How often was the Australian Open a big slam?

[sandy mayer]

Tilden, Cochet, Lacoste, Riggs, Kramer, and Gonzales never played the Australian Open. Borotra, Budge and Vines played it only once. Perry played it only twice. I realise this may have been because of how difficult it was to travel to Australia until the rise of the passenger plane. It seems there were periods when the Australian Open was not that big, besides the mid to late 70s and early 80s. Many of the 20s mens winners I have never heard of. The 50s-60s seem to have been a pretty good period, with so many great Australian players being around. In 1983 it became much bigger with McEnroe, Lendl and Wilander entering. Does anyone know why it became bigger in 83? The change of stadium in 88 led to growing prestige and it has been as big as the other slams for a long time now, which is very good for tennis. Djokovic's slam count is not tarnished through having so many Australian titles.

 

[urban]

In the amateur era, it was difficult and time costly, to travel to Australia. In Gordon Forbes book, the amateur circuit is well described. The top players were semi-pros and had a pretty solid summer schedule in Europe, including Britain. On the US circuit, many Australian, British and South African amateurs played, not so many from Central Europe. I remember Bergelin and Drobny from around 1950. The US Federation made a distinct effort in 1962, to fly European players via jet planes to Forest Hills. Australia was a bit outside the main international circuit. Some Americans like Trabert, Seixas, Olmedo and later Ashe played there, often in context with the Davis Cup. For many Europeans is was simply too far away. The Australian nationals in the 50s and 60s had the advantage that many top Aussies played there. But it was played at changing venues (Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane), often was badly organized, and many voices called for a replacement within the Grand Slam by the Italian Champs at Rome, with often had a better field.

In the early 1980s, the ILTF under the lead of Philippe Chatrier made a big effort, to get more influence on the game with a stronger emphasis on the four Grand Slam events. In the 1970s, there had been a general shift to the USA with the emergence of WCT. Riordans cicuit or WTT. This conflict was now over with the decline of those organisations. But the ILTF had to deal now with the ATP. The ATP had strong positions with the Miami event (often called the fifth slam) and the year end Masters. To counter these events, the ILTF put more money and power into the tradtional GS events including Melbourne (and later invented in a new year end final, the Grand Slam Cup). I think, especially Paris and Melbourne took profit from those moves, the fields on both mens and womens sides got better, the prize money got better (also bonus money), and the dates corresponded better with the international schedule. Then, the date change to begin of the year (and starting point of the Grand Slam) and the venue change to Flinders Park consolidated the status of the AO.

 

[Gizo]

This is an article in French about the Australian Open, with a heavy focus on the 1983 Australian Open:

It includes the following (translated) excerpts, including some quotes from Wilander:

'In this year 83, it is the Grand Prix which will be at the origin of the renewed interest in the Australian Open: the final winner of the ranking will receive a bonus of 600,000 dollars. A colossal sum at the time.'

“ Let's be honest, that's why me, John (McEnroe) or Ivan (Lendl) came ,” smiles Mats Wilander. The year before, no one came. $600,000 was huge ." There are still four at the end of the 1983 season who can claim first place in the Grand Prix: McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander and Connors. " Only Jimmy didn't come, he was the big absentee but overall, the general impression was that everyone was there, which hadn't happened at the Australian Open since... maybe- "I don't know exactly what it was like in the 50s or 60s, but there was a different feeling there ,"

''Well, I would have gone to Australia anyway since there was the Davis Cup final, but if I played the Australian Open, it It was mainly for this bonus of 600,000 dollars which, I admit, made the 19 year old kid that I was drool a little ."

'If I'm honest ," he said, " even playing it in '83, we didn't quite have the feeling of playing a Grand Slam. It became that way over the years. When we got to '83, for for us, it was a bit like Miami or Indian Wells. A big thing but without the prestige of Roland-Garros, Wimbledon or the US Open. It took a while for the 'Australian' to make up for the lost years. "

1983, la fin du mépris : comment l'Open d'Australie est redevenu un Grand Chelem - Eurosport

LES GRANDS RÉCITS - Longtemps, l'Open d'Australie, déserté par les meilleurs joueurs du monde, a été le parent pauvre du Grand Chelem.

www.eurosport.fr

Unsurprisingly money was a factor.

