If Guillermo Coria won the 2004 French Open... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

If Guillermo Coria won the 2004 French Open...

tommyg6
06-07-2012, 04:08 AM
How would've affected his career? Some ppl say that loss hurt him big time and he wasn't the same after that. That being said, had he won the 2004 French Open against Gaudio, would his career would've taken off to higher levels? and become even more dominant?

leng jai
06-07-2012, 04:09 AM
IMO it would have improved his career.

Doggy
06-07-2012, 04:10 AM
http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpp7c1unOJ1qlxyddo1_400.gif

Mark Lenders
06-07-2012, 04:11 AM
He'd be a Slam winner and Gaston wouldn't for starters.

As for the rest, impossible to say really, who knows?

Certinfy
06-07-2012, 04:15 AM
He would have been a better player than Ferrer...





Oh wait, he still is. :lol:

Mark Lenders
06-07-2012, 04:18 AM
He would have been a better player than Ferrer...





Oh wait, he still is. :lol:

/thread

UsD.AnDreS
06-07-2012, 04:34 AM
He would've had a Nadal-like career.

Mountaindewslave
06-07-2012, 05:31 AM
I think honestly not that much would have changed, maybe Coria would have won more masters clay events for a few seasons but Nadal comes onto the map far too largely as soon as 2005 is reached for Coria to dominate clay whatsoever even with confidence.

FiBeR
06-07-2012, 06:13 AM
would have won in Rome for sure and who knows what would he have done to Rafa's confidence back then

spanish_army
06-07-2012, 06:18 AM
who cares?

n8
06-07-2012, 06:19 AM
In 2004, Coria was the person to beat on clay. As expected he made the final of Roland Garros, but unexpectedly, just missed the title. At this stage he was only 22 and probably thought he had lots more chances to take the title.

In 2005, he once again had a very good clay season, making the final of Monte Carlo and Rome. However, in both these finals he lost close ones to Nadal. He lost in the Roland Garros 4th round to Davydenko. Soon after this, I think in Umag, he developed service yips that pretty much derailed his career.

Why did he develop service yips a year after his Roland Garros fiasco? Well, because he starts to realise that 2004 was really his best chance. He could see how good Nadal was already (Nadal was only 18 when he beat him in Monte Carlo and Rome) and could probably tell Nadal was going to dominate clay for the foreseeable future. He knew he would probably have to beat Nadal to win Roland Garros and this was too much to bear, knowing that he didn't have to beat anyone of Nadal's calibre a year before.

This is speculation, but several tennis experts agreed that Nadal was more of a destroyer of Coria's confidence than the 2004 Roland Garros final. But it was cumulative, had Coria won Roland Garros in 2004, he wouldn't have felt so much pressure to better Nadal. So I think, if he won that Grand Slam, his career from mid 2005 would've been much better. Probably no more majors, but at least top 20 for a few more years.

Pirata.
06-07-2012, 07:09 AM
He would have been a better player than Ferrer...





Oh wait, he still is. :lol:

/thread

You guys are so obsessed with David, it's honestly getting sad at this point.

n8
06-07-2012, 07:50 AM
Here is a slice of tennis history for those who missed it (Coria's 2 match points): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxhGFliheRo#t=3h9m45s

dencod16
06-07-2012, 07:54 AM
You guys are so obsessed with David, it's honestly getting sad at this point.

Because they cannot accept he beat Murray. :smash:

viruzzz
06-07-2012, 08:13 AM
The question is quite easy, don't you think?
I mean only Vilas, Gaudio and Del Potro are slam winners here in Argentina.

3 Players... 3!!! Only 3 players!!!

If you want to add Sabatini, fine, 4 players.

What do you think? What do you think it would be for Guillermo to be one of those instead of Gaudio?

But that's not only in his country, you can see it this way:

- He would have one more Roland Garros than Sampras, and the same number of Muster.

I know, it's quite unfair to see it that way, but if he had won that, that would be the best moment of his career. SO many people think the final itself is the best moment of Coria's career.

It'd have taken to the "non-slam winner level" to the "slammers".

buzz
06-07-2012, 08:59 AM
It would have been his best achievement and put him in the Ferrero Moya maybe even Muster in the clay category. Now he is slightly below.

It wouldn't mean a lot for after 2005 because his second serve had always been shitty, returns from others got better which resulted in him losing all confidence in the shot.

asmazif
06-07-2012, 09:41 AM
He would have been a better player than Ferrer...





