Could Andy Murray Be the Greatest Player Ever to Never Reach No. 1?

[Kirijax]

Andy Murray continues to add to his list of achievements. Here are some of his records:

2012 U.S. Open Champion
2013 Wimbledon Champion
2012 London Olympic Gold Medalist
Ten Masters 1000 titles
33 ATP Tour titles
One of only six men to do a hat-trick of semifinals at all four Grand Slam tournaments.

And the list goes on. Despite his accomplishments though, he has never reached the ranking of No. 1. With Djokovic so far ahead of everyone else right now, there is the possibility that Murray will end his career without ever once reaching the ranking of No. 1. Will he retire as the greatest ever to not reach the rankings? I took a look at the players who had finished their career with a career-high rankings of No. 2.

Manuel Orantes
Ken Rosewall
Guillermo Vilas
Arthur Ashe
Michael Stich
Goran Ivanisevic
Michael Chang
Petr Korda
Alex Corretja
Magnus Norman
Tommy Haas

A pretty good group, but IMO the only ones that could challenge Murray at this point would be Guillermo Vilas and Arthur Ashe. Ken Rosewall doesn't really belong in this group in the first place. Has Murray already surpassed Vilas and Rosewall, or does he still have some work to do?

Guillermo Vilas:
4 Grand Slams
62 ATP Tour titles
1974 World Tour Final Championship

Arthur Ashe
3 Grand Slams
35 ATP Tour titles
WCT Championship

Could Murray end up the Greatest No. 2 Player of All Time?

 

[Kieran]

Rosewall doesn't belong in the group? Because he's too great? Because he's far greater than anyone else on the list.

Haas doesn't belong in the group. Imagine a tennis era where Tommy was world #1. That's known as the WTA.

Andy might still get to #1 at some stage, but he's sure better than Stich, Orantes, Chang, Ivanisevic, Haas, Korda, Corretja. Not sure about Vilas. But now Rios got to #1, which was some trick back in the day...

 

[britbox]

Rosewall was the real #1 in 1962 and 1963 at the very least. It just happened he was pro rather than amateur.

 

[Kirijax]

Rosewall doesn't belong in the group? Because he's too great? Because he's far greater than anyone else on the list.

Haas doesn't belong in the group. Imagine a tennis era where Tommy was world #1. That's known as the WTA.

Andy might still get to #1 at some stage, but he's sure better than Stich, Orantes, Chang, Ivanisevic, Haas, Korda, Corretja. Not sure about Vilas. But now Rios got to #1, which was some trick back in the day...

Yeah, Rosewall belongs up there with the greats of the greats. Doesn't belong on that list.
Alot of those guys on the list, including some of those who reached No. 1 were lucky to come at a time when there was no dominant player and the rankings were moving around almost weekly. Murray is just unlucky to be playing in an era alongside three of the greatest ever. Don't get me started on Rios...

 

[Front242]

Haas was a hell of a player and injuries absolutely destroyed his career so he never realized his full potential. He was a very deserving number 2 and his ranking only tumbled because of injuries. Before his recurrent shoulder injury last year he was in the running for the WTF at 36. Pretty incredible imo. The guy can still beat the top guys when in form as we saw against Novak at Miami in 2013. Looking forward to seeing him back hopefully this month and if he's been able to work on his fitness he'll still be tough to beat.

 

[britbox]

^ As much as I like(d) Tommy's game, he never had the mental fortitude to be a #1 or win a major. He was good at everything but not great at anything.

 

[Kieran]

Haas was a hell of a player and injuries absolutely destroyed his career so he never realized his full potential. He was a very deserving number 2 and his ranking only tumbled because of injuries. Before his recurrent shoulder injury last year he was in the running for the WTF at 36. Pretty incredible imo. The guy can still beat the top guys when in form as we saw against Novak at Miami in 2013. Looking forward to seeing him back hopefully this month and if he's been able to work on his fitness he'll still be tough to beat.

Haas was never, ever...ever!...good enough to be at the summit of the sport. Injuries or no injuries. It would be a dark day for the game if Tommy was there, and I like old Tom, and you're right, he was deserving of his #2 ranking, but he was no great player, in the record-book scheme of things...

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yeah, Tommy was a terrific talent to watch but he's quite out of place in this conversation. Hell, Nalbandian has a better claim, and it's not even a particularly good one.

 

[nehmeth]

Rosewall doesn't belong in the group? Because he's too great? Because he's far greater than anyone else on the list.

