 

clout

Hall of Fame
For women:

Serena - 2015 USO (would’ve matched Court and won the CYGS; she’d be the undisputed GOAT if she didn’t lose to Vinci of all ppl)

Graf - 1989 RG (lost a tight 3 setter to ASV; she would’ve won 9, yes 9, straight GS titles including 2 straight CYGS. Again, Steffi would’ve been the undisputed GOAT if this had happened)

Navratilova - 1984 AO (correct me if I’m wrong, but she would’ve won 8 straight majors if she had finished off Turnbill in the semis and drew Evert, whom she owned at the time, in the finals. Again Martina would’ve been a the front runner GOAT candidate with this insane stat)

Evert - 1981 AO (this match permanently turned the rivalry in Martina’s favour)

Henin - 2006 WI (no Williams sisters at Wimbledon this year gave Justine a clear path to the title in one of her peak years, but lost again to Mauresmo)

Sharapova - 2005 AO (she likely beats Davenport in the finals and would’ve went up 3-1 in the H2H against Serena. Not finishing this match permanently turned the matchup in Serena’s favour)

Hingis - 1997 RG (would’ve won the CYGS as a teen) or 1999 RG (never won a major again after this s*** show)

Venus - 2008 USO (would’ve beat Serena en route to her second straight major) or any/all of those finals losses to Serena back in 2002-03 (we'd be talking about Venus as the most dominant female tennis player at her peak post-2000)

Davenport - 2005 AO and 2005 WI (would’ve won 5 majors and beat both Williams sisters in the same year; 3 slams doesn’t do Lindsay’s amazing career any justice)

Azarenka - 2012 and 2013 USO (two straight backbreaking losses to Serena; had she won both, this would’ve put Azarenka in ATG territory)

Clijsters - 2001 RG (would’ve won her maiden RG title, and maybe wouldn’t have lost those future finals to Henin) or 2012 AO (in her last big chance at a major, she lost a tight semi against Azarenka, and surely would’ve won her 5th major over a subpar Sharapova)

Halep - 2014 RG, 2015 USO, 2017 RG, 2017 USO, and 2018 AO (for someone as young as Halep, she’s blown a lot of golden chances to become an undisputed ATG - she still has time to become one though)
 
Last edited:

PMChambers

Hall of Fame
Federer 2007 FO.
Grand Slam
7 Majors in row.
Beat Nadal on Clay near his peak.
The GS would give him a lot in the Major race. Especially against Nadal.
 

jrepac

Hall of Fame
Had Mandlikova beaten Evert in the 81 Wimbledon final she would've won 3 slams in a row heading into New York. Surely then she would've gotten a better seeding at the Open than fifth.

Perhaps the 86 Wimbledon might've been more impactful making Hana the player to have given Martina her last two losses there.

Either way, a Wimbledon title would've completed the career slam, only the fourth woman in the Open Era to do so. I think this would have put Hana somewhere between 10-12 in ATG list.

If not Wimbledon, then another French title would've solidified her reputation as a great clay court player. The French was her most consistent slam making the semis or better 5 times and only failing to reach her seeding once between 1979 and 1987 (85 French L to Kohde in QF).
Agree; always felt a win at W would have greatly bolstered Hana's CV. And, she was certainly capable of doing it. '86, I thought she would, honestly.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
No excuses for Hoad in 1956, please. He won Hamburg after Wim (no bad back) lost to old Patty at Munich 6-1, 6-0, 2-6, 5-7, 4-6 (no bad back), and reached the final at Forest Hills. Maybe his serve was a bit affected by the strong wind at the final, but he certainly was not injured, because he won the doubles later and a week later Toronto over Davidson in for sets. Maybe after Toronto he had a loss of form, losing some fnals in Australia.
By cancelling his flight to the U.S. and taking the long ocean cruise to rest his back, Hoad had to miss the Newport event, the principal preparatory event for Forest Hills.

He went straight from the Queen Mary to Forest Hills.
 
