Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

by GillesSimon Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:09 pm

in the open era? Gaston Gaudio is my choice. notworthy

by time please Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:23 pm

I think that is such a strange thing to vote on - a single slam winner may have produced the most amazing final and entertained the audience brilliantly, and a multiple slam winner may well have won some majors where his opponent played too much in awe or was just no competition, and the entertainment factor was a fraction of the former.

Far better to vote for the most entertaining final respective of the players - after all that is what a match is supposed to be about!

by sirfredperry Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:24 pm

Surely a contradiction in terms - a "bad" GS winner. These guys can die happy. They won a Slam and that's no mean achievement. Probably more interesting to look at who had the hardest passage to a slam win - say beating a number of top seeds to get there. Has there been anyone to fall into that category that you can think of?

by GillesSimon Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:46 pm

Yes but in this case it was Coria who lost the French Open rather than Gaudio winning it Shocked

by Tenez Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:53 pm

Not many can claim a positive H2H v Nadal on clay...and Gaudio has just that.

In the last 10 years, I'd say Johanson is probably the worst as more than Gaudio he benefited from Safin being drunk for the night before.

by GillesSimon Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:57 pm

Tenez wrote:Not many can claim a positive H2H v Nadal on clay...and Gaudio has just that.

In the last 10 years, I'd say Johanson is probably the worst as more than Gaudio he benefited from Safin being drunk for the night before.

That is Safin`s fault for being unprofessional, not Johansson`s for being professional. Wink

by time please Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:06 pm

GillesSimon wrote:Yes but in this case it was Coria who lost the French Open rather than Gaudio winning it

I didn't actually watch that match Gilles, but as it was a 5 setter I am sure the crowd felt they had their money's worth even if the first set was a bagel! Anyway really wasn't my point - victory, provided it is a clean fight, should be celebrated not come with a caveat!

by Tenez Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:09 pm

GillesSimon wrote:
Tenez wrote:Not many can claim a positive H2H v Nadal on clay...and Gaudio has just that.

In the last 10 years, I'd say Johanson is probably the worst as more than Gaudio he benefited from Safin being drunk for the night before.

That is Safin`s fault for being unprofessional, not Johansson`s for being professional.

Whether it's Safin's fault or not is irrelevant...Johanson was there to make the most of a bizarre opportunity.

by time please Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:13 pm

Tenez wrote:
GillesSimon wrote:
Tenez wrote:Not many can claim a positive H2H v Nadal on clay...and Gaudio has just that.

In the last 10 years, I'd say Johanson is probably the worst as more than Gaudio he benefited from Safin being drunk for the night before.

That is Safin`s fault for being unprofessional, not Johansson`s for being professional.

Whether it's Safin's fault or not is irrelevant...Johanson was there to make the most of a bizarre opportunity.

You see Gilles that is what I was querying with the sentiment behind your original post, and here you are disagreeing with Tenez because presumably you favour Johnason over Gaudio - in other words you are being completely subjective in applying your caveats.

by socal1976 Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:51 pm

Thomas Johansson, funny that most of the names everyone mentions took place between 1997 and 2004, could it be because of a weak era? Wait no, weak grandslam winners can't be evidence of that could it?

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:56 pm

socal1976 wrote:Thomas Johansson, funny that most of the names everyone mentions took place between 1997 and 2004, could it be because of a weak era? Wait no, weak grandslam winners can't be evidence of that could it?

You mean Gaudio & Johanson? 2 winners out of 32 slams 1997-2004. Could only be a weak era!

by socal1976 Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:59 pm

I know a not so subtle allusion to weak eras would get our friend Julius riled up. Nice to hear from you julius.

Signing off to go to bed.

by Tenez Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:20 pm

Gaudio was actually a better shot maker than Nadal. The sole GS winner with a SHBH besides Federer in the last 10 years or so! And he did that on clay. Hats off I say.

Last time Gaudio and Nadal met on clay

2006 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo
Monaco Clay S Nadal, Rafael
5-7, 6-1, 6-1 Stats

Gaudio won the first set before the lungs made the difference once again. Knowing that Nadal was pummelling Gaudio's BH, It shows that Gaudio's BH was probably better than Nadal's FH.

by yummymummy Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:23 pm

Thomas Johannsen

by LuvSports! Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:38 pm

um just saying the head to head was 3-3 and all of their meetings were on clay with gaudio winning the first 3 at Hamburg, Bastad and Buenos aires and then rafa winning the last 3 on clay at monte carlo twice and stuttgart. Matchstat.com as my witness! :P

by Danny_1982 Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:43 pm

I'd say Johanson too... Not sure he'd care though! No matter what the circumstances it was an amazing achievement.

by barrystar Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:03 pm

Jan Kodes Wimbledon 1973, the year of the boycott?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2003/jun/23/tennis.wimbledon200311

It feels like a slightly tough one to say, because he did win twice at RG and got to the USO final on grass twice, although Wimbledon was decimated as a proper contest that year.

Mark Edmonson - Aus 1976, but he beat Newcombe in the final and was a more than decent doubles player.

