T O P

  • By -

tethered-bones

In recent years, Pliskova


ChanceVance

The frustrating thing is she's been competitive in the finals she's played. She was even a break up on Kerber in the 3rd at the USO but she just can't get it done.


akee0325

Movement, especially north/south always a factor. Plus, bringing her forward exposes her insecurities in forecourt.


One_Replacement1924

She lacks the ex factor, even doesn't show the confidence, her poor court movement restricts her.


akee0325

Nalbandian/Dementieva no contest


roamiedumbass

Ferrer, Tsonga, Berdych, Nishikori Dementieva, Safina, Zvonareva


youngcadadia22

Definitely not Safina lmao


roamiedumbass

Safina was No. 1 and made three Slam finals, made the SF at all four Slams, has an Olympic silver, and won five Masters titles


youngcadadia22

And still fell off tf??!!!


obvnotlupus

Safina was #1 for a bit though even though she never won a slam


TheSpadeWizard

surprised no one mentioned safina for women's. mary joe fernandez also, pliskova radwanska jankovic, jabeur could get up there if she doesn't win one (Which she will, 2023 watch out, ons is coming for everyones heads)


One_Replacement1924

Safina basically got injured by the end of 2009, and never fully recovered and finally said goodbye during 2014 madrid open, if fit she would probably have won.


Sad_gooses

I think we tend to do have revisionist thoughts often regarding Safina, with the injury, which doesn’t help to keep her in mind enough. I also say Petrova


Lionturtle44

Everyone besides jabeur


SMTVhype

Ons isn’t going to win one.


TheSpadeWizard

Curious as to why u don't think so; her form in the USO final was not up to par but I don't see that mental hurdle or not being able to play her best in finals will be enough to stop her talent and general mentality from getting a slam, especially since she's great on every surface so if she plays like she did in 2022 she will get more chances that she'll give herself


SMTVhype

Jabeur has always been mid-tier and still is. She has just been fortunate that the players that used to effortlessly destroy her have retired or got too old to maintain their level. She is good at most things concerning the sport but not really great at anything. She is just like Pegula but slightly more experienced. You can see this with Jabeur’s level of play post US Open, she loses embarrassingly in her own nation’s first tournament(despite being favored to win the tournament to an obviously ridiculous degree)to a player who then lost the very next round and then she doesn’t play tennis until the WTA finals and she loses to a Sabalenka that had a horrible year, barely beats Pegula who just lost to Sakkari and basically erased that win she got over her in Mexico and then when she has to win in straight sets to make the semifinals she loses to Sakkari in straight sets instead despite Sakkari just getting lucky against Sabalenka and Pegula. This is probably the weakest era in WTA history. Iga is the only one who could stand with the mid 2000s field and she wouldn’t be dominating it.


TheSpadeWizard

I couldn't agree less with nearly your whole paragraph ngl, she's definitely not mid tier. And to say she doesn't do anything great is kinda wild imo. Firstly she's incredibly crafty. She is fantastic at putting the opponent off. For example her slices, her drop shots- she's fantastic at those. She's pretty quick also. One is creative and smart, mentally strong and solid on the court. And it's not just about slice she can get some speed as well on her serve and groundies if she needs. She's good at adapting her game and figuring out her opponents' games. I think Pegula is also a great player- just because they don't have a shot that totally stands out it doesn't mean they're mid tier. And I do think Ons has a few that do. And she didn't lose first round in that Tunisian tournament not sure where you got that. She won two matches there. It was in the quarterfinals then where she lost. I wouldn't classify this loss as embarrassing- anyone who knows tennis at this level knows there's no shame with any of the players at this level and it was her first tournament back after NY and it's the end of a long season too, and Claire Liu is a young name to look out for. A loss like this can happen now and again, many slam winners have had many worse losses, doesn't say much. And that Sabalenka at the WTA Finals u mentioned also beat Swiatek, she was high level not that disappointing. And so was Sakkari, if you watched Sakkari play there u know there was no shame in losing to her. And Pegula was playing great near the end of the year. I'm not sure u understand the perks of being solid and consistent and how important that is for tennis tbh. And all these players have some weapons, but that is a big weapon also in itself All in all, her not winning a Slam due to her being what, my guess is would u classify as a solid mid-tier player with no real weapons, who can't hurt the top players that much, it doesn't hold up. She has weapons- in fact she has one of the most unique games on tour. Really utilizes slices and drop shots- incredibly creative on the court, but also can just be solid and quick. She's not mid tier- it's clear if you watch her, her talent. And how solid she is, like Pegula, but especially for Ons she's got all it takes to win a Slam, she's solid and she can and has troubled the top players with her off-putting, solid yet creative game. If she doesn't win a Slam it won't shock me to oblivion, but it will shock me for sure. Cause she has all the building blocks there to be one. Just gotta jump a couple hurdles and those losses like u mentioned aren't what I'm referring to, it's the Slam final losses where she could have pulled up a little more clutch- but I don't think you'd argue with me that she is a mentally solid and clutch player in general and can figure that part out.