D

Deleted member 735320

Guest
For women:

Serena - 2015 USO (would’ve matched Court and won the CYGS; she’d be the undisputed GOAT if she didn’t lose to Vinci of all ppl)

Graf - 1989 RG (lost a tight 3 setter to ASV; she would’ve won 9, yes 9, straight GS titles including 2 straight CYGS. Again, Steffi would’ve been the undisputed GOAT if this had happened)

Navratilova - 1984 AO (correct me if I’m wrong, but she would’ve won 8 straight majors if she had finished off Turnbill in the semis and drew Evert, whom she owned at the time, in the finals. Again Martina would’ve been a the front runner GOAT candidate with this insane stat)

Evert - 1981 AO (this match permanently turned the rivalry in Martina’s favour)

Henin - 2006 WI (no Williams sisters at Wimbledon this year gave Justine a clear path to the title in one of her peak years, but lost again to Mauresmo)

Sharapova - 2005 AO (she likely beats Davenport in the finals and would’ve went up 3-1 in the H2H against Serena. Not finishing this match permanently turned the matchup in Serena’s favour)

Hingis - 1997 RG (would’ve won the CYGS as a teen) or 1999 RG (never won a major again after this s*** show)

Venus - 2008 USO (would’ve beat Serena en route to her second straight major) or any/all of those finals losses to Serena back in 2002-03

Davenport - 2005 AO and 2005 WI (would’ve won 5 majors and beat both Williams sisters in the same year; 3 slams doesn’t do Lindsay’s career any justice)

Azarenka - 2012 and 2013 USO (two straight backbreaking losses to Serena; had she won both, this would’ve put Azarenka in ATG territory)

Clijsters - 2001 RG (would’ve won her maiden RG title, and maybe wouldn’t have lost those finals to Henin) or 2012 AO (lost a tight semi against Azarenka, and would’ve won her 5th major over a subpar Sharapova)

Halep - 2014 RG, 2017 RG, 2015 USO, and 2018 AO (for someone as young as Halep, she’s blown a lot of golden chances to become an undisputed ATG - she still has time to become one though)
Sukova beat Martina in the 84 Aussie; Turnbull lost to Evert Lloyd in the other; Wendy beat Martina in the 80 Auusie semi
 

David Le

Hall of Fame
Agassi: ‘90 & ‘91 RG and obviously ’95 USO
Seles: Anything from ‘93-‘96 (because of the incident) Graf won basically everything she touched
 

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
A few not mentioned

1. Goolagong- Any of the USO Finals she had lost

2. Henin- Wimbledon, specifically eradicating the Bartoli choke or beating Mauresmo in 2006.

3. King- playing the AO in 1972. Even she has said she looks back and wishes she had played it...she odds on would have won the CYGS that year.

4. Roddick- 2009 Wimbledon.
 

PDJ

G.O.A.T.
Slightly different: But had Evert played the French from 1976-78 (whilst ridiculously dominant on clay) or the AO more than a scant 6 times, if the Wimbledon grass was as it is now, which would really suit Evert's game, then those tiresome GOAT discussions might be unnecessary.
But, priorities were different.
Hey ho.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Hall of Fame
Agassi at the US Open 95 is a good call. The question of the thread is however, which slam would add more to his status on the GOAT/ATG list so I think this slam per se would not mean much (9 vs 8 slams, 3 vs 2 USO). One could argue that this slam was the trigger for his slump in 96/97/98 but then again he also had problems in his marriage and even if it wasn’t for this slump who knows whether he had married Steffi and had won those slams at the end of his career. So all in all not sure whether much had changed. What I do think however is that this was the match which got Pete into his head in particular at the US Open. Had he won this match he might have won one of this encounters in 2001/2002.
 
1984 French Open. This loss hurts a lot for Mac. He was 42-0 heading into that match. If Mac holds the 2 set lead(including 4-2 lead in the 4th set), then he has a great shot at having the best season ever. That also gives him 8 slam titles, along with the insane season. This match allows McEnroe to leapfrog a few players in the rankings.

