The History of Men's Tennis (Open Era)

Born: October 10, 1979 in Viña del Mar (Valparaíso)
Height: 1.81 m
Plays: Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

Massú took his first steps on the tennis court under the tutelage of his maternal Jewish-Hungarian grandfather. Massú, whose paternal lineage traces back to Lebanese and Palestinian origins, enjoyed a prolific junior career (crazy genetic heritage?). In 1998, when Marcelo Ríos ascended to the world’s top ranking, sports journalists were already heralding Massú and Fernando González as his potential successors.
While Ríos’ younger compatriots may not have eclipsed his ranking achievements, Massú carved out a unique niche in Chilean tennis history. He stands alone among the trio as the recipient of one of tennis’ most coveted prizes – an Olympic gold medal. His triumph in Athens in 2004 ignited debates about the greatest player in Chilean history: Ríos captured the most ATP titles, González collected the most medals (the only player in history with gold, silver & bronze, and has the best resume given major events), but neither has won a title as significant as Massú. These three distinctive players triumphed at the World Team Cup ’03, Ríos wasn’t a member of the team when Chile defended the title.
Massú’s Olympic feat was nothing short of extraordinary. Not only did he clinch gold in singles, but he also partnered with González to secure the top spot in doubles. Both finals were nail-biting five-set encounters, resolved within a breathtaking 24-hour span. This unprecedented double-gold performance transcended tennis, etching Massú’s name into the annals of sports history for decades to come.
In the culminating matches of the tournament, Massú vanquished American players who were also experiencing career-defining moments. However, the magnitude of Massú’s accomplishment is further amplified by his earlier victories over former world No. 1 players Gustavo Kuerten and Carlos Moyà. What makes this achievement even more astounding is that Massú arrived in Athens on the heels of eight consecutive hardcourt losses. The fact that these Olympic triumphs represent his sole hardcourt title in singles and his only doubles title overall underscores the miraculous nature of that unforgettable week.
Massú was renowned for his tenacity and indefatigable fighting spirit. He frequently emerged victorious from seemingly insurmountable deficits, particularly in the ‘best-of-three’ format. He did it even in the finals: Buenos Aires 2002 and Palermo 2003. His approach to the game suggested a preference for marathon matches – the longer the contest, the more it suited his style. Curiously, this mental fortitude didn’t fully translate to major tournaments, where he maintained a negative record, even on the clay courts of Roland Garros. It’s really staggering that a player of his calibre, played a fourth round at Slams just once – US Open ’05 when he lost a 4-hour-32-minute marathon to Guillermo Coria leading 2-1 in sets, yet he didn’t have chances for victory in the last two sets. Massú accused Coria of faking an injury during the match.
During the 2000s, no other player was involved in as many protracted matches as Massú. He was notorious for stretching the time between serves to the maximum allowed (25 seconds in ATP events and 20 seconds in majors at that time). After the first few pro years of being primarily associated with clay courts, he surprised many by reaching the final of the indoor Madrid tournament. This result undoubtedly bolstered his confidence on harder surfaces, culminating in his glorious performance in Athens. As Massú approached his 29th birthday, he began to encounter the physical limitations that often challenged professional athletes before turning 30. The final five years of his career saw him primarily competing at the Challenger level, where despite his efforts, he was unable to reclaim a position within the Top 100 rankings which would allow him to participate in the biggest events. As a coach, he helped Dominic Thiem achieve a career-best result, the ’20 US Open title.
Trivia: Massú holds the distinction of playing the longest four-set “tie-break” matches, both occurred in Davis Cup against less accomplished players: in 2007, he succumbed to Dudi Sela of Israel 3-6, 4-6, 7-6, 4-6 in an epic 5-hour, 7-minute battle; two years later, he prevailed over Austrian Stefan Koubek in a marathon lasting 5 hours, 14 minutes, creating a unique situation that these two players have played the longest match of their careers, finished in 4, not 5 sets… Massú is the first player in history to officially ask for a Hawk–Eye challenge, it happened at the beginning of his match against Raemon Sluiter in Miami 2006. Three years before they faced each other in an Austrian final.

Career record: 257–238 [ 225 events ]
Career titles: 6
Highest ranking: No. 9
Best GS result:
US Open (fourth round 2005)
Olympic Gold medalist in singles and doubles (Athens 2004)
World Team Cup champion 2003 and 2004

Born: March 24, 1975 in Linköping (ÖsterGötland)
Height: 1.79 m
Plays: Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

The Grand Slam champions from Sweden and their number of titles are as follows:
11 – Björn Borg, 7 – Mats Wilander, 6 – Stefan Edberg…
and 1 – Thomas “ToJo” Johansson, who is not related to Joachim “Pim-Pim” Johansson (the US Open ’04 semifinalist). Despite producing many distinctive players in the 80s and 90s, Sweden only saw “ToJo” joining the three great Swedes: Borg, Wilander, and Edberg as a Grand Slam titleholder. Johansson first caught my attention in 1993, as an unranked 18-year-old ‘wildcard’ (he had been recognised as a big talent already four years earlier becoming the best European under 14), when he defeated the experienced Karel Nováček, then ranked No. 17, in Bolzano. He made it to the quarterfinals, where he lost a close three-setter to Andrey Olhovskiy. Such an impressive debut – without any prior experience in Challengers or Satellites – was absolutely astonishing, and I thought he would become an extraordinary player.
I first saw him on TV in 1995, playing against Michael Stich in Vienna, a few months later against Boris Becker in Melbourne and Goran Ivanišević in Munich. However, in these three matches he didn’t make much of an impression on me, even though he won the first two sets against Becker, known as a slow-starter though. Then, in May 1996, Johansson surprised many, including myself, by dismantling Henri Leconte 6-1, 6-1, 6-4 in the Frenchman’s farewell match on Centre Court in Paris. Seeing the young, humble Swede win so convincingly in such a significant match, with the entire stadium against him, was unexpected. If someone had told me then that he would become a Grand Slam champion, I wouldn’t have believed it. He seemed too reserved, too timid to capture the biggest titles.
I always appreciated Johansson’s powerful first serve (considering his relatively modest height) and his ability to perfectly hit ground-strokes down the line from both wings. Struggling to close out tight matches could have easily dashed his hopes of ever reaching a major final. “It’s the worst what could happen. I would prefer to lose 2-6, 2-6, 2-6” said the devastated Swede after a heart-breaking quarterfinal loss at the US Open ’98. Nonetheless, more than three years later, he seized his opportunity in Melbourne, aided by fortunate circumstances (Andre Agassi‘s withdrawal, a favorable draw in the second week, and Marat Safin‘s infamous birthday party a night before the final). He stunned the tennis world by lifting the Australian Open ’02 trophy, becoming one of the most surprising Grand Slam champions in history. “I was only 24 years old, so for me, it was a huge title,” Johansson reflected on his first widely acclaimed success at the 1999 Canadian Open, a victory that undoubtedly gave him the confidence to truly believe in winning a major event. “All of the best players in the world were there. It was like an approval that if I played my best tennis, I could compete with the best. Beating Yevgeny Kafelnikov and Jim Courier, two big champions, was just amazing.” Until the end of his career, Johansson was unable to replicate his Montreal and Melbourne achievements, but he did play some of his best tennis in Autumn ’04, when he defeated Agassi in the final in Stockholm.
Two other notable results following his Australian glory, were reaching the Wimbledon ’05 semifinal and earning a silver medal in doubles at the Olympics the year before. Considering the generally strong performances of Swedish players on clay courts over the decades as well as Johansson’s super solid baseline strokes, it is inexplicable that he never reached the third round at Roland Garros in eleven appearances, and took part in only one ATP semifinal on clay (which occurred when his opponent decided not to play the quarterfinal due to injury). Johansson finished his career with a disappointing 35% win rate on clay.
Trivia: in January 2004, he made another unranked run to an ATP quarterfinal, in Adelaide, following knee surgery that had sidelined him for the entire 2003 season.

