In Argentina there is an urban legend that says that at a party a fan approached Nalbandian and said: "David, you are the best player there is. Why aren't you the N1 in the world?"... The man looked at him and He replied... "Because it's twelve at night and Roger went to sleep at ten"
@@viksinha5410 basically he's saying he doesn't have the dedication of Federer nor does he want to (he would rather party at midnight than sleep at 8 to be physically fit)
@@ivandesantis858 I mean, career high #5, won a couple 1000 titles, QF or better at all slams. Very impressive for being in the big 3 or 4 era. Tho it is kinda weird he was more consistent that Wawrinka and no slam, but lesser peak I guess... Can't say he didn't leave it all out there, that match he beat near peak Fed being down 2 sets at wimbledon 👌 he was always a threat, even if only so many not named Federer, Nadal or Djokovic could win a slam
@@Dman9fp I think Stan the man brought more of a toughness to the court and a resiliency that he developed over the years as opposed to Jo Will who I think relied on his enormous talent to carry him. And listen he lost to Nole in that AO which is Nole's most successful place as far as slams.
Tsonga and berdych just played in the wrong era where the styles they used died off. If they played in the 80s or 90s they probably would have won a couple slams
I remember loving Nikolay Davydenko after reading a quote of his. After reporters asked why he played so many tournaments he said; " I'm a professional tennis player. If I don't play, I don't get paid".
I always liked him but he was fined, criticized, and he even dropped out of a tournament for not putting "an effort" in those losses. He was also suspected of being part of sports betting scheme for tanking a match to enrich betters but was found innocent. I still loved to see him play though.
@@WonderWhatHappened Hit the nail on the head...how is it physically/mentally possible to give 100% every tournament....if he didn't manage his schedule well and played every week? Had to be throwing matches....
@@benyang2427 with all those travelling expenses you need money. You can play some tournaments and if you are tired you can lose not a big deal. If you play every tournament you can't be fresh all the time but you get money with every win don't forget that.
@@pedropelaez funny because that's the only reason he couldn't win a slam. He wasn't consistent on being health every year and he doesn't take care of his body. It's also the reason he fell off immediately after 2009.
Ferrer is an odd one. He seemed really to maximize everything he had but just being in this era with these top players. Other than being in a different era, I really don't know what more he could have done. He was so consistent
Ferrer actually had a much better career than his tennis skills through pure sheer will power. Normally a player of his size and talent wouldn't get near the end stages of a Grand Slam. For me, there's nothing missing from his career to feel bad about! One of my favourite players!
Had he had a bit more of height and power on his offensive strokes, he would have been something like Alcaraz. Great player but it was hard for him to overcome the B3. He didn't have the neccesary tools to beat them on major stages.
Ferrer reminded me of Michael Chang, who did win the French once. Ferrer was a constant grinder and scrapper. He lacked the size and power to threaten the big 3.
Murray is an excellent player, one of the best of his generation But to have him as big 4 is an understatement for the 3 monuments of tennis that are Novak, Roger and Rafa
@@TheOtherGuy021 I understand but in my opinion Murray may be top 10 of all time. And he got heavily injured right in his prime, in 2016. Imagine Novak getting injured for life in 2015.
In my opinion, I've never ever seen such a rare legend, like Marcelo Rios. A maestro in a harmony of aesthetics of tennis arena. Perhaps, the first and last in my life. 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
And yes, before you ask! Im 100% certain if he defeated Khachanov he would mop the floor with whoever there is left in the draw…Ruud and Alcaraz included!…
Tsonga has to be one of the most underrated tenis player of past 20 years and this list is another proof of that. He was more talented and succesful that some people in this video (and more fun to watch!). I would always put him before Berdych on the near slam winners list.
@@erikthehalfabee6234 He didn't have better results though. Tsonga won more and most importantly when it comes to this list he was closer to slam title than Berdych (closer to winning this AO final than Berdych to winning his Wimby one). Maybe Berdych could have achieved more than Tsonga... but in the end he didn't.
In my mind, the biggest disappointment was Nalbandian. He could beat *anyone* and pretty much did at various points in his career. He just could never put it all together in one slam tournament. I think it was mostly because of his temper. A close second is Rios, though a lot of that was because of injury. Incidentally, Mecir is one of my favorite players ever. I just loved the way he moved around the court and how he could systematically dissect all of the great Swedish players of his era (except Edberg). I'm not sure, but I think he was the last player to use a wooden racquet on tour (the Prince Woodie).
Mecir was my favorite player in the 80s. He was so gifted with his angles, changes of pace, disguise, deceptive speed, and how he would move forward to put away volleys. If only he had a better serve and a more reliable body. I wish there were more videos of his matches. One thing the video forgot to mention is that he also faced prime Wilander and had a winning record against him.
I noticed the 'big 3' mentioned in closing the door on the likes of Ferrer and Berdych. But also Andy Murray closed the door on them too multiple times.
Nalbandian é o melhor jogador da história tecnicamente que nunca venceu um slam....esquerda de duas mãos fantástica...devolução de saque espetacular...angulacoes incríveis tanto de esquerda como de direita...voleios sempre seguros e com muita técnica...grande variação de jogo com slices deixadas lobbys...muita inteligência pra jogar e capaz de vencer qualquer jogador em qualquer superfície....
I used to enjoy watching Mario Ancic play. He only won three titles and reached one GS semifinal. Injuries and illness brought him down at a very young age. Not sure how good he could have been, if healthy his prime would have been right when Nadal and Djokovic were heating up and Federer was still at the top with them. But Ancic could definitely play.
