Worst of the 2 time winners

see above

  • nastase

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Kriek

    Votes: 18 37.5%

  • Brugera

    Votes: 8 16.7%

  • Kafelnikov

    Votes: 7 14.6%

  • Safin

    Votes: 4 8.3%

  • Hewitt

    Votes: 2 4.2%

  • Smith

    Votes: 4 8.3%

  • Rafter

    Votes: 4 8.3%
  • Total voters
    48
I really don't know kriek, smith and nastase so I can't comment on them (I know their names but have not seen them unless maybe a 2 minute clip).

out of the modern guys kafelnikov might be a good choice.
 
I would say Kriek, but I consider the Australian Open to have only started sometime from 1985-1988, before that disregarding all the obvious "joke slam" only based winners (aka the kriek types), while not totally disregarding but slightly diminishing even the worthy ones (aka not kriek types) who won vs depleted competition, so with that said I go with Kafelnikov the weakest of the real 2 slam winners.

From best to worst:

1. Smith- arguably player to beat in 71 and 72.
2. Nastase- most talented by far.
3. Safin- due to sheer level of play in 2 wins.
4. Hewitt- hard to rank any higher considering he probably would be 0 slam winner if he didnt peak in transitional era, hard to rank any lower considering he is a 2 time year end #1 and 2 time WTF winner as well, and made people like Kafelnikov his slave.
5. Rafter- won 2 slams at tail end of Sampras era, beating some good players. Late bloomer, remained a major factor and threat for majors until retirement.
6. Bruguera- very good clay specialist, but not alot of Clay Masters for a 2 time RG winner. Virtual non entity on any other surface.
7. Kafelnikov- somehow slipped through the cracks to win 2 majors, was never seen as a major factor or threat in the mens game even in his prime.
8. Kriek- Australian Open as it once was.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
safin might have been the best based on his level of play and opponents beat (prime fed and sampras).

outside of those years he was quite dissapointing for extended periods (lots of early round losses even in his prime) but when he was on he was really dangerous.
 
soyizgood said:
2 slams + Olympic gold.
Click to expand...

Everyone of those other players apart from Kriek (who I disregard as a real slam winner anyway) has won numerous Masters titles. Kafelnikov couldnt even win a single one (nor the WTF). Multiple Masters > Olympic singles gold, especialy back in 2000.
 
Johan Kriek....I think his 2 Australians were in a depleted uncaring field....he had the same guy in the final for 2 years.

I wanna say Kalfenikov.....but seeing his matches he was quite good. He was just an unlikable person.

Brugera was a great claycourter.....he earned his titles beating Courier.
 
Kriek...I have never really heard of him or the guy he beat in both of his major finals. I had to look him up because I could not even recall his first name off hand. The guy he beat in the finals was a nobody really to, except for beating J Mac in 1 final. In the jam packed 80's talent group...Kriek is like...nobody.
 
Kriek, as was stated, the AO was not the same high quality tourney as it is today. The bugger was lightening fast though.
 
In order of greatness

Nastase
Smith
Hewitt
Safin
Rafter
Kafelnikov
Brugera
Kriek

Now before anyone gives Kriek too hard a time, you have to remember that he beat McEnroe 5 times, four times of which on indoor carpet which was McEnroes best surface.
 
Last edited:
It seems a consensus mostly.

Nastase and Smith the top 2 in one order or another
Safin and Hewitt 3rd and 4th best in one order or another
Rafter 5th
Kafelnikov and Bruguera 6th and 7th in one order or another
Kriek last

The two people who voted for Hewitt and Safin are clueless idiots btw.
 
