Originally Posted by hoodjem
Nothing against Agassi in particular, but in general, I believe that the career slam is the silliest, emptiest, and most vapid accolade in all of tennis "honors".
It is a recent creation of brainless, shallow journalistic hype.
It and two dollars might buy you a cup of coffee.
I think winning on all surfaces is important. It's the Golden Career Slam I think it's moronic. All it means is that player won 5 best of 3 set matchs and a 5 set final on hards (or grass), there's nothing unique about the format. It's obviously inferior to a slam win, means next to nothing in comparison.