Haas doesn't belong in the group. Imagine a tennis era where Tommy was world #1. That's known as the WTA.

Andy might still get to #1 at some stage, but he's sure better than Stich, Orantes, Chang, Ivanisevic, Haas, Korda, Corretja. Not sure about Vilas. But now Rios got to #1, which was some trick back in the day...

Just hard for me to believe Rosewall was never #1

Tommy Haas was #2 in the world and just getting used to that rarefied air when his shoulder required surgery and then a host of tragedies ensued. He never got a chance to be in the conversation.

Vilas played in the golden age of Connors, McEnroe, and Borg. He carved out an excellent career for himself, but he could never beat Borg on the dirt. Of all the others I would say he should be in the conversation.

Murray may yet reach #1 - which would end this thread. :snicker. But yes, he's like the Vilas of this present generation.

 

[britbox]

^Rosewall was the defacto #1 in the early 60s... he just happened to be playing the pro circuit. When Laver (the official #1) turned pro, I think Rosewall took him out 9 times out of 11 or 11 out of 13 (one of the two, without looking it up). The only reason Rosewall wasn't an official #1 was tennis politics and a split tour. For the purposes of this discussion, I think he should removed - he was the real #1 for a time.

 

[Federberg]

Given how dodgy the rankings calculations were back in the day, it's reasonable to suggest that if the modern rankings calculations were used Rosewall may well have been a number 1 anyway. Apart from him Vilas and Murray stand out for the title of "Greatest ever..."

 

[britbox]

^ There isn't really a "may"... Rosewall was the best player on the planet for a spell and would have been the real #1 under any ranking system that combined the pro and amateur tours.

 

[Kieran]

^ There isn't really a "may"... Rosewall was the best player on the planet for a spell and would have been the real #1 under any ranking system that combined the pro and amateur tours.

Exactly. Plus, he was a heavyweight in an era which included Hoad, Gonzales and then Laver...

 

[Federberg]

^ There isn't really a "may"... Rosewall was the best player on the planet for a spell and would have been the real #1 under any ranking system that combined the pro and amateur tours.

I wasn't disputing the fact that he was the best player at one time. I was just suggesting that using today's ranking calculation would probably confirm that. I only used "may" because I couldn't say it with certainty without doing the calculation myself

 

[britbox]

Of that list, I think Murray has the best claim to be honest.

 

[El Dude]

As others have said, Rosewall doesn't apply. I believe the OP is looking at ATP rankings only, which began in 1973? Rosewall peaked 10-15 years before that.

Anyhow, it really comes down to Vilas vs. Murray. Vilas may even eventually get a #1 ranking as their is some dispute about 1977, when he certainly deserved it.

That said, don't write Andy off. At some point Roger is going to slip back in the rankings and there's no one up-and-coming that looks to play second fiddle to Novak other than Andy. If Novak slips at all, or gets injured, Andy could be there to sneak in. I see at least another couple years before the next generation is ready to challenge for the crown, so Andy has some time.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

^^was finally decided in recent weeks that world rank charts from olden days won't be altered, no world no1 rank for vilas.

 

[El Dude]

[

^^was finally decided in recent weeks that world rank charts from olden days won't be altered, no world no1 rank for vilas.

That's a bummer. Vilas really deserved it.

 

[Kieran]

[

^^was finally decided in recent weeks that world rank charts from olden days won't be altered, no world no1 rank for vilas.

That's a bummer. Vilas really deserved it.

What! Jimmy Connors won the Walt Disney Copacabana Pepsi Challenge, beating Slim Pickins in the final. Then he beat Noah Chance in the final of the Walmart Coca Cola Open, followed up with a great victory against Hootie Hellisdat in the final of the Lucky Strike Grand Slam Tournament of Champions and Near-Champions in Hells Toilet, Boca Raton.

Shame on you for comparing that banner year with a measly couple a majors...

 

[I.Haychew]

[

^^was finally decided in recent weeks that world rank charts from olden days won't be altered, no world no1 rank for vilas.

That's a bummer. Vilas really deserved it.

What! Jimmy Connors won the Walt Disney Copacabana Pepsi Challenge, beating Slim Pickins in the final. Then he beat Noah Chance in the final of the Walmart Coca Cola Open, followed up with a great victory against Hootie Hellisdat in the final of the Lucky Strike Grand Slam Tournament of Champions and Near-Champions in Hells Toilet, Boca Raton.

Shame on you for comparing that banner year with a measly couple a majors...

:laydownlaughing
That was funny, Kieran. You made me lol out loud!