Here are their major wins:

Stan Smith
1971 US Open
R128: Stan Smith def. Raul Ramirez (6-0, 6-2, 7-6)
R64: Stan Smith def. Brian Fairlie (6-2, 7-5, 6-2)
R32: Stan Smith def. Tom Leonard (6-2, 6-3, 4-6, 6-3)
R16: Stan Smith def. Milan Holecek (7-5, 3-2 ret.)
QF: Stan Smith def. Marty Riessen (7-6, 6-2, 7-6)
SF: Stan Smith def. Tom Okker (7-6, 6-3, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3)
FR: Stan Smith def. Jan Kodes (3-6, 6-3, 6-2, 7-6)

1972 Wimbledon
R128: Stan Smith def. Hans-Joachim Ploetz (6-1, 6-1, 6-3)
R64: Stan Smith def. Hank Irvine (6-4, 9-8, 6-3)
R32: Stan Smith def. Sandy Mayer (6-3, 7-5, 3-6, 9-7)
R16: Stan Smith def. Ian Fletcher (8-6, 4-6, 6-2, 6-4)
QF: Stan Smith def. Alex Metreveli (6-2, 8-6, 6-2)
SF: Stan Smith def. Jan Kodes (3-6, 6-4, 6-1, 7-5)
FR: Stan Smith def. Ilie Nastase (4-6, 6-3, 6-3, 4-6, 7-5)

Ilie Nastase
1972 US Open
R128: Ilie Nastase def. Jairo Velasco Sr. (6-0, 6-2, 6-0)
R64: Ilie Nastase def. Roger Taylor (7-5, 6-2, 6-7, 2-6, 7-6)
R32: Ilie Nastase def. Patrice Dominguez (6-3, 5-7, 6-2, 6-3)
R16: Ilie Nastase def. Bob Hewitt (6-4, 6-4, 6-2)
QF: Ilie Nastase def. Fred Stolle (6-4, 3-6, 6-3, 6-2)
SF: Ilie Nastase def. Tom Gorman (4-6, 7-6, 6-2, 6-1)
FR: Ilie Nastase def. Arthur Ashe (3-6, 6-3, 6-7, 6-4, 6-3)

1973 French Open
R128: Ilie Nastase def. Jaime Pinto-Bravo (6-1, 6-4)
R64: Ilie Nastase def. Jiri Hrebec (6-2, 6-4)
R32: Ilie Nastase def. Jurgen Fassbender (6-2, 6-1, 6-3)
R16: Ilie Nastase def. Francois Jauffret (6-4, 6-2, 6-4)
QF: Ilie Nastase def. Roger Taylor (6-0, 6-2, 7-6)
SF: Ilie Nastase def. Tom Gorman (6-3, 6-4, 6-1)
FR: Ilie Nastase def. Nikola Pilic (6-3, 6-3, 6-0)

Johan Kriek
1981 Australian Open
R64: Johan Kriek def. Drew Gitlin (6-2, 7-5, 6-1)
R32: Johan Kriek def. Thomas Hogstedt (6-2, 6-4, 7-6)
R16: Johan Kriek def. Chris Lewis (7-5, 7-5, 3-6, 2-6, 6-4)
QF: Johan Kriek def. Tim Mayotte (7-6, 6-3, 7-5)
SF: Johan Kriek def. Mark Edmondson (6-0, 7-6, 7-5)
FR: Johan Kriek def. Steve Denton (6-2, 7-6, 6-7, 6-4)

1982 Australian Open
R64: Johan Kriek def. Mike De Palmer (6-3, 3-6, 6-2, 7-6)
R32: Johan Kriek def. Eric Sherbeck (6-1, 7-6)
R16: Johan Kriek def. Charlie Fancutt (6-2, 6-2)
QF: Johan Kriek def. Drew Gitlin (6-0, 6-4, 6-1)
SF: Johan Kriek def. Paul McNamee (7-6, 7-6, 4-6, 3-6, 7-5)
FR: Johan Kriek def. Steve Denton (6-3, 6-3, 6-2)

Sergi Bruguera
1993 French Open
R128: Sergi Bruguera def. Henri Leconte (7-6, 6-1, 6-0)
R64: Sergi Bruguera def. Thierry Champion (6-0, 6-0, 6-0)
R32: Sergi Bruguera def. Magnus Larsson (6-1, 6-3, 6-1)
R16: Sergi Bruguera def. Fernando Meligeni (6-3, 6-1, 7-5)
QF: Sergi Bruguera def. Pete Sampras (6-3, 4-6, 6-1, 6-4)
SF: Sergi Bruguera def. Andrei Medvedev (6-0, 6-4, 6-2)
FR: Sergi Bruguera def. Jim Courier (6-4, 2-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-3)