Career record: 357–296 [ 288 events ]
Career titles: 9
Highest ranking: No. 7
Best GS results:
Australian Open (champion 2002)
Wimbledon (semifinal 2005)
US Open (quarterfinal 1998 and 2000)
Davis Cup champion 1998 (didn’t play in the final)
World Team Cup champion 2008

Born: January 16, 1971 in Barcelona (Catalonia)
Height: 1.87 m
Plays: Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

Spanish tennis had to wait eighteen years for another major title after Manuel Orantes‘ US Open victory of 1975. In the interim, players like José Higueras and Emilio Sánchez reached the top 10 but were never seen as serious Grand Slam contenders. Bruguera, initially, wasn’t either. Though he showed promise as a teenager – nearly upsetting Jimmy Connors in Hamburg in 1989 and then demolishing the veteran “one and one” in Rome a week later – his first pro years were marked by inconsistency.
Bruguera’s straight-set victory over top seed Stefan Edberg in the first round of the 1990 French Open as well as his semifinal in the same city (indoors) a few months later, hinted at his potential. He confirmed his aspiration to be a leading player on clay courts in the 90s, triumphing at Monte Carlo ’91, but it wasn’t until 1993 that he found consistency on the ‘red dirt’ when he decided to be an ultra defensive baseliner. After a mixed start to the season, Bruguera hit his stride, making deep runs in several clay-court tournaments (including his second title in Monaco – the last one at the Masters 1K level), culminating in a dominant performance at Roland Garros. His run to the final was reminiscent of Björn Borg‘s prime, including a triple bagel over former quarterfinalist Thierry Champion. In the final, Bruguera ended Jim Courier‘s twenty-match winning streak at the French Open in a gruelling four-hour battle.
When Bruguera successfully defended his title in 1994, it seemed he might rule Paris for years to come. Yet, despite his huge success, there was little remarkable about Bruguera’s tennis to remember him with sentiment. His game was built on patience and heavy topspin from both wings, frequently manufactured as he was standing two-three meters behind the baseline; the balls struck by him had very high net-clearance. Generally speaking, he waited primarily for his opponents to make mistakes. Although tall, his second serve was more of an entry point to rallies rather than a weapon, and his volleying was average at best. His forehand and backhand, while effective in constructing points from far behind the baseline, lacked the aggression seen in other contemporary Slam champions.
Bruguera’s strength laid in his passing shots, which allowed him to create impressive records against excellent serve-and-volleyers like Patrick Rafter (6-2, with a win even on Wimbledon grass!) and Pete Sampras (3-2); in defiance of his returns being generally unthreatening; he often applied a blocked forehand return. Among his fourteen career titles, only one came on a surface other than clay, a hardcourt victory in Bordeaux ’93, in the final against Diego Nargiso, a talented but underachieving Italian.
Though Bruguera tried to adapt his clay-court game to other surfaces, he never reached a major quarterfinal outside of Roland Garros. Technically-wise, his career peaked with a Masters ’94 semifinal – he was trying to be more aggressive with all his basic shots and almost made the final in Frankfurt. It seemed that he’d be dangerous on faster surfaces, fighting for the position on top of the world, but it never happened. After a semifinal loss in Paris 1995 where he was a double defending champion, he never won another title, despite playing professionally until 2002 (his streak of seven consecutive lost finals began in Rome ’95).
Bruguera’s decline could be attributed to the physical and mental demands of his game, which required him to operate at maximum capacity. By the age of 23, with two French Open titles already in hand, his motivation may have waned. Although he reached three more big finals – at the 1996 Olympics, Key Biscayne in 1997, and Roland Garros the same year – he lost all of them having been easily outplayed. After 1997, he became a mere shadow of his former self, with his shocking 2-6, 2-6, 3-6 defeat to Hernán Gumy at the 1998 French Open serving as a symbol of his fall from the top. “Currently, nothing goes my way, on and off the court,” Bruguera lamented after that first round loss, a fitting epitaph for the twilight of his career. Just four years after his second triumph in Paris, he couldn’t have won a set on his beloved clay losing thirteen in succession, not playing even a tie-break.

Career record: 447-271 [ 267 events ]
Career titles: 14
Highest ranking: No. 3
Best GS results:
Roland Garros (champion 1993-94; runner-up 1997; semifinal 1995)
Olympic Silver medal in Atlanta (1996)

Born: June 25, 1982 in Moscow (Moscow Oblast in Soviet Union)
Height: 1.81 m
Plays: Right-handed

