Which of the four Grand Slams do you fancy the best?

Discussion in 'Pro Tennis (Mens)' started by Mastoor, Jun 9, 2016.

  1. Mastoor

    Mastoor Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    298
    Trophy Points:
    63
    In entire history of tennis only 3 men won Grand Slams .

    First Don Budge won it in 1938. This was a Calendar Grand Slam in 1938, but the streak consisted of 6 consecutive slams. Comparing to Novak streak this was done on 2 surfaces, except Wimbledon other slams had 5 or 6 rounds only, it was amateur era and he didn't have the best of the opponents. On the other hand this was a Calendar Grand Slam which is what ITF recognizes for proper Grand Slam.

    Rod Laver won Calendar Grand Slam or if you like Grand Slam in 1962 and 1969. He played Australian Open in 5 rounds largely against people from his own country, 4 slams were on 2 surfaces, competitions were not exactly pro and he didn't always had the best of the opponents.

    Novak's streak of four consecutive slams is called Non-calendar Slam and as such is not recognized by ITF for a "proper" Grand Slam. We can call it Djoker's Poker but it is still a Grand Slam, set of all 4 consecutive slams. Unlike Budge and Laver, No1e played a full set of 28 matches to win those 4 slams. He won them on 3 surfaces in the most professional era and playing against #2 seeds in all 4 finals (Federer was #2 in Wimbledon and USO, Murray at AO and FO).
     
  2. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm still liking Laver's 1969 Open Era Grand Slam best... Because it was THE Grand Slam... i.e. a Calendar Year Grand Slam which is the real definition of the term. The historical significance edges it for me.

    Still, I put the Djokerslam ahead of his 1962 Grand Slam because he was playing amateurs on a split tour without the pros... and ahead of Budge's 1938 slam.

    So, in order for me would be:

    Laver 1969
    Djokovic 2015/2016
    Budge 1938
    Laver 1962
     
  3. Denis

    Denis Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Laver won 3/4 slams on grass in 1969. No way that equals Novaks performance.
     
  4. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But it's a True Grand Slam and Djoker's isn't.
     
  5. Moxie

    Moxie Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    5,163
    Likes Received:
    1,221
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with you on Laver '68 then the Nole Slam, and your reasoning about 1962. Either there is a true Grand Slam, as the ultimate achievement, or there isn't. I think there still is, so Laver is over Novak.
     
  6. Ricardo

    Ricardo Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2016
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    43
    please refrain from changing definition for us, the Grand Slam is what it is.
     
  7. Denis

    Denis Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    43
    A 'true' grand slam because laver started his streak randomly in January instead of June? Nonsense.

    Besides, laver won his AO in a field of only 48 largely Australian amateurs.
     
  8. Ricardo

    Ricardo Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2016
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    43
    nonsense is those who are trying to change the definition which isn't invented yesterday, only because it suits them.
     
  9. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A grand slam is winning all four majors in the one season. You can personally redefine it as much as you like... but it's still not the Grand Slam... and yeah, a Calendar Year Grand Slam is statistically harder to complete.
     
  10. Federberg

    Federberg Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    2,606
    Likes Received:
    523
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Personally I'll go with Novak's. Altogether tougher proposition. More varied surfaces and tougher competition
     
  11. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What he did may be tougher... but it's not a Grand Slam by true definition.

    The Calendar Year Grand Slam is the holy grail of tennis. It's statistically harder to do.

    If you have a ten year career then you have 10 attempts at it. In that same 10 year span, you would have 37 attempts at 4 in a row.
     
  12. shawnbm

    shawnbm Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Novak's is a very impressive feat to me, but the Calendar Year Grand Slam is what it is. Laver had to win the biggest events of the year and that creates its own unique pressure. The surfaces were grass and clay then, but everybody was playing the same events. Laver's deservedly should be first, with Novak behind him. If Novak does do it, then I put it ahead of Laver because of the additional surface issue.
     
    britbox likes this.
  13. Ricardo

    Ricardo Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2016
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Exactly, the chance is 1:4 comparing to winning 4 in a row. Then again facts don't matter to the fanatics.
     
  14. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Agreed. If he pulls it off this year I would too... and he would also have 6 in a row.
     
  15. shawnbm

    shawnbm Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Can you imagine that--six in a row? I think Martina did that in 1983-84.
     
    Mastoor likes this.
  16. Federberg

    Federberg Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    2,606
    Likes Received:
    523
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yup in terms of chances the Calendar Year one is obviously tougher. But as with year end rankings, I'm not particulary bothered about the calendar issue. Just doing what Novak has done in this era with a deeper pool of talent is the clincher for me
     
  17. Ricardo

    Ricardo Masters Champion

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2016
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    43
    deeper pool may be for lower ranked players, but his best opponents are Murray and 34yo Fed while Laver competed against Rosewall and other legends. In any case Murray is not all timer.
     
  18. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What he's done isn't the issue for me... needless to say it's a great achievement but it's not a grand slam in the true definition. Kind of like a 6 nations rugby team winning 5 on the spin isn't counted as a grand slam unless it's in the same season... The Year End No.1 doesn't matter to me either... but at least you don't call yourself the Year End #1 in June.
     
  19. Federberg

    Federberg Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    2,606
    Likes Received:
    523
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ah! Your issue is with the precise definition of a grand slam. Yup I agree with your definition. I'm just saying that I think Novak's 4 in row earns greater respect from me given how the sport has progressed
     
    Mastoor likes this.
  20. britbox

    britbox Multiple Major Winner

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2015
    Messages:
    13,592
    Likes Received:
    2,315
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fair enough.
     
Loading...

Share This Page