Which one slam non-wonder had the best career? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Which one slam non-wonder had the best career?

DwyaneWade
09-08-2012, 03:35 PM
Note that each of these players was much more than a 'one-slam wonder'.

Who had the best career (I know Ferrero is not done *yet* but he will be gone quite soon and I doubt he significantly bolsters his resume)?

How would you rank these guys?

DwyaneWade
09-08-2012, 03:37 PM
For me personally I would go:

Roddick
Chang
Ivanisevic
Ferrero
Stich

TigerTim
09-08-2012, 03:38 PM
Andy Roddick

Freak3yman84
09-08-2012, 03:50 PM
The guy in my sig ;)

TigerTim
09-08-2012, 03:51 PM
The guy in my sig ;)

Murray hasn't won a slam yet.

Freak3yman84
09-08-2012, 03:52 PM
Murray hasn't won a slam yet.

:haha: Sarcastic right?

TigerTim
09-08-2012, 03:53 PM
:haha: Sarcastic right?

Of course D-man :p

Freak3yman84
09-08-2012, 03:56 PM
Of course D-man :p

Just checking :p

HKz
09-08-2012, 04:03 PM
Well Roddick and Ferrero are the only two that reached world #1 status, however, Roddick was the closest out of any of them to picking up a second slam. Plus, Roddick had more GS finals and a much better overall GS record than the others. Statistically, going with anyone other than Roddick is pointless. However, if Murray if won only one slam, now that could certainly make a little debate, but even then, Murray still has a little bit more work to do :p

mcnasty
09-08-2012, 04:04 PM
Ivanisevic because it was at the tail end of his career. How sweet that was. (Although he played for a few more seasons, hadn't Ivanisevic practically retired after the Wimbledon win?)

As for Roddick and Chang, they won their slams at relatively early stages of their career, making their subsequent failures at winning slams rather bitter.

DwyaneWade
09-08-2012, 04:13 PM
Well Roddick and Ferrero are the only two that reached world #1 status, however, Roddick was the closest out of any of them to picking up a second slam. Plus, Roddick had more GS finals and a much better overall GS record than the others. Statistically, going with anyone other than Roddick is pointless. However, if Murray if won only one slam, now that could certainly make a little debate, but even then, Murray still has a little bit more work to do :p

Ivanisevic was quite close at Wimbledon in 1992 and 1998.

Ferrero probably should have won another French Open but ran into Guga twice and then choked against Costa. He also had a very well-rounded of the GS resumes (SF in Australia, W in French, QF in Wimbledon, F in US Open). Stich wasn't too shabby himself (SF in Australia, F in French, W in Wimbledon, F in US Open). And Chang did quite well for himself, reaching the SF for better in 8 majors.

Just playing Devil's Advocate. Roddick reached 4 AO SFs, 3 Wimbledon Fs and a SF, and 1 US open F with a win.

Johnny Groove
09-08-2012, 04:17 PM
Roddick arguably the greatest one slam wonder of all time, Pre-Open Era included.

DwyaneWade
09-08-2012, 04:20 PM
In fact all of these players had impressive well-rounded resumes. Except for Roddick at the French all 5 of them reached the QF or better at every single major.

Roy Emerson
09-08-2012, 04:34 PM
Roddick

Ben D.
09-08-2012, 04:40 PM
fixed the question, then Richie.

HKz
09-08-2012, 04:45 PM
Ivanisevic was quite close at Wimbledon in 1992 and 1998.

Ferrero probably should have won another French Open but ran into Guga twice and then choked against Costa. He also had a very well-rounded of the GS resumes (SF in Australia, W in French, QF in Wimbledon, F in US Open). Stich wasn't too shabby himself (SF in Australia, F in French, W in Wimbledon, F in US Open). And Chang did quite well for himself, reaching the SF for better in 8 majors.

Just playing Devil's Advocate. Roddick reached 4 AO SFs, 3 Wimbledon Fs and a SF, and 1 US open F with a win.

Never said the others weren't close, but Roddick was definitely the closest. He was 1 point away from serving for the match in that 5th set, and obviously had those 4 set points to get to 2 sets to love up.

hipolymer
09-08-2012, 04:52 PM
Why is this even a poll? Stupid, obvious questions should never be polls.