1. Would you say that a doubles slam is the same as winning a singles slam? 2. This comparison is flawed because there is no debate that a slam > OG (there is also little to no debate between WTF and OG, but since this thread supposes there is one, this part wouldn't quite apply) 3. For someone whose career is as complete as is Fed's, a missing SOG does stick out, especially if it supposedly isn't at all important. He's won the DOG, but doubles is a completely different animal to singles. 4. This is true 5. But this doesn't make "Career Golden Slam" any less better-sounding than "Career WTF Slam" NB: I still believe WTF is more fundamental to a tennis player's career than the SOG. But once a WTF has already been won, a SOG > an additional WTF.