1994 French Open
R128: Sergi Bruguera def. Martin Damm (6-1, 6-1, 7-6)
R64: Sergi Bruguera def. Christian Ruud (6-2, 6-2, 7-6)
R32: Sergi Bruguera def. Ronald Agenor (6-3, 6-3, 6-3)
R16: Sergi Bruguera def. Patrick Rafter (6-4, 6-3, 6-1)
QF: Sergi Bruguera def. Andrei Medvedev (6-3, 6-2, 7-5)
SF: Sergi Bruguera def. Jim Courier (6-3, 5-7, 6-3, 6-3)
FR: Sergi Bruguera def. Alberto Berasategui (6-3, 7-5, 2-6, 6-1)

Yevgeny Kafelnikov
1996 French Open
R128: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Galo Blanco (6-1, 6-3, 6-3)
R64: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Thomas Johansson (6-2, 7-5, 6-3)
R32: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Felix Mantilla (6-4, 6-2, 6-2)
R16: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Francisco Clavet (6-4, 6-3, 6-3)
QF: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Richard Krajicek (6-3, 6-4, 6-7, 6-2)
SF: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 6-0, 6-2)
F: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Michael Stich (7-6, 7-5, 7-6)

1999 Australian Open
R128: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Jonas Bjorkman (6-3, 6-2, 6-4)
R64: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Jason Stoltenberg (7-5, 3-6, 7-6, 7-6)
R32: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Jim Courier (5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 3-0 ret.)
R16: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Andrei Pavel (6-3, 7-6, 6-7, 3-6, 6-4)
QF: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Todd Martin (6-2, 7-6, 6-2)
SF: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Tommy Haas (6-3, 6-4, 7-5)
F: Yevgeny Kafelnikov def. Thomas Enqvist (4-6, 6-0, 6-3, 7-6)

Patrick Rafter
1997 US Open
R128: Patrick Rafter def. Andrei Medvedev (6-3, 6-4, 7-5)
R64: Patrick Rafter def. Magnus Norman (6-2, 6-1, 6-2)
R32: Patrick Rafter def. Lionel Roux (6-1, 6-1, 6-2)
R16: Patrick Rafter def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 7-6, 4-6, 6-3)
QF: Patrick Rafter def. Magnus Larsson (7-6, 6-4, 6-2)
SF: Patrick Rafter def. Michael Chang (6-3, 6-3, 6-4)
FR: Patrick Rafter def. Greg Rusedski (6-3, 6-2, 4-6, 7-5)

1998 US Open
R128: Patrick Rafter def. Hicham Arazi (4-6, 4-6, 6-3, 6-3, 6-1)
R64: Patrick Rafter def. Hernan Gumy (6-4, 6-1, 6-2)
R32: Patrick Rafter def. David Nainkin (6-1, 6-1, 6-1)
R16: Patrick Rafter def. Goran Ivanisevic (6-3, 6-4, 4-6, 6-1)
QF: Patrick Rafter def. Jonas Bjorkman (6-2, 6-3, 7-5)
SF: Patrick Rafter def. Pete Sampras (6-7, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4, 6-3)
FR: Patrick Rafter def. Mark Philippoussis (6-3, 3-6, 6-2, 6-0)

Marat Safin
2000 US Open
R128: Marat Safin def. Thierry Guardiola (7-5, 6-7, 6-4, 6-4)
R64: Marat Safin def. Gianluca Pozzi (6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 3-6, 6-4)
R32: Marat Safin def. Sebastien Grosjean (6-4, 7-6, 1-6, 3-6, 7-6)
R16: Marat Safin def. Juan Carlos Ferrero (6-1, 6-2, 6-2)
QF: Marat Safin def. Nicolas Kiefer (7-5, 4-6, 7-6, 6-3)
SF: Marat Safin def. Todd Martin (6-3, 7-6, 7-6)
FR: Marat Safin def. Pete Sampras (6-4, 6-3, 6-3)

