What's the second most prestigious slam?

Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by MonkeyBoy, Mar 19, 2013.

?

What's the second most prestigious slam?

  1. US Open

    39 vote(s)
    48.8%
  2. French Open

    32 vote(s)
    40.0%
  3. Actually it's the AO

    2 vote(s)
    2.5%
  4. Wimbledon (another slam is more prestigious)

    7 vote(s)
    8.8%
  1. MonkeyBoy

    MonkeyBoy Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,467
    Everyone seems to agree that Wimbledon is by far the most prestigious grand slam, and the Australian Open the least. But what's the second most prestigious?

    Edit: Oops. I means to put this in general pro
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2013
    #1
  2. Beryl

    Beryl Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Messages:
    1,983
    Cincinnati
     
    #2
  3. beast of mallorca

    beast of mallorca Legend

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,752
    IW.......the 5th Slam.......:twisted:
     
    #3
  4. Leelord337

    Leelord337 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,911
    Location:
    univ houston courts
    Its almost a tie between the French Open and the US Open. I went w/Roland Garros because of the long history there...but he nearly a tossup imo. The AO, even though its my favorite slam because it seems to have the best tennis because all of the players are fresh and ready to kick off the season, is the least prestigious
     
    #4
  5. MonkeyBoy

    MonkeyBoy Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,467
    The french has the novelty of being the only major on clay, but the US open is older and seems to have a more 'epic' aura.
     
    #5
  6. Strategy

    Strategy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Messages:
    655
    I also went with US Open, but you could say French Open as well...
     
    #6
  7. firepanda

    firepanda Professional

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,423
    Location:
    New Zealand
    French Open has the most history, is the clear pinnacle of the clay season. It's the most physically demanding tournament. The players are at their best there as well. At US they're all shattered after a million hard courts. AO is rather sudden and prone to shock results. Wimbledon is straight after French and players are still adjusting to grass.
     
    #7
  8. Magnus

    Magnus Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    5,172
    This.

    10 chars.
     
    #8
  9. Relinquis

    Relinquis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,335
    Location:
    On the courts; hard & clay ...
    Roland Garros... by far more prestigious than US Open and Aussie Open.
     
    #9
  10. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    Look at the USOpen winners and runner-up list: you will see every open era great: Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Sampras, Federer, Edberg, Agassi, Borg.

    RG is great but outside Borg, Lendl, Wilander, and Nadal you have mainly one slam wonders, who were just able to steal a title here in the middle of their 4 small tournaments. It's even poorer when we look at the runner-up.

    The AO lack history.

    I think the prestige comes partly from the previous people who won the event (mainly from the PR) before. The USO is thus more prestigious than RG. It doesn't mean that it is better.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2013
    #10
  11. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,003
    Location:
    Cologne
    The US Open. It has the 2nd most followers on Twitter.
     
    #11
  12. Roddick85

    Roddick85 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,155
    Location:
    Montreal
    By far the US Open.
     
    #12
  13. robin7

    robin7 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,155
    They should turn AO into carpet.
     
    #13
  14. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,228
    Today is different. The four GS are almost equally important. Maybe Wimbledon the most prestigious still, but not by much.

    In past eras Wimbledon was clearly the most prestigious tournament in the world, and the US OPEN was the second most pretigious tournament. That "feeling" more or less remained until very recently. Even in the late 90s many players still considered Wimbledon and then the US OPEN the two most prestigious tournaments.

    I guess now it is different. I suppose many players today consider RG (and even the Australian Open) as prestigious and important as the US OPEN (or even Wimbledon).
     
    #14
  15. jaggy

    jaggy G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    12,716
    Location:
    Carrboro, NC
    Cincy is the most prestigious, probably US Open next.
     
    #15
  16. Rattler

    Rattler Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    297
    Location:
    On the fringe
    Roland Garros, most Americans think it is the U.S. Open; however, Roland Garros is for the longevity of the event, and the surface. Clay is head and shoulders the preferred surface on te Globe...again it seems odd since the U.S. is almost exclusively hard court than any other surface seems to be a novelty at best.
     