Михаил Михайлович Южный – a son of Mikhail, who served as a Soviet army colonel, carried the military tradition throughout his career, famously saluting after victories while using his “Head” racquet as a makeshift cap. Like a soldier, he consistently sported a short haircut, yet his playing style evolved significantly over the years. Early in his professional career, his backhand bore a striking resemblance to those of Björn Borg and Andrea Gaudenzi, with a two-handed swing. However, unlike Borg and Gaudenzi, who released their left hand at the moment of contact, Youzhny let go just before hitting the ball, giving his backhand a unique touch. Regular use of the slice backhand also facilitated the development of a more natural one-handed backhand over time.
Youzhny’s breakthrough came early in his career, during the 2002 Davis Cup final against France in Paris. Called upon to replace Yevgeny Kafelnikov in the deciding rubber, the young Russian found himself down two sets but staged a remarkable comeback to win the next three. This victory made him the first player in Davis Cup history to overturn a two-set deficit in the deciding fifth rubber of a final. Remarkably, Youzhny had been close to the Russian Davis Cup team long before this moment of glory, having served as a ball boy during the 1995 final.
Throughout his career, Youzhny worked with the stoic Russian coach Boris Sobkin, who recalled the early days with Mikhail and his older brother Andrey (who never played an ATP match): “Mischa was always breaking racquets and crying. Not many coaches want to work with a boy with such a strong character. They would practice on one court for 15 minutes, then be forced to move to another because a member wanted to play. This would happen all day. But there was something special in Mischa’s eyes – a sparkle, maybe. Sometimes the eyes tell more than the parents. I never saw him as a Top 10 player back then, but I knew he had something special.”
In 2002, the 20-year-old Youzhny clinched a significant title on the clay courts of Stuttgart, overcoming Guillermo Cañas in a grueling five-set final, having been down 4:1 in the final set. This victory undoubtedly influenced Shamil Tarpischev’s decision to trust Youzhny in the decisive match of the Davis Cup final later that year. Nick Bollettieri spoke highly of Youzhny, predicting a bright future. Indeed, Youzhny was a complete player who enjoyed a successful career, including two US Open semifinals (having defeated top players – they both were in the development process though – in the quarterfinals of 2006 and 2010), but one could argue he could have achieved more. Certainly, more could have been expected from him in Masters 1000 events, as he never reached the semifinals, losing six quarterfinal matches. The last loss (Shanghai ’14) was especially disappointing because he faced an opponent of similar caliber, was leading by a set and a break, yet still couldn’t secure the win.
Two key factors likely limited his success: first, his serve. Despite his ~6’0” height, Youzhny never developed a dominant serve, which could have earned him more easy points. The fact that he never served 20 aces in any of his 39 five-set matches is telling. His preparation to the serve was quite particular: he was standing a half meter behind the baseline, probably a side effect of excessive foot faults at the beginning of his career. Second, his lopsided record against Roger Federer – 17 losses, with only one match (Halle ’03) where the Russian was close to winning. Only two of their encounters were finals (Dubai ’07 and Halle ’13), but it’s impossible to know how different Youzhny’s career might have been had he managed to overcome Federer more often to improve his self-esteem.
Youzhny retired just shy of 500 main-level wins, a milestone he narrowly missed after a closely contested second-round match against Roberto Bautista Agut in St. Petersburg ’18. At thirty-six, having lost his Top 100 status after 17 years, it was a sensible decision to retire rather than chase that elusive 500th victory.
A notable trivia: Youzhny defeated Novak Đoković in two dramatic matches at consecutive events in 2007, just before Đoković ascended to serious contender status against Federer and Rafael Nadal. In Marseille, Youzhny triumphed 6-4, 4-6, 7-6 after trailing *1:4 and 4:5 (0/30) in the decider. Then, in Rotterdam, he prevailed 3-6, 7-6, 7-5, saving match points in both sets – first in the tiebreak, and then at *4:5 (15/40) in the final set. The Serb avenged those defeats to some degree winning their very long Dubai ’10 final.

Career record: 499–416 [ 418 events ]
Career titles: 10
Highest ranking: No. 8
Best GS results:
Australian Open (quarterfinal 2008)
Roland Garros (quarterfinal 2010)
Wimbledon (quarterfinal 2012)
US Open (semifinal 2006 & 2010; quarterfinal 2013)
Davis Cup champion 2002 (won clincher) and 2006 (didn’t play in the final)

Born: April 26, 1985 in Greensboro (North Carolina)
Height: 2.08 m
Plays: Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

John Isner and Ivo Karlović (211 cm) hold a unique place in tennis history. While there were exceptional servers in the 80s, 90s, and 00s, these two towering giants introduced something entirely new to the game in the 2010s. Though both had established themselves as ATP tour players a decade earlier (Karlović in 2003, Isner in 2007), their presence on the court evolved into something almost unprecedented – a type of “tennis without tennis.” Matches against them often felt like a distinct sport where the outcome hinged on a handful of points. They racked up countless aces, engaged in innumerable tie-breaks, and frequently played marathon fifth sets. Isner, in particular, shattered previous records with his extraordinary battle against Nicolas Mahut at Wimbledon 2010.
Isner’s remarkable capabilities were on display as early as his second main-level event in Washington, 2007. He reached the final by winning five consecutive matches in deciding third-set tie-breaks – a feat that was unparalleled in tennis history. Unlike Roger Federer, who had won three straight deciding tie-breaks in 2005 across two tournaments, Isner accomplished his streak over five consecutive days on the same courts! This led many to believe that he was one of the most mentally resilient players ever. While his results from the Challenger circuit and college years painted a more nuanced picture, that week in Washington, Isner’s excessive luck defied probability. Among the five players he defeated in those tie-breaks were notable names like Tim Henman, Tommy Haas, and Gaël Monfils.
Sixteen years later, Isner retired from professional tennis. Looking back, he should feel fulfilled, having achieved far more than Karlović, who was six years his senior and possessed a similar skill set. Isner’s crowning achievement came at the 2018 Miami Open, where he claimed his biggest title after reaching three previous Masters 1000 finals (Indian Wells 2012, Cincinnati 2013, and Paris 2016). Surprisingly, he won Miami with minimal reliance on tie-breaks, breaking his opponents several times throughout the tournament. Among those he defeated were top-tier players and fellow giants, though considerably shorter than himself, like Marin Čilić, Juan Martín del Potro, and Alexander Zverev.
Throughout his career, Isner was consistently reliant on tie-breaks and extended fifth sets at major tournaments. He holds the unfortunate record for losing the most matches after holding match points (33 losses, compared to Karlović’s 22). Contrary to popular belief that such losses indicate a lack of mental toughness, Isner was anything but mentally fragile. The term “choke” doesn’t fit him. Like any seasoned player, he had matches that slipped through his fingers, but these were often due to his weaker backhand and limited movement rather than a mental collapse. No matter how skilled or confident his opponents were on any given day, they always knew what to expect against Isner – a moment in the second or third decisive set when he might face the only break(match) point, with their fate hinging on exploiting Isner’s backhand (if he had missed his first serve), forcing him to move quickly along the baseline. Beating Isner ‘7-6, 6-4’ or losing to him ‘7-6, 6-7, 4-6’ very often depended on the efficacy of his first serve at a critical juncture, regardless of how he felt the ball when hitting it from the back of the court. Tomáš Berdych was an intriguing exception, consistently breaking Isner’s serve. My explanation is that the tall Czech’s ability to hit the ball effectively at shoulder height with his backhand neutralized Isner’s kick serves, which typically troubled other opponents. Berdych was less productive returning Karlović’s serve though.
Isner was a more well-rounded player than Karlović. While the Croatian relied heavily on his serve-and-volley game, often slicing his backhands and waiting for a slower ball to attack with his forehand, Isner employed a more “one-two punch” strategy as a server, mixing up the serve speed (second serve faster than the first one, Karlović was never doing that), at times sneaking to the net behind kick-second serves. As a returner, he tended to wait until the final stages of sets to press, at which point he was much more effective than Karlović in retrieving balls. Isner even led Rafael Nadal 2-1 in sets at the 2011 French Open, a testament to his adaptability and resilience. Excluding the Laver Cup, which I don’t consider a main-level event, Nadal is the only great player born in the 1980s that Isner never defeated. Over the years, Andy Murray seemed to be Isner’s toughest opponent, but the American finally got the better of him in their ninth meeting at Wimbledon 2022, when Murray, playing with a metal hip, was far from the agile defender who had previously bested Isner at crucial moments.
With his booming serve, Isner always had the potential to reach a major final at Wimbledon or the US Open, where the electric crowd energized him. However, New York typically saw him exit in the third round, while London witnessed his deepest run in 2018 when he reached the semifinal before losing an epic match to his old college rival, Kevin Anderson. That match played a significant role in Wimbledon’s decision to introduce a tie-break in the fifth set starting in 2019.
Now that both Isner and Karlović have retired (both played their last matches at the US Open, the Croat two years earlier), Reilly Opelka (211 cm) remains the lone tennis player with the height more typical of a volleyball or basketball player. While Opelka’s movement & backhand appear better than Isner’s, and his tactical approach mirrors the latter’s, he lacks Isner’s commitment and passion. In Dallas 2022, Opelka and Isner co-created a new record for the longest tie-break. They played six times against each other: 17 sets, 14 tie-breaks (10-4 Opelka) – it explains there’s nothing special that these two US giants overcame Björn Borg‘s “eternal” record.

