Top 10 Players To Never Win a Slam

As it is quiet on the board at the moment and some of the old topics have re-surfaced, I thought I would throw this out there. I would like you guys to list the 10 best players you have seen never to win a Slam. Can be retired or active. I think this is interesting. I expect some names to make the list, I may even be surprised by past players that have never been discussed on any forum. After much thought and consideration this is my list.

1) Andy Murray
2) Todd Martin
3) Miroslav Mercir
4) David Nalbandian
5) Kevin Curren
6) Nikolay Davydenko
7) Marcelo Rios
8) Tim Henman
9) Cedric Pioline
10) Mark Philippoussis

Who are yours?

I think I pretty much agree with your list legend - I'd maybe put Philippoussis a few places higher because of two slam finals and that awesome serve, and the fact that injuries undoubtedly prevented him from reaching full potential.

It is very sad that Mercir, the bane of all those slam winning Swedes didn't manage to bag one for himself.

Tim definitely deserved one for the brilliant Wimbledons he gave us, year after year. I remember thinking Curren would be too strong for the 17 year old Becker, but Boris took to a W final on Centre Court like one very sure of his destiny.

It would have been wonderful to see Nalbandian triumph - for sheer talent and watchability and because that is likely to be forgotten, a few years down the line, simply because his name is not etched into one of the major trophies.

Let's hope Murray's name only temporarily heads this list

I was wondering if people would slate me for putting Henman in. I think 6 Semi Final appearances at the Slams is a remarkable measure of consistency. I put him lower purely because I felt he could've achieved more at Masters level. Same with Philippoussis. Loved his serve and the fact that Ivanisevic and Kraijcek won a Slam and he didn't is a small crime given his game was perfect for Grass.

Kurren and Mercir I felt sorry for. Both had victories against top players and were so unlucky at the Slams to come up against up and coming players on a purple patch. Though Mercir achieved some success at the Olympics I am sure he would trade that for a Slam.

Nalbandian and Bjorkman made this list for me because of their respective games. Both are talented and part of my disgust towards Greg is that he beat Bjorkman in 1997 at the US Open!! Nalbandian has been unlucky with injuries I feel. A fitter Nalby might have triumphed in the Slams around 2007-2009 period when Roger and Rafa had patches of bad form.

Todd Martin had the unfortunate luck of playing in a era where he had to contend with Sampras, Agassi, Chang and Courier. The fact he made 2 finals is an achievement.

One player that comes to my mind is Henri Leconte. He was extremely talented and could (should) have achieved a lot more than he actually did.

Leconte with Soderling were playing with my mind. Leconte was very talented. I just felt looking at his record and measuring him against others in that list, to my preference he just missed out. Soderling again, I thought his French Open exploits were amazing beating defending champions in consecutive years. Just missed out on the consistency in other Slams.

Not sure about Bjorkman and Todd Martin on that list. Tim Henman, Kevin Curren woudl not make my top 10.

Medvedev and Davydenko certainly woudl rank higher in my view.

I'd go with Rios, Nalby (2002 must still haunt him), Leconte and Mecir...and Coria (2004 must still haunt him - more so than Nalby).

I don't know about Davy Tenez. With him I think it is more of a blown chance with his career. I really do. If it wasn't for Monfils, I am sure Davy would be the subject of major 'bottling' debates and remembered more vividly than what Monfils is and will be. Bjorkman was a fantastic player. a real throwback to 80's tennis. Had he not put his full attention on doubles, he may have bagged a Slam. Henman deserves a spot on that list. Aside of the disaster that was Wimbledon 2001, he still made the Semi's of the French Open and US Open when he was 30. Again I feel he had a lovely touch and he had a very good second serve.

Todd Martin and Curren were very solid players. Martin like Henman had a better peak beyond say the age of 25 where most successful players bloom or remain in peak. I find it beyond a joke that Cash could win Wimbledon and Curren couldn't win a Slam.

lydian,

If Coria wasn't such a dick I would've considered him

Agree with most of that LK - especially Coria being a complete turnip. The other players absolutely hated him. He had the misfortune of bottling 2004...and Nadal became a thorn in his side in 2005 which sent him into terminal decline at USO that year...didnt he serve something like 35 double faults in 2 matches? Completely lost the plot.

I also agree with Davy...for a man of obvious talents he was another bottler, and unfortunately he had serious issues playing Federer.