    #16
  17. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    It's either the US or French. It's personal opinion and will almost always be a North America vs Europe war.
     
    #17
  18. spinovic

    spinovic Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2013
    Messages:
    4,667
    I tend to agree with you, with the exception of Wimbledon. It has changed drastically in this new era of tennis. I attribute much of that to the current top guys who seem to try their best to win any slam they compete in. That, and the way all the courts are so similar allows them to do that more easily than in the past.

    In the past, it was clearly Wimbledon and the US Open, IMO. Now, I think Wimbledon still holds its place as the "the slam", but the gap has closed, and the gap between the other three is virtually non-existent. But, if you had to rank them, I'd say it is still...

    Wimbledon
    US Open
    Roland Garros
    Australian Open


    I do think the US Open and Roland Garros could be reversed depending on where you're from. I definitely think some would view the French Open as more prestigious.
     
    #18
  19. Hitman

    Hitman G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    11,878
    I agree with this post.
     
    #19
  20. merwy

    merwy Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,055
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Agree with you, the difference between the 4 has definitely become smaller. I still somehow view AO as the least important though.. i dunno why, to much joking around and it doesn't have the prestigious, official feel to it?

    I view RG as second best because.. I like clay and RG has a somewhat classy feel to it, just like Wimbledon but not as much. US Open is a bit too commercialized for me. With the loud music in between changeovers, you know. Maybe it used to be more important in the past because tennis was very USA-dominant. When Sampras-Agassi played the final against each other the stands were packed obviously, who wouldn't want to 2 legends of their own country battle it out? This has changed though.
     
    #20
  21. Murrayfan31

    Murrayfan31 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2010
    Messages:
    4,020
    US Open. But I actually prefer the US Open over Wimbledone. Much higher level of play with true bounces and true footing. Wimbledone has embarrassed themselves but changing the court texture to make it higher bouncing for ******. I lost respect for them.
     
    #21
  22. mightyrick

    mightyrick Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    4,753
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Unfortunately, technology has more than anything to do with the slowing of the surfaces. So much so that, the serve and volley style has been all but obliterated in the modern game.

    I mean, could you imagine Del Potro's current forehand on the Wimbledon surface 30 years ago? The guy hits 100mph forehands. You can't serve and volley against that. These guys hit so hard. They serve so ridiculously hard. They had to adjust the surfaces... otherwise you'd end up with matches with almost no rallies. Just nothing but winners/aces on nearly every point after the first or second ball.

    What I wish they would have done was "slow down" the racquets and strings.

    Regardless, I personally am a fan of longer rallies.
     
    #22
  23. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,228
    Make them all use 75 s.i. racquets with gut and we would see a very different game today (even on today's slow homogeneous conditions/surfaces). Players would have to come to the net way more to finish the points, they could not hit as hard as they can (as they nearly do with today's mega-top-spin) because they could not land the ball in doing so, we could see maybe another McEnroe or Edberg rise to the top...

    It would be so much fun, but sadly it won't happen.
     
    #23
  24. Narcissist

    Narcissist Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    484
    Also why I would pick Roland Garros. As a euro is hard to pick the USO given it's commercialisation and loud music when you have wimbledon and RG, it feels more like the the WTF than a grand slam event should. When I think of RG I think of the eiffel tower in the background, the flower filled terraces but the USO really brings nothing to mind.

    It is also hard to see the USO and second most prestigious when it is one of two hard court slams. It's status over here is probably not helped by the fact none of the USO matches are televised here on normal TV channels either.
     
    #24
  25. spinovic

    spinovic Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2013
    Messages:
    4,667
    Exactly why I think your location determines what you view as the second slam. Also think your preference of surface could as well.

    Wimbledon is pretty much universally viewed as the top though. Not much dispute there.

    I would still go with the US Open at #2, but honestly, I don't feel a tremendous difference between the other 3 after Wimbledon. Especially now, with all the surfaces playing so similarly, you get the same guys competing for the titles slam after slam.

    In the past, as recently as 10-20 years ago, the premier players were always pushing hard for Wimbledon and the US Open, then Australian Open to a lesser degree. And Roland Garros was frequently won by "somebody else".