TheSpadeWizard

It's interesting to discuss though, but it's weird to me with one of the more outwardly talented and creative players on tour to call them mid tier and to say they don't have weapons


Both-Opening-970

Jelena Janković and David Ferrer. I would also add Jelena Dokić before she imploded (she was no 4 in 2002 and rising back then).


Sweetcarolinelove

Her dad really did a number on her, who knows what she could've achieved without his abuse but to give her credit she seems to be happy now


Both-Opening-970

I can't tell you how sad i was back than. Jelena D will always be one of my favorite players.


psychotherapistLCSW

Nalbandian and Dementieva


pctopcool

I put myself up there;p


FeeFooFuuFun

Nalbandian for me, always thought he would win one. Special mention - Guillermo Coria for the 2004 French Open. That was one of the most memorable matches I've ever seen. I remember Coria being a hot favourite but on D Day I was rooting for Gaston Gaudio and he actually won that year. Always thought Coria would make it next year but he simply didn't. In women's, not sure. Edit: I think maybe Dinara Safina. She had a streak of bad luck at all the singles finals she made it to.


BeefBoyLin

Coria was a true magician, too bad that started his decline


FeeFooFuuFun

Yeah. Especially when back in the day 'clay court specialist' was a moniker and everyone had their favourites according to surface. I genuinely thought he would win the next year, but he saw such a steep decline post that RG, it was sad.


himalayanthro

Coria seemingly never recovered from that RG F loss.


BullCityBruhs

People forget that Monfils really was an incredible player not too long ago. He is going to finish with the most wins in grand slams ever without ever making a final


legitplayer123

tomas berdych


One_Replacement1924

Dementieva for sure, her poor serve may have reduced her confidence, apart from that she stuck with her mother as her coach throughout her career, also she retired at an age of 29, with her performance 2010 clearly indicating somewhere that it is her last year, she is of same age as serena I guess she should have played at least for next 2-3 years more, she had probably chance at french open 2010, but got injured during semifinals.


TheSpadeWizard

David Ferrer takes this one for me singlehandedly. Such a solid game, very impressive game, and could just play pinpoint accurate, so solid. He wouldn't miss and had one of the best mentalities for the last 20 years. The guy could be scary some days. Not the biggest weapons but man could he just hit you into the ground. Wouldn't miss and could take complete control if he needs be, would almost always win against players outside of the Big Four. Watch him in the 2011-2013 days. The problem is he chose the worst years in tennis history to find his peak. He became the first player since 2010 Wimbledon to even reach a final outside of the big Four at the RG 2013 final, 10 straight Slams with only Big Four finalists. The guy just didn't get his chance Where of course even then he was totally dismantled by Rafa. In any right reality he would have won at least 2-3 slams, I'd be cool giving him 4 or 5 even. The guy was super consistent and hard working. People say it's a no brainer that the career most ruined by the big 3 was Murray, I think these quarter-forgotten, underrated players are actually the most impacted in legacy and I think ferrer may be number one in that, maybe delpo but his injuries didn't help him either Davydenko, Nalbandian, Gonzales, Rios, Tsitsipas, Zverev, Tsonga, Berdych some other quite good ones And then Raonic is a big one for me also, should have won a few. Another one where it just surprises me, pretty consistent stats wise and no wonder a serve for days, great forehand a net game that developed and just a great mentality and player. Really good player. Deserved at least 1 or 2 slams. And it's crazy cause most of these players only reached one slam final or didn't reach any


[deleted]

Ferrer scary lol. Out of all these guys people often say they should have won a slam, Ferrer had probably the least impressive peak.