2005 Australian Open
R128: Marat Safin def. Novak Djokovic (6-0, 6-2, 6-1)
R64: Marat Safin def. Bohdan Ulihrach (6-4, 6-1, 6-3)
R32: Marat Safin def. Mario Ancic (6-4, 3-6, 6-3, 6-4)
R16: Marat Safin def. Olivier Rochus (4-6, 7-6, 7-6, 7-6)
QF: Marat Safin def. Dominik Hrbaty (6-2, 6-4, 6-2)
SF: Marat Safin def. Roger Federer (5-7, 6-4, 5-7, 7-6, 9-7)
FR: Marat Safin def. Lleyton Hewitt (1-6, 6-3, 6-4, 6-4)

Lleyton Hewitt
2001 US Open
R128: Lleyton Hewitt def. Magnus Gustafsson (6-3, 6-2, 7-5)
R64: Lleyton Hewitt def. James Blake (6-4, 3-6, 2-6, 6-3, 6-0)
R32: Lleyton Hewitt def. Albert Portas (6-1, 6-3, 6-4)
R16: Lleyton Hewitt def. Tommy Haas (3-6, 7-6, 6-4, 6-2)
QF: Lleyton Hewitt def. Andy Roddick (6-7, 6-3, 6-4, 3-6, 6-4)
SF: Lleyton Hewitt def. Yevgeny Kafelnikov (6-1, 6-2, 6-1)
FR: Lleyton Hewitt def. Pete Sampras (7-6, 6-1, 6-1)

2002 Wimbledon
R128: Lleyton Hewitt def. Jonas Bjorkman (6-4, 7-5, 6-1)
R64: Lleyton Hewitt def. Gregory Carraz (6-4, 7-6, 6-2)
R32: Lleyton Hewitt def. Julian Knowle (6-2, 6-1, 6-3)
R16: Lleyton Hewitt def. Mikhail Youzhny (6-3, 6-3, 7-5)
QF: Lleyton Hewitt def. Sjeng Schalken (6-2, 6-2, 6-7, 1-6, 7-5)
SF: Lleyton Hewitt def. Tim Henman (7-5, 6-1, 7-5)
FR: Lleyton Hewitt def. David Nalbandian (6-1, 6-3, 6-2)
 
timnz said:
Nastase
Smith
Hewitt
Safin
Rafter
Kafelnikov
Brugera
Kriek

Now before anyone gives Kriek too hard a time, you have to remember that he beat McEnroe 5 times, four times of which on indoor carpet which was McEnroes best surface.
Click to expand...

It's stunning to me that Nastase only won two majors. Nastase is about as talented as any majors winner ever. Stan Smith and Nastase for a short time was such a great rivalry and you would have thought it would be THE rivalry of the 1970's. Never turned out that way.

Of course Nastase did win a ton of the Year End Championships with four championships in five tournaments.
 
pc1 said:
It's stunning to me that Nastase only won two majors. Nastase is about as talented as any majors winner ever. Stan Smith and Nastase for a short time was such a great rivalry and you would have thought it would be THE rivalry of the 1970's. Never turned out that way.

Of course Nastase did win a ton of the Year End Championships with four championships in five tournaments.
Click to expand...

The year end championship wins breaks the tie break between Nastase and Smith putting Nastase ahead.
 
Dan Lobb said:
Is the year-end such a big deal? It didn't seem like much this year.
Click to expand...

It was the 4 th slam back then, along WCT.

Smith has two indoor majors and two official slam titles, Nastase won 4 indoor majors and two official slams.

Smith equalizes, however, by virtue of his two DC final wins over Nastase.DC was huge back then.
 
pc1 said:
It's stunning to me that Nastase only won two majors. Nastase is about as talented as any majors winner ever. Stan Smith and Nastase for a short time was such a great rivalry and you would have thought it would be THE rivalry of the 1970's. Never turned out that way.

Of course Nastase did win a ton of the Year End Championships with four championships in five tournaments.
Click to expand...

I agree.They ahd a short but exciting rivalry, with opposing styles and personalities.

Smith won 2 DC finals over Nastase, a Wimbledon Final and a Masters .

Nasatse beat Stan in two Masters finals but didn´t beat Stan anywhere else - major titles-

H2H seems like Smith was the dominant guy, although Nastase was more talented.