Otherwise I suppose Johannson 2002 - but he was hardly a mug - something he has in common with pretty much every slam winner I'd suggest.

by Guest Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:14 pm

If Rusedski had had won the USO in 97, surely he would've been the worst slam champ ever.

by Guest Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:15 pm

Hello

May I add that I can't think of a more boring player than him.

Henman was great to watch, i loved his net skills, but Rusedski vomit

emancipator

by Josiah Maiestas Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:12 pm

TJ's singles record was quite poor..

Career record - 357–296

by Positively 4th Street Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:25 pm

Tenez wrote:Gaudio was actually a better shot maker than Nadal. The sole GS winner with a SHBH besides Federer in the last 10 years or so! And he did that on clay. Hats off I say.

Last time Gaudio and Nadal met on clay

2006 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo
Monaco Clay S Nadal, Rafael
5-7, 6-1, 6-1 Stats

Gaudio won the first set before the lungs made the difference once again. Knowing that Nadal was pummelling Gaudio's BH, It shows that Gaudio's BH was probably better than Nadal's FH.

Actually the Nadal-Gaudio HTH is 3-3. Talk about cherry-picking to support an argument! Their previous 2 meetings were both Nadal victories:

6-3, 6-0 in 62 minutes - surely down to the lungs too with such a marathon match...

6-3, 6-3, 6-4 in 2 hours 40 - not swift by any means but no first set for Gaudio before 'lungs' took over.

Clearly a case of a young Nadal losing a few times to a good clay practitioner and then improving and turning the tables.

by Josiah Maiestas Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:30 pm

6-3, 6-0 in 62 minutes - surely down to the lungs too with such a marathon match...

Yes the lungs have helped him acquire such comfortable (on paper) victories. Even this 6-3 6-0 which you 'cherry picked' sigh, could have took around 2 hours with the amount of fidgeting and passive, high percentage strokes he plays.. thumbsup

by Positively 4th Street Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:37 pm

Josiah Maiestas wrote:
6-3, 6-0 in 62 minutes - surely down to the lungs too with such a marathon match...
Yes the lungs have helped him acquire such comfortable (on paper) victories. Even this 6-3 6-0 which you 'cherry picked' sigh, could have took around 2 hours with the amount of fidgeting and passive, high percentage strokes he plays..

How, pray tell, could it have taken almost 2 hours when we know it took just over 1 hour?

High percentage strokes is fair enough, but very little Nadal does is passive.

By the way, has anyone else rumbled you as a double (triple?) agent yet?

by Josiah Maiestas Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:46 pm

Just over an hour you say? I can only assume that Gaudio failed badly even with the basic future level play of keeping the ball in play via looping. We all know how terrible he can play when the betting syndicates are keeping contact..

High percentage strokes is fair enough, but very little Nadal does is passive.

Against players with slow feet and poor reading of the game, it will allow him to be more aggresive, just as it would if player x pushes the ball back rather than put some depth on the ball..

by **laverfan** Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:13 pm

Slam winners before 1922 (the abolition of Challenge round) should be considered 'lucky' to a very large extent. But, worst, perhaps not! Wink

Johansson, Korda, Kodes, Edmondson, Del Potro, Gaudio, Costa, Muster, Ferrero, Tanner, Gerulaitis, Panatta, Orantes, Teacher, Gimeno, Cash, Stich, Moya played and won and should not be denigrated for their victories.

Sidney Wood (Wimbledon 1931) is perhaps the luckiest of all and did not have to play the final, but did win the previous rounds to get to the final (including beating Fred Perry).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_Wimbledon_Championships_–_Men%27s_Singles

by Josiah Maiestas Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:11 am

laverfan wrote:Slam winners before 1922 (the abolition of Challenge round) should be considered 'lucky' to a very large extent. But, worst, perhaps not!

Johansson, Korda, Kodes, Edmondson, Del Potro, Gaudio, Costa, Muster, Ferrero, Tanner, Gerulaitis, Panatta, Orantes, Teacher, Gimeno, Cash, Stich, Moya played and won and should not be denigrated for their victories.

Sidney Wood (Wimbledon 1931) is perhaps the luckiest of all and did not have to play the final, but did win the previous rounds to get to the final (including beating Fred Perry).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_Wimbledon_Championships_–_Men%27s_Singles

So what happened to Jean Borotra? Were both semi finalists injured? Shocked

by eraldeen Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:28 am

Thomas Johansson

by Leff Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:23 am

Australian Open is the most likely major to produce odd winners because it's the one top players have tended to skip (e.g., Borg).

US Open rarely ever had an odd winner. Safin beating Sampras was a shocking result. Nevertheless, over the years we have known Safin as a talented player capable of beating the best.

French Open has had odd winners too as it's the kind of tournament where clay court specialists win, and some of those couldn't win anywhere else. This is also true for Wimbledon (especially when the lawns were faster). Big servers with little else (e.g., Ivanesevic, Krajicek) could only win there.

