Who do you think should have won more slams than they did or didn't in ATP and WTA??

#1
Who do you think if they were more consistent and stayed injury free and lived upto their full potential would have ended up with a lot more slams than they do now(active). No Big three please (they already have many). I think Tsonga, del potro, kvitova.
 

BGod

Hall of Fame
#3
Nalbandian should have had at least 5 and injuries were a problem for him for sure but he also underachieved/choked in several tournaments.

Juan martin del Potro is the go to pick for good reason. Guy made semifinal at the French then won USO coming back 1-2 against the 5-time defending champ. All at 20. He absolutely would have won 5-7.
 
#4
I agree with most of the names mentioned, though "should" is always a tricky proposition I'll have to think more about WTA players. Tommy Haas (injuries) comes to mind for me, and going way back, I think Nastase, if equipped with a better temperament, had the talent to achieve a lot more.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
#8
Seles is the obvious pick in the women’s game.

I think that it’s beteeen Muster and Delpo in the men’s game. Delpo really hit a bad string of injured after his incredible 2009 season.

I cannot believe that Muster came back after getting his knee torn up when he was hit by that drunk driver. But I believe that his demolished knee costed him some slam titles for sure.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
#9
How Safin only won 2 slams is beyond me. If he had his act together, should have cleaned up from 2000 to 2004, then another 2-3 slams during Fedal’s peak years (of which he got 1). Unfortunately he was too busy chasing the supermodels and clubbing. Resulting in poor conditioning, followed by injuries.
 
#10
Nalbandian should have had at least 5 and injuries were a problem for him for sure but he also underachieved/choked in several tournaments.

Juan martin del Potro is the go to pick for good reason. Guy made semifinal at the French then won USO coming back 1-2 against the 5-time defending champ. All at 20. He absolutely would have won 5-7.
You overdo it. Djokovic and Nadal would him not allow him to win as much GS titles.
 
#16
Every player, ever should have more wins than they do/did if they live up to their potential. The problem is, you have to actually win matches against other players. Ifs don't mean anything.
 
#22
Off the top of my mind, of the best/most talented players that never have won a slam (that I've seen), Mecir, Rios, Nalbandian, and Monfils have to be towards the top of the list. The top underachievers in my opinion are Safin and Ivanisevic, who had the ability to win way more. Roddick was unlucky to have just one Slam title, given that he made five finals (2009 Wimbledon was probably the 2nd one he should have snagged).
 

sredna42

Professional
#25
He's undoubtedly already been mentioned, but my favourite player Nalbandian. He should have had 4 or 5, was IMO as good as or better than Fed talent wise, and was the most savage underachiever in tennis.
 
#28
Del Potro should have won 4 or 5, Nalbandian should have won 3 or 4, Murray should have won at least 6, Safin should have won at least 7, Tsonga should have won 1 or 2 and so are Monfils and Gasquet...talking about 80's and 90's players, Chang should have absolutely won at least 5 or 6 times as many as he did, Courier should have won just a couple more, Kuerten should have won TWICE as many RG titles as he did if not more! Gerulaitis should have won a a couple more! On women's end, Novotna should have won at least 4 or 5 Wimbledons, Sabatini should have won at least 7 and i'm very serious! Mandlikova could have won just a couple more, Goolagong Cawley was exceptional in my book and should have went double digits! (nothing too over the top though, maybe in 10-12 slams range!), Justine Henin should have went double digits as well and achieved career grand slam at least once (better yet - twice...), Venus Williams shouldn't have collapsed in the beginning of this decade as well the way she did and should have kept winning slams along with sister (12+ slams range very likely!), Capriati twice as many as she did, Mauresmo between 6 and 8...and Hingis...boy is she the biggest underachiever of them all! The girl should have been like grand slam tally record holder amongst women by now! And i'm not even kidding!
 
#31
Roddick, w/o a doubt. Should have had at least 1 Wimbledon (if not 2). Michael Chang as well (won 1 of 4 slam finals). Marat Safin certainly had the talent to win more. If he wasn't such a hedonist (womanizer & party guy), he would have had more. But he undoubtedly had fun and "did it his way".

Simona Halep has made it to 4 slam finals (1 AO & 3 RG). She should really have 2 RG titles under her belt already. She will likely reach another final in the next few years. She may or may not achieve another slam title.
 
Last edited:
#33
I won't mention names that have already been said, but even Serena should have won more.

Her mid 00's record should have been way better and that was the best time for her to extend that 02-03 form.

That being said, I think Henin and Venus should have won more too but all these 3 players were in the same period so it is what it is lol.
 
Top