Which slam champions has Zverev eclipsed?

[Pheasant]

Many in a recent poll said that Zverev is the greatest 0-slam champion ever. I won’t dispute that. He’s got 10 big titles now and a decent amount of deep runs at slams.

My question is, how many slam champions has he passed?

I can think of 4 right off the bat.

1. Thomas Johannson- thanks to Safin being seen by other tennis players drinking at a bar the night before the 2002 AO championship match, this guy walked into a title. Despite being gifted that match, he still only finished 14th that year. His best finish was 13th 3 years later. This one is a no-brainer.

2. Mark Edmondson: the highest ranking that he ever hit was #15. A fluke run does not a legend make.

3. Gaston Gaudio: He was the benefit of the biggest choke in slam history. What he did outside of that choke was not memorable all all.

4. Brian Teacher: he had a cakewalk draw in the 1980 AO to bag that title. He played nobody in the top-10. This was a joke of a draw. His highest ranking ever was #7.

I’m sure that I’m missing a bunch more. Who else would you put Zverev ahead of?

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

I don’t think Z has eclipsed any of them. He can do it by winning a slam.

 

[buscemi]

I think Kriek would come next, and I think that's probably it.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

 

[Winner Sinner]

As an Italian I also add Panatta and Pietrangeli.
Zverev is a player in terms of career and absolute value superior to both of them, no doubt about it.

Panatta danced at the top only in 1976, where he won Rome and Paris, helping to bring Italy the first Davis Cup in its history.
That year it reached its best ranking at No. 4, ending the season at No. 7.
For the rest of his career he did not do better first or after than n°14 at the end of the season.
The only other prestigious tournament he won outside of Rome and Paris was in Stockholm.

I think that even a Berrettini could have the tools to be considered a player with a better career than Panatta, let alone Zverev.

As for Pietrangeli, I reiterate that he achieved those successes in an era where most of the best players of his era were professionals playing an alternative circuit.
I would keep pre-Open era tennis players out of these discussions, too many variables to take into consideration.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I think there would be a bunch more.
The entire RG winners list until Nadal came along is full of obscure 1 time winners. Albert Costa/Moya/Ferrero. Many of them I would say are below Zverev.

 

[buscemi]

I think there would be a bunch more.
The entire RG winners list until Nadal came along is full of obscure 1 time winners. Albert Costa/Moya/Ferrero. Many of them I would say are below Zverev.

I think he has a solid case over Costa. Moya and Ferrero, who each reached #1 and the final of a hard court Major, would be tougher to topple.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I think he has a solid case over Costa. Moya and Ferrero, who each reached #1 and the final of a hard court Major, would be tougher to topple.

I don't think ranking is a problem. His atp points would be higher than both of them. The rankings follow what was competition around you.
Ferrero maybe but not Moya.

 

[ChrisRF]

I don't even like him, but in all seriousness: As an Olympic champion (and in addition to that two-time Slam finalist, two-time WTF champion and 7-time Masters champion) he eclipsed MOST of them.

The better debate would be two-time Slam champions who didn't win much else.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I don't even like him, but in all seriousness: As an Olympic champion (and in addition to that two-time Slam finalist, two-time WTF champion and 7-time Masters champion) he eclipsed MOST of them.

The better debate would be two-time Slam champions who didn't win much else.

Not really most of them. 1/4 of them most likely. Half of them are level with him.

1/4 of them are very far ahead of him.

 

[Hitman]

None of them, he needs a slam.

 

[Dominic & Andrey]

Maybe Gaudio, maybe.

 

[buscemi]

I don't even like him, but in all seriousness: As an Olympic champion (and in addition to that two-time Slam finalist, two-time WTF champion and 7-time Masters champion) he eclipsed MOST of them.

The better debate would be two-time Slam champions who didn't win much else.

Here's the list of 1 Major winners for reference:

Gimeno​

Orantes​

Edmondson​

Panatta​

Tanner​

Gerulaitis​

Teacher​

Noah​

Cash​

Chang​

Gómez​

Stich​

Muster​

Krajicek​

Korda​

Moyá​

Ivanišević​

Johansson​

Costa​

Ferrero​

Roddick​

Gaudio​

del Potro​

Čilić​

Thiem​

Medvedev​

 

[Berrettini_Fan]

He's not even the best player ever without a slam. That honor belongs to Casper Ruud.

 

[nolefam_2024]

He's not even the best player ever without a slam. That honor belongs to Casper Ruud.

Frek ruud

250 king

 

[tennis_pro]

He could win another 30 Masters and 5 WTFs and it won't matter.

Comparing a Slamless dude to someone with a Slam, even if it's Gaudio, Gaudio comes on top no matter what.

It's a different story with comparing a 1-Slam winner to 2-Slam winners (many people would put Roddick over Kafelnikov despite the 1 Slam difference), because at least he proved he can do it. Zverev hasn't.