Oh wait, he still is. :lol:

Just remembered you hyping Pics to win AO '11 during the second week :lol:

:p

Chris Kuerten
06-07-2012, 09:41 AM
He would probably still be playing.

I miss him so much, it was always exciting to watch him play on clay, great talent.

TigerTim
06-07-2012, 09:59 AM
nothing much would have changed. Coria is slightly overrated on here imo.

latso
06-07-2012, 10:25 AM
Here is a slice of tennis history for those who missed it (Coria's 2 match points): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxhGFliheRo#t=3h9m45s
Thanks for reminding me this absolutely beautiful BH of Gaudio, pure awesomeness :worship:

Action Jackson
06-07-2012, 10:46 AM
If my car had 2 wheels and no motor it would be a bicycle.

tennishero
06-07-2012, 10:59 AM
Here is a slice of tennis history for those who missed it (Coria's 2 match points): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxhGFliheRo#t=3h9m45s

omg i forgot he even had MP's... i'd rather not even watch that, sickening loss

TBkeeper
06-07-2012, 11:08 AM
Yes of course he would've been a lot more succesful player.
Just like Davy if he hadn't choked away his 2 French open semi-finals :facepalm:

ossie
06-07-2012, 11:40 AM
he would still be the mug he is today.

Johnny Groove
06-07-2012, 11:45 AM
I think he would have challenged Nadal on clay at least in 05 and 06. I mean, a past it Gaudio was able to win a set 7-5 vs. Nadal in Monte Carlo in 06.

Mentally, Coria was destroyed after that 2005 Rome final.

Adri89
06-07-2012, 11:51 AM
Well, the RG 2004 actually destroys his career. Not only because he lost, but it is the way he lost it. He could have accept a loss in that final, like he did for the tough loss against Verkerk in 2003 in SF and come back stronger. But he felt so much pressure in the FO, that he couldn't handle it. Gaudio-Coria is probably the most dramatic match I've ever seen with the Nadal-Federer of 2008. But in this case, it's even more dramatic from my point of view because the two players were showing some humans emotions. They're not champions out of this world like Rafa and Roger. Gaston was afraid to play the final, he played like shit until the middle of the third, and after Coria cramped because of his nerves. The final set was just unreal. How can a player handle that ? The dream of Coria was done. And against a countryman, after have been the huge favorite, having MPs, leading 2 sets to love, and playing his best tennis during the tournament...

Coria in 2004 was in the best form of his life. I mean, he won MC, finalist in Hamburg and even Miami (kind draw though). After the defeat in this final, he did a final in a little tournament on grass but after he didn't win a match of the whole year except his first round in Wimbledon ! Almost 6 months without a win for a player who was number 3 and at his best tennis before RG. And that was before Nadal.

RG destroys his career. And Nadal was the one who didn't give a chance to come back. Like he did with Ferrero. He destroyed those players who were the bests on clay before him, they both were struggling for differnts reasons at this moment, they were going to be back at a good level in 2005 but Nadal was the one who made them give up (at different level). Nadal is a secondary reason to the decline of Coria.

It would have been great to have the Ferrero of 2003 and the Coria of 2004 to challenge more often Nadal like Coria did in the epic Roma's final of 2005. I think until 2008, they could have beat him time to time.

Chase Visa
06-07-2012, 12:59 PM
Coria declined due to his brain. Had he won RG he wouldn't have retired so early, and would still be Top 5.

Whether Nadal's RG record would've changed I dunno, but he certainly could've beaten him at some places.

n8
06-07-2012, 01:10 PM
Well, the RG 2004 actually destroys his career. Not only because he lost, but it is the way he lost it. He could have accept a loss in that final, like he did for the tough loss against Verkerk in 2003 in SF and come back stronger. But he felt so much pressure in the FO, that he couldn't handle it. Gaudio-Coria is probably the most dramatic match I've ever seen with the Nadal-Federer of 2008. But in this case, it's even more dramatic from my point of view because the two players were showing some humans emotions. They're not champions out of this world like Rafa and Roger. Gaston was afraid to play the final, he played like shit until the middle of the third, and after Coria cramped because of his nerves. The final set was just unreal. How can a player handle that ? The dream of Coria was done. And against a countryman, after have been the huge favorite, having MPs, leading 2 sets to love, and playing his best tennis during the tournament...