Tom Okker won over 50 tournaments in his career. He beat greats like Laver, Gonzalez, Rosewall, Ashe, Smith, Connors among others. He may be the best of the bunch that never won a major.
Being short myself, I hate to say it but I am seeing it increasingly difficult for anyone under 6’ to win a slam. I think Ferrer was under 6’. These guys nowadays have a major advantage with court coverage and serve power with their height. Ferrer should’ve won the French Open, but he played Rafa in the finals
This was a terrific vid. Helena Sukova should be mentioned. All time great Doubles player, and got to 4 GS Singles Finals--just kept running into Martina and Steffi LOVE that you included players like Mercir, Leconte, Pioline, and Corretja. Tennis fans of the last 5-6 years, love to pretend tennis didn't exist before the Big 4 era
@@alancawfield6549 They were called Big 4 by the media and us tennis fans because by the end of the 2000s and for most of the 2010s decade, they were reaching semis and finals in every M1000 and Grand Slam consistently. Of course, we are talking about Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Everybody called them that way. Then time passed by and people who wasn't into tennis at that point or people with amnesia started with the "it's not Big 4, it's Big 3!" because of the amount of GS titles that Andy has. If you were into tennis at that time, you know it was all about the Big 4 in terms of Majors and Masters.
@@juanpablom89 But it was never really a big 4 though, Murray (although great) was never on the same level as the other 3 . He was consistent but didn't have the level of greatness the other 3 had.
@@alancawfield6549 Big FOUR as I said. I didn't ask for a correction. Those 4 were head and shoulders above everyone else on Tour for years. Could care less if Andy didn't win as many Slams as the other 3. Week in and Week out, they were the 4 to beat
@@juanpablom89 ABSOLUTELY. These newer fans or ones with convenient amnesia are ones I tend to ignore most times. They know little about tennis and obviously didn't watch the Big 4 from the late 2000s onwards
Jankovic could also be on the list she was a former world number 1 and a 2008 US Open finalist. For some players it's the era they are in for Dimentieva, Safina and Jankovic they were playing in the Williams sisters era. They all lost a lot of Grand Slam matches against Venus and Serena when they were at their peak 2000-2010.
To me, Leconte should be the most important mention, along with Nalbandian. Just look at how prime Leconte *destroyed* Sampras in the 1991 Davis Cup. When he was on, he played outstanding tennis. Unfortunately, he was troubled by injuries, and sometimes lacked mental toughness.
Leconte was such an exciting and charismatic player. A character on and off the court. On his day he could beat anyone with his natural ability and shot making. He struggled with injury and had persistent back problems which affected his movement. A shame. Tsonga definitely should have won a slam. Richard Gasquet looked like a contender in the earlier years but he never improved his movement to compete for the top tournaments.
I would add James Blake. Big flat forehand, pretty much hit it hard and harder lol. I loved watching his attacking style tennis. I think he played in a very tough era of men's tennis with the big 4
Blake doesn’t belong to big-4 era! He belongs to the “transitional” era from Sampras/Agassi gen to Fedal! Big-4 era didn’t truly begin until at least 2008…He was still a player in 2008, but already on his last wheels at that point, whilst Djokovic and Murray were only truly joined Frdal at that point to finally form what people refer to as the big-4!
People like Davydenko, Blake, Baghdatis, Gonsalez, Ljubicic, Ferrero, Safin, Ancic, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Roddick etc…all mostly associated with Fedal, some of them played against Djokovic and Murray, but compared to Fedal only briefly…
There are couple of players that belong as much to the big-4 era as the Fedal era! These players are Berdych and Ferrer! Their longevity and consistency made them relevant for way longer than probably any other player in 21st century!…
I believe it's the best of 5 format that keeps a lot of very good players from winning a slam. The Big 3 for years were masters at winning best of 5 matches. More vulnerable at best of 3.
Todd Martin gave his ATP tournament wins as 8 or 9 in an interview sometime in the early Zeros. He was saying something to the effect that he'd been coming for X number of years and only never been stopped somewhere along the way in any given tournament in about 9 instances, so that he was quite familiar with the also-ran thing in the departure lounge.
Nalbandian was a different type of player playing for himself and for his national team, in one he was really good, but he took another step forward during a davis cup, a shame the title finally arrived for argentina after his retirement
Very nice video. I think everyone on your list who was mentioned deserves to be mentioned. I would choose Nalbandian. Saw him at the 2006 French Open beat Davydenko. I saw many of those players on the list. Rios one of the most naturally talented on the list.
How does this list not include sukova who reached 4 finals and 3 semis, MJ Fernandez who reached 3 finals, 6 semis, and has Olympic bronze, Turnbull who reached 3 finals and 4 semis, Casals who reached 2 finals and 3 semis, Jaeger that reached 2 finals and 5 semis, Jankovic that reached 1 final and 5 semis as well as being #1, or garrison with 1 final and 4 semis? 🤷♂️🤷♂️
I was rooting for soderling to win that french open or in any slam considering he was playing peak fedal and defeating them in slams and in their favorite surfaces. I also think haas could have won a couple of slams if it weren't for his injuries.
There have been 152 male Slam winners so far. Well, I can say without any fear of being proven wrong that Henry Leconte, Miloslav Mecir, Marcelo Rios, David Nalbandian were better players than at least half of those
Cilic had 3 slam finals of the 2 he lost, one went to 5 sets and one he was held back by injury as for the 1 slam he won, he completely destroyed top 10 opponents (including Federer) from QF to F I wouldn't call him lucky he's proven to be dangerous when he's on
@@lotus630 He maximized his opportunities. He has proven to be a threat even nowadays (look at his performances on FO and USO), but he is not consistent enough like at one moment was Wawrinka or Murray.
