-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Rank the slams
- Thread starter Kaan
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Maryusdemetry
Senior List
- Jun 14, 2012
- 226
- 34
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Australian
Wimbledon
French
US
Wimbledon
French
US
Fav:
AO
Wimbledon
USO
RG
Reality:
Wimbledon
------------------
RG
USO
------------------
AO
AO
Wimbledon
USO
RG
Reality:
Wimbledon
------------------
RG
USO
------------------
AO
Almost exactly correct.
My subjective favs are exactly the same as yours.
The only inaccuracy is that the US Open is ahead of the French not vice versa. The winners list in NY rivals Wimbledon and distances all other events in depth and historical importance
I have since discovered that in 1962 Laver also won the opens of Ireland, Norway and Switzerland, giving him 9 national titles that year. He won 19 tournaments in total that year.
- Jun 16, 2012
- 12,249
- 9,695
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I know it sounds stupid, but this puts it below the other 3 for me. Imagine if the title came down to a tie breaker (probably has?). It's just hollow
Outside of Australia we rank 4th... but not by that much at all, the word Grand Slam has meaning and every player enjoys having their name next to performs well at a grand slam event, including ours.
It would be without question. Just listen to how both Andy and Novak described how the tournament is run and their praise for Craig Tilley and the organisers. No other tournament gets that kind of praise.
And a new attendance record of 684,000 odd. That is simply phenomenal.
And a new attendance record of 684,000 odd. That is simply phenomenal.
- Thread starter
- #35
It says 686,006 on wiki for last years Aus Open.
Ah ok, they mentioned it was a record on the radio when I was driving home. But they must have been wrong. Still a great attendance figure though.
bombermick
Norm Smith Medallist
The Aussie is the player's favorite, but it will never have the prestige of Wimbledon and Paris. Every young player grows up dreaming of winning at London.
- Apr 28, 2008
- 12,331
- 9,130
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Arsenal Kilmarnock
Wimbledon
RG
Aus-US
that's just how it is in reality, although a clay court specialist would definitly dream more of winning RG. I think the reason Australians sometimes write off RG is that traditionally it has had less tv coverage here than the others. Also, given it's timeslot, it's difficult to look at orange clay when you are tired at midnight. Also, during the 90's and until Rafa, RG winners often had early round exits elsewhere. Nevertheless, the 6 weeks or so of the season that encompasses RG, the short grass season, then Wimbledon, is undoubtably the most exciting part of the tennis season.
Though, the funniest thing is that Wimbledon tends to be the easiest slam to make a semi final. Some seeds cant play grass and fall early, letting past it likes of Safin, Bjorkman and Shuettler stumble into the semis, and no-names like Popp and Voltchkov make the semis. I remember Wimby 1999 having a strong quarter-final field, but the one Lleyton won in 2002 was ridiculous. A nalbandian-malisse semi is just hilarious, nalbandian had only just started to do well before Wimby. There were some strong grass courters in that QF field (Krajicek, Shalken, Henman), but it was really a dream run of ease for Hewitt. That 2 year gap between when Sampras stopped winning and Federer started winning was just hilarious.
The AO would have been way out in last 25 years ago. But there is no doubt that the last 25 years have been fantastic since the move from Kooyong, and it's passing or has already passed the USO. The amount of classic encounters that the AO is stockpiling is something that the USO cant really match. Generally, the USO is seen as the easiest to win (late in season, hardcourt), but both AO & USO tend to have the seeds go further, so they are more reliable than the prestigious 2. The winners board is decent as well;
Last 20 years;
Sampras
Agassi
Becker
Sampras
Korda
Kafelnikov
Agassi x 2
T.Johansson
Agassi
Federer
Safin
Federer x 2
Djokovic
Nadal
Federer
Djokovic x 3
T.Johansson and arguably P.Korda are the only non-legends in that 20 years, but they were still great players in their prime (and I was cheering for both to win from the QFs).
RG
Aus-US
that's just how it is in reality, although a clay court specialist would definitly dream more of winning RG. I think the reason Australians sometimes write off RG is that traditionally it has had less tv coverage here than the others. Also, given it's timeslot, it's difficult to look at orange clay when you are tired at midnight. Also, during the 90's and until Rafa, RG winners often had early round exits elsewhere. Nevertheless, the 6 weeks or so of the season that encompasses RG, the short grass season, then Wimbledon, is undoubtably the most exciting part of the tennis season.
