View Single Post
Old 05-15-2012, 02:55 PM   #829
kiki
G.O.A.T.
 
kiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 17,101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krosero View Post
1970 - Dunlop and Masters as 3rd and 4th
1971 - AO is fine, but Rome over RG
1972 - WCT Finals
1973 - WCT Finals
1974 - WCT Finals
1975 - WCT Finals
1976 - Philadelphia
1977 - Masters
1978 - Philadelphia (very close call w/ the Masters)
1979 - Masters
1980 - Masters
1981 - Masters
1982 - Masters

I've gone with Philly in '76 and '78 because in each case it had a couple more top tenners in the draw -- including the world #1 -- than the other tournament in question (Dallas and the Masters respectively).

I agree with what FedericRoma83 said, the AO fields were still missing players but these fields were not as weak as those up to 1982. And he and I would both like to include the Slams except in the most extreme cases.

It's a close call with the Masters, though.

The AO's prestige at this time was still extremely low, if you go by the comments of players like Lendl in '85 who pointedly said it was not one of the top tournaments. The AO had been in the doldrums for so long that its reputation was still very low, even as the top players were returning to it. They returned but in cases like Lendl, after losing they would say the tournament meant nothing. However, I doubt they would say that if they won the tournament. So all in all I'm inclined to consider these AO's as majors.

Yes they called the Big 3 Slams, and Dallas, the most prestigious events. It makes sense that if the Pepsi Grand Slam were looking for the most prestigious events, they would choose a "big name" tournament like the WCT Finals. But I tend to weight strength of draw more than prestige.
You just canīt have more than 8 toptenners at the Masters or WCT finals..so Philadelphia may have been favoured because of its gigantic draw
__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet
kiki is offline   Reply With Quote