Perhaps a feature in many of these names is the element of bottle..or perhaps they would have would a slam? Mecir was an injury issue...and Henman perhaps just wasnt good enough against Sampras and others - clearly 2001 should have been his year really (assuming he could have beaten Rafter though which would have been a tall order). Martin bottled a few times also...remember that loss to Washington at Wimbledon when 5-1 up in the final set? Ouch. Similarly I felt Nalby bottled the final against Hewitt, just didnt show up and his career never really recovered. Bjorkman is an interesting one....very talented and a great returner of serve but not sure about a slam winner??? Perhaps USO97 was his chance? He shouldnt have lost to Greg...but would he beat Rafter...? Not sure.

prostaff85 wrote:One player that comes to my mind is Henri Leconte. He was extremely talented and could (should) have achieved a lot more than he actually did.

Aaaaaaahhhh Henri still looking as wonderfully French and louche as ever at the AH. He was so wonderful to watch and always managed to look as if he had strolled down after lunch and a very good bottle of wine.

legendkillar wrote:I don't know about Davy Tenez.

Davy was stopped 5 times in slams by Federer (3 semis and 2 QF)!!!! and never stopped by Nadal in a slam. He actually holds a 6/1 record on HC v Nadal.

I cannot find a player who has ben so unlucky to live in Federer's era, especially considering the excellent record Davy has in finals!

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I don't know about Davy Tenez.

Davy was stopped 5 times in slams by Federer (3 semis and 2 QF)!!!! and never stopped by Nadal in a slam. He actually holds a 6/1 record on HC v Nadal.

I cannot find a player who has ben so unlucky to live in Federer's era, especially considering the excellent record Davy has in finals!

cunning like Macca there Tenez!!

A fact indeed.

It has me thinking and mulling.

I shall have a re-think.

At your service LK!

I decided to put it to my work colleague, but she has the unfortunate mishap of telling me that she has never heard of Davydenko or Rios (who I am contemplating replacing with Davy) I have had to explain the 4 Slam tournaments and some stats surounding them. She is opting for Rios as he seems 'fitter' than Davy. That is debatable. I shall see what the rep I have a meeting with at 2pm has to say on it. I am hoping he might follow the game too.

Rios is a former number one...much better than Bjorkman ever was.

Philippoussis came back from injury to walk into the finals of Wimbledon in the weak era of 2003. A faster 90s grass and he would have walked away with the Wimbledon title and would have seen his absence on this list and that's not to say he even deserves a place on the list anyways. The scary part is in the 90s where you actually had to know how to volley and not just serve, he was no where close to a Wimbledon finals.
LK, don't make me laugh by comparing Philippoussis to Ivanisevic and Krajicek. It's lunacy to even question their slam winning cridentials
as a comparison to Philippoussis. Those two were in every way and form a better player than him.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Philippoussis came back from injury to walk into the finals of Wimbledon in the weak era of 2003. A faster 90s grass and he would have walked away with the Wimbledon title and would have seen his absence on this list and that's not to say he even deserves a place on the list anyways. The scary part is in the 90s where you actually had to know how to volley and not just serve, he was no where close to a Wimbledon finals.
LK, don't make me laugh by comparing Philippoussis to Ivanisevic and Krajicek. It's lunacy to even question their slam winning cridentials
as a comparison to Philippoussis. Those two were in every way and form a better player than him.

I got about that far before I switched off.

My pleasure to always educate you.

"Weak Era" Hurrah! Oh, how I've missed that childish phrase, these last few....hours.

I wouldn't have Martin or Bjorkman in there - I never remotely considered them even an outside bet for a slam.

I am wondering if anyone will be brave enough to stick a list out themselves. I have only decided to re-consider Davy with Rios. Anyone else is out of the question.

Analysis of your list

1) not sure about Murray as only half way though his career, I'll consider players who are at least a bit near the end
2) Todd Martin - good choice
3) Miroslav Mercir - before my time
4) David Nalbandian - good choice
5) Kevin Curren -before my time
6) Jonas Bjorkman/Davydenko - at least the first of these seems generous to include
7) Marcelo Rios - good choice
8) Tim Henman - wouldn't have been my first thought, but could be in there
9) Cedric Pioline - not sure? lucky to be here?
10) Mark Philippoussis - decent choice (ish)

Henman Bill wrote:Analysis of your list

1) not sure about Murray as only half way though his career, I'll consider players who are at least a bit near the end
2) Todd Martin - good choice
3) Miroslav Mercir - before my time
4) David Nalbandian - good choice
5) Kevin Curren -before my time
6) Jonas Bjorkman/Davydenko - at least the first of these seems generous to include
7) Marcelo Rios - good choice
8) Tim Henman - wouldn't have been my first thought, but could be in there
9) Cedric Pioline - not sure? lucky to be here?
10) Mark Philippoussis - decent choice (ish)

3 Grand Slam finals and reached all the Slam Semi's. No-one without a Slam has anywhere near the same consistency

Murray is the best player never to have won a slam, however that may just be because he is still playing and hasn't won one yet. At some similar stage of their career (very roughly) other players, like maybe Lendl or Tilden or even Federer hasn't won one yet, but did later. I will include Soderling because he possibly is a bit nearer his career end and with injuries maybe too late to win one.

