The Greatest Non-Slam Champion of the Open Era

[Kirijax]

Since 1968, who's the greatest of the players who have not won a Grand Slam title? To narrow it down, I chose 10 players for the following reasons:

1. Grand Slam Finals
2. ATP Tour Titles
3. Masters Titles
4. World Tour Championship
5. Highest Ranking

There may be some left out so let me know who i should add and I'll consider adding that player to the list. For now, here are the Top Ten Non-Slam Champions of the Open Era. Who gets your vote for No. 1?

 

[Federberg]

Robin Soderling? Todd Martin?

I'm sure there are more that might make the list

 

[Kirijax]

Robin Soderling? Todd Martin?

I'm sure there are more that might make the list

Not enough tour titles.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Boy this a tough one..

I really think the REAL king of them all is Tommy Haas.

Victories over a slew of #1's, a game that is just sublime, but not even a slam final.

Possible oversites could be Todd Martin and Tim Henman.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

In the end..I voted for Ferrer.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

We had this subject discussed before and my opinion remains the same. Rios. So much talent but he just could not produce come slam time. Personality issues, bad coaching, who knows. 5 masters is not too shabby though, and making it to number 1...

 

[Riotbeard]

Great thread! I didn't vote, because my historical knowledge is too limited, but a really interesting topic, and I am looking forward to good reading and learning about these guys.

 

[Fiero425]

In the end..I voted for Ferrer.

Unfortunately I agree! I can't stand the way he plays, but because of his longevity hanging in the top echelon the longest, I give it to DAVID; even though other players have more accomplishments! :cover :nono :angel: :dodgy:

 

[BIG3]

I picked Rios from the poll list. He was once ranked #1 without slam, which is very rare in ATP, so different from WTA. After reading each players, I feel this is a TOUGH competition. Still, Rios was the ONLY #1 ranked.

 

[Federberg]

Wait! What! :eyepop Is no one going to say Nalbandian?? It's a tough one. I'm not that invested. There's a case to be made for a lot of those guys. Ferrer, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Rios. I mean if we're just talking achievements, then those would be the ones I would look at. If we're talking flat out ability, then probably Rios, Soderling, Mecir and Nalbandian stand out for me

 

[Fiero425]

Wait! What! :eyepop Is no one going to say Nalbandian?? It's a tough one. I'm not that invested. There's a case to be made for a lot of those guys. Ferrer, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Rios. I mean if we're just talking achievements, then those would be the ones I would look at. If we're talking flat out ability, then probably Rios, Soderling, Mecir and Nalbandian stand out for me

As much as I like Nalbandian and his game, I can't get past that "temper tantrum" assaulting/injuring the linesman at Queens! The idiot was just a few games away from winning in straight sets! Cilic was not going to win that match even with the "frustrating" break of serve that initiated the drama! I've never seen anything like that; dealing with the likes of Graebner, Richey, Nastase, Connors, & McEnroe back "in the day!" :cover uzzled angel: :dodgy:

 

[Federberg]

Wait! What! :eyepop Is no one going to say Nalbandian?? It's a tough one. I'm not that invested. There's a case to be made for a lot of those guys. Ferrer, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Rios. I mean if we're just talking achievements, then those would be the ones I would look at. If we're talking flat out ability, then probably Rios, Soderling, Mecir and Nalbandian stand out for me

As much as I like Nalbandian and his game, I can't get past that "temper tantrum" assaulting/injuring the linesman at Queens! The idiot was just a few games away from winning in straight sets! Cilic was not going to win that match even with the "frustrating" break of serve that initiated the drama! I've never seen anything like that; dealing with the likes of Graebner, Richey, Nastase, Connors, & McEnroe back "in the day!" :cover uzzled angel: :dodgy:

Yes that was a low moment for Nalbandian, and completely inexplicable. But some of the other guys on the list have had their episodes as well. Not least Rios and Ferrer

 

[Luxilon Borg]

In the end..I voted for Ferrer.

Unfortunately I agree! I can't stand the way he plays, but because of his longevity hanging in the top echelon the longest, I give it to DAVID; even though other players have more accomplishments! :cover :nono :angel: :dodgy:

I LOVE the way he plays..there is NO one on the tour that has maximized their potential like the Little Beast.

At five foot 9 he goes head to head with the heavyweights. And he has unmatchable heart.

 

[Kirijax]

Wait! What! :eyepop Is no one going to say Nalbandian?? It's a tough one. I'm not that invested. There's a case to be made for a lot of those guys. Ferrer, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Rios. I mean if we're just talking achievements, then those would be the ones I would look at. If we're talking flat out ability, then probably Rios, Soderling, Mecir and Nalbandian stand out for me

If we were talking flat-out ability, that would be tough. Mecir comes to mind in that case. But this is just about results and what they left behind. I picked Ferrer because I think he will finish his career with the "Most ATP Titles Without A Slam" record, but I could easily go for Corretja.