Career record: 489-317 [ 308 events ]
Career titles: 16
Highest ranking: No. 8
Best GS results:
Wimbledon (semifinal 2018)
US Open (quarterfinal 2011, 18)

Born: November 25, 1977 in Buenos Aires
Height: 1.85 m
Plays: Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

Guillermo Ignacio Cañas first picked up a tennis racquet at the age of 7, inspired by the legendary Argentinian player and his namesake, Guillermo Vilas. Although sharing a similar name didn’t propel Cañas to mirror Vilas’ achievements, he is still regarded as one of the finest Argentine players born in the 1970s, perhaps even the best. Known for his powerful physique, remarkable agility, and relentless “never-say-die” attitude, Cañas had an unbelievable ability to win points in seemingly lost situations (splits in defence), a skill unmatched before Rafael Nadal emerged. A versatile competitor, Cañas was the first Spanish native speaker in the 21st Century to reach finals on all primary surfaces: outdoors (clay, grass, hard) and indoors (hard) – and he did it in just seven months between June ’01 and January ’02. The year 2001 it was the first one when grass slowed down, certainly helping players of Cañas’ type.
His most memorable moment came in July 2002 when he claimed the title in Toronto. In retrospect, his path to the championship was nothing short of extraordinary. Cañas defeated Roger Federer (1), Paradorn Srichaphan (9), Yevgeny Kafelnikov (1), Marat Safin (1), Tommy Haas (2), and Andy Roddick (1) in succession. The numbers in parentheses denote each player’s career-high ranking (before or after that event), making his feat all the more remarkable. “Day by day, I felt more confident in my game,” said the 24-year-old Cañas, then ranked 19th. “It’s incredible to feel like you can beat anyone on the tour. Maybe I surprised myself. I knew I had the potential, but I had never executed it like this. To beat five top-10 players in one tournament feels amazing.” Cañas waited five years to contest another Masters 1000 final, which came after his return from a two-year suspension for testing positive for the diuretic hydrochlorothiazide. His ban was eventually reduced to a year, but by that time, the Argentine had lost his career-best ranking, vanishing from the list of active surnames. This marked his third extended break from the sport, with the first two in 2000 and 2003 resulting from persistent wrist injuries. Despite these setbacks, Cañas climbed back into the Top 100 within just seven months, largely thanks to his success in Challengers (five titles). He then enjoyed an ATP resurgence, defeating five Top 20 players in Miami before being schooled by ten years younger Novak Đoković in the final.
Given his ability to challenge the game’s elite across all surfaces and for his extraordinary fighting spirit, perseverance (only he and Nicolás Massú were regularly involved in three-hour Bo3 battles at the beginning of 00s), Cañas seemed destined to reach a Grand Slam semifinal at least. However, despite coming close twice – in 2002 and 2005 – he fell just short on both occasions. In 2002, facing eventual champion Albert Costa, Cañas held a 2-1 set lead and was up *4:2 (30/15) in the fourth set, only to lose the next ten games in a heartbreaking defeat.

…Fun Facts about Cañas…

• Tim Henman‘s worst torture on the court. Even though the man from Buenos Aires lost their first encounter in Toronto ’98, holding a 6-3, 5:2* lead, he won their next six meetings, including two gruelling five-setters, clinching 7-5 (French Open ’01) and 9-7 (Aussie Open ’04) in the 5th sets as well as 7-6 in the deciding 3rd set (Vienna ’01)

• He was one of the toughest challengers for Lleyton Hewitt as the Australian ascended to the top of the tennis world. It’s quite rare for two players without dominant serves to engage in marathon tie-breaks against each other, yet this is precisely what transpired between Cañas and Hewitt. Remarkably, the Argentine triumphed in both instances, on clay: a 14/12 tie-break at Delray Beach ’99, where he saved six set points, and a 15/13 tie-break at the 2002 French Open, saving five set points along the way.

• In 2007, he stunned the tennis world by defeating Federer 7-5, 6-2 at Indian Wells, ending the Swiss maestro’s 41-match winning streak. Just two weeks later, Cañas triumphed again over Federer in Miami, this time after a dramatic encounter. “I don’t know the secret to beating him,” Cañas remarked. “I just fight for every point, and maybe that’s why I won. Playing great tennis against Federer – it’s like living a dream.”

• He holds the unique and somewhat dubious distinction of being the only player known to lose a match after leading two sets to love and 5:0! This nightmarish collapse occurred in his Davis Cup vital debut in 1999, where he fell to Venezuela’s Maurice Ruah 6-3, 6-3, 6-7, 3-6, 3-6 in Caracas, without holding a match point. Argentina still won the tie 4-1.