Coria in 2004 was in the best form of his life. I mean, he won MC, finalist in Hamburg and even Miami (kind draw though). After the defeat in this final, he did a final in a little tournament on grass but after he didn't win a match of the whole year except his first round in Wimbledon ! Almost 6 months without a win for a player who was number 3 and at his best tennis before RG. And that was before Nadal.

RG destroys his career. And Nadal was the one who didn't give a chance to come back. Like he did with Ferrero. He destroyed those players who were the bests on clay before him, they both were struggling for differnts reasons at this moment, they were going to be back at a good level in 2005 but Nadal was the one who made them give up (at different level). Nadal is a secondary reason to the decline of Coria.

It would have been great to have the Ferrero of 2003 and the Coria of 2004 to challenge more often Nadal like Coria did in the epic Roma's final of 2005. I think until 2008, they could have beat him time to time.

Right shoulder surgery had something to do with that. He only played Cincinnati and Masters' Cup after Wimbledon in 2004. But nice post otherwise. :)

lucho_coria
06-07-2012, 01:12 PM
Well, the RG 2004 actually destroys his career. Not only because he lost, but it is the way he lost it. He could have accept a loss in that final, like he did for the tough loss against Verkerk in 2003 in SF and come back stronger. But he felt so much pressure in the FO, that he couldn't handle it. Gaudio-Coria is probably the most dramatic match I've ever seen with the Nadal-Federer of 2008. But in this case, it's even more dramatic from my point of view because the two players were showing some humans emotions. They're not champions out of this world like Rafa and Roger. Gaston was afraid to play the final, he played like shit until the middle of the third, and after Coria cramped because of his nerves. The final set was just unreal. How can a player handle that ? The dream of Coria was done. And against a countryman, after have been the huge favorite, having MPs, leading 2 sets to love, and playing his best tennis during the tournament...

Coria in 2004 was in the best form of his life. I mean, he won MC, finalist in Hamburg and even Miami (kind draw though). After the defeat in this final, he did a final in a little tournament on grass but after he didn't win a match of the whole year except his first round in Wimbledon ! Almost 6 months without a win for a player who was number 3 and at his best tennis before RG. And that was before Nadal.

RG destroys his career. And Nadal was the one who didn't give a chance to come back. Like he did with Ferrero. He destroyed those players who were the bests on clay before him, they both were struggling for differnts reasons at this moment, they were going to be back at a good level in 2005 but Nadal was the one who made them give up (at different level). Nadal is a secondary reason to the decline of Coria.

It would have been great to have the Ferrero of 2003 and the Coria of 2004 to challenge more often Nadal like Coria did in the epic Roma's final of 2005. I think until 2008, they could have beat him time to time.

Coria had a surgery and he didn't play the second part of 2004 ;)

Adri89
06-07-2012, 01:47 PM
Yeah, I forgot that the injury was that long. I remember him losing all his matchs at the TMC, so I thought he came back earlier

Allez
06-07-2012, 01:49 PM
Rafa would still have happened, so aside from the said RG win, he would not have won another slam.

mooncreek
06-08-2012, 04:03 AM
It would be safe to say that Coria and Nadal would have had a rivalry on the clay. Rafa would not have dominated clay so easily when he was 18-20 years old as he would have been concerned with this second rival. I think Coria would have at least made another French Open final - and if it had been in 2005, Nadal might have been intimidated being in his first final against the defending champion. He would never have been a dominating force due to Nadal eventually surpassing him.

selyoink
06-08-2012, 04:09 AM
Obviously winning RG would've helped is career. It also would've helped tennis because it would remove the blight that is Gaudio as a grand slam champ. Whether he would've won anymore RGs who knows but he would've been able to beat Nadal on clay as Rome 2005 showed losing an epic 5-setter and he wasn't at his peak at that point, not that Nadal was either.

fast_clay
06-08-2012, 04:24 AM
it does not matter if he won rg 04, he simply did not have access to the fuentes email address

BauerAlmeida
06-08-2012, 02:16 PM
He could've defeated Nadal ocassionally on clay, but Nadal would still be the best player there winning most RG and the Masters 1000. But at least he would have some competition.

n8
06-08-2012, 02:24 PM
He could've defeated Nadal ocassionally on clay, but Nadal would still be the best player there winning most RG and the Masters 1000. But at least he would have some competition.

Federer too. I would've like to see more Federer v Coria on clay. Federer won both times they played on clay (both in Hamburg, Federer best clay event).