Good morning you should've never said thankfully Del Potro .He definitely was very good but sadly injuries destroyed a great career. Every tennis fan accept this as gospel.
I agree with you, Rios had so much natural talent that had he applied himself and really tried to win a slam, he would have eventually, probably won one.😳
Tommy Haas deserves a mention. His career was derailed by a serious car accident to his parents where he quit the tour for 2 years and then blew his shoulder. He actually had winning records over Roddick, Federer, Safin and was 5-5 against Sampras.
As it stands, Soderling is going to be a pub quiz question as only he and Djocko have beaten Nadal at RG. Also, I feel like Ferrer is someone so worthy of admiration. If he was maybe even 5ft 11 (very small for a male tennis player) he could've won a slam even in THAT era.
Maybe Kevin Curren deserves a mention, or even Kevin Andersen. Both were very fine players who possibly had it in them to win a Slam, but Lady Luck conspired against them.
Yes Kevin Curren was the only player ever to beat Jimmy Conners and John McEnroe in the same tournament. Wimbledon 1985 the year after Mac's greatest year where he took the game to another level. Went all the way to the final only to lose to Boris Becker.
Philippoussis would give Sampras a serious run for it in any head-to-head. It was just the way it was. You get that. If you had the insight you didn't take the illustrious star [ Sampras ] at the short odds in head-to-head versus Philippoussis. Good chance of getting done on it. Nor the other way, Philippoussis at good odds, coz he won't be doing Sampras in straight sets, either.
Dementieva could have been the greatest girl of the era, on par with Serena, if she developed a non-terrible serve. Her groundstrokes were unbelievable for a girl, but her terrible serve meant she had to grind out every point with them and, at the end of the day, meant her game wasn't efficient enough to get to the top.
Dimentieva serve was a problem for her throughout her career. In the 2004, Miami final against Serena she never held her serve in the match losing 6-1 6-1. Interestingly, the two games she won was against Serena serve. Dimentieva was a better returner and great mover. In the 2009, Wimbledon semi final against Serena is the best Dimentieva had ever serve she was even hitting aces on second serve. Was disappointed for her that she fix her weakness in that match and was playing so well and was so close had a match point and lost. I don't think she ever got over that match and retired the following year
No. It was more than just a shaky serve. Dementieva was a no heart shrink on the big stages world class choke artist. Possibly on par with Serena if if if if ?? Dial it back. Dementieva never even had a hope of being on par with Henin or Clijsters.
Recently I looked at the player's slam performance from the different angle. I wanted to analyze each year for each player using the metric of a worst performance. The better the worst performance - the better the player's year. As a limiting number I took reaching a 2nd week (R16). Turned out it is not that frequent that player reaches R16 at all 4 slams in a year. Overall 99 cases for the 56 years of Open Era (2020 is excluded because there was no Wimbledon). It is below two players per year. Not a lot of players who have multiple years with such result: Djokovic - 11 Federer - 10 Nadal - 8 Lendl - 6 Murray - 6 Agassi - 4 Edberg - 4 Ferrer - 3 Zverev - 3 Newcombe - 2 Courier - 2 Sampras - 2 Medvedev - 2 Sinner - 2 What is notable that JMac is not on this list (only managed it once). Alcaraz so far has zero (it did not help that he missed Australian in 2023). Surprised by low number for Sampras - it's not like he played in early years like Borg, when the trip to Australia was a rarity (in 1968 only two players PLAYED in all 4 slams). Djokovic is in the lead despite involuntarily missing Australian and US Open in 2022. Connors is punished for missing lots of French Opens. Overall this list is more interesting for modern players, when all slams are equally attended. There are two slamless players on this list - Ferrer and Zverev, reinforcing their status as the best players, who never won a slam.
Jankovic, Tsonga, Nishikori, Monfils, Gasquet, Robredo, Verdasco, Dimitrov, Raonic etc should've made it to the list as well. At least Tsonga and Jankovic since they retired.
todd martin had a chance also to win the compaque grand salm cup in 1995 specially he defeated the so much inform at that time boris becker in the semis but he lost to ivanisivic in the final who made use of the fast court and poured a barrage of aces including 4 in a row in the final game not mentioning tons of easy points on his first serve in the interview todd complained about the goran serve and said that almost 45 points were won by goran first serve leaving him not much chance , i was always a fan of todd martin , a player with his capabilities deserved more titles and more focus
Tsonga is more deserving than Monfils imo. Monfils plays more ala Dustin Brown or Shapovalov. It's his own lack of discipline why he underachieved. Talent alone will never get you far enough.
The list should be way longer, especially since we mix women into this (although i question, whether we should have on the first place...). Tsonga, Baghdatis, Blake all had grand slam winning game at one point of their career, they are by no definition multi-slam material, but they all could have at least won one grand slam each! I remember Andrea Jaeger being hyped at one point in the late 60's and early 70's, before the rise of Chris Evert, followed by Navratilova...she had immense talent, but could have never converted it into grand slam victory! Pam Shriver is also the one, that should have grabbed at least one grand slam in singles, despite being mainly doubles specialist, so is Helena Sukova! And off course let's not forget about Mary Joe Fernandez, who realistically could have won multiple grand slams if not for Seles/Graf, who were constantly blocking her from the title...we can add Amanda Coetzer to the list as well! She definitely deserved to win in late 90's more than Iva Majoli! The arguments can be made for Kournikova and Schett as well, especially at French Open! ...Mikhail Youzhny also comes to mind as i have vivid memories of him being great US Open player at one point and there was a season or two, were he was literally inches away from pulling off a victory in NYC...Zvonareva and Petrova as well...there were bucnh of russians in 00's, who should have won grand slam title in singles, but never did...