 

[NoleFam]

I've never seen a player with this kind of resume have no Slams. I think he really blew that RG final, and blew the USO final as well.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I've never seen a player with this kind of resume has no Slams. I think he really blew that RG final, and blew the USO final as well.

And many 1 time winners blew many finals
Thiem 3 before
Medvedev 2 before
Goran 3 before

Its fine. He wins 1 slam and he is right there in the middle of 1 time slam winners

 

[NoleFam]

And many 1 time winners blew many finals
Thiem 3 before
Medvedev 2 before
Goran 3 before

Its fine. He wins 1 slam and he is right there in the middle of 1 time slam winners

They didn't blow all those finals. Some of those were beatdowns so I wouldn't call that blowing them. He was up 2 sets to 0, and 2 sets to 1 in both finals and lost both. After this past RG final, I'm not sold he will ever win 1.

 

[nolefam_2024]

They didn't blow all those finals. Some of those were beatdowns so I wouldn't call that blowing them. He was up 2 sets to 0, and 2 sets to 1 in both finals and lost both. After this past RG final, I'm not sold he will ever win 1.

Ivanisevic did.

 

[travlerajm]

Frek ruud

250 king

Ruud is the best Bo5 specialist not to win a slam.
Zverev is the best Bo3 specialist not to win a slam.

If they face each other in the ATP finals, bet on Z.
If they face each other in a slam, take Casper.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Ruud is the best Bo5 specialist not to win a slam.
Zverev is the best Bo3 specialist not to win a slam.

If they face each other in the ATP finals, bet on Z.
If they face each other in a slam, take Casper.

Do not care about this comment at all. Just came to say

 

[buscemi]

Ruud is the best Bo5 specialist not to win a slam.

Don't agree on this. Ruud has a 65.8% winning percentage in BO5. Just looking at the first two contenders who came to mind, Mecir is 72.1% and Nalbandian is 71.2%.

 

[travlerajm]

Don't agree on this. Ruud has a 65.8% winning percentage in BO5. Just looking at the first two contenders who came to mind, Mecir is 72.1% and Nalbandian is 71.2%.

But how many slam finals have those others reached?
Ruud came within 1 match of becoming #1.

 

[NatF]

Lol at any clown saying Ferrero.

 

[nolefam_2024]

But how many slam finals have those others reached?

Covid bans giving ranking a whirl and a 250 king cheap finals don't change our mind

Worst player to be world number 2 ever

 

[travlerajm]

Worst player to be world number 2 ever

I agree he has a strong case for that too.

However, I think you may be devaluing what it takes to outperform your Bo3 record in slams.

 

[buscemi]

But how many slam finals have those others reached?

Two for Mecir and one for Nalbandian.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Don't agree on this. Ruud has a 65.8% winning percentage in BO5. Just looking at the first two contenders who came to mind, Mecir is 72.1% and Nalbandian is 71.2%.

Zverev is better than both at 74% and when he wins his first slam, he will tip over to 75+%

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

I'm not part of ABZ but he's gotta win one to be in the conversation. We must respect the past champions. Vamos and Bamos and all of that.

He is currently in the conundrum Drederick Tatum was in before last summer. @Poisoned Slice

 

[Tennfan123]

None.
Players primarily play for slams. None of those players would swap their slam winning day.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

For what it's worth I think Alexander would tell you the same thing. He knows how important it is, which is what could propel him to finally winning one. Could he take out Sinner/Alcaraz or both to do it? That might be too big an ask.

I think he will win at least a slam though . Best chance probably on the mud. A draw would have to implode a bit for it to happen elsewhere.

Is his baseline play better than some slam champions? Maybe. But untestable therefore unprovable therefore irrelevant therefore unacceptable. (@Sport ) So a slam win must be procured.

 

[nolefam_2024]

For what it's worth I think Alexander would tell you the same thing. He knows how important it is, which is what could propel him to finally winning one. Could he take out Sinner/Alcaraz or both to do it? That might be too big an ask.

I think he will win at least a slam though . Best chance probably on the mud. A draw would have to implode a bit for it to happen elsewhere.

Is his baseline play better than some slam champions? Maybe. But untestable therefore unprovable therefore irrelevant therefore unacceptable. (@Sport ) So a slam win must be procured.

Its not too big an ask

GOAT had 3 years straight between 2012 to 2014 where he won just 1 slam a year

Slams are hard to come by and no reason to believe Sineraz will win all next year.