Mac mentioned that he was paid guarantees to play at the Australian Open on a few occasions, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if that was the case in 1983. There was a lot of commotion about a pregnant Goolagong receiving guarantees to play at the tournament in 1980, which really irked Turnbull. Plus the fact that the USA team weren't competing in the Davis Cup final that year, unlike in 4 out of the 5 previous years, could well have been a factor.

The 1983 final between Wilander and Lendl, while still a meaningful result, didn't really have the feel of a big grand slam final. Lendl's comments afterwards that he would see if he could fit the tournament into his schedule the next year, were mostly likely code speak for 'I'll only be back next year if I'm paid enough'. However by 1987 Lendl rated the Australian Open as important - after losing to Mecir in the Miami final, he said that the only significant tournament so far that season was the Australian Open. And Miami still awarded greater prize money and more ranking points at the time, plus had a larger draw size.

During the first week of the 1982 Australian Open, McEnroe, Lendl and Wilander were instead playing in the first edition of the ECC in Antwerp, which offered considerably greater prize money and at times was billed as the biggest indoor tournament in the world. Antwerp was held 2 weeks earlier in 1983 compared to 1982 so preventing a similar clash, with Mac and Lendl playing in both tournaments.

Also in 1982 the Sydney indoor tournament in mid-October had Mac, Connors, Gerulaitis and Mayer, an invitational tournament in Melbourne straight after had Lendl, Gerulaitis and Mayer (Connors was injured and withdrew), an invitational tournament in Perth in early November had Mac, Borg, Lendl and Gerulaitis, and an invitational tournament straight after in Sydney (the AKAI Gold Challenge with best of 5 set matches across the board) had those same 4 players (Vitas replaced Connors who withdrew). However the Australian Open which started at the end of November had none of those players in the draw. The fact that those players were willing to travel down to Australia during the year to play in tournaments, but not the Australian Open itself, was very telling. So clearly something had to be done, and better money / guarantees / bonuses was unsurprisingly an effective solution.

 

[sandy mayer]

This is an article in French about the Australian Open, with a heavy focus on the 1983 Australian Open:

It includes the following (translated) excerpts, including some quotes from Wilander:

'In this year 83, it is the Grand Prix which will be at the origin of the renewed interest in the Australian Open: the final winner of the ranking will receive a bonus of 600,000 dollars. A colossal sum at the time.'

“ Let's be honest, that's why me, John (McEnroe) or Ivan (Lendl) came ,” smiles Mats Wilander. The year before, no one came. $600,000 was huge ." There are still four at the end of the 1983 season who can claim first place in the Grand Prix: McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander and Connors. " Only Jimmy didn't come, he was the big absentee but overall, the general impression was that everyone was there, which hadn't happened at the Australian Open since... maybe- "I don't know exactly what it was like in the 50s or 60s, but there was a different feeling there ,"

''Well, I would have gone to Australia anyway since there was the Davis Cup final, but if I played the Australian Open, it It was mainly for this bonus of 600,000 dollars which, I admit, made the 19 year old kid that I was drool a little ."

'If I'm honest ," he said, " even playing it in '83, we didn't quite have the feeling of playing a Grand Slam. It became that way over the years. When we got to '83, for for us, it was a bit like Miami or Indian Wells. A big thing but without the prestige of Roland-Garros, Wimbledon or the US Open. It took a while for the 'Australian' to make up for the lost years. "

1983, la fin du mépris : comment l'Open d'Australie est redevenu un Grand Chelem - Eurosport

LES GRANDS RÉCITS - Longtemps, l'Open d'Australie, déserté par les meilleurs joueurs du monde, a été le parent pauvre du Grand Chelem.

www.eurosport.fr

Unsurprisingly money was a factor.

Mac mentioned that he was paid guarantees to play at the Australian Open on a few occasions, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if that was the case in 1983. There was a lot of commotion about a pregnant Goolagong receiving guarantees to play at the tournament in 1980, which really irked Turnbull. Plus the fact that the USA team weren't competing in the Davis Cup final that year, unlike in 4 out of the 5 previous years, could well have been a factor.