You left out Todd Martin. 6 Career semi finals and two finals( Where he lost in 3 to Sampras and 5 to Agassi) He's usually the first guy I think about when I think of best players without a Slam. Also, the Steve Martin of Tennis, in that he had grey hair in his 30's
@@onjohns1 Well, I feel dumb. I don't know, I must have gotten distracted and looked away for a bit. In my defense, it was a pretty short segment. But they got him in there, which is good. My mistake Thanks for pointing it out
Others not mentioned in the video: Fabrice Santoro Jo Wilfred Tsonga Jelena Jankovic Vera Zvonareva Karolina Pliskova Nicole Vaidisova Agnieszka Radwanska
For the last 20 years, it's gotta be Nalbandian and Soderling at the top of this list for me. Ferrer was very consistent, but his highs weren't as high.
Ferrer was more consistent than the other 2, but like you said, it was never gonna be enough to slay the B3. A less consistent player like Wawrinka snatched them 3 Mayors by upping his game on big moments. That's an ability Ferrer never had.
@@Forestgreenflicka good one. I've also just learned about Mark Edmondson - ranked 212 when he won the 1976 AO, and never rose higher than 15 in the world
In Argentina there is an urban legend that says that at a party a fan approached Nalbandian and said: "David, you are the best player there is. Why aren't you the N1 in the world?"... The man looked at him and He replied... "Because it's twelve at night and Roger went to sleep at ten"
I don’t get it…
@@viksinha5410
basically he's saying he doesn't have the dedication of Federer
nor does he want to (he would rather party at midnight than sleep at 8 to be physically fit)
@@lotus630 Oh
@@lotus630 True. In 2005 before the Masters Cup he was fishing and was called up to play.
@@viksinha5410 you are a little slow
When Tsonga lost the Australian Open final in 2008, I thought for sure he would win at least one slam.
He dismantled Rafa Nadal in the semifinals that year. Yeah I also thought big things were ahead for him
@@ivandesantis858 I mean, career high #5, won a couple 1000 titles, QF or better at all slams. Very impressive for being in the big 3 or 4 era. Tho it is kinda weird he was more consistent that Wawrinka and no slam, but lesser peak I guess... Can't say he didn't leave it all out there, that match he beat near peak Fed being down 2 sets at wimbledon 👌 he was always a threat, even if only so many not named Federer, Nadal or Djokovic could win a slam
@@Dman9fp I think Stan the man brought more of a toughness to the court and a resiliency that he developed over the years as opposed to Jo Will who I think relied on his enormous talent to carry him. And listen he lost to Nole in that AO which is Nole's most successful place as far as slams.
Tsonga and berdych just played in the wrong era where the styles they used died off. If they played in the 80s or 90s they probably would have won a couple slams
@@taylorpack7705 Tsonga vs Safin both at their prime would have been a great matchup IMO
Ferrer and Davydenko were no underachievers. They maximized their potential. Nalbandian and Rios on the other hand ...
They both deserve at least one slam.
Nalbandian had 8-11 Head to head against Federer that’s pretty impressive.
Mecir would have gotten one if he hadn't had to retire~
I remember loving Nikolay Davydenko after reading a quote of his. After reporters asked why he played so many tournaments he said; " I'm a professional tennis player. If I don't play, I don't get paid".
I always liked him but he was fined, criticized, and he even dropped out of a tournament for not putting "an effort" in those losses. He was also suspected of being part of sports betting scheme for tanking a match to enrich betters but was found innocent. I still loved to see him play though.
@@WonderWhatHappened Hit the nail on the head...how is it physically/mentally possible to give 100% every tournament....if he didn't manage his schedule well and played every week? Had to be throwing matches....
That's why other players spend so much time doing commercials
He also had several wins over Nadal early in Nadal’s career.
@@benyang2427 with all those travelling expenses you need money. You can play some tournaments and if you are tired you can lose not a big deal. If you play every tournament you can't be fresh all the time but you get money with every win don't forget that.
David Nalbandian was the type of player who literally SHOULD'VE Won 1 grand slam. He had everything to succeed with his forehead and backhand.
That backhand is just something else.
@@zeroelus One of the best backhand in his time definitely.
But not the fitness. I think if he was fitter he would won at least 1.
@@pedropelaez funny because that's the only reason he couldn't win a slam. He wasn't consistent on being health every year and he doesn't take care of his body. It's also the reason he fell off immediately after 2009.
There was also this referee decision with Roddick in that US open SF I think, I can't recall the year.
Ferrer is an odd one. He seemed really to maximize everything he had but just being in this era with these top players. Other than being in a different era, I really don't know what more he could have done. He was so consistent
coiuld have won more masters
only thing missing from him is height
Ferrer actually had a much better career than his tennis skills through pure sheer will power. Normally a player of his size and talent wouldn't get near the end stages of a Grand Slam. For me, there's nothing missing from his career to feel bad about! One of my favourite players!
Had he had a bit more of height and power on his offensive strokes, he would have been something like Alcaraz. Great player but it was hard for him to overcome the B3. He didn't have the neccesary tools to beat them on major stages.
Ferrer reminded me of Michael Chang, who did win the French once. Ferrer was a constant grinder and scrapper. He lacked the size and power to threaten the big 3.
Ferrer was incredible. He managed to reach number 3 in midst of the Big 4 reign.