I think it was a pitty Smith turned off by 1974 and never regained old form.At least, nastase was an outsider till 1976.
 
Yep it is

Dan Lobb said:
Is the year-end such a big deal? It didn't seem like much this year.
Click to expand...

Come on Dan...you know for the past 40 years it has been a very big deal...are you just stiring things up? ;-)

Here is a clipping about Nastase winning the 1975 event. Despite the reporter making a mistake about connors at the australian, it says that the masters was a major event.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...JJBYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HPgDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5051,880292

And this, again calling the Masters a major event

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...4BUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=WI8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=5068,4041836
 
Last edited:
boredone3456 said:
Kriek...I have never really heard of him or the guy he beat in both of his major finals. I had to look him up because I could not even recall his first name off hand. The guy he beat in the finals was a nobody really to, except for beating J Mac in 1 final. In the jam packed 80's talent group...Kriek is like...nobody.
Click to expand...

Kriek was very very talented.Strong and ultraquick, one of the fasstest and nimblest players that I have ever seen.

it´s true that his 2 AO wins were in a quite depleted field.But the guy has an excellent record on grass, indoor, hards and even reached a SF at his worst surface, the clay courts of Roland Garros.

reached the USO semis once and twice the QF, reached a FO sf, twice the Masters and Wimbledon QF, another sf and another QF at melbourne and a semi and a final at the WCT finals.You cannot do much better than that unless you are a Borg, a Lendl, a Connors or a Mc Enroe.

In any other era, with less competition, he may have won two more majors.he was a nut case, however, much like Mandlikova for the ladies.
 
timnz said:
Come on Dan...you know for the past 40 years it has been a very big deal...are you just stiring things up? ;-)

Here is a clipping about Nastase winning the 1975 event. Despite the reporter making a mistake about connors at the australian, it says that the masters was a major event.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...JJBYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HPgDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5051,880292
Click to expand...

good post.1975 was a great year with Ashe,Nastase,Newcombe,Borg and Orantes winning the biggest titles while Connors lost the 3 finals he played...in spite of being generally considered as the best player of the world.

We also had Ramirez winning at Rome and Marty Riessen winning at the US indoors.An exciting year, whatsoever.
 
In terms of both talent and career achievements, Nastase was clearly the best out of those players. Smith isn't that far behind in second place and the two of them had a good rivalry. However in addition to Nastase's greater volume of career titles and major indoor titles, he was more versatile as he was far better on grass than Smith was on clay.

Kriek has to be bottom of the list given that he won his two Australian Open titles during the tournament's bleakest period. Still he was a pretty fun to player to watch when he was playing well.
 
Nastase, Newcombe and Smith

I find it really interesting that Newcombe never beat Nastase, in fact he only ever won 1 set from him. In contrast Newk lead the head to head against Smith.

Correction : Apparently Nastase lost to Newcombe in their first match in 1969. My point still stands though about Nastase's dominant head to head over Newk.
 
Last edited:
I'll say Kriek.

I always thought of him as more of a journeyman, with occasional flashes of brilliance. (Like a lesser Leconte.)

His highest ranking was no. 7, and he won only 14 titles in his illustrious career.
 
Last edited:
timnz said:
I find it really interesting that Newcombe never beat Nastase, in fact he only ever won 1 set from him. In contrast Newk lead the head to head against Smith.

Correction : Apparently Nastase lost to Newcombe in their first match in 1969. My point still stands though about Nastase's dominant head to head over Newk.
Click to expand...

I saw the 1974 Year End Masters match between Nastase and Newcombe. Nastase hit some miracle shots in that match and totally in control. The shot of the match was when Newcombe hit a good overhead that seemed headed toward the stands. Nastase leaped up and smashed the overhead passed a stunned Newcombe! This was the only Masters that Nastase didn't win. He lost a great final in five sets to Vilas. Considering it was on grass you would have to say in retrospect it was a mild upset. To me that was the best tournament performance of Vilas' career. He beat Newcombe, Nastase, Borg, Ramirez and Parun. That's a great list of opponents that he beat.
 