Though, the funniest thing is that Wimbledon tends to be the easiest slam to make a semi final. Some seeds cant play grass and fall early, letting past it likes of Safin, Bjorkman and Shuettler stumble into the semis, and no-names like Popp and Voltchkov make the semis. I remember Wimby 1999 having a strong quarter-final field, but the one Lleyton won in 2002 was ridiculous. A nalbandian-malisse semi is just hilarious, nalbandian had only just started to do well before Wimby. There were some strong grass courters in that QF field (Krajicek, Shalken, Henman), but it was really a dream run of ease for Hewitt. That 2 year gap between when Sampras stopped winning and Federer started winning was just hilarious.
The AO would have been way out in last 25 years ago. But there is no doubt that the last 25 years have been fantastic since the move from Kooyong, and it's passing or has already passed the USO. The amount of classic encounters that the AO is stockpiling is something that the USO cant really match. Generally, the USO is seen as the easiest to win (late in season, hardcourt), but both AO & USO tend to have the seeds go further, so they are more reliable than the prestigious 2. The winners board is decent as well;
Last 20 years;
Sampras
Agassi
Becker
Sampras
Korda
Kafelnikov
Agassi x 2
T.Johansson
Agassi
Federer
Safin
Federer x 2
Djokovic
Nadal
Federer
Djokovic x 3
T.Johansson and arguably P.Korda are the only non-legends in that 20 years, but they were still great players in their prime (and I was cheering for both to win from the QFs).
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,401
- 58,108
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
My ranking:
Wimbledon
Aus
US
French
Given the fact that the Aus Open has a short history and until recently failed to attract highly ranked players, does anyone know how it actually became a Grand Slam in the first place? I'm very happy that it is a Grand Slam but the more I think about it the srtanger it seems that it is one (if that makes sense). The only thing I think it might have something to do with is the great success of those great Australian players of the past like Rod Laver.
Wimbledon
Aus
US
French
Given the fact that the Aus Open has a short history and until recently failed to attract highly ranked players, does anyone know how it actually became a Grand Slam in the first place? I'm very happy that it is a Grand Slam but the more I think about it the srtanger it seems that it is one (if that makes sense). The only thing I think it might have something to do with is the great success of those great Australian players of the past like Rod Laver.
- Dec 21, 2012
- 20,077
- 15,849
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, Redbacks, Adelaide United
Have to go:
Australian
Wimbledon
French
US
Mainly due to broadcast times, always good having the Australian open during the day and the French + Wimbledon at similar times at night. The US open is on at a pretty poor time if you ask me, so I hardly watch much of it. In terms of matches then I would probably go Wimbledon, US/Aus, French. Don't enjoy the clay too much but it's still a grand slam.
Australian
Wimbledon
French
US
Mainly due to broadcast times, always good having the Australian open during the day and the French + Wimbledon at similar times at night. The US open is on at a pretty poor time if you ask me, so I hardly watch much of it. In terms of matches then I would probably go Wimbledon, US/Aus, French. Don't enjoy the clay too much but it's still a grand slam.
I believe Australia actually has something to do with the beginnings of the tennis Grand Slam. When one of our early great players Jack Crawford had won the Australian, French and Wimbledon championships in 1933, an American journalist stated that if Crawford could win the US title, it would give him a grand slam on the courts, borrowing the term Grand Slam from the card game bridge. The championships of Australia, France, Britain and USA were considered the four big titles because in 1933, they were the only nations to have won the Davis Cup. When Don Budge stated his intention to win the Grand Slam five years later in 1938, this was still the case. In fact it was only in 1974 that somebody else won the Davis Cup (South Africa).
Dannnnnnnnnn
Moderator
- Aug 24, 2012
- 37,624
- 54,664
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- T'Wolves/Patrick Beverley/Footscray
- Moderator
- #42
To be honest, I don't really have a ranking. I enjoy watching great tennis, and great tennis doesn't discriminate according to the surface/atmosphere. If I'd been to the tournaments, that would be a different story. I like all of them equally, but the US pisses me off because of the tiebreak. Other than that, they're all the same to me.
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,401
- 58,108
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,401
- 58,108
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
I often wish the Slams were a bit better spread out throughout the year, there is such a big gap now until the French then we have Wimbledon straight afterwards.
I just presumed the AO was the 4th prestigious. The reason why the organisers try so hard to make it a successful event, in all areas, was to make up for the lack of prestige.
It depends on the criteria. For atmosphere, facilities and standard of tennis we would be number one with the French number two.
For prestige and tradition, Wimbledon easily.
The U.S is my least favoured. Sitting in the top tier in the new set-up is akin to sitting in the top tier at the “G”. The players are like ants. Good atmosphere though.
For prestige and tradition, Wimbledon easily.
The U.S is my least favoured. Sitting in the top tier in the new set-up is akin to sitting in the top tier at the “G”. The players are like ants. Good atmosphere though.