Career record: 252–195 [ 196 events ]
Career titles: 7
Highest ranking: No. 8
Best GS results:
Roland Garros (quarterfinal 2002, 05 & 07)
World Team Cup champion 2002

Born: September 8, 1976 in Weert (Limburg)
Height: 1.93 m
Plays: Right-handed

Putting emphasis on going far in the most important events, I suppose I’d classify him as the least accomplished player among the best born between 1959 and 1989, who participated in a minimum of 200 main-level events. Some might ask, “Why did you incorporate him and not Sam Querrey?” After all, their achievements are nearly identical. My response would be, “because it’s a subjective list of the best players.” Two factors influenced my choice of Schalken over Querrey: his impressive record in finals (9-3 vs. 10-10; one of nine titles captured in a ‘best of five’ final – Stockholm ’01) and his remarkably consistent performances in Grand Slams from Wimbledon 2002 to Wimbledon 2004 – worthy of a Top 10 player, though he never quite reached that rank.
Schalken began his tennis journey hitting against a wall, which might explain some of his stiffness. The wall is excellent for developing patience, flat hitting (Schalken’s backhand down the line his trademark shot), but it doesn’t encourage the movement that young players need. The Dutchman was indeed patient, favoring clay courts in his early years on the tour before slightly improving his serve to become more successful on hard courts. His serving approach prioritized accuracy over speed, and in the early 2000s, he consistently ranked among the best in first-serve percentage, maintaining an impressive average of around 68%. Despite his ability to challenge the best players of the 90s, Schalken struggled for a long time to achieve results that matched his potential at major tournaments. For 28 consecutive Slams, he never advanced beyond the third round. However, when he finally broke that barrier, he reached the quarterfinals, and over the next three years, the second week of majors became his natural habitat. Between July 2002 and 2004, he reached the last 16 as many as six times and won five of those fourth-round matches; he was three times (UO ’03, AO ’04, WB ’04) eliminated by Andy Roddick – the best player in the world at the time. On one occasion, he even secured a victory in the quarterfinals when he faced Fernando González, a novice at that level, outsmarting the hard-hitting Chilean in a thrilling encounter. In his lone major semifinal, the Dutchman had no chance to beat Pete Sampras – the only great player born in the 70s, whom Schalken never defeated. Quite surprisingly Schalken was unable to play a Masters 1K semifinal (the same applied to Querrey), five times losing in the quarterfinals at this level (Querrey lost four), being very close to go one round further in Paris ’01.
Luck finally favored Schalken after years of heartbreaks at the turn of 90s/00s, when he lost several nail-biting matches, particularly at Wimbledon. These defeats seemed to defy probability because he didn’t appear overly tense or physically spent; rather, a combination of volitional factors led to these losses. Year after year (except 2001), he fell in London to American and Australian players in epic five-set matches: 6-8 (Jan-Michael Gambill), 11-13 (Jim Courier), 18-20 (Mark Philippoussis), and 5-7 (Lleyton Hewitt) respectively in fifth sets. All this painful experience was eventually rewarded in the latter stages of his career, as he improved his record in five-setters from a dismal 6:14 to a respectable 12-14, including a dramatic victory over a five-set specialist Nicolás Lapentti at Wimbledon ’03.
From the perspective of Dutch tennis, Schalken was a bridge between two generations: the older, more successful players (Richard Krajicek, Jan Siemerink, Paul Haarhuis, and Jacco Eltingh) and the younger, less accomplished ones (Raemon Sluiter, Martin Verkerk, Peter Wessels, Dennis van Scheppingen and Johan van Lottum). In 2001, Schalken played a key role in the Netherlands’ only advancement to the Davis Cup semi-finals; in the first round, he defeated Carlos Moyá in straight sets, helping secure a 4-1 victory over Spain; in the quarterfinal, he won the doubles match alongside Haarhuis against Germany (4-1). Ultimately in the semifinal, he suffered one of his many heartbreaking five-set losses, this time to Nicolas Escudé, after nearly five hours of play (7-6, 6-7, 6-4, 6-7, 6-8), despite being just points away from winning each of the three sets he lost.
Like Wayne Ferreira, Schalken enjoyed an injury-free career for nearly its entirety. But when injury finally struck, it marked the end of his career. Schalken had to withdraw from Roland Garros in 2004, ending a streak of 35 consecutive majors played; he couldn’t participate due to a diagnosis of mononucleosis. Despite this, he still managed to reach the Wimbledon quarterfinals. However, on more demanding surfaces, he could no longer muster the power needed, retiring from four matches in one season after having only five retirements in the previous ten years of his career (counting all levels). Suddenly, at the age of 29, he decided to retire.
His final noteworthy achievement came in a Davis Cup tie against Switzerland in the first round of 2005. Schalken won the deciding match against a young Stanislas Wawrinka in dramatic fashion. The Swiss led 4:1 in the final set with two breaks and served for the match at 5:4, only to squander four or five match points – depending on the count, as one of the match points was replayed after a controversial call was overruled by the umpire, Enric Molina. Reflecting on the match, Schalken said: “All I see is that yellow thing. When I find some calm in my game, the tennis ball appears larger. If that peace isn’t there, it looks like a golf ball coming at you rapidly, leaving you constantly on the defensive.” Schalken achieved much less than Krajicek, but given the Netherlands in the Davis Cup, his contributions were more instrumental to the team over the years.

Career record: 292–267 [ 263 events ]
Career titles: 9
Highest ranking: No. 11
Best GS results:
Wimbledon (quarterfinal 2002-04)
US Open (semifinal 2002; quarterfinal 2003)

Born: May 15, 1987 in Glasgow (Scotland)
Height: 1.89 m
Plays: Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