While I understand Kriek being the weakest I am surprised Kafelnikov doesnt have more votes. He wasnt even good enough to win a Masters titles, and top players of the time did not fear him at all. Also he has virtually no big wins in slams, and his draws to his 2 slam titles were quite easy. What is his biggest ever win in a slam, an injured and immobile Agassi at the French (not the one he won either), Sampras on clay a the French, Todd Martin on hard courts. Then some of his head to head records, 5-9 vs Tomas Johansson who many consider the worst 1 slam winner, I think he lost 8 in a row at one point, 1-7 vs Lleyton Hewitt mostly when he was in his prime and Hewitt was on the way up, 0-9 vs Sampras outside of clay.

Seeing Hewitt and Safin combining for the same # of votes as Kafelnikov as funny. Those two are at a way higher level than he is, atleast in terms of singles play.
 
Kafelnikov won the 1996 French Open for the loss of just 1 set, which included straight set wins over Sampras and Stich. Sampras was not a dud on clay at the time, but a regular quarter finalist or better at the event. Kafelnikov's best win at a major was clearly this win over Sampras. Try and undermine it all you want, but it was an excellent win.
 
If you think Sampras and Stich in the semis and finals is a tough draw to a French Open title compared to the norm you can keep deluding yourself to that. Even at that it might not be too bad if he had numerous wins in slams on par or bigger than that, but for a 2 slam winner to have your biggest ever wins in slams being Sampras on clay or Todd Martin on hard courts is pretty shocking to put it mildly, and compared to all others on this (minus Kriek) falls WAY short.
 
NadalAgassi said:
If you think Sampras and Stich in the semis and finals is a tough draw to a French Open title compared to the norm you can keep deluding yourself to that.
Click to expand...

Sampras was a former 3-time French Open quarter finalist and 1994 Rome champion.
Stich was a former French Open semi finalist and had reached 2 Hamburg finals in a row in 1992-1993, winning in 1993.

If you don't think these are bigger victories than Todd Martin at the 1999 Australian Open, then I don't know what to say. They are clearly bigger. Even Krajicek, who Kafelnikov beat in the quarter finals of the 1996 French Open, is a former French Open semi finalist, a Rome finalist and Barcelona champion.

NadalAgassi said:
Even at that it might not be too bad if he had numerous wins in slams on par or bigger than that, but for a 2 slam winner to have your biggest ever wins in slams being Sampras on clay or Todd Martin on hard courts is pretty shocking to put it mildly, and compared to all others on this (minus Kriek) falls WAY short.
Click to expand...

Kafelnikov dropped 1 set on his way to winning the 1996 French Open. Of the 2-time major winners mentioned in this thread, only Nastase at the 1973 French Open has done better (with no sets dropped).
 
Mustard said:
If you don't think these are bigger victories than Todd Martin at the 1999 Australian Open, then I don't know what to say.
Click to expand...

Martin has reached 2 slam finals on hard courts. Sampras has only made it past the quarters once at RG (that semifinal blowout loss to Kafelnikov). Martin on hard courts > Stich or Sampras on clay. Of course Sampras or Stich are better than Martin on every surface probably (Stich vs Martin on hard courts is debateable) but it is comparing Martin on his best surface to them on by far their worst.

Meanwhile you prove yet again (for about the 100000000th time) you are quite stupid and illiterate. I did not say specifically Martin was a bigger win. I said Kafelnikov's biggest win in a slam was either Sampras at the 96 French OR Martin at the 99 Australian, which means arguably it could be either. Neither is an impressive "best ever slam win" for a 2 time slam winner though, so which you consider his biggest ever slam win means diddley squat.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mustard said:
Kafelnikov won the 1996 French Open for the loss of just 1 set, which included straight set wins over Sampras and Stich. Sampras was not a dud on clay at the time, but a regular quarter finalist or better at the event. Kafelnikov's best win at a major was clearly this win over Sampras. Try and undermine it all you want, but it was an excellent win.
Click to expand...
that's a kinda clean way through his draw, but pete didn't have much left in the tank in the SF, after 3 five-setters (martin, bruguera, courier)... a fresh sampras would probably have defeated kafelnikov as he did on so many other occasions (even on heavy 'watered' clay in the 1995 davis cup final at moscow).

and of course, he can also thank stich for (brillantly, it's true) taking the musterminator out... ;)
 
vive le beau jeu ! said:
that's a kinda clean way through his draw, but pete didn't have much left in the tank in the SF, after 3 five-setters (martin, bruguera, courier)... a fresh sampras would probably have defeated kafelnikov as he did on so many other occasions (even on heavy 'watered' clay in the 1995 davis cup final at moscow).

and of course, he can also thank stich for (brillantly, it's true) taking the musterminator out... ;)
Click to expand...