The 1983 final between Wilander and Lendl, while still a meaningful result, didn't really have the feel of a big grand slam final. Lendl's comments afterwards that he would see if he could fit the tournament into his schedule the next year, were mostly likely code speak for 'I'll only be back next year if I'm paid enough'. However by 1987 Lendl rated the Australian Open as important - after losing to Mecir in the Miami final, he said that the only significant tournament so far that season was the Australian Open. And Miami still awarded greater prize money and more ranking points at the time, plus had a larger draw size.

During the first week of the 1982 Australian Open, McEnroe, Lendl and Wilander were instead playing in the first edition of the ECC in Antwerp, which offered considerably greater prize money and at times was billed as the biggest indoor tournament in the world. Antwerp was held 2 weeks earlier in 1983 compared to 1982 so preventing a similar clash, with Mac and Lendl playing in both tournaments.

Also in 1982 the Sydney indoor tournament in mid-October had Mac, Connors, Gerulaitis and Mayer, an invitational tournament in Melbourne straight after had Lendl, Gerulaitis and Mayer (Connors was injured and withdrew), an invitational tournament in Perth in early November had Mac, Borg, Lendl and Gerulaitis, and an invitational tournament straight after in Sydney (the AKAI Gold Challenge with best of 5 set matches across the board) had those same 4 players (Vitas replaced Connors who withdrew). However the Australian Open which started at the end of November had none of those players in the draw. The fact that those players were willing to travel down to Australia during the year to play in tournaments, but not the Australian Open itself, was very telling. So clearly something had to be done, and better money / guarantees / bonuses was unsurprisingly an effective solution.

Thanks for this. How big an increase was there in 1983 from 1982 for the Grand Prix overall winner? There doesn't seem to have been a massive jump from 82 to 83 in the winnings available for the Australian Open.

 

[elegos7]

Thanks for this. How big an increase was there in 1983 from 1982 for the Grand Prix overall winner? There doesn't seem to have been a massive jump from 82 to 83 in the winnings available for the Australian Open.

There was no increase, in 1982 the Grand Prix winner (Connors) also got 600,000 dollars. However, by the time of the 1982 Australian Open he had such a big lead, that noone could have caught up with him.

 

[Mustard]

The Australian Open was big in 1969 (although a smaller draw), and 1971 when it was effectively the Dunlop Sydney Open (the Dunlop also being much bigger in 1970 than that year's Australian Open). The 1975 Australian Open men's singles final was big because it was Newcombe vs. Connors, the top 2 players in the world who had somehow avoided each other throughout 1974. Nearly all other times in the 1970s and early 1980s, the Australian Open's reputation was poor, and it largely had poor slots in the calendar. The repuation of the tournament started improving in 1983, when Wilander, Lendl and McEnroe all played it, and then things gradually improved, moving to a new venue in 1988, and getting the same ranking points as the other 3 majors by 1995.

The dates of the Australian Open from 1969-1988 below. The event was held at Kooyong, Melbourne from 1972-1987:

1969 (Brisbane): 20-27 January 1969 (the first leg of Rod Laver's Grand Slam in Brisbane)
1970 (Sydney): 19-27 January 1970 (a much weaker field than the 1970 Dunlop Sydney Open from 16-22 March 1970, where Laver beat Rosewall in the final)
1971 (Sydney): 7-14 March 1971 (the date and the strong field suggests that the 1971 Australian Open effectively became the 1971 Dunlop Sydney Open)
1972 (Kooyong, Melbourne): 26 December 1971 - 3 January 1972 (tournament moves to Kooyong, Melbourne, where it stays up to 1987)
1973: 26 December 1972 - 1 January 1973
1974: 26 December 1973 - 1 January 1974
1975: 21 December 1974 - 1 January 1975
1976: 26 December 1975 - 4 January 1976
1977 (Jan): 3-9 January 1977 (a much better slot for Roscoe Tanner's win)
1977 (Dec): 19 December 1977 - 31 December 1977
1978: 25 December 1978 - 3 January 1979 (interestingly, the 1978 tournament finished in January 1979)
1979: 24 December 1979 - 2 January 1980 (again, the 1979 tournament finished in January 1980)
1980: 26 December 1980 - 4 January 1981 (even more bizarre this time with the January 1981 end, while the women's event was 24-30 November 1980)
1981: 21 December 1981 - 3 January 1982 (the last of the bizarre end dates)
1982: 29 November 1982 - 13 December 1982
1983: 29 November 1983 - 11 December 1983
1984: 26 November 1984 - 9 December 1984
1985: 25 November 1985 - 8 December 1985
1986: No Tournament held
1987: 12-25 January 1987
1988 (move to Flinders Park, Melbourne): 11-24 January 1988