Murray is an excellent player, one of the best of his generation
But to have him as big 4 is an understatement for the 3 monuments of tennis that are Novak, Roger and Rafa
@@TheOtherGuy021 I understand but in my opinion Murray may be top 10 of all time. And he got heavily injured right in his prime, in 2016. Imagine Novak getting injured for life in 2015.
Only when Federer and Murray were dealing with injuries.
In my opinion, I've never ever seen such a rare legend, like Marcelo Rios. A maestro in a harmony of aesthetics of tennis arena. Perhaps, the first and last in my life. 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Marcelo Ríos was one of the most naturally talented players of all time. So sad that he lacked discipline and physical status.
And yes, before you ask! Im 100% certain if he defeated Khachanov he would mop the floor with whoever there is left in the draw…Ruud and Alcaraz included!…
Tsonga has to be one of the most underrated tenis player of past 20 years and this list is another proof of that. He was more talented and succesful that some people in this video (and more fun to watch!). I would always put him before Berdych on the near slam winners list.
I think Berdych had better tools to perform at the highest levels than Tsonga, but Tsonga on a good day was explosive af.
No.
Berdych was better, even if, like you and many others, i liked Tsonga more
@@erikthehalfabee6234 He didn't have better results though. Tsonga won more and most importantly when it comes to this list he was closer to slam title than Berdych (closer to winning this AO final than Berdych to winning his Wimby one). Maybe Berdych could have achieved more than Tsonga... but in the end he didn't.
and Tsonga definitely was better (when in form) than let's say Ferrer.
In my mind, the biggest disappointment was Nalbandian. He could beat *anyone* and pretty much did at various points in his career. He just could never put it all together in one slam tournament. I think it was mostly because of his temper. A close second is Rios, though a lot of that was because of injury. Incidentally, Mecir is one of my favorite players ever. I just loved the way he moved around the court and how he could systematically dissect all of the great Swedish players of his era (except Edberg). I'm not sure, but I think he was the last player to use a wooden racquet on tour (the Prince Woodie).
Don’t forget Agnieszka Radwańska from Poland. One of the best and most talented players never to win a slam.
Hope he's known on his street, at least.
Exactly tjrtt!
Mecir was my favorite player in the 80s. He was so gifted with his angles, changes of pace, disguise, deceptive speed, and how he would move forward to put away volleys. If only he had a better serve and a more reliable body. I wish there were more videos of his matches. One thing the video forgot to mention is that he also faced prime Wilander and had a winning record against him.
I have him tops as well,.If he had played 4 more yrs he wouldn't be on this list~
I noticed the 'big 3' mentioned in closing the door on the likes of Ferrer and Berdych.
But also Andy Murray closed the door on them too multiple times.
Murray was very close to being on this list himself
that's how scary good the top 3 are
@@lotus630 haha, true! on the other hand, Murray reached over 20 semifinals in GS, if he hadn't won any of them, it would be a tragic for century :D
Marcelo Rios is a bedazzling talent....wish he had at least 1 slam.
Korda had doping,so Rios should win AO 98.
Rios is modern day kyrios. They don't like to suffer. To be a slam champion you need to suffer out there.
@@alberts2208 Rios is better than Nick, he was more consistent, hence why he achieved n1.
Rios Win 5 atp 1000
Rios gano en total 18 titulos
I'd also include Tsonga he was a Top 10 with Berdych for many years, but they were vitctims of the Big-3
Nalbandian é o melhor jogador da história tecnicamente que nunca venceu um slam....esquerda de duas mãos fantástica...devolução de saque espetacular...angulacoes incríveis tanto de esquerda como de direita...voleios sempre seguros e com muita técnica...grande variação de jogo com slices deixadas lobbys...muita inteligência pra jogar e capaz de vencer qualquer jogador em qualquer superfície....
Nishikori deserves a spot here. Maybe Milos Raonic and Kevin Anderson too.
No
Boo way
No
I think these are retired tennis players not current or recent ones.
Yes nihsikori no raonic or Anderson (once they retire)
I used to enjoy watching Mario Ancic play. He only won three titles and reached one GS semifinal. Injuries and illness brought him down at a very young age. Not sure how good he could have been, if healthy his prime would have been right when Nadal and Djokovic were heating up and Federer was still at the top with them. But Ancic could definitely play.
Tom Okker won over 50 tournaments in his career. He beat greats like Laver, Gonzalez, Rosewall, Ashe, Smith, Connors among others. He may be the best of the bunch that never won a major.
Yes, he is. Ferrer is close 2nd
Being short myself, I hate to say it but I am seeing it increasingly difficult for anyone under 6’ to win a slam. I think Ferrer was under 6’. These guys nowadays have a major advantage with court coverage and serve power with their height. Ferrer should’ve won the French Open, but he played Rafa in the finals
I felt desperately sorry for Tim Henman, he was in a tough era with Sampras and Federer. I can’t imagine the pressure he felt at Wimbledon.
He wasn't really that close to their level of play imo
This was a terrific vid. Helena Sukova should be mentioned. All time great Doubles player, and got to 4 GS Singles Finals--just kept running into Martina and Steffi
LOVE that you included players like Mercir, Leconte, Pioline, and Corretja. Tennis fans of the last 5-6 years, love to pretend tennis didn't exist before the Big 4 era
Big 4? It's big 3.
@@alancawfield6549 They were called Big 4 by the media and us tennis fans because by the end of the 2000s and for most of the 2010s decade, they were reaching semis and finals in every M1000 and Grand Slam consistently. Of course, we are talking about Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Everybody called them that way. Then time passed by and people who wasn't into tennis at that point or people with amnesia started with the "it's not Big 4, it's Big 3!" because of the amount of GS titles that Andy has. If you were into tennis at that time, you know it was all about the Big 4 in terms of Majors and Masters.
