The World Hardcourt * championship was played in France (exception 1 year in Brussels) from 1912 to 1923 (skipped the War years though). * Actually Clay - that is just what they called Clay in those days. It was open not just to French Players but any amateurs. http://bmarcore.club.fr/tennis/avant14/E-champ.html The true French Open didn't start until 1925, because it wasn't open to Non-French residents before hand. However, the World HardCourt championship was really the Proto-French Open. It had deep fields with great players playing. My view is that this should either be regarded as the French Open or at least as a Major title on par with the other 'Grand Slam' titles. It had amongst its winners - Tony Wilding, Bill Tilden, Otto Froitzheim, Henri Cochet, William Johnston ie top players. Suzanne Lenglen won it 5 times. From the Wikipedia article on Lenglen: "The World Hard Court Championships (WHCC), the official clay court world championships, were held in Paris (except for one year in Brussels) beginning in 1912 and lasting through 1923. Unlike the pre-1925 French Championships, the WHCC was open to all nationalities. Therefore, the WHCC is the truer forerunner of the open-to-all-nationalities French Championships that began in 1925. For purposes of determining the total number of Grand Slam titles won by Lenglen, the WHCC is used for 1914 and 1920 through 1923 instead of the closed-to-foreigners French Championships for those years" I agree wholeheartedly with these comments. Implications: You'd have Bill Tilden credited with a French Open equivalent (he won this event in 1921) whereas he doesn't at the moment. Tony Wilding would be credited with two more majors. What do people think? Should the World Hard Court (Clay) Championships be regarded as a major or even more an actual Grand Slam title?