Pretty much, a totally gassed Sampras at about 20% on his worst surface, then finals choker and mental midget/headcase Stich on his worst surface in a slam final. An enviable situation to put it mildly. Kafelnikov did play some of his best tennis ever at the 1996 French and fully deserved to win, but it certainly is nothing that puts him above any other 2 slam winners, nor answered the question of his ability to beat the toughest opponents in a major event.
 
I would vote Safin lowest due to inconsistency.
I would also rate him the highest for peak performance.
 
Last edited:
NadalAgassi said:
Martin has reached 2 slam finals on hard courts.
Click to expand...

At the time of the 1999 Australian Open, it was 1 major final, and that had been 5 years previously. His recent form had been very up and down. Deep runs in majors had been scarce for a few years.

Martin was a very good player, and 1999 ended up being the best year of his career alongside 1994, but we didn't know that at the time he played Kafelnikov at the 1999 Australian Open.

NadalAgassi said:
Sampras has only made it past the quarters once at RG (that semifinal blowout loss to Kafelnikov). Martin on hard courts > Stich or Sampras on clay. Of course Sampras or Stich are better than Martin on every surface probably (Stich vs Martin on hard courts is debateable) but it is comparing Martin on his best surface to them on by far their worst.
Click to expand...

Sampras reached 3 quarter finals in a row at the French Open from 1992 to 1994. In 1994, he was the tournament favourite after just winning Rome, or at least co-favourite with Medvedev. Sampras was a proven major winner, going for 4 majors in a row, whereas Medvedev hadn't won a major. This is not the Sampras of 1997-2002, who would lose early at every French Open, but the Sampras of 1992-1996, who was a serious title contender.

And Stich, as I mentioned, a former French Open semi finalist, losing in 4 sets to Courier in 1991, and the 1993 Hamburg champion. Stich was always around the top 10 in the years before 1996 as well.

NadalAgassi said:
Meanwhile you prove yet again (for about the 100000000th time) you are quite stupid and illiterate.
Click to expand...

Personal insults? Really?

NadalAgassi said:
I did not say specifically Martin was a bigger win. I said Kafelnikov's biggest win in a slam was either Sampras at the 96 French OR Martin at the 99 Australian, which means arguably it could be either. Neither is an impressive "best ever slam win" for a 2 time slam winner though, so which you consider his biggest ever slam win means diddley squat.
Click to expand...

I think your attacks on Kafelnikov are bizarre.
 
Last edited:
vive le beau jeu ! said:
sounded like an exciting match indeed ! :)
do you also have the (5 sets) ivanisevic-muster of 1997, by the way ?
Click to expand...

I don't have that match, no. I wish I did. A great 5-set win for Goran, and the only time when Muster lost a singles match on clay in the Davis Cup. I do have the 1997 Dubai final between Muster and Ivanisevic, not long before their Davis Cup match, and it's pretty enthralling, at a time when Muster and Ivanisevic were both in the top 3 in the world behind Sampras. Muster won 7-5, 7-6.
 
Kriek is not even a real 2 time slam winner, given that the Australian Open was not a real slam those days, so by default him. Of the real 2 slam winners? Obviously between Bruguera and Kafelnikov. Kafelnikov is the better all around player, but Bruguera is much better on clay than Kafelnikov is on any surface, so I dunno.
 
Safin getting 3 votes is downright comical. Almost nobody on this list could in a million years dream of beating peak Federer in a hard court slam, or crushing a prime or virtually prime Sampras (2000 was not peak Sampras but it was his last prime-ish year) in a US Open final. If you think Kafelnikov, Bruguera, Kriek, or even Rafter, Hewitt, or the uber talented but erratic and poor big match playing Nastase ever manages this in a million years then I have a large bridge for sale.