Even with that loss to Lendl, Mac started out 62-1 for the year. 1984 is definitely a woulda coulda shoulda year. Even as it sits today, his 82-3 record in 1984 is the best winning pct in history.

This loss stinks big time. This one still hurts a ton as a fan.
Could have gone to Australia and potentially completed a CYGS too.
 

Drob

Professional
Hoad - if he beats Rosewall in the 1956 US final he achieves the Grand Slam. With all the usual caveats about it being amateur it would still be seen as a big plus to his resume.

Serena if she had won any of the recent finals she has lost. Then she would have equaled Margaret Court's record.

Both events probably given much bigger emphasis than they should because very few people care enough, or know enough, about tennis history to put player's achievements into any sort of realistic perspective.
More so for Jack Crawford, who lost the US Nationals in a five-setter, and who is mostly forgotten, whereas Hoadie abides.
 

Drob

Professional
Sticking to former players as you laid out, I am thinking first about key finals (including Davis Cup and WCS) where the player had a good or very good chance to win, did not just get beat flat out, and which are matches not already mentioned:

Gobert - 1920 World Hard Court Championship (Laurentz)

Washer - 1923 World Hard Court Championship (Johnston)

Johnston - 1922 or '24 US National (Tilden)

Borotra - 1927 Wimbledon or '29 RG (Cochet; Lacoste)

Hunter - 1928 US National (Cochet); 1929 US National (Tilden)

Shields - 1930 US National

Plaa - 1932 French Pro (Ramillon)

Hopman - 1932 Australian (Crawford)

Vines - 1932 Davis Cup Challenge Round (Borotra) or 1933 Wimbledon (Crawford)

Crawford - 1933 US National (Perry)

Cramm - 1937 Davis Cup Interzone Final or 1937 US National or 1937 PSW (Budge)

Perry - May 10, 1937 in Plainfield, NJ (Vines)

Puncec - 1939 PSW (Bromwich)

Riggs - 1939 Davis Cup Challenge Round (Quist)

Petra - 1939 or 1946 MC

Nusslein - 1934 or '39 Wembley (Vines; Budge)

Kovacs - 1941 US National (Riggs)

Drobny - 1946 or 1950 RG (Bernard; Parker), or 1949 Wimbledon (Schroeder)

G. Brown - 1946 Wimbledon (Petra)

Parker - 1947 US National (Kramer)

Budge - 1947 US Pro (Riggs)

Bromwich - 1948 Wimbledon (Falkenburg), or '37, '49 or '50 Australian (McGrath; Pails; Quist)

Schroeder - 1949 US National (Gonzalez)

Patty - 1947 or 1959 MC (Berglein; Halliet)

Kramer - 1952 Wembley (Gonzalez)

Segura - 1957 or '59 Wembley (Rosewall; Anderson)

Gonzalez - 1956 or 1961 French Pro (RG) (Trabert; Rosewall)

Hoad - 1958 US Pro (Gonzalez) or 1962 Wembley (Rosewall)

Fraser - 1960 Australian (Laver), or 1959 Italian International (Ayala)

Ralston - 1964 Challenge Round (Stolle), or 1966 Wimbledon (Santana)

Santana - 1965 Davis Cup Challenge Round (Stolle & Emerson)

Stolle - 1965 Wimbledon (Emerson)

Gimeno - 1967 US Pro or 1967 French Pro (Laver)

Okker - 1968 USO (Ashe) or 1973 YEC (Nastase)

Nastase - 1971 Davis Cup World Group Final (Smith); 1972 World Group Final (Smith)

Ashe - 1972 USO (Nastase) or 1978 YEC (McEnroe)

Kodes - 1973 USO (Newcombe), or 1970 Italian Open (Nastase), or 1975 German Open (Orantes)

Panatta - 1977 World Group Final (Alexander), 1980 World Group Final (Smid), 1978 Italian Open (Borg)

Gerulaitis - 1981 YEC (Lendl)