 

[El Dude]

Perhaps unsurprisingly, I did a statistical study of this last year when it was a topic of conversation. Basically I gave points for Slam results and titles of different levels and then came up with a number. It is a bit simplistic, but gives us something to work with. Updating it, these are the top non-Slam winners of the Open Era, according to my system:

58 David Ferrer
46 Tom Okker
45 Nikolay Davydenko
40 Marcelo Rios
40 Alex Corretja
37 Harold Solomon
35 Miroslav Mecir
35 David Nalbandian
35 Raul Ramirez
34 Brian Gottfried
34 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
33 Tomas Berdych
33 Tommy Haas
32 Thomas Enqvist
30 Tim Henman
30 Andriy Medvedev

This system really benefits total career stats and longevity, so you don't see players like Robin Soderling or Guillermo Coria. It might be better described as "best careers of non-Slam winners."

 

[El Dude]

OK, I somewhat obsessively crunched some more numbers and put a bunch of players through the same formula that I used to rank players in my nation series. It is more detailed, including all Slam results (from Wins to 2R), titles, and year-end rankings. Here is the list, with the point totals for comparison's sake:

1. Ferrer 390
2. Okker ~350*
3. Davydenko 311
4. Berdych 272
5. Gottfried 270
6. Rios 258
7. Nalbandian 257
8. Solomon 256
9. Corretja 253
10. Tsonga 252
11. Henman 248
12. Haas 246
13. Enqvist 231
14. Robredo 225
15. Ramirez 224
16. Martin 222
17. Mecir 210
.... Medvedev 192
.... Philippoussis 178
.... Soderling 174

*incomplete data; a lot of estimation

A couple things. One, I'm fairly certain that 1-17 is complete, but my guess is that there are players that slot in after Mecir and before Soderling.

Two, as you can see, like the simpler system, this one likes longevity over players with short but excellent careers, like Miroslav Mecir (who might have had the highest peak of any player on this list).

Finally, I think it is interesting how clumped together most players are, at least from Berdych down to around Mecir, but especially in the #6-12 range. I think with some error in the system and the fact that it doesn't take into account everything, you could slide people around within those ranges.

But in conclusion, I think it is clear that here are three real contenders for best player never to win a Slam: Ferrer, Okker, and Davydenko. Ferrer and Davydenko are similar - very consistent players with tremendous longevity, but not amazing peaks. Okker is from a different era, playing from the mid-60s to early 80s and thus played during a time when a lot of players skipped the Australian Open and French Open. I think if he had played more of those tournaments his overall number would be equal or higher than Ferrer's.

My vote goes to Tom Okker, with David Ferrer a close second.

 

[jhar26]

Very tough. Went with Rios in the end. In terms of consistency/longevity there's something to be said for Ferrer though.

 

[Kirijax]

OK, I somewhat obsessively crunched some more numbers and put a bunch of players through the same formula that I used to rank players in my nation series. It is more detailed, including all Slam results (from Wins to 2R), titles, and year-end rankings. Here is the list, with the point totals for comparison's sake:

1. Ferrer 390
2. Okker ~350*
3. Davydenko 311
4. Berdych 272
5. Gottfried 270
6. Rios 258
7. Nalbandian 257
8. Solomon 256
9. Corretja 253
10. Tsonga 252
11. Henman 248
12. Haas 246
13. Enqvist 231
14. Robredo 225
15. Ramirez 224
16. Martin 222
17. Mecir 210
.... Medvedev 192
.... Philippoussis 178
.... Soderling 174

*incomplete data; a lot of estimation

A couple things. One, I'm fairly certain that 1-17 is complete, but my guess is that there are players that slot in after Mecir and before Soderling.

Two, as you can see, like the simpler system, this one likes longevity over players with short but excellent careers, like Miroslav Mecir (who might have had the highest peak of any player on this list).

Finally, I think it is interesting how clumped together most players are, at least from Berdych down to around Mecir, but especially in the #6-12 range. I think with some error in the system and the fact that it doesn't take into account everything, you could slide people around within those ranges.

But in conclusion, I think it is clear that here are three real contenders for best player never to win a Slam: Ferrer, Okker, and Davydenko. Ferrer and Davydenko are similar - very consistent players with tremendous longevity, but not amazing peaks. Okker is from a different era, playing from the mid-60s to early 80s and thus played during a time when a lot of players skipped the Australian Open and French Open. I think if he had played more of those tournaments his overall number would be equal or higher than Ferrer's.

My vote goes to Tom Okker, with David Ferrer a close second.

Awesome El Dude! How did you know I was secretly hoping you would do this! Maybe we can make another front page article out of this!

 

[Fiero425]

Very tough. Went with Rios in the end. In terms of consistency/longevity there's something to be said for Ferrer though.

You're probably more right than moi! At least Rios got to be #1 for about 5 minutes, but I definitely agree that due to his longevity in the top 10, DAVID Ferrer should get it; even though I say he woefully unachieved by not finishing off top players with points to win on so many occasions! :cover uzzled :nono - Like others of his comparative ability like Berdych, the other members of the Spanish Armada, Tsonga, Gasquet, and so many others who were quite gifted with talent, they would allow Nole, Murray, Federer, and Nadal to come back "from the dead" to win when they were just about out of a match! :nono :cover :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Front242]

Rios.