Smith or Hewitt getting any votes at all is also pretty silly.
 
martinezownsclay said:
Kriek is not even a real 2 time slam winner, given that the Australian Open was not a real slam those days, so by default him. Of the real 2 slam winners? Obviously between Bruguera and Kafelnikov. Kafelnikov is the better all around player, but Bruguera is much better on clay than Kafelnikov is on any surface, so I dunno.
Click to expand...
Kafelnikov has a pretty solid case over Rafter. Beyond them each having 2 Majors:

-Overall Record: Kafelnikov: 609-306 (66.56%); Rafter: 358-191 (65.21%)​
-Weeks at #1: Kafelnikov: 6; Rafter: 1​
-Total Titles: Kafelnikov: 26; Rafter: 11​
-Masters Series Titles: Kafelnikov: 0; Rafter: 2​
-Olympics: Kafelnikov: Gold Medal; Rafter; no medals​
-Years in the Top 10: Kafelnikov: 6; Rafter: 3​
-Versatility: Kafelnikov: 11 carpet/9 hard/3 clay/3 grass titles; Rafter: 7 hard/4 grass/0 clay/0 carpet titles​
-H2H: Kafelnikov 3-2​

Pretty much the only stat Pat has over Yevgeny is the 2 Masters Series titles.
 
Last edited:
lots of hate on Kriek here....I wonder how many of those who voted for him saw him play? While I get it re: the AO being depleted, it was still an achievement. I picked Brugera, who I felt was a one-surface pony, where Kriek could be dangerous on any surface.
 
jrepac said:
lots of hate on Kriek here....I wonder how many of those who voted for him saw him play? While I get it re: the AO being depleted, it was still an achievement. I picked Brugera, who I felt was a one-surface pony, where Kriek could be dangerous on any surface.
Click to expand...
Kriek did make that French Open SF, but he was only 26-26 overall on clay with not titles and no finals.
 
buscemi said:
Kafelnikov has a pretty solid case over Rafter. Beyond them each having 2 Majors:

-Overall Record: Kafelnikov: 609-306 (66.56%); Rafter: 358-191 (65.21%)​
-Weeks at #1: Kafelnikov: 6; Rafter: 1​
-Total Titles: Kafelnikov: 26; Rafter: 11​
-Masters Series Titles: Kafelnikov: 0; Rafter: 2​
-Olympics: Kafelnikov: Gold Medal; Rafter; no medals​
-Years in the Top 10: Kafelnikov: 6; Rafter: 3​
-Versatility: Kafelnikov: 11 carpet/9 hard/3 clay/3 grass titles; Rafter: 7 hard/4 grass/0 clay/0 carpet titles​
-H2H: Kafelnikov 3-2​

Pretty much the only stat Pat has over Yevgeny is the 2 Masters Series titles.
Click to expand...

Yeah stats wise I guess, but a topic like this is largely subjective to just how good someone is or more specifically how good a 2 slam winner they were. Rafter beating prime Sampras to win his US Open, and defending both a US Open title and a WImbledon final, already makes him better than Kafelnikov for me. And since he was a big threat on atleast 2 major surfaces, better than Bruguera for me based on that too. Rafter also had a shorter prime/career due to injuries and just choosing to retire early, which partly explains things like fewer titles. And I would rather be the guy with US Open titles and Wimbledon titles and Masters titles than the guy with a title each at the two less prestigious slams, no finals even at either Wimbledon or the US Open and no Masters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

d-quik
Rank these two-time slam champions from best to worst (competed in open era)
Replies
11
Views
347
dryeagle
D
thalivest
Rank the 2 slam winners for men
Replies
16
Views
2K
benmarks1984
B
Flash O'Groove
Slam winner or n°1 players defeated
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
Rhino
Rhino
B
Rank the 4 time slam winners in Open Era - men
Replies
39
Views
1K
Dan Lobb
D
MonkeyBoy
Roddick is underrated
3 4 5
Replies
235
Views
11K
FD3S
FD3S
Back
Top