Clerc - 1981 World Group Final (McEnroe)

Vilas - 1982 RG (Wilander)

Connors - 1984 World Group Final (Wilander)

Cash - 1987 or '88 AO (Wilander)

Muster - 1989 Key Biscayne (drunk driver)

Becker - 1990 Wimbledon (Edberg) or 1996 YEC (Sampras), or 1989, '91 or '95 MC (Mancini; Bruguera; Muster)

Lendl - 1988 or '89 USO (Wilander; Becker)

Noah - 1989 IW (Mecir)

Courier - 1993 RG (Bruguera), or '93 Wimbledon (Sampras), or '91 YEC

Brugera - 1995 Italian Open

Stich - 1996 RG (Kafelnikov) or '93 GSC (Korda)

Moya - 1998 YEC (Corretja) or '99 IW (Philippoussis)

Medvedev - 1999 RG (Agassi)

Haas - 1999 GSC

Rafter - 2000 or 2001 Wimbledon (Sampras; Ivanisevic), or 1999 Italian Open (Kuerten), or 2000 World Group Final (Ferrero)

Kuerten - 2000 Key Biscayne (Sampras)

Agassi - 1991 RG (Courier) or 2002 USO (Sampras) or 1998 GSC (Rios), or 2000 YEC (Kuerten)

Ferrero - 2002 YEC (Hewitt)

Safin - 2002 AO (Johannson) or 2000 German Open (Kuerten)

Roddick - 2004 Wimbledon (not just '09), or 2004 World Group Final (Nadal) or 2010 IW (Ljubicic)

Ferrer - 2011 MC (Nadal) or 2013 Key Biscayne (Murray)
 
Last edited:

Drob

Professional
Gobert - up-and-coming player before The Great War, winning Olympic Gold in 1912 and finalist at WHCC in 1913, losing to Tony Wilding; was Wimbledon finalist, and beat Wilding at British Covered Courts. Won French Covered Courts three times, British Covered Courts four times and European Covered Courts. Also French National Ch., beating Decugis in CR, the World Covrered Court Championship, an ILTF official world championship. Had some good wins against top players in 1920 and 21. The WHCC would have given him a Slam and perhaps pushed him close to the first rate, after five years lost at war.

Hunter - four-time Slam finalist (one Wimbledon, one US Pro). Tilden's doubles partner in late 1920s. Both US National finals went five sets.

Borotra - thought he had won the '27 Wimbledon final when his shot on match point grazed Cochet's racket (by nearly all accounts) but the umpire hesitated and asked Cochet who gave a non-reply and play resumed. The 1929 RG final vs. Lacoste was a taut battle, 6-8 in the fifth. I'd like to read about it. Either of these matches goes the other way and the relative positions among the three alters notably.

Hopman - he was the world's most famous coach (or Captain), but he was almost a champion.

Vines - He could not get it done at Davis Cup. The following year he lost to Perry in the Interzone Final.

Perry - he wins that match in Plainfield, and he takes a 30-29 lead in the WCS, instead of other way around. Vines won 32-29. Perry lost the match 7-9, 6-4, 3-6. Who knows?

Nusslein - Hans won Wembley, and every other major pro title. But a win at Wembley over Vines (whom he had beaten at US Pro) or, especially, the great Don Budge, might have raised him out of his semi-obscurity.

Puncec - In his mid-twenties, the Croatian was coming into his own just before WWII. In 1938-39 he posted a 19-1 Davis Cup singles record, won MC, semifinalist twice at Wimbledon and at RG; success on Riviera circuit. Primarily clay-courter, but Wimbledon shows he had promise on grass and a PSW would have made him world champ on cement. Returning after war, he was 33 years old and had lost the verve.

Petra - An elite clay-court title would have complemented Petra's Wimbledon triumph. WWII prisoner of war. In his early twenties, just before the war, compiled 6-1 Davis Cup record, won Coupe Noel and finalist at MC. In 1946 was semifinalist at RG, won Wimby, finalist at MC and 5-1 DC record. Made quarters at RG and Wimbledon in 1947. Thereafter barely played. Indications are he would have been a force during 1940-45.