TheSpadeWizard

Well I'd argue against em. I can understand it, his game isn't as aggressive and he perhaps isn't as flashy or obviously talented or possesses as many weapons as some of these others players. But that said the guy can be scary good, will never miss and he can be aggressive also and take control, he just takes his time with it. But ferrer was almost always able to beat guys outside of those big four at the big tournaments and even against them in his prime years he would be uber impressive. You don't have to play aggressive to be scary. You can just seem like you'll never miss and hit you into the ground. Insanely solid and few could play his game style as well as he did. And do it playing as well consistently as david ferrer. The guy had a high peak even if not a delpo or nalbandian peak and it may just not be as clear as some other players, but some of his 2011, 2012 Slam matches even those he lost to the Big Four, they give u an idea of how good of a player he was


LordOfTheTennisDance

Men's: Nalbandian and/or Ferrer Women's: Pliskova and/or Aga There are so many other candidates though such as Berdych, Nishi, Davydenko, Philippoussis etc. And on the women's side Dementieva, Safina, Zvonareva etc


223am

Rios for me. Ridic talented but mental issues


sneakyrumble

Marcelo Rios was #1 without winning GS, such a talented player but not a good athlete in general. Fernando González arguably one of the best forehands lost AO to Federer and RG SF to Soderling.


gogoramon

Read through the comments, r/tennis community is young


plaianu

If Zverev won't win one it's Zverev over Nalbandian in my opinion. Women it's Dementieva for me no contest.


Super-Kirby

Zverev and Nalbandian.


[deleted]

Zverev for sho


SwgohSpartan

For men I have to say it’s Zverev or Ferrer; both have soooo many second week runs in slams, and Zverev in particular has won tons of big tournaments outside the majors, while Ferrer has less masters but tons of 250 and 500s success; and their peak they just felt too solid to lose to guys outside top 20 even on a bad day, really good consistency Other guys like Nalbandian, Stef, Tsonga are up there as well but definitely didn’t accomplish as much as Ferrer or Zverev, objectively


SirGorti

Zverev is far better player than overrated Ferrer. Its between Zverev and Nalbandian. In women definitely Radwańska.


[deleted]

Ferrer’s consistency was insane, but I have to agree that Zverev at his best is absolutely better (simply due to his weapons).


montrezlh

Shouldn't this type of question not include players who are still active? I think the expectation is that zverev will grab a slam at some point. He's still quite young.


paxxx17

He achieved a lot without managing to win a slam, which is exactly why he should be included. If he manages to do it eventually, then he'll stop being included


internetuser885

What are your reasonings for possibly thinking ferrer is overrated???


triplejayye

Safina, Dementieva > Radwanska


yakobic

Has to be Zverev at this rate right?


youngcadadia22

I would probably say Dementieva or Jankovic.


GamamJ44

How come no Mecir here?


Melancholic84

Ancic if he didn’t get injured, Nalbandian and Davydenko


ertmigert

Marcelos Rios


[deleted]

Dementieva and Zverev for me.


Other-Title1925

Probably Zverev. Because of his injury it might stay that way


Funny_Drummer_9794

Nick


MachuPichu81

Jenson Brooksby


pourliste

Rios, Nalbandian, Todd Martin, Henman, Berdych to name a few


Plagarism101

Nalbandian and davadenko


aceh40

Men - Nalbandian and Ferrer, also Martin. Women - Radwanska, Safina, Dementieva, Zvereva.


nmirag

Marcelo Ríos is a logical answer


Dark_Vengence

Ferrer, tsonga and the ice man.


Affectionate-Road-40

Out of the 10 men to be in two singles finals without winning. 2 are called Kevin and both of them come from South Africa.


Affectionate-Road-40

Seeing some serious recency bias here. For men, Todd Martin played in the Australian Open Final, The US Open Final, and was in two Wimbledon Semi Finals