The Australian Open has stayed around the 1987-88 slot ever since, sometimes finishing in early February. The only exception was the 2021 event being on 8-21 February 2021 due to Covid, taking place 3 weeks later than the originally planned 18-31 January slot.

 

[Gizo]

Thanks for this. How big an increase was there in 1983 from 1982 for the Grand Prix overall winner? There doesn't seem to have been a massive jump from 82 to 83 in the winnings available for the Australian Open.

So the winner of the the Volvo Grand Prix earned $600,000 in both 1982 and 1983, but Connors had a big lead in 1982, while there was a lively 4 way race for that crown in 1983, meaning that the 1983 Australian Open now was hugely decisive there, vs. not remotely relevant in 1982. Lendl said this main goal ahead of the 1983 Australian Open (and afterwards for that matter) was / had been to 'win the grand prix', not to win the Australian Open, his first major etc., which was pretty telling.

Wilander title victory in 1983 earned him $677,500 in total, $77,500 for winning the tournament in its own right, and then $600,000 for winning the grand prix with (3,101 points). Lendl earned $138,500 in total, $38,500 for finishing as the runner-up at the tournament, and $100,000 for finishing as the runner-up in the grand prix (with 2,969 points).

The fact that there was no scheduling clash with the ECC in Antwerp, unlike in 1982, cannot be understimated as a factor as well. McEnroe earned prize money of $200,000 for winning the title in Antwerp in 1983, which was greater than the individual prize money paid out for winning any of the majors, WCT Finals, Masters, Philadelphia, Wembley etc.

From Wilander's perspective, Sweden were also playing in the Davis Cup final in the same Kooyong venue just after Christmas. It was clearly a huge goal for him to win that competition for the first time in his career (though he'd have to wait another year until 1984 to do that), with it still clearly a bigger deal than the Australian Open in its own right. Some quotes from Wilander in the same article about the Davis Cup vs. Australian Open:

“ If I had been given the choice between winning the Davis Cup or the Australian Open and the jackpot I would have chosen the Davis Cup for sure. Without the slightest hesitation. For the prestige first of all, which was so much better than that of the Australian Open. “

“ Losing that (Davis Cup) final was a disaster. I was devastated. It completely eclipsed my joy at having won the Australian Open. “

His Davis Cup team mates, Nystrom, Jarryd and Simonsson, all entered the 1983 Australian Open as well. They all spent a 6 week stretch together in Australia, preparing for and playing in the Australian Open and Davis Cup final, hanging out, having fun, playing golf, enjoying some beers etc. Wilander said that he really fell in love with Australia as a country during that stay.

It really wouldn't suprise me if the top players were paid, unofficial, 'under the table' guarantees to show up at the Australian Open for a period as well. It was known that Goolagong received an appearance fee to show up and play in 1980 (and that was probably wasn't the only time that happened), so would anyone really be surprised if the top male players, especially McEnroe, were awarded similar treatment.

 

[timnz]

Tilden, Cochet, Lacoste, Riggs, Kramer, and Gonzales never played the Australian Open. Borotra, Budge and Vines played it only once. Perry played it only twice. I realise this may have been because of how difficult it was to travel to Australia until the rise of the passenger plane. It seems there were periods when the Australian Open was not that big, besides the mid to late 70s and early 80s. Many of the 20s mens winners I have never heard of. The 50s-60s seem to have been a pretty good period, with so many great Australian players being around. In 1983 it became much bigger with McEnroe, Lendl and Wilander entering. Does anyone know why it became bigger in 83? The change of stadium in 88 led to growing prestige and it has been as big as the other slams for a long time now, which is very good for tennis. Djokovic's slam count is not tarnished through having so many Australian titles.