My list ~1990 - present

1) Martin
2) Rios
3) Coria
4) Nalbandian
5) Davydenko
6) Henman
7) Rusedski
8) Philippoussis
9) Soderling
10) Gonzalez/Pioline/Grosjean - can't decide/ can't quite finish off the list!

legendkillar wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Philippoussis came back from injury to walk into the finals of Wimbledon in the weak era of 2003. A faster 90s grass and he would have walked away with the Wimbledon title and would have seen his absence on this list and that's not to say he even deserves a place on the list anyways. The scary part is in the 90s where you actually had to know how to volley and not just serve, he was no where close to a Wimbledon finals.
LK, don't make me laugh by comparing Philippoussis to Ivanisevic and Krajicek. It's lunacy to even question their slam winning cridentials
as a comparison to Philippoussis. Those two were in every way and form a better player than him.

I got about that far before I switched off.

well I salute you legend I got as far as by Sim

Pretty good names in the previous lists. There are many unsung ones in such a list.

Should Baghdatis make this list? Not sure.

Some I would consider would be....

Paradorn Srichaphan. ATP #9.
Joachim Johansson (Pim Pim) ATP #9.
Magnus Norman ATP #2.
Andrei Medvedev ATP #4.

Baghdatis? Be careful Laverfan, you are a mod now which means you have a responsibility to write sensible opinions always.

Simple_Analyst wrote:My pleasure to always educate you.

If you had actually read my post before trying to work out ways to disagree, the Philioppousiss serve is something that is comparable to the likes of Krajicek and Ivanisevic of the 90's. I wasn't comparing credentials because the latter have enjoyed Slam success. 5 years apart in finals from US Open 1998 to Wimbledon 2003 is quite the feat to achieve. I don't care for your 'weak era' theory because it is not applicable. Did Krajieck make the final on HC in a Grand Slam? No. Did Ivanisevic? No. Kinda shows that Philippoussis was a player not hindered by surfaces.

laverfan wrote:Pretty good names in the previous lists. There are many unsung ones in such a list.

Should Baghdatis make this list? Not sure.

Some I would consider would be....

Paradorn Srichaphan. ATP #9.
Joachim Johansson (Pim Pim) ATP #9.
Magnus Norman ATP #2.
Andrei Medvedev ATP #4.

Some good names there LF.

Tsonga could be a shout given his AO 2008 exploits and Wimbledon 2011 exploits.

Legendkilla wrote:

"Same with Philippoussis. Loved
his serve and the fact that Ivanisevic
and Kraijcek won a Slam and he didn't
is a small crime given his game was
perfect for Grass"

Funnily, you didn't know what you wrote but hardly a suprise.


Coming back, did Phili make a semi finals on clay?
You are not talking much sense why i disagreed at the first place. Ivanisevic and Krajicek have both been consistent in all slams than Phili throughout their careers. He made 1 finals at the USO and his next best result i think was the 4th round once. Goran and Krajicek have even made the quarters or better in every single slam so there is no way you can even lament on their slams compared to Phili and brand it as a crime, it shows basic ignorance.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Legendkilla wrote:

Same with Philippoussis. Loved
his serve and the fact that Ivanisevic
and Kraijcek won a Slam and he didn't
is a small crime given his game was
perfect for Grass.

Funnily, you didn't know what you wrote but hardly a suprise.


Coming back, did Phili make a finals on clay?
You are not talking much sense why i disagreed at the first place. Ivanisevic and Krajicek have both been consistent in all slams than Phili throughout their careers. He made 1 finals at the USO and his next best result i think was the 4th round once. Goran and Krajicek have even made the quarters or better in every single slam so there is no way you can even lament on their slams compared to Phili and brand it as a crime, it shows basic ignorance.

Ignorance? Coming back Did Krajicek or Goran make a final on Clay?