The best British player of the Open Era by a country mile, yet rather paradoxically, Scottish, not English (original Gaelic surname: Mac Mhuirich). When I ponder Murray’s brilliant career, I ask myself, “How many major titles could he have won if he had defeated Novak Đoković five-six times more?” They haven’t met in Murray’s last seven tormented years, with Đoković finishing 25-11 in their Head-to-Head record (they could have played in Madrid ’22 but the Scot withdrew). More importantly, Đoković has beaten Murray in all five of their meetings (2011, 12, 13, 15, 16) in Melbourne and both clashes (2015, 16) in Paris, all played in the semi-finals or finals. The Serb also won their four ATP meetings being close to lose (Shanghai is the most memorable) while Murray never did the same other way around.
The Đoković-Murray rivalry reminds me of the one between Goran Ivanišević and Pete Sampras nearly two decades earlier. Both rivalries involve players born in the same year (1971 and 1987), where one, despite having slightly more tools and coping well with tight situations, couldn’t find the medicine for his biggest nemesis. These rivalries highlight the importance of physical and mental aspects when two almost identical players face off, especially in the Đoković-Murray feud. Over the years, when they faced each other regularly, I noticed that Murray had the ability to play on equal terms with Đoković for about 2.5 hours. After that, he couldn’t maintain the same level of intensity, whereas Đoković was always prepared for punishing, geometrically complicated baseline rallies for four hours or longer.
This was especially noticeable in their three four-setters at majors: the 2013 and 2015 Australian Opens, as well as the 2014 US Open. In all those matches, they exchanged tie-breaks in the opening two sets, followed by pretty one-sided remaining sets. Murray did manage to defeat Đoković in a five-setter once though, in a crucial for his legacy 2012 US Open final, where he raised his first Grand Slam trophy after four previous final losses (Ivan Lendl – Murray’s coach at the time, the greatest player of the 80s, had also experienced the bitter taste of four Grand Slam final defeats in a row). That final followed a similar pattern to the mentioned four-setters: tight first two sets lasting over two hours, followed by Đoković dominating, but Murray had taken both opening sets, allowing him to control the rest. Although outplayed in the middle sets, he remained relatively fresh and prevailed 7-6, 7-5, 2-6, 3-6, 6-2, equalling the record for the longest US Open final co-produced by his coach (1988). I consider that victory the most important of Murray’s career. “After the third and fourth sets, it was tough mentally for me… Novak is so, so strong. He fights till the end in every single match and I don’t know how I managed to come through in the end. It was close to five hours and I’ve had some really long and tough matches. I just managed to get through,” Murray said, celebrating that success in an untypical fashion by crouching at the intersection of the baseline and doubles sideline, fulfilling his dream of winning a major title.
He reasonably waited for that moment over four years. At the end of 2008, when the Roger Federer vs Rafael Nadal rivalry was well-established, Murray suggested he was closer to them than Đoković. The Serb had already won his maiden major title (Australian Open ’08), but Murray seemed a better, more complex player in the latter half of that season. Between Wimbledon ’08 and the 2009 Australian Open, he defeated Đoković twice (Cincy final i.a.), Federer thrice (Madrid semis i.a.), and Nadal once (in the US Open semifinal; I reckon Murray played his best tennis there). This positioned him as a main contender for the Australian Open title and the future world No. 1. However, in the fourth round in Melbourne, he lost to an inspired Fernando Verdasco, who just became a national hero after clinching the Davis Cup final ’08. Murray had to wait four and seven years respectively (for his first Grand Slam title and reaching the top of the rankings) for those anticipated achievements when 2009 commenced. It seemed a matter of time before Murray would reach the top spot in men’s tennis, but he was unable to win the most important major matches against the toughest opponents. Federer defeated him three times in Slam finals (2008, 2010, 2012), and Nadal bested him five times in Slam semifinals, including three times in 2011. Additionally, the Spaniard won their epic Masters ’10 semifinal. It reinforced Murray’s position in the tennis hierarchy as a member of the Big 4, yet with a distinctive aura of being the weakest link.
Unlike several players who reached No. 1 only to be quickly forgotten, Murray did it in great and striking fashion: 2016 belonged to him, however, he began the phenomenal period of his career already at the end of 2015, clinching the Davis Cup title for Great Britain… Federer stopped playing after Wimbledon ’16 (Murray won it, for the second time), and Nadal struggled with form and injuries, leaving Murray with one main rival instead of three. He managed well against Đoković that season, meeting him five times and winning twice, including the crucial season-ending final in London, which decided who would finish the year as the best player in the world – an unprecedented feat. “It’s a very special day,” Murray said during the trophy presentation. “It’s been a tough rivalry. I’ve lost many of them but obviously I’m happy I’ve got the win today. To finish the year No. 1 is very special. It’s something I never expected.” Really? His pursuit of the year-end top spot was exceptionally intense: after claiming the second Gold medal in singles as the first player in history, and an unexpected US Open defeat being the main favorite, he played the Davis Cup semifinal (losing the longest match of his career to Juan M. Del Potro), then won five consecutive events (two in Asia, three in Europe), extending his winning streak to 28 matches into January 2017 when he was stopped in the Doha final.
However, Murray paid the price for the enormous effort. He sensationally lost in the fourth round of the 2017 Australian Open to Mischa Zverev. Despite expectations that the older Zverev wouldn’t win a set, Murray’s body felt the burden of the previous crazy season, and he was a step slower, making the difference in the end. This marked the beginning of Murray’s decline. Soon after equalling the longest tie-break in history, he lost to several lower-ranked players in early rounds (Vasek Pospisil at Indian Wells, Albert Ramos at Monte Carlo – wasting the biggest advantage in a crucial set). He partially regained form mid-season, reaching the French Open semifinal (losing to Stan Wawrinka in one of the best major semifinals I’ve seen) and the Wimbledon quarterfinal where he was ousted limping in the decider. Following those five-set defeats, Murray’s career collapsed due to a serious hip injury which sidelined him for a year. For the next seven years following Wimbledon ’17, he was a shadow of his former self. There was even a period in early 2019 when it seemed Murray wouldn’t return at all after undergoing a second hip surgery. He still believed in his competitiveness and, after his comeback just to check his body with a “metal hip”, he won a doubles title along with Feliciano López!
A few months later, he captured his last title in singles (Antwerp), in the final coming back from behind in sets two and three against Wawrinka, his toughest rival, apart from the Big 3. The momentum was halted by COVID-19. On the other hand, another six-month break (his third such a long break since he turned 30) from competitive tennis could have helped him to save the energy and prolong his career since the ranking of all players was frozen. For 1.5 years after the COVID break, Murray, a Top 150 player, could count on “wild cards” actually everywhere, avoiding playing the qualifying events. It helped him return to the Top 100, but his objectives were always super ambitious. He badly wanted to be seeded at Slams again to make a big run there for the last time, and nearly did it in 2023. His tremendous mental spirit empowered him to win very long back-to-back five-setters at the Australian Open. In his next event, which took place in Doha, he advanced to the final, winning three matches on the verge of defeat (including a stunning 7-6, 2-6, 7-5 victory over Alexander Zverev)! Those two results as well as three Challenger triumphs gave him an advancement to the Top 40, but it was his swan song in terms of pushing his physical/mental reserves to the limit. Since Rome in May ’23, to the rest of his singles career thirteen months later, he was losing the majority of ‘best of three’ matches that went beyond 2.5 hours. In his last singles match at Wimbledon ’23, he suffered an almost five-hour loss to Stefanos Tsitsipas. Two Autumn defeats to Alex de Minaur, squandering match points on both occasions, made the cup of bitterness overflow. Murray realized the year 2024 should be his last on the professional tour. He inaugurated his last season winning just 1 out of 6 matches and finished it the same style in June. Being physically unable to compete at the highest level at the age of 37, Murray chose to participate in his last two tournaments in July only in doubles (Wimbledon, Olympics in Paris where he fought bravely partnering Dan Evans)… Quite bizarrely, he decided to switch racquets from Head (he was loyal to this brand throughout his career) to Yonex in the last few events.