    Typically, the clay court specialists weren't viewed as highly as other players, regardless of their wins at Roland Garros, because they couldn't win anywhere else. Now, the game has gone in a direction where those guys and that style of play is ideal for all surfaces.
     
    #25
  26. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,228
    Yes, it is quite funny what has happened.

    During the 90s, those Spanish players like Mantilla, Costa (Albert), Corretja...were seen like "clones", heavy top-spin, strong and very fit players, that could do very well on clay and some slow hard courts, but that they were very average on faster surfaces.

    A big part of the media saw them as "talentless players", "workers" and some French media also called them "dirty rats" (because of them winning almost only on the dirt).

    The consensus was that those type of players were not as talented as other type of players like Edberg, McEnroe, Becker, Sampras, Rafter, Stich, Agassi, Ivanisevic..(no matter serve and volley, or all-courter, or baseliners, what these later ones had in common to be called "the talented ones" seem to be that they did not base their game on mega-top-spin, consistency and extreme fitness).

    Now, 15 or 20 years later, because of the changes in surfaces, balls and strings, everybody try to play more or less "that game" of the Spanish claycourters from the 90s, and they do that everywhere.

    But if four of the top-5 today play "that game", that same media can not call them "the talentless ones" now.

    So now that same media call the mega-top-spin+strong players+endurance+quickness as "tennis is achieving new heights never seen before", and now call them "incredibly talented players", when less than 15 years ago, that same style they called "talentless, workmanlike tennis".

    It is very funny how the media selling machine works.
     
    #26
  27. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    I wish this was still true. 2006, 2007, and 2008 all had surprise finalists, and 2009 had that amazing run by Verdasco. It used to the slam where somebody finally caught fire and hit through a couple of big names on his way to a deep round, but now it's like the U.S. Open, Part II. Same old top four seeds in the same old match-ups.
     
    #27
  28. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    I have a hard time thinking of the U.S. Open as the second best slam. It's got the prestige historically, being the second biggest tournament behind Wimbledon for a long time. Even in the 70s when the Australian and Roland Garros were struggling with weak turn-outs of the top players, everyone played the U.S. Open. But nowadays it's so poorly run. Super Saturday is probably the dumbest idea in tennis (though I guess they're doing away with it now), and I'm sure they could find the funds to build a roof.

    As far as enjoyment, I think the Australian is my second favorite. There's something about staying up late and missing out on much-needed sleep that plays into the aura of the thing. It's not classy like Wimbledon, but it's fun and well-organized, and everyone's well-rested for it.
     
    #28
  29. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,411
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    #29
  30. tennisplayer1993

    tennisplayer1993 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2012
    Messages:
    703
    Location:
    All Around The World
    I believe it's the US Open in my opinion, but this biased because when I go back to New York during breaks, I am 20-30 mins from it and I was able to watch many matches in person almost every year from 2001-2003.
     
    #30
  31. tennisplayer1993

    tennisplayer1993 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2012
    Messages:
    703
    Location:
    All Around The World
    omg +10000000 thats how i think too well in terms of the change in the Wimbledon grass courts.
     
    #31
  32. tennisplayer1993

    tennisplayer1993 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2012
    Messages:
    703
    Location:
    All Around The World
    I'm actually a huge fan of aces/winners, but I guess we all have our preferences
     
    #32
  33. Netspirit

    Netspirit Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,243
    Location:
    Snoqualmie, WA
    US Open, the second-oldest slam
     
    #33
  34. papertank

    papertank Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,706
    The USO is more prestigious in the US, the French is more prestigious in Europe. Objectively, I think they are about tied.
     
    #34
  35. Towerofpower205

    Towerofpower205 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    181
    I would say the French
     
    #35
  36. ultradr

    ultradr Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,489
    It used to be US Open but US is losing its status in every aspect these days.

    And now top spin clay style baseline tennis took over the world since 2003.

    Real tennis season revolves around French and Wimbledon, especially now.

    US Open and Australian open are losing its identities.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2013
    #36

Share This Page