@@juanpablom89 But it was never really a big 4 though, Murray (although great) was never on the same level as the other 3 . He was consistent but didn't have the level of greatness the other 3 had.
@@alancawfield6549 Big FOUR as I said. I didn't ask for a correction. Those 4 were head and shoulders above everyone else on Tour for years. Could care less if Andy didn't win as many Slams as the other 3. Week in and Week out, they were the 4 to beat
@@juanpablom89 ABSOLUTELY. These newer fans or ones with convenient amnesia are ones I tend to ignore most times. They know little about tennis and obviously didn't watch the Big 4 from the late 2000s onwards
Guillermo Coria! Biggest choke of all time and never the same again after that
Jankovic could also be on the list she was a former world number 1 and a 2008 US Open finalist. For some players it's the era they are in for Dimentieva, Safina and Jankovic they were playing in the Williams sisters era. They all lost a lot of Grand Slam matches against Venus and Serena when they were at their peak 2000-2010.
Not to mention Henin and Clijsters as well.
To me, Leconte should be the most important mention, along with Nalbandian. Just look at how prime Leconte *destroyed* Sampras in the 1991 Davis Cup. When he was on, he played outstanding tennis. Unfortunately, he was troubled by injuries, and sometimes lacked mental toughness.
Leconte was such an exciting and charismatic player. A character on and off the court.
On his day he could beat anyone with his natural ability and shot making. He struggled with injury and had persistent back problems which affected his movement. A shame.
Tsonga definitely should have won a slam.
Richard Gasquet looked like a contender in the earlier years but he never improved his movement to compete for the top tournaments.
I would add James Blake. Big flat forehand, pretty much hit it hard and harder lol. I loved watching his attacking style tennis. I think he played in a very tough era of men's tennis with the big 4
Blake doesn’t belong to big-4 era! He belongs to the “transitional” era from Sampras/Agassi gen to Fedal! Big-4 era didn’t truly begin until at least 2008…He was still a player in 2008, but already on his last wheels at that point, whilst Djokovic and Murray were only truly joined Frdal at that point to finally form what people refer to as the big-4!
People like Davydenko, Blake, Baghdatis, Gonsalez, Ljubicic, Ferrero, Safin, Ancic, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Roddick etc…all mostly associated with Fedal, some of them played against Djokovic and Murray, but compared to Fedal only briefly…
There are couple of players that belong as much to the big-4 era as the Fedal era! These players are Berdych and Ferrer! Their longevity and consistency made them relevant for way longer than probably any other player in 21st century!…
Blake stunk~
David Nalbandian was a fantastic player, the equal of the big 3 if he could have stayed in shape and injury free.
I believe it's the best of 5 format that keeps a lot of very good players from winning a slam. The Big 3 for years were masters at winning best of 5 matches. More vulnerable at best of 3.
Tsonga and Nishikori should be on the list too.
Todd Martin gave his ATP tournament wins as 8 or 9 in an interview sometime in the early Zeros. He was saying something to the effect that he'd been coming for X number of years and only never been stopped somewhere along the way in any given tournament in about 9 instances, so that he was quite familiar with the also-ran thing in the departure lounge.
Ferrer was a favorite of mine when watching matches. He grinded every point. Has great fitness for sure.
Nalbandian was a different type of player playing for himself and for his national team, in one he was really good, but he took another step forward during a davis cup, a shame the title finally arrived for argentina after his retirement
Very nice video. I think everyone on your list who was mentioned deserves to be mentioned. I would choose Nalbandian. Saw him at the 2006 French Open beat Davydenko. I saw many of those players on the list. Rios one of the most naturally talented on the list.
Great list! Thanks for including the great Todd Martin. Perhaps in the tier below this, I'd place Aaron Krickstein.
1) David Ferrer
2) Tom Okker
3) Alexander Zverev
4) Tony Roche
5) Tomas Berdych
How does this list not include sukova who reached 4 finals and 3 semis, MJ Fernandez who reached 3 finals, 6 semis, and has Olympic bronze, Turnbull who reached 3 finals and 4 semis, Casals who reached 2 finals and 3 semis, Jaeger that reached 2 finals and 5 semis, Jankovic that reached 1 final and 5 semis as well as being #1, or garrison with 1 final and 4 semis? 🤷♂️🤷♂️
Simillar a little bit to Garrison A. Radwanska 👍
My mistake. Gerulaitis won Aussie Open.
I was rooting for soderling to win that french open or in any slam considering he was playing peak fedal and defeating them in slams and in their favorite surfaces. I also think haas could have won a couple of slams if it weren't for his injuries.
He really was become the tennis god slayer
I think he had the potential to go the Djokovic route
There have been 152 male Slam winners so far. Well, I can say without any fear of being proven wrong that Henry Leconte, Miloslav Mecir, Marcelo Rios, David Nalbandian were better players than at least half of those
Ferrer Berdych are top choices in big 3 era
Other than Nalbandian, Coria, and ríos, none of these ever came, or would have ever come, close to even being conceivable to win a slam
Conversely, you have a list of people that thankfully won at least one slam, like Roddick, Del Potro, Cilic, Gaudio
Cilic had 3 slam finals
of the 2 he lost,
one went to 5 sets
and one he was held back by injury
as for the 1 slam he won, he completely destroyed top 10 opponents (including Federer) from QF to F
I wouldn't call him lucky
he's proven to be dangerous when he's on
@@lotus630 He maximized his opportunities. He has proven to be a threat even nowadays (look at his performances on FO and USO), but he is not consistent enough like at one moment was Wawrinka or Murray.
