Who else besides Lendl and Laver have lost in every GS final?

Fed's a US Open defeat away from it, who else?

Courier played in all four slam finals but never lost in the AO final.

Not sure who else.

Some French guy surely.

Rosewall.

I thought Edberg, but he never lost in a US Open final...
McEnroe never lost in a AO final and Connors never in FO. Hmm...

I think Laver and Lendl in the open era are the only two.

I think Laver and Lendl in the open era are the only two.

TBO, Laver didn't do that in the open era. It was around 1960-61, right?
Then it's only Lendl in the open era.
But I guess it's not a record he's proud of. :lol:

TBO, Laver didn't do that in the open era. It was around 1960-61, right?
Then it's only Lendl in the open era.
But I guess it's not a record he's proud of. :lol:

Yes you're right. So it is only Lendl in the open era.

Yes you're right. So it is only Lendl in the open era.
Poor Ivan :lol:

Federer has a chance to be the only guy beaten in every GS final by the same player each time. That'd certainly be a funny record.

Federer has a chance to be the only guy beaten in every GS final by the same player each time. That'd certainly be a funny record.

Given that he has been in 20 Grand Slam finals, it wouldn't be really that bad or embaressing for him however, it would be really embaressing for someone who has been in only a handful of Grand Slams.

Poor Ivan :lol:

Before we start feeling to sorry of Ivan, we need a list of all who made it to every slam final. Still a pretty elite group.

Agassi never lost in the final of the OZ open I think. He did lose at the French, Wimbledon and the US open to my knowledge.

Given that he has been in 20 Grand Slam finals, it wouldn't be really that bad or embaressing for him however, it would be really embaressing for someone who has been in only a handful of Grand Slams.

Of course he'd be embarrassed. He's Nadal's bitch.

I fail to understand this thread. Just how can being runner-up to all majors be an embarrasment? If a hypothetical player were to win each of the 4 majors 4 times, yet loose a fifth time on all four, he would make both this list and top the list of GS winners with 16 wins. As for a player who won 3 majors but never bagged the other, his having made it to 1 or more final on that slam (even if he lost them) would certainly be better than never having reached the final. Lendl lost finals at his weakest tournament (Wimbledon), but Connors or Sampras never even made it to the final at theirs(RG); now there you have a posible cause for embarrasment for a top player. And an argument to say that Lendl was a better all-round player than either of the other two.

Besides, winning a tournament once is great, but the doubt may arise whether it was a fluke. If that player has been RU one or more times before, the chance the win was a stroke of good luck diminishes. Example: Federer in RG much better to win 1/4 finals than 1/1 final) or Rafa in Wimbledon (1 out of 3).

I fail to understand this thread. Just how can being runner-up to all majors be an embarrasment?

You make far too much sense for MTF GM. :cool: :)

Irrational hate can produce some creative observations.

theRAFA

Fed will try to complete his collection of runner up plates in the USO. He already has the other 3. :p

he already has two slams this year, so why not make it four finals? ;)