Career record: 739 – 262 [ 289 events ]
Career titles: 46
Highest ranking: No. 1
Best GS results:
Australian Open (runner-up 2010-11, 13, 15-16; semifinal ’12; quarterfinal ’14)
Roland Garros (runner-up 2016; semifinal 2011, 14-15 & 17; quarterfinal 2009 & 12)
Wimbledon (champion 2013 & 16; runner-up 2012; semifinal 2009-11; quarterfinal 2008, 14 & 17)
US Open (champion 2012; runner-up 2008; semifinal 2011; quarterfinal 2013-14 & 16)
Two-time Olympic Gold medallist (London ’12 and Rio ’16)
Davis Cup 2015 champion
Masters 2016 champion

Year-end ranking 2003-23… 540 – 411 – 64 – 17 – 11 – 4 – 4 – 4 – 4 – 3 – 4 – 6 – 2 – 1 – 16 – 240 – 125 – 122 – 134 – 49 – 42

Born: February 16, 1959 in Wiesbaden (Heßen in West Germany)
Height: 1.81 m
Played: Left-handed

If someone unaware of tennis history compiled both singles and doubles achievements to find the best tennis player in modern history, it would be John Patrick McEnroe without any doubts. The American, of Irish descent (original Gaelic surname: Mac Conruadh) and born in a German city (he moved to New York City with his parents after one year), has gone down in sports history not only as an outstanding player with unorthodox technique but also as someone completely unpredictable in his on-court reactions.
McEnroe first caught the attention of a wider audience in 1977. Being mainly intended to compete in juniors, he went through the qualifying rounds of Wimbledon and advanced to the semi-finals. Nobody had done it before, and no one has reached the Wimbledon semi-finals with so little experience – McEnroe was only playing the fifth main-level tournament of his career! A year later, as a 19-year-old, he decided to completely sideways when serving – a technique not seen before or after – and it helped him to serve better and find himself at the net faster. He ascended to the top of the tennis world, winning five events at the end of the season, including the first of his three ‘Masters’ titles, furthermore he was unstoppable in the Davis Cup final demolishing two British players. Thanks to diversity/accuracy more than speed, he was perceived as the best server as well as the most brilliant volleyer in the world. Even though neither of his baseline wings could be called ‘spectacular’, he was tough to outmanoeuvre from the back of the court because he was patient & taking the ball on the rise, keeping opponents under constant pressure, forcing them guessing when he would attack the net with unconventional approach-shots.
His top position in tennis was cemented at the turn of the ’70s and ’80s when he co-created excellent duels with the most significant players at that time, Jimmy Connors (their five clashes went to the distance in the ‘best of five’ format) and Björn Borg. The rivalry with the Swede, in particular, captured the imagination of fans. McEnroe and Borg, manifesting contrast game-styles & personalities, met nine times in finals, and their final clash at Wimbledon ’80 became part of sports history. Borg was leading 2-1 in sets, 5:4 (40/15) and serving, yet he lost the set after the most famous tennis tie-break, 16/18, lasting twenty-two minutes! In the fifth set, they held serve up to 7:6, when Borg passed McEnroe on the eighth match point and fell to his knees in a triumphant gesture. The immortal contest lasted nearly four hours – very long given grass-court standards from the era of wooden racquets. A year later, McEnroe repaid Borg in the Wimbledon final, snapping a 41-match winning streak of the Swede at the All England Club. A few months later, McEnroe won the US Open final against Borg, becoming the first player since the 1920s (Bill Tilden) to win three consecutive titles in New York. Soon afterwards, Borg suspended/ended his career prematurely, but BigMac’s new, exceptionally challenging rival, Ivan Lendl, emerged, and spectators could witness the full transition from wooden to graphite racquets at the highest level, following their meeting in Philadelphia. It was at the hands of the Czech that McEnroe suffered perhaps the saddest defeat of his career at Roland Garros ’84, missing a great opportunity to achieve one of the toughest feats in tennis – triumphing in Paris while constantly attacking the net (Stefan Edberg came close five years later as well).
A few words about McEnroe’s devastating loss… June 10, 1984, after a series of 42 victories in a row, in the Roland Garros final McEnroe met Lendl, whom he had defeated four times that season before the Parisian final, including “a piece of cake” on three occasions (Masters ’83 the most notable). And in the memorable final, it looked like another smooth win through two and a half sets. Lendl, however, managed to survive that match, even though in each of the last three sets, McEnroe was only two games away from victory. Never again has an offensive tennis player been so close to winning the French Open. A few months after that painful defeat, McEnroe took his revenge on Lendl, outclassing him in the US Open final. BigMac was 25 years old and already had seven Grand Slam titles to his name (he’d have won more if the Aussie Open had had a similar status to the other Grand Slam tournaments – McEnroe did not play there until 1983, when he reached the semi-finals), and probably no one thought he would not improve his achievements in majors. At the end of 1984, he was still young and almost unbeatable – his win/loss record for the season was extraordinary, 82-3! No one could compare to such a great season until Roger Federer in 2005.
The year 1985 was pivotal in McEnroe’s career though – he failed to win any Grand Slam event and felt weary of tennis playing a few rounds of doubles in almost every singles event, at the same time two great youngsters entered the picture, Boris Becker and Edberg. Lendl did to McEnroe in New York more or less something McEnroe had done to Borg four years before on the same court – he took away the belief in being the best on the planet. After a sensational defeat to Brad Gilbert at Masters ’85, held in January 1986, McEnroe suspended his career for seven months. During that time, he married actress Tatum O’Neal, with whom he has three children. After his return, he did not regain his former glory, although he remained dangerous to the end of his career, maintaining a Top 20 ranking, claiming several titles (Dallas ’89 being the biggest in the last professional years). Concluding the 1987 US Open, he again had a seven-month hiatus – this time, however, partly not voluntarily – he was disqualified for two months and fined 17.5 thousand dollars. Upset by the decision of tennis authorities, he extended his absence for five more months, and immediately after his return, he won the tournament in Tokyo in impressive style (April 1988)! McEnroe was losing more often and displaying unsportsmanlike behavior with increasing frequency. At the Australian Open ’90, he was finally disqualified against Mikael Pernfors after offending the line judge, head judge, and supervisor. During the tournament in the Paris hall, Bercy (1990), he did not even shake the hand of Jakob Hlasek, with whom he had won a doubles title a year before. Usually, players calm down as they age, but not McEnroe; his way of acting became more controversial over the years. He announced 1992 as the final season of his turbulent, yet beautiful tennis career. As a farewell to his beloved grass, he once again showcased his wonderful, old-fashioned game (all strokes with a continental grip, shorten backswings) at Wimbledon. He reached the semi-finals in singles and triumphed in doubles alongside fellow serve-and-volley artist Michael Stich after the longest doubles final in history (19-17 in the 5th against Jim Grabb/Richey Reneberg), lasting 5 hours and 1 minute.
Officially, he played his last singles match in Munich ’92 (Compaq Grand Slam Cup), a few days after helping the United States to regain the Davis Cup trophy as a Pete Sampras‘ partner, but more than a year later, he made a cameo in Rotterdam, losing to a very solid Magnus Gustafsson 2-6, 6-7. McEnroe began the match trailing 0:4; since then, until the end of the match, he played as if he had never retired. In the same tournament, along with Becker, McEnroe won two matches, advancing to the semifinals where they were beaten by Jeremy Bates and Jonas Björkman, who would become McEnroe’s partner twelve years later! Björkman and McEnroe played two events together in 2006, the Swede was already at the end of his career but still considered one of the best doubles players in the world. They triumphed in San Jose (February) but lost in the Stockholm quarterfinals eight months later. “I’m surprised that it went to the final tiebreaker, but the right team won,” the 47-year-old, with a head full of grey, McEnroe told reporters after the San Jose final. “Jonas carried the weight. When I came here, I thought we could either lose in the first round or win the whole thing.” In 1999, he joined the elite International Tennis Hall of Fame in Newport. That same year, he became the US Davis Cup coach. He led the team to the 2000 Davis Cup semi-finals, but after a miserable 0-5 defeat to Spain, he resigned, and his function was taken over by his younger brother Patrick McEnroe (as players they met thrice, the middle match in the final, coincidentally John’s last title).