Good morning you should've never said thankfully Del Potro .He definitely was very good but sadly injuries destroyed a great career. Every tennis fan accept this as gospel.
Meçir was incredibly gifted and exciting to watch - he was a giant cat indeed. Retired too soon.
Marcelo Rios, hands down greatest talent to never win a major.
I agree with you, Rios had so much natural talent that had he applied himself and really tried to win a slam, he would have eventually, probably won one.😳
Oh God...this video is highly emotional...
Lost is lost for lifetime!!!
Tsong is missing in the list
Tsonga ,Monfils ,Nishikori , Nalbandian,,Berdych,Raonic,Ferrer should have won at least one GS
Tommy Haas deserves a mention. His career was derailed by a serious car accident to his parents where he quit the tour for 2 years and then blew his shoulder. He actually had winning records over Roddick, Federer, Safin and was 5-5 against Sampras.
As it stands, Soderling is going to be a pub quiz question as only he and Djocko have beaten Nadal at RG.
Also, I feel like Ferrer is someone so worthy of admiration. If he was maybe even 5ft 11 (very small for a male tennis player) he could've won a slam even in THAT era.
You can kinda see what he could have been with a more "able" physique in the succes of Alcaraz.
Mecir, Soderling, and Safina are my tops to never win a Slam with Berdych a consolation prize~
Maybe Kevin Curren deserves a mention, or even Kevin Andersen. Both were very fine players who possibly had it in them to win a Slam, but Lady Luck conspired against them.
Yes Kevin Curren was the only player ever to beat Jimmy Conners and John McEnroe in the same tournament. Wimbledon 1985 the year after Mac's greatest year where he took the game to another level. Went all the way to the final only to lose to Boris Becker.
Curren should have beaten Becker in the 1956 Wimbledon Final.
To answer your question...Nalbandian. Then maybe Marcelo Rios. Pretty soon, the answer to your question will be Nick Krygios.
Philippoussis would give Sampras a serious run for it in any head-to-head. It was just the way it was. You get that. If you had the insight you didn't take the illustrious star [ Sampras ] at the short odds in head-to-head versus Philippoussis. Good chance of getting done on it. Nor the other way, Philippoussis at good odds, coz he won't be doing Sampras in straight sets, either.
Another subject of amazement : that Stich only won one...
Pio-line ? Seriously ? Pio-LEAN for ****'s sake !
Ferrer is easily no.1
Ferrer... My biggest idol and favorite tennisplayer
Of the ones I saw, felt bad for Berdych and Ferrer
Agnieszka Radwanska
top peak, nalbandian, top career david ferrer.
Marcelo Rios, Tommy Hass, Henri Leconte ...
How did we not include Jelena from Serbia?!
Tim Henman
xD
Dementieva could have been the greatest girl of the era, on par with Serena, if she developed a non-terrible serve. Her groundstrokes were unbelievable for a girl, but her terrible serve meant she had to grind out every point with them and, at the end of the day, meant her game wasn't efficient enough to get to the top.
The same can be said of Agnieszka Radwanska.
Dimentieva serve was a problem for her throughout her career. In the 2004, Miami final against Serena she never held her serve in the match losing 6-1 6-1. Interestingly, the two games she won was against Serena serve. Dimentieva was a better returner and great mover. In the 2009, Wimbledon semi final against Serena is the best Dimentieva had ever serve she was even hitting aces on second serve. Was disappointed for her that she fix her weakness in that match and was playing so well and was so close had a match point and lost. I don't think she ever got over that match and retired the following year
No. It was more than just a shaky serve. Dementieva was a no heart shrink on the big stages world class choke artist. Possibly on par with Serena if if if if ?? Dial it back. Dementieva never even had a hope of being on par with Henin or Clijsters.
Great video, I am sure you put a lot of hours in editing it. Great job, big like!
Big thanks
Mecir had the
makings/talent/temperament of winning all the 4 , unfortunately 😕 bad luck followed by injuries spoilt it all.
Ever heard of Jo-Wilfried Tsonga ? How can you make a video about best non GS winners without even mentioning him...
Wow, didn’t know there were so good and interesting players out there
Robin soderling is the only player I'm aware of that won the last tournament he ever played. They may be others but he's the only one I know of.
There is this guy named Pete Sampras......he also won the last tournament he ever played.........usopen 2002
Tsonga, Monfills and Mardy Fish to name some more here
Recently I looked at the player's slam performance from the different angle. I wanted to analyze each year for each player using the metric of a worst performance. The better the worst performance - the better the player's year. As a limiting number I took reaching a 2nd week (R16). Turned out it is not that frequent that player reaches R16 at all 4 slams in a year. Overall 99 cases for the 56 years of Open Era (2020 is excluded because there was no Wimbledon). It is below two players per year.
Not a lot of players who have multiple years with such result:
Djokovic - 11
Federer - 10
Nadal - 8
Lendl - 6
Murray - 6
Agassi - 4
Edberg - 4
Ferrer - 3
Zverev - 3
Newcombe - 2
Courier - 2
Sampras - 2
Medvedev - 2
Sinner - 2
What is notable that JMac is not on this list (only managed it once). Alcaraz so far has zero (it did not help that he missed Australian in 2023). Surprised by low number for Sampras - it's not like he played in early years like Borg, when the trip to Australia was a rarity (in 1968 only two players PLAYED in all 4 slams). Djokovic is in the lead despite involuntarily missing Australian and US Open in 2022. Connors is punished for missing lots of French Opens. Overall this list is more interesting for modern players, when all slams are equally attended. There are two slamless players on this list - Ferrer and Zverev, reinforcing their status as the best players, who never won a slam.