Certinfy
06-08-2012, 02:30 PM
Just remembered you hyping Pics to win AO '11 during the second week :lol:

:p
:lol: That was weird because I actually called Ferrer to beat Nadal in the QF, and he played up to his ranking (for one of the few times in his career) so I just hyped him up after that. :o

There's only 2 times that I've actually had respect for Ferrer, one was that match against Nadal in Melbourne and the other against Djokovic in London last year (which I was at) and I can't deny Ferrer was absolutely amazing.

Leo
06-08-2012, 02:44 PM
Obviously the difference between GS champion and runner-up is vast. Besides just that obvious fact, that loss hugely impacted his confidence and the development of his career. Being bested on clay the following year by both Nadal and Federer in the warm-ups events added to his failing confidence - and then Davydenko, who previously was helpless vs. Coria and had been destroyed by him at the French, hit him off the court in the '05 RG R16. He had some impressive runs afterwards including the QF of the USO that year (losing to Ginepri in an ugly five-setter) and qualifying for the YEC, but by then his serve had already developed the yips and he just continued to slide.

He definitely had good hands and talent for a clay court, but he was smug and I never liked the guy. Gaudio's French run was glorious tennis.

Leo
06-08-2012, 02:49 PM
It would have been great to have the Ferrero of 2003 and the Coria of 2004 to challenge more often Nadal like Coria did in the epic Roma's final of 2005. I think until 2008, they could have beat him time to time.

Agreed. Would be fun to see the Kuerten of 2000-01, Ferrero of 01-03, and Coria of 04 challenging Nadal for some years on clay. Rather than an offensive player like Federer who was finding his top clay game in 05 but still didn't have it to top Nadal.

Wing Man Frank
06-08-2012, 04:07 PM
Question is what would have happened had Henman won it instead?

Would we have seen the rise of the 'CHIP N CHARGE!' tactic at RG?

TigerTim
06-08-2012, 05:13 PM
Question is what would have happened had Henman won it instead?

Would we have seen the rise of the 'CHIP N CHARGE!' tactic at RG?

:worship: He was a set and a break up as well :sobbing: and owned Guadio in their H2H.

super_cerdito
06-08-2012, 05:18 PM
It is funny how cruel tennis destiny is, it ruined one of the three best claycourter of this geneartion to give a GS to a stupid lucky mug as Gaudio.

no idea how successful Coria would have been, but firstly the match vs Verkerk changed his mind and Gaudio´s totally destroyed him.

Wing Man Frank
06-08-2012, 05:22 PM
:worship: He was a set and a break up as well :sobbing: and owned Guadio in their H2H.

It was like he had a panic attack on court and suddenly realised where the hell he was. :(

TigerTim
06-08-2012, 05:25 PM
It was like he had a panic attack on court and suddenly realised where the hell he was. :(

Yep, for a set and a half he forgot he was in a slam semi :o. French Open WAS his biggest chance IMO, no pressure, mind you 6-0 in the 3rd vs Goran and losing :sobbing: at least goran won the final.

BauerAlmeida
06-08-2012, 05:30 PM
Henman was never going to beat Coria in RG.

sexybeast
06-08-2012, 06:33 PM
Coria may have been around to be destroyed by Nadal and Federer in big claycourt tournaments the years between 2005-2008, maybe he would win 20+ mickeymouse tournaments aswell.

sexybeast
06-08-2012, 06:34 PM
Henman was never going to beat Coria in RG.

Anyone could beat Coria when Coria was in the mood of losing. Even Verkerrk in straight sets.

bounccer
06-08-2012, 08:44 PM
Coria'game on hardcourt ans grass was awful, but on clay, it was a beauty!!

When he was on he retrieved everything, beautiful touch, drop shot, lob, backhand down the line, he was very smart on this surface, light on his feet, supreme agility...


His 2005 match in Rome with Nadal is the best clay court match of the century IMO, watch it if you can, Nadal was already a monster, and even quicker than today and Coria gives him a master test this day.

His style his non existent today. Nobody match this science of clay, this deplacement, even Nadal imo. Nadal his by far superior than ever was Coria but he has 1000 time his power.

This 2004 miss was a tragedy, like was this mental. Even more a tragedy was this meteoric ermergence of this young spaniard in 2005. But it would be very difficul for Coria anyway, Federer was an awful match-up for him, he would probably deny him a lot without Nadal.