So, the odd winners list:

Australian: Brian Teacher, Edmondson, Korda, Bowrey, Johanssen
French: Panatta, Gomez, Gaudio
Wimbledon: Jan Kodes, Pat Cash, Krajicek, Ivanesevic

Some of those mentioned by others were surprise winners when they won, but continued to play at a high level for the next several years. Del Potro may win another major. Moya was always a in contention at the French, and unlike the other Spaniards of that time, he was fairly successful on other surfaces too. Stich was a well rounded player. Pat Cash was brilliant when he won Wimbledon. Manuel Orantes was quite competitive for a few years.

If I have to pick one player who could have been "unworthy," it must be Gaston Gaudio. Kodes won Wimbledon when top players boycotted; he was not a bad player though.

by lydian Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:25 am

If Gaudio's lung are purported to be "small", I'd say his mentality is even smaller! His 3 wins against Rafa came when Nadal was 16, 17 and 18 years old! After that he won 1 more set. Oh let me guess....could it be actually be that Nadal is simply a BETTER tennis player? Oh no, that's not possible because Nadal is only a lung-machine who happened to take the tennis racquet thrust into his hand by his uncle and is bereft of any talent whatsoever. Yeah right.

This "ran out gas" argument after a few 15 stroke ralleys for otherwise uber-fit tennis players is completely ridiculous and gets more ridiculous each time I hear it. On the one hand we keep hearing how Nadal needs to play for more time between points to recover...presumably meaning he needs the rest more than they do but yet on the other hand he's also meant to be super fit compared to the others and wears them down! An oxymoron if ever I heard one! And the argument keeps moving around like a swirling snake with random snippets of match data thrown in to make the argument appear as though it works and yet the strawman burns each time under scrutiny...

by Tenez Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:48 am

Isn't a 57 61 61 in Monaco 2006 typical of a Nadal lung size effect? No diferent that the Nadal Almagro match where Nadal was outplayed in Madrid 10 for a set 46 62 62 before once again, a few more rallies took the edge out of his compatriot. Those kind of scores are such a trademark of Nadal. It woudl be absurd to deny that more than any player out there, Nadal produces such scoring lines. Djoko is also producing those nowadays.

Anyway, completely disagree with Leff list and reasoning too....Naming guys like Goran, Kraji and Korda as lucky winners is weird. Their talent was obvious.

Johanson never reached 5 in the world (Gaudio did) and he won also more career titles.

by noleisthebest Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:55 am

Tenez wrote:Isn't a 57 61 61 in Monaco 2006 typical of a Nadal lung size effect? No diferent that the Nadal Almagro match where Nadal was outplayed in Madrid 10 for a set 46 62 62 before once again, a few more rallies took the edge out of his compatriot. Those kind of scores are such a trademark of Nadal. It woudl be absurd to deny that more than any player out there, Nadal produces such scoring lines. Djoko is also producing those nowadays.

Anyway, completely disagree with Leff list and reasoning too....Naming guys like Goran, Kraji and Korda as lucky winners is weird. Their talent was obvious.

Johanson never reached 5 in the world (Gaudio did) and he won also more career titles.

Nole is not producing any such scores, he is dominating. It's the classic tennis match scenario that's been around for eons in which an inferior player throws he kitchen sink at you for a set and then when beaten by skill , naturally gives up and gets steam-rolled.
Are you advocating one set matches?

by Josiah Maiestas Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:15 pm

Wimbledon: Jan Kodes, Pat Cash, Krajicek, Ivanesevic

Well Jan Kodes was way before my time, Goran had a 64.3% career record, quite respectable in every sense. He also had 3 finals runner up before being able to convert Whistle

Krajicek had 411-219 win/loss record on the ATP, as well as 17 titles. He also achieved his highest ranking in 1999, 3 years after his sole GS title.

by GillesSimon Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:52 pm

What about Petr Korda? Wasn`t he assisted by drugs? Shocked

by Tenez Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:02 pm

Huge talent Korda. It did not have the charisma to get the luxury of a cover by the ATP...unlike some others.

by GillesSimon Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:05 pm

Tenez wrote:Huge talent Korda. It did not have the charisma to get the luxury of a cover by the ATP...unlike some others.

Interesting. Name and shame! censored

by Tenez Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:11 pm

GillesSimon wrote:
Tenez wrote:Huge talent Korda. It did not have the charisma to get the luxury of a cover up by the ATP...unlike some others.

Interesting. Name and shame!

by Guest Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:15 pm

GillesSimon wrote:
Tenez wrote:Huge talent Korda. It did not have the charisma to get the luxury of a cover by the ATP...unlike some others.

Interesting. Name and shame!

You'll be lucky getting any proof of that from Tenez or anyone in this universe and space time continuum. Maybe in the 5th dimension, there is a planet where an infinite number of monkeys will play tennis and the top 4 will have taken PEDS to be there at some point in time. And the one who managed to finish writing Beethoven's last symphony will have composed it on LSD too. laughing

by Tenez Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:31 pm

Jubbahey wrote:
GillesSimon wrote:
Tenez wrote:Huge talent Korda. It did not have the charisma to get the luxury of a cover by the ATP...unlike some others.

Interesting. Name and shame!

No proof?

Haven't you heard about Agassi's biography? It's there...from the horse's mouth!

by Sponsored content

Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner

Re: Who is the worst Grand Slam winner