In the open era it really was only sub-par particularly in 1970,1972-1982. So only 13 tournaments over the entire open era of 55 AO tournaments played

 

[urban]

We have to remember, that in the 1970s and early 1980s, was a big struggle for promotional supremacy by several big "players" and institutions (Richard Evans and Marshall Happer have written about it). The ILTF tried to establish its position against the US promotions, the WCT of Lamar Hunt and WTT. Chatrier feared, that the shift to the US would destroy his ILTF events, especially the French Open, which indeed had many top male players missing due to commitments with WCT and WTT (like Laver, Rosewall, Connors, even Borg). The women fields were pretty weak in the mid and late 1970s, even Evert, the leading clay courter didn't play due to WTT and WTA. It was even worse for the AO, it was only depending on the participation by NTL and WCT (later WCT) players in 1969 and 1971, and was badly organized by badgers like Bill Edwards, who was openly against pro and open tennis. The ATP awarded low points for the AO on its computer ranking, and because of the difficult schedule, the AO got into the shadow of the Philly WCT event (with up to 96 draws) within the strong spring WCT circuit, and later the Masters event, not to speak of the rich free-lance events like Antwerp.

Around 1980, the ILTF and Chatrier pumped millions of money into the 4 slams and the Grand Prix, which imo was an ILTF event (certainly in its origin in 1970, for the later time i am not completely sure). The WCT slowly died due to false watering down and over expanding schedules, although Lendl for instance played a ton of rich WCT events even in 1982. Also the WTT declined heavily. Nevertheless, Chatrier wasn't the lone winner of the situation. Now the ATP, now more an promotional agency than a players union, grew ever stronger, and they controlled the big US events at Indian Wells (with Pasarell), especially Key Biscaine (lead by Butch Buchholz), which got more ranking points and prize moeny than the AO, and last but not least the year end Masters, which had grown in status with the stabile MSG venue. It was now a struggle between the ILTF (with the 4 slams and the Davis Cup in hand) and the ATP, it escaleted again, when the ILTF tried to establish an own year end event (the Grand Slam Cup), to counter the Super Nine circuit of the ATP.

 

[WCT]

WCT didn't really die until later in the 80s. Later in the 70s, their tour was folded into the Grand Prix, but the tournaments were still there. Then, in 1982, they split off again, this time doing a year long tour where every tournament had at least a 100k first prize. This is the tour where Lendl won most of his 15 tournaments that year.

A Grand Prix bonus pool had existed long before 1982. And it wouldn't be 600k like some winner take all. The second ranked player in points probably won at least half that much. Then 3rd place, 4th place they would also get money.

All I'm saying is if the bonus money was such an inducement to play Australia in 82 and 83 then it should have been before then. Seems to me that the biggest factor was the time it was played. For much of the 70s, you are asking players to go there over Christmas and New Years. Move it up 3 or 4 weeks and you avoid that. Schedule to avoid conflict with events like the ECC and players started coming.


That said, Wilander specifically mentions the bonus pool money in the interview so there must be something to it. I'm just saying they played for a lot of bonus money long before 1982. I'm not saying it was 600k. IIRC, it may have been may be 300 in the 70s, but prize money went up everywhere in that period, not just the Grand Prix bonus pool.

 

[sandy mayer]

So the winner of the the Volvo Grand Prix earned $600,000 in both 1982 and 1983, but Connors had a big lead in 1982, while there was a lively 4 way race for that crown in 1983, meaning that the 1983 Australian Open now was hugely decisive there, vs. not remotely relevant in 1982. Lendl said this main goal ahead of the 1983 Australian Open (and afterwards for that matter) was / had been to 'win the grand prix', not to win the Australian Open, his first major etc., which was pretty telling.