Kovacs - after Rios, maybe the greatest talent to never win a Slam.

Budge - You'd think it wouldn't matter what, if anything Budge accomplished after the War. But Don badly wanted the '47 US Pro. He hoped by beating Riggs that he might get picked to tour with Jack Kramer. By some accounts he good have used the money. He had played Riggs near even in the '46 WCS and during their Euro-Africa tour in early '47. But Don and his wife were enjoying hanging out with Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra and their gang, and he was drinking. Riggs was in better physical condition and outlasted the erstwhile god in five sets.

Bromwich - such a splendid player - and unorthodox! Six years lost to War, including grueling service in the Pacific infantry. Lost Wimbledon final after holding several match points. A shame . . . no shame on Bromwich. He did win a couple of Australians; seven New South Wales (Sydney); four Victorian (Melbourne); PSW; Queen's Club; beat Budge in '37 and Cramm at Australian '38; 22-7 DC singles, including heroics at '39 Challenge Round in US; 3-time SF at US Nationals; 13 men's doubles Slam titles. Another player who would have won some Slams singles titles during the war years.

Patty - with a victory in either of those two MC finals, Patty would have achieved winning the four jewels of clay-court tennis: RG, Italian, German/Madrid and MC (Clay-Court Grand Slam), a feat realized by only six players, I believe (Drobny, Pietrangeli, Vilas, Kuerten, Nadal, Djokovic)

Drobny - Or a second Wimbledon, or third RG, either w/in grasp, would be significant enhancement to his rep.

Kramer - strangely less effective at big pro tournaments than WCS. Had Jake won this Wembley final, it might have damped down strong suspicions that he feared a WCS rematch with Gonzalez, and reaffirmed his No. 1 status.

Segura - won three US Pros in early 1950s. He remained a fiery competitor on the pro circuit, tied overall with Trabert and Hoad, better than 40 percent against Sedgman, and similar versus Kramer, and competitive with anyone. Won Aussie Pro and Masters Pro in late his 30s and was winning tournaments into his 40s. A Wembley title would have been nice.

Fraser - one heck of a athletic, power player for a brief period. One of the best serves in history. Back-to-back U.S. Nationals and beat Laver at 1960 Wimbledon final. DC singles record of 11-1 and hat-trick at '59 Challenge Round. Aussie 1960 would have given him his national championshp. Italian 1959 would have highlighted his versatility. Did win New South Wales twice and Victorian. Semifinalist at RG.
 
Last edited:

urban

Legend
Good list by Drob. Like Federer, Bill Tilden is a goat candidate anyway. But in 1927, he was awfully close to win the RG-Wim double against Lacoste (2 mp) resp. Cochet (big 5-0 lead in the third), a feat which would have enhanced his status even further. Ironically, those close defeats made his impact on memory even greater.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
More so for Jack Crawford, who lost the US Nationals in a five-setter, and who is mostly forgotten, whereas Hoadie abides.
Yes, in the grand scheme of things, you are absolutely right. Hoad had other more important achievements than an amateur GS.

Crawford deserved that 1933 GS, his drinks were spiked by friends at the U.S. final, he led 2 sets to one, would have won if sober.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Gobert - up-and-coming player before The Great War, winning Olympic Gold in 1912 and finalist at WHCC in 1913, losing to Tony Wilding; was Wimbledon finalist, and beat Wilding at British Covered Courts. Won French Covered Courts three times, British Covered Courts four times and European Covered Courts. Also French National Ch., beating Decugis in CR, the World Covrered Court Championship, an ILTF official world championship. Had some good wins against top players in 1920 and 21. The WHCC would have given him a Slam and perhaps pushed him close to the first rate, after five years lost at war.

Hunter - four-time Slam finalist (one Wimbledon, one US Pro). Tilden's doubles partner in late 1920s. Both US National finals went five sets.