 

[NatF]

His resume on paper is probably the best of the non-slammers, but the era he's competed in and his record at the slams themselves despite his two finals leaves a lot to be desired. Rating him over one slam wonders is fine, but most players that broke through and won a major did so because they were simply better than Zverev. Look at his first run to a major final, a parade of mugs and then he chokes and plays one of the most pitiful finals we've ever seen. This is supposed to be an achievement we use to elevate him to the level of guys like Krajicek, who toppled peak F-ing Sampras on his way to a Wimbledon title, or Pat Cash who went through three ATG's without dropping a set (albeit not in their preferred conditions or in the case of Jimbo in their primes) to win Wimbledon? Is he greater than Gimeno who was consistently a top 3/4 player behind only giants of the pre-open era like Pancho, Rosewall and Laver?

Any slam winner who was also number one is automatically ahead of Zverev IMO. I would say any slam winner who actually had multiple deep runs at the majors as well because Zverev hasn't shown the game or mental fortitude to convert on the biggest stages yet.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Here's the list of 1 Major winners for reference:

Gimeno​

Orantes​

Edmondson​

Panatta​

Tanner​

Gerulaitis​

Teacher​

Noah​

Cash​

Chang​

Gómez​

Stich​

Muster​

Krajicek​

Korda​

Moyá​

Ivanišević​

Johansson​

Costa​

Ferrero​

Roddick​

Gaudio​

del Potro​

Čilić​

Thiem​

Medvedev​

Looking at this list he looks better than half of them at the very least.

 

[Dominic & Andrey]

Noah > Zverev.

 

[nolefam_2024]

When Andy Murray had 0 slams, he was the most eligible 0 slam winner
When Andy Murray had 1 slams, he was the most eligible 1 slam winner
When Andy Murray had 2 slams, he was the most eligible 2 slam winner
When Andy Murray had 3 slams, he was the most eligible 3 slam winner

The same is not true for Zod. Even if he wins slams.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

None.
Players primarily play for slams. None of those players would swap their slam winning day.

Correct answer, but certain people on this board scrape the bottom of every barrel to find some credit to give to the tennis washout called Zverev, who consistently proved he was a failure in not doing the thing players enter the sport to do: win majors and above that--if they are on the greatest level-- win the Grand Slam. Zverev is--up to this point in his career--a failure. Trivia and meaningless stats do not change that.

 

[GloW]

maybe med

 

[GloW]

Ruud is the best Bo5 specialist not to win a slam.
Zverev is the best Bo3 specialist not to win a slam.

If they face each other in the ATP finals, bet on Z.
If they face each other in a slam, take Casper.

thats a joke. just because ruud has more grand slam finals doesn't mean he is better in bo5 then zverev.

 

[thrust]

He's not even the best player ever without a slam. That honor belongs to Casper Ruud.

Zverev, IMO definitely, has the superior career to Ruud, who has never won a masters title as far as I know. Ruud's major achievement is reaching 3 slam finals in which he lost.

 

[GloW]

But how many slam finals have those others reached?
Ruud came within 1 match of becoming #1.

same with zverev but he got injured.

 

[travlerajm]

thats a joke. just because ruud has more grand slam finals doesn't mean he is better in bo5 then zverev.

Ok but Ruud has a better inside-out fh and wears his headband better.

 

[nam416]

He could win another 30 Masters and 5 WTFs and it won't matter.

Comparing a Slamless dude to someone with a Slam, even if it's Gaudio, Gaudio comes on top no matter what.

It's a different story with comparing a 1-Slam winner to 2-Slam winners (many people would put Roddick over Kafelnikov despite the 1 Slam difference), because at least he proved he can do it. Zverev hasn't.

It wasn't Andy who proved he could do it, it was the officials who robbed Nalby of his rightful win the wrong call(s). The less said about Andy's Final opponent, the better.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

The funny thing is if Zverev wins ONE slam, he has a case at being the strongest 1-slam winner ever. That's how good his career is outside slams.

7M1000, 2 YEC and 1 Olympic Gold.

But I would not be shocked at all if he never wins one. He's 28 soon.

Better career than those 4, Kriek and others.

 

[nolefam_2024]

The funny thing is if Zverev wins ONE slam, he has a case at being the strongest 1-slam winner ever. That's how good his career is outside slams.

7M1000, 2 YEC and 1 Olympic Gold.

But I would not be shocked at all if he never wins one. He's 28 soon.

Better career than those 4, Kriek and others.

Does he? I don't think so.

Meddy is far ahead.

 

[zakopinjo]

He is better than all the winners of 1 slam(except Del Potro).

 

[ChaelAZ]

 

[GloW]

Ok but Ruud has a better inside-out fh and wears his headband better.

Zverev better BH, 1st serve, 2nd serve, knowledge of the game, experience, fire power, and better chainz.

 

[tennis_pro]

It wasn't Andy who proved he could do it, it was the officials who robbed Nalby of his rightful win the wrong call(s). The less said about Andy's Final opponent, the better.

He won in the end. And Ferrero wasnt some mug, he was a top top player for a couple of years and was a very competent rival on HC.