Wilander title victory in 1983 earned him $677,500 in total, $77,500 for winning the tournament in its own right, and then $600,000 for winning the grand prix with (3,101 points). Lendl earned $138,500 in total, $38,500 for finishing as the runner-up at the tournament, and $100,000 for finishing as the runner-up in the grand prix (with 2,969 points).

The fact that there was no scheduling clash with the ECC in Antwerp, unlike in 1982, cannot be understimated as a factor as well. McEnroe earned prize money of $200,000 for winning the title in Antwerp in 1983, which was greater than the individual prize money paid out for winning any of the majors, WCT Finals, Masters, Philadelphia, Wembley etc.

From Wilander's perspective, Sweden were also playing in the Davis Cup final in the same Kooyong venue just after Christmas. It was clearly a huge goal for him to win that competition for the first time in his career (though he'd have to wait another year until 1984 to do that), with it still clearly a bigger deal than the Australian Open in its own right. Some quotes from Wilander in the same article about the Davis Cup vs. Australian Open:

“ If I had been given the choice between winning the Davis Cup or the Australian Open and the jackpot I would have chosen the Davis Cup for sure. Without the slightest hesitation. For the prestige first of all, which was so much better than that of the Australian Open. “

“ Losing that (Davis Cup) final was a disaster. I was devastated. It completely eclipsed my joy at having won the Australian Open. “

His Davis Cup team mates, Nystrom, Jarryd and Simonsson, all entered the 1983 Australian Open as well. They all spent a 6 week stretch together in Australia, preparing for and playing in the Australian Open and Davis Cup final, hanging out, having fun, playing golf, enjoying some beers etc. Wilander said that he really fell in love with Australia as a country during that stay.

It really wouldn't suprise me if the top players were paid, unofficial, 'under the table' guarantees to show up at the Australian Open for a period as well. It was known that Goolagong received an appearance fee to show up and play in 1980 (and that was probably wasn't the only time that happened), so would anyone really be surprised if the top male players, especially McEnroe, were awarded similar treatment.

Thanks this. It's extraordinary that Lendl saw winning the grand prix as more important than winning the Australian Open, and it's incredible that Wilander saw the Davis Cup as so much more important than the Australian Open, even in 1983 when the field was good. Today no-one would talk this way about the Australian Open.

 

[King_olaf_the_hairy]

In the amateur era, it was difficult and time costly, to travel to Australia. In Gordon Forbes book, the amateur circuit is well described. The top players were semi-pros and had a pretty solid summer schedule in Europe, including Britain. On the US circuit, many Australian, British and South African amateurs played, not so many from Central Europe. I remember Bergelin and Drobny from around 1950. The US Federation made a distinct effort in 1962, to fly European players via jet planes to Forest Hills. Australia was a bit outside the main international circuit. Some Americans like Trabert, Seixas, Olmedo and later Ashe played there, often in context with the Davis Cup. For many Europeans is was simply too far away. The Australian nationals in the 50s and 60s had the advantage that many top Aussies played there. But it was played at changing venues (Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane), often was badly organized, and many voices called for a replacement within the Grand Slam by the Italian Champs at Rome, with often had a better field.

There's a very interesting anecdote in Drobny's autobiography about the one time he played Down Under, in 1950:

'Just before the Australian Championships in Melbourne [Eric] Sturgess and I were asked to spend a weekend with Sir Norman and Lady Brookes. Sir Norman was the first and only left-hander to win at Wimbledon until I succeeded in 1954, and was also President of the Australian LTA.

"We asked [Harry] Hopman what to take for the weekend. He replied "Oh, nothing much. It's quite informal. We play some golf and tennis and relax." Sturgess and I turned up in sports jackets and open-necked shirts. You can imagine our chagrin when, on the first night of our visit we found Sir Norman had a dinner party at which everyone wore dinner jackets including Hopman.'

I believe those kind of mind games were a commonplace occurrence for Harry; anything to undermine the best foreign players before they even set foot on the courts. A non-Aussie who wanted to play would have to face the arduous trip just to get there, a bevvy of talented home players with the crowd's unwavering support, and on top of all that Hopman's low-key psychological warfare. It's no wonder a lot of them thought it wasn't worth the effort to travel more than once or twice.