Jankovic, Tsonga, Nishikori, Monfils, Gasquet, Robredo, Verdasco, Dimitrov, Raonic etc should've made it to the list as well. At least Tsonga and Jankovic since they retired.
Finally someone said gasquet the amount of uneducated people in these comments smh
Berdych is the best one. His natural body build and weaker mentality let him down.
Tsonga is a big omission. Nalbandian and Coria underachieved, but imo Berdych and Ferrer overachieved.
Yvonne Goolagong Cawley was great!!!!!!! She won many; I just wanted to say she was my favorite.
Sad to say Kyrgios will top this list when he’ll retire
Phillipousis had an enormous amount of talent but like everyone else on this list they lacked the mental strength and determination to win a slam.
The winners of all these matches can only feel so good because of how great the losers were
In this order: Marcelo Rios, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Berdych, Davydenko, Phillippousis
it's a crime not to have Zverev on the list.
Soderling for me. Maybe Tsonga.
Soderling was so awesome and an original~
Great vide, thanks. I think you could´ve mentioned Fernando Verdasco.
I was going to leave a super smart and essential comment here, when Elena Dementieva came up - and I forgot what I wanted to say 🥰
How about a video showing the “luckiest” person who won the most unexpected grand slam.
Zverev & Tsitsipas
Nalbandian's record is so wild. On a side note, I always thought Ivanisevic was pronounced "EE-vahn-EE-suh-vitch".
America got it wrong for years. Started of as Ivanisevick. Then, Ivanisevich, and it should have been Ivanishevich.
@@Polarcupcheck goran never cracked the USA code . A good clutch of finals and semis but no trophy
Before I watch I hope I see Davydenko and Rios on this list.
Kei nishikori, Milos raonic
todd martin had a chance also to win the compaque grand salm cup in 1995 specially he defeated the so much inform at that time boris becker in the semis but he lost to ivanisivic in the final who made use of the fast court and poured a barrage of aces including 4 in a row in the final game not mentioning tons of easy points on his first serve in the interview todd complained about the goran serve and said that almost 45 points were won by goran first serve leaving him not much chance , i was always a fan of todd martin , a player with his capabilities deserved more titles and more focus
Tsonga and Monfils should definitely be included. Such entertaining and gifted players who put up great opposition.
Tsonga is more deserving than Monfils imo. Monfils plays more ala Dustin Brown or Shapovalov. It's his own lack of discipline why he underachieved. Talent alone will never get you far enough.
Monfils is no better than Tsonga
The list should be way longer, especially since we mix women into this (although i question, whether we should have on the first place...). Tsonga, Baghdatis, Blake all had grand slam winning game at one point of their career, they are by no definition multi-slam material, but they all could have at least won one grand slam each! I remember Andrea Jaeger being hyped at one point in the late 60's and early 70's, before the rise of Chris Evert, followed by Navratilova...she had immense talent, but could have never converted it into grand slam victory! Pam Shriver is also the one, that should have grabbed at least one grand slam in singles, despite being mainly doubles specialist, so is Helena Sukova! And off course let's not forget about Mary Joe Fernandez, who realistically could have won multiple grand slams if not for Seles/Graf, who were constantly blocking her from the title...we can add Amanda Coetzer to the list as well! She definitely deserved to win in late 90's more than Iva Majoli! The arguments can be made for Kournikova and Schett as well, especially at French Open!
...Mikhail Youzhny also comes to mind as i have vivid memories of him being great US Open player at one point and there was a season or two, were he was literally inches away from pulling off a victory in NYC...Zvonareva and Petrova as well...there were bucnh of russians in 00's, who should have won grand slam title in singles, but never did...
I feel like Zvrev is going to be on this list someday. He’s won two ATP championships but no slam.
without big 4 it will be easier
Olympic gold
Zverev will win Slams, still young on a weak era
You left out Todd Martin. 6 Career semi finals and two finals( Where he lost in 3 to Sampras and 5 to Agassi) He's usually the first guy I think about when I think of best players without a Slam. Also, the Steve Martin of Tennis, in that he had grey hair in his 30's
Um…Todd Martin was in the video at 8:41.
@@onjohns1 Well, I feel dumb. I don't know, I must have gotten distracted and looked away for a bit. In my defense, it was a pretty short segment. But they got him in there, which is good. My mistake Thanks for pointing it out
Most likely to Join the list will be Tiafoe , Felix, Fritz, Kyrgios , Rublev
All of them are undeserving to be on this list as of now. Out of them, the biggest potential to be an "underachiever" is held by FAA.
Ivanisevic almost made it on this list.
6:33 "16 slam titles?"
Others not mentioned in the video:
Fabrice Santoro
Jo Wilfred Tsonga
Jelena Jankovic
Vera Zvonareva
Karolina Pliskova
Nicole Vaidisova
Agnieszka Radwanska
We might seriously see Sascha Zverev in here
For the last 20 years, it's gotta be Nalbandian and Soderling at the top of this list for me. Ferrer was very consistent, but his highs weren't as high.
Ferrer was more consistent than the other 2, but like you said, it was never gonna be enough to slay the B3. A less consistent player like Wawrinka snatched them 3 Mayors by upping his game on big moments. That's an ability Ferrer never had.
Request for a follow-up video: Who are the WORST players who DID win a slam?
Johan Kriek.
@@Forestgreenflicka good one. I've also just learned about Mark Edmondson - ranked 212 when he won the 1976 AO, and never rose higher than 15 in the world