Borotra - thought he had won the '27 Wimbledon final when his shot on match point grazed Cochet's racket (by nearly all accounts) but the umpire hesitated and asked Cochet who gave a non-reply and play resumed. The 1929 RG final vs. Lacoste was a taut battle, 6-8 in the fifth. I'd like to read about it. Either of these matches goes the other way and the relative positions among the three alters notably.

Hopman - he was the world's most famous coach (or Captain), but he was almost a champion.

Vines - He could not get it done at Davis Cup. The following year he lost to Perry in the Interzone Final.

Perry - he wins that match in Plainfield, and he takes a 30-29 lead in the WCS, instead of other way around. Vines won 32-29. Perry lost the match 7-9, 6-4, 3-6. Who knows?

Nusslein - Hans won Wembley, and every other major pro title. But a win at Wembley over Vines (whom he had beaten at US Pro) or, especially, the great Don Budge, might have raised him out of his semi-obscurity.

Puncec - In his mid-twenties, the Croatian was coming into his own just before WWII. In 1938-39 he posted a 19-1 Davis Cup singles record, won MC, semifinalist twice at Wimbledon and at RG; success on Riviera circuit. Primarily clay-courter, but Wimbledon shows he had promise on grass and a PSW would have made him world champ on cement. Returning after war, he was 33 years old and had lost the verve.

Petra - An elite clay-court title would have complemented Petra's Wimbledon triumph. WWII prisoner of war. In his early twenties, just before the war, compiled 6-1 Davis Cup record, won Coupe Noel and finalist at MC. In 1946 was semifinalist at RG, won Wimby, finalist at MC and 5-1 DC record. Made quarters at RG and Wimbledon in 1947. Thereafter barely played. Indications are he would have been a force during 1940-45.

Kovacs - after Rios, maybe the greatest talent to never win a Slam.

Budge - You'd think it wouldn't matter what, if anything Budge accomplished after the War. But Don badly wanted the '47 US Pro. He hoped by beating Riggs that he might get picked to tour with Jack Kramer. By some accounts he good have used the money. He had played Riggs near even in the '46 WCS and during their Euro-Africa tour in early '47. But Don and his wife were enjoying hanging out with Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra and their gang, and he was drinking. Riggs was in better physical condition and outlasted the erstwhile god in five sets.

Bromwich - such a splendid player - and unorthodox! Six years lost to War, including grueling service in the Pacific infantry. Lost Wimbledon final after holding several match points. A shame . . . no shame on Bromwich. He did win a couple of Australians; seven New South Wales (Sydney); four Victorian (Melbourne); PSW; Queen's Club; beat Budge in '37 and Cramm at Australian '38; 22-7 DC singles, including heroics at '39 Challenge Round in US; 3-time SF at US Nationals; 13 men's doubles Slam titles. Another player who would have won some Slams singles titles during the war years.

Patty - with a victory in either of those two MC finals, Patty would have achieved winning the four jewels of clay-court tennis: RG, Italian, German/Madrid and MC (Clay-Court Grand Slam), a feat realized by only seven players, I believe (Drobny, Pietrangeli, Borg, Vilas, Kuerten, Nadal, Djokovic)

Drobny - Or a second Wimbledon, or third RG, either w/in grasp, would be significant enhancement to his rep.

Kramer - strangely less effective at big pro tournaments than WCS. Had Jake won this Wembley final, it might have damped down strong suspicions that he feared a WCS rematch with Gonzalez, and reaffirmed his No. 1 status.

Segura - won three US Pros in early 1950s. He remained a fiery competitor on the pro circuit, tied overall with Trabert and Hoad, better than 40 percent against Sedgman, and similar versus Kramer, and competitive with anyone. Won Aussie Pro and Masters Pro in late his 30s and was winning tournaments into his 40s. A Wembley title would have been nice.