Career record: 883-198 [ 263 events ]
Career titles: 77
Highest ranking: No. 1
Best GS results:
Australian Open (semifinal 1983; quarterfinal 1985, 89 & 92)
Roland Garros (runner-up 1984; semifinal 1985; quarterfinal 1981, 83)
Wimbledon (champion 1981, 1983-84; runner-up 1980, 82; semifinal 1977, 89, 92; quarterfinal 1985)
US Open (champion 1979-81, 1984; runner-up 1985; semifinal 1978, 82 & 90; quarterfinal 1987)
Davis Cup champion 1978-79, 81-82 & 92 (the last time only as a doubles player)
Masters champion 1978, 83-84

Year-end ranking 1976-92… 264 – 21 – 4 – 3 – 2 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 2 – 14 – 10 – 11 – 4 – 13 – 28 – 20

Born: March 3, 1967 in Kaliningrad (Kaliningrad Oblast in Soviet Union)
Died: October 19, 2019
Height: 1.87 m
Plays: Left-handed (two-handed backhand)

Александр Владимирович Волков – the only one among the best players born in the 1960s, introduced to my website, who is no longer alive…
“He was a tough player to play. He could have played terribly, but if he was on and he was feeling the ball well, he was tough to play on grass because he took the ball very early. He was not a great server and not a great volleyer. He wasn’t great at any stroke in particular, but he had a very good all-court game if he was on. He played very unconventionally… if you didn’t play your best and he was playing well, it was that little fraction of one ball here, one point there that could have made the difference.” Michael Stich said on Volkov shortly after the Russian passed away; the player who almost defeated Stich in their fourth-round match at Wimbledon ’91. Stich needed a miracle to win, serving a curved second serve ace on the line at 1:3, 30/40 in the 5th set, before ultimately triumphing in the tournament and becoming an unexpected champion. Volkov came to prominence at Wimbledon four years before when ranked 503 (!) and without any main-level wins, he advanced to the fourth round as a qualifier. It was revealed that as a teenager he’d played two-handed from both sides and switched to a one-handed forehand at the age of 18. He explained: “My coaches told me that against the best players I had to hit the ball with one hand or I wouldn’t have a chance. They were right. Until this tournament, though, I haven’t done so well.”
“Tricky” is the key to Volkov’s playing style. He was a less consistent version of Marcelo Ríos; with a similar ease they were executing all the basic shots. Unlike the Chilean, however, the Russian wasn’t fond of running. It was quite amusing to watch him especially on grass; while most players used serve-and-volley tactics and hit their approaching volleys within the service boxes, Volkov often volleyed behind the boxes. His movement toward the net was more a few quick steps than actual running. As Stich noted, when Volkov had a good day, he was a threat to all the top players. He defeated Pete Sampras twice, moreover scored wins over Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and Andre Agassi (in their only meeting). The only top player who consistently had Volkov’s number was Boris Becker, who defeated him ten times without ever being close to losing (twice in the indoor finals: 1989 and 1992), although five of those matches went to deciding third sets. Volkov had the most puzzling record – facing multiple Grand Slam champions – against Stefan Edberg (3-4 H2H, with two dramatic defeats); as they met for the second time, the Swede was the favorite to win the US Open ’90 title after an impressive summer on US hardcourts, but the Russian blew him off the court in the first round. “It’s much freer, it’s because Mr. Gorbachev came,” said Volkov after the biggest upset of 1990, commenting on the geopolitical situation at the time. “I can play anywhere I want to, with someone along or on my own. I can keep all my prize money; I just have to pay taxes. Mikhail Gorbachev came and everything became more open.” Dissolution of the Soviet Union occurred the following year, in December. The years 1993-94 were the best for Volkov: in 1993, he reached the semifinals of two big tournaments on hardcourts (Indian Wells and the US Open); in 1994, he significantly contributed to Russia advancing to the Davis Cup final, where he suffered what could be considered the most bitter defeat of his career to Edberg. It’s difficult to determine Volkov’s most significant title among the modest three he collected. I would argue that his maiden title holds special importance because he defeated three potential Top 10 players, whereas his other two triumphs involved defeating only one such player each. He spent his entire life in Калининград, a unique Russian exclave city, which had been established by Baltic tribes (Twangste) in the High Middle Ages, and belonged to either Germany (KönigsBerg) or Poland (Królewiec) for centuries before World War II.
Trivia: as a Top 20 player, Volkov saved match points to defeat two tennis legends in their final matches. First, in Atlanta ’92, Volkov survived against fifteen years older Guillermo Vilas, 5-7, 7-6(6), 6-3. A year later, he did the same against eleven years older Björn Borg, 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(7) in Moscow. Interestingly, Volkov had also defeated fifteen years older Jimmy Connors in Wembley ’89, saving a match point with a score of 3-6, 6-4, 7-6(6)!! The American was ranked higher during their only meeting while Vilas and Borg were ranked very low, and it was super surprising that Volkov needed MP-down tie-breaks to outlast them. There’s no other player born in the 60s/70s, overcoming three legends of the 70s in the latter stages of their careers. Volkov faced the fourth titan of the 70s John McEnroe twice, losing both matches in straights… Throughout his career, Volkov was loyal to the racquet of the German brand Völkl. After retirement, he played a substantial role in helping Marat Safin become the best player in the world as his coach. “We always talked well, lived in the same room, played together. He was part of my life in tennis. Five years ago we performed at a tournament. In the evening we sat down to dinner, I ordered a bottle of wine asking him to drink by the glass, to which he replied: <I don’t want, because I won’t be able to stop later.>” – said Andrey Chesnokov after Volkov’s unexpected death at the age of 52, giving a clue about the cause of decease.

Career record: 304–256 [ 240 events ]
Career titles: 3
Highest ranking: No. 14
Best GS results:
US Open (semifinal 1993; quarterfinal 1992)