You can go around in circles all day

Philly had the same strengths as Krajieck and Ivanisevic. Krajieck arguably better out of the 3 in other departments.

So really you are not making much sense and just looking to start a row in an empty phonebox!

Circles? Your initial comparison was laughable enough to keep me in a straight line.

So are you going to tell me what Clay finals Ivanesvic and Krajicek made or is it another in a line of throw away comments you make?

How am i suppposed to answer you if you don't even know what you write?

I know what I write. The opinion of Philoppoussis not winning a Slam is that, an opinion not a fact.

An Analyst as 'Simply' as challenged as you could see that, or maybe not. I can write in Braille if you wish?

Simple_Analyst wrote:Baghdatis? Be careful Laverfan, you are a mod now which means you have a responsibility to write sensible opinions always.

Is that why you do not want to be a Moderator?

Not really. My patience is so thin that, if i were a mod, would have ban you for the day for dragging Baghdatis' name here.

You can go around in circles all day

_______________

Pretty much sums up the tennis section of this forum at times!

Simple_Analyst wrote:Not really. My patience is so thin that, if i were a mod, would have ban you for the day for dragging Baghdatis' name here.

Clearly shows your bias.

I think that Tom Okker and Alex Corretja are missing from the list, maybe Leconte at a push, otherwise it's pretty solid. An interesting balance needs striking between consistency and one-off achievement. If room needs to be made for my two or three suggestions above Henman is the most vulnerable in my view, then Pioline and hopefully Murray on the basis that he'll take the up escalator out of it.

1) Andy Murray
2) Todd Martin
3) Miroslav Mercir
4) David Nalbandian
5) Kevin Curren
6) Nikolay Davydenko
7) Marcelo Rios
8) Tim Henman
9) Cedric Pioline
10) Mark Philippoussis

Don't agree with Todd Martin or Kevin Curren and think that Tom Okker and Henri Leconte are worthy replacements

Can't understand how a player like Leconte cannot be in it. Unless this is a list based on the number of near misses, rather than talent

Not particularly in that order....

1) Miroslav Mercir
2) Andy Murray
3) Medvedev
4) David Nalbandian
5) Tsonga
6) Nikolay Davydenko
7) Marcelo Rios
8) Tim Henman
9) Leconte
10) Mark Philippoussis

Simple_Analyst wrote:Not really. My patience is so thin that, if i were a mod, would have ban you for the day for dragging Baghdatis' name here.

SA r u the last left out breed of die hard Fed hater? why do you hate him that much coz he broke Sampras records and got the GOAT title?

Never knew Federer's second name is Baghdatis.

banbrotam wrote:Don't agree with Todd Martin or Kevin Curren and think that Tom Okker and Henri Leconte are worthy replacements

Can't understand how a player like Leconte cannot be in it. Unless this is a list based on the number of near misses, rather than talent

Kevin Curren not as talented Okker?????

Like I said, list your top 10. That is my list. Not official. I can't see how anyone can generate a list without Martin given the competition he faced.

A leaf out of the LF book

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snVKBZbnnnQ

Never make the mistake the assume he was just all power

Tenez wrote:Not particularly in that order....

1) Miroslav Mercir
2) Andy Murray
3) Medvedev
4) David Nalbandian
5) Tsonga
6) Nikolay Davydenko
7) Marcelo Rios
8) Tim Henman
9) Leconte
10) Mark Philippoussis

Nice one Tenez. Now THAT'S a list!!

My list becomes too long when I start going back...

Here are some more names that stand out...

Jose-Luis Clerc ATP #4.
Jose Higueras ATP #6.
Vijay Amritraj ATP #16 (bit outside Top 10).
Ramnathan Krishnan ATP #105 (outside Top 10 by a mile).
Aaron Krickstein ATP #6.
Guy Forget ATP #4.
Brian Gottfried ATP #3 (In 1977 he has 5 titles + 10 finals).

....

Some interesting names there LF.

Guy Forget. He seemed so 'gentle' in his play. Never one to try and bash the life out of the ball, though at times I wished he did!

I feel the need to fight the corner of Martin as at 6'6 there is this 'perception' that people think he was just power and far from it! 1993-1999 he was a permanent top 20 fixture. I think for people to ignore that is sheer ignorance!

I agree, regarding Martin, he gets overshadowed by his other US contemporaries. It is a worthy cause, though.

The "great" Todd Martin who failed to reach a slam final because Malivai Washington was on his way?

C'mon. Medvedev WAS in a slam final and got Agassi under his foot before a very partial crowd shouted for a longer match.