Fraser - one heck of a athletic, power player for a brief period. One of the best serves in history. Back-to-back U.S. Nationals and beat Laver at 1960 Wimbledon final. DC singles record of 11-1 and hat-trick at '59 Challenge Round. Aussie 1960 would have given him his national championshp. Italian 1959 would have highlighted his versatility. Did win New South Wales twice and Victorian. Semifinalist at RG.
Great evaluations.

Only quibbles....Segura, Budge, Hoad...the big losses they took were post-prime and should not affect their evaluations overall.

Segura won the Sydney TOC in 1957, L.A. Masters 1958, U.S. Pro in 1950, 1951...these were big wins, dwarfed his losses at Wembley.

Budge prime 1937-1942, post war "was not the same player" (Riggs' evaluation), his second career 1946-1954 not the same, well post prime. Budge should be

evaluated on prime period, pre-injury. Injured in 1943, never recovered his serve.

Hoad the same as Budge, two careers. Prime 1956-1961, post prime 1962-1967. Two different players. Also in Hoad's case, different results on grass vs.

artificial surface. Hoad and Budge both out of shape after prime periods, liked to hoist the beer mugs.
 

Drob

Professional
Good list by Drob. Like Federer, Bill Tilden is a goat candidate anyway. But in 1927, he was awfully close to win the RG-Wim double against Lacoste (2 mp) resp. Cochet (big 5-0 lead in the third), a feat which would have enhanced his status even further. Ironically, those close defeats made his impact on memory even greater.
I guess I view Tilden as beyond the vicissitudes of a single match. I view Laver that way also - beyond any single match, regardless he may still feel the sting of Dallas. I sort of felt that way about Budge, but for what I explained as my understanding of his attitude in 1947.

That RG loss to Lacoste seems a darn shame, with Bill apparently hitting the match-winning ace. Al Laney wrote that Lacoste was on the way to the net to congratulate him. Even with a WHCC and French Pro, plus innumerable other significant clay-court titles, that French Int'l Ch of Tennis would have really been a boost, even to Tilden's resume. It also would have made the Tilden-Lacoste head-to-head different. So I can see the value of your rec.

The '27 Wimbledon SF is just a mystery.

Didn't Tilden also nearly beat Vines at '35 Wembley final at 42-years of age? That would have been something too.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
I guess I view Tilden as beyond the vicissitudes of a single match. I view Laver that way also - beyond any single match, regardless he may still feel the sting of Dallas. I sort of felt that way about Budge, but for what I explained as my understanding of his attitude in 1947.

That RG loss to Lacoste seems a darn shame, with Bill apparently hitting the match-winning ace. Al Laney wrote that Lacoste was on the way to the net to congratulate him. Even with a WHCC and French Pro, plus innumerable other significant clay-court titles, that French Int'l Ch of Tennis would have really been a boost, even to Tilden's resume. It also would have made the Tilden-Lacoste head-to-head different. So I can see the value of your rec.

The '27 Wimbledon SF is just a mystery.

Didn't Tilden also nearly beat Vines at '35 Wembley final at 42-years of age? That would have been something too.
I think that with Budge and Hoad, you have to take account ofo injury impact on their games.

Budge tore his shoulder muscle in 1943 and never got his first serve back.

Hoad was playing with a pulled thigh muscle in that 1958 Cleveland final, so I doubt that he could have won it.
 

Drob

Professional
I think that with Budge and Hoad, you have to take account ofo injury impact on their games.

Budge tore his shoulder muscle in 1943 and never got his first serve back.

Hoad was playing with a pulled thigh muscle in that 1958 Cleveland final, so I doubt that he could have won it.
"If you're hurt you don't play; if you play you aren't hurt."
 

Drob

Professional
Roy Emerson said that. Aussie creed. And professional sports creed. You think Hoad was some kind of wimp?

Stop it, damn it.

You posted to me two weeks ago you were going to avoid using the "H word." Stick to what you said and Avoid Using the H word.

Hoad had a lousy record in Major finals. Accept it.

He may be one of the 10 most talented ever. He may be a type of folk hero. But he lost when it counted far more than he won.
 
Top