Grand slam and grand slam?

[Tenny]

When you win all four of the grand slams, you win THE Grand slam? I now what they mean but it's still confusing to me. Why don't they call it THE grand slam 'Great slam' or 'Super slam' or something?

T.

[norcal]

Agassi has the 'career' slam.

[Craig Sheppard]

There's no need to give it another name, because there is only one Grand Slam. If you win just Wimbledon, you don't win a grand slam. The players are so moronic they don't even know this anymore. I can expect casual fans to get this mixed up, but not players. Grand Slam has ONE and ONLY ONE meaning. The four tournaments comprising a Grand Slam are known as MAJORS. If you win Wimbledon, Roland Garros, US Open, or Aussie Open, you've won a major tournament, or simply major. If you win all 4 majors in one year, you've won the Grand Slam.

Craig

[Tenny]

Originally Posted by Craig Sheppard

The four tournaments comprising a Grand Slam are known as MAJORS. If you win Wimbledon, Roland Garros, US Open, or Aussie Open, you've won a major tournament, or simply major. If you win all 4 majors in one year, you've won the Grand Slam.
Craig

Craig,

That's what I thought. I think it's confusing many times people would say or write like this : Pete Sampras, the winner of 14 grand slam titles...instead of 14 major titles.

[Craig Sheppard]

Exactly Tenny, you're right it should be 14 majors. The media started misusing the phrase at some point and now it has stuck all over the place. I'm not sure when it really started being misused, but I remember growing up in the 80s and 90s hearing "majors" and then all of a sudden in the late '90s and '00s it was "grand slams". It's just not correct.

It does cause confusion for casual fans, because they hear that Pete won 14 "grand slams" according to the media, and then they hear Steffi Graf won a Grand Slam in '88. So they think Steffi's achievement isn't such a big deal, since Pete won 14. But it's a huge distinction of course. And all because some sportswriters who don't know tennis misused the phrase.

Craig

[el_mago]

Originally Posted by Craig Sheppard

Exactly Tenny, you're right it should be 14 majors. The media started misusing the phrase at some point and now it has stuck all over the place. I'm not sure when it really started being misused, but I remember growing up in the 80s and 90s hearing "majors" and then all of a sudden in the late '90s and '00s it was "grand slams". It's just not correct.

It does cause confusion for casual fans, because they hear that Pete won 14 "grand slams" according to the media, and then they hear Steffi Graf won a Grand Slam in '88. So they think Steffi's achievement isn't such a big deal, since Pete won 14. But it's a huge distinction of course. And all because some sportswriters who don't know tennis misused the phrase.

Craig

Exactly, Grand Slam is winning all four in the same calendar year. If you just win one, you say" they won a slam or a major".

[rhubarb]

Originally Posted by Craig Sheppard

The four tournaments comprising a Grand Slam are known as MAJORS.

Don't agree! To me, "major" is golfing terminology, and there it should stay.
Grand Slam tournaments are exactly that: Grand Slam tournaments.

Nobody with any knowledge of tennis would confuse a (calendar-year) Grand Slam with an individual tournament. It's usually completely clear from the context.

[Craig Sheppard]

Originally Posted by rhubarb

Don't agree! To me, "major" is golfing terminology, and there it should stay.

That is true, golf also uses the terminology. It has not always been a golfing term however. Just to either prove or disprove my point: which decade did you start following tennis?

[rhubarb]

I started following tennis in the 70s, and I'm not in the US. That probably makes the difference. I'm aware that the word is used in the tennis environment, but still find it a reasonably "foreign" concept.

[Craig Sheppard]

OOoooo throw me a curve with the international part. Not sure about that then, I grew up watching tennis in the US during the '80s. Well, call it what you will. They're majors to me, each of which is only a quarter of a Grand Slam.

Craig

[Camilio Pascual]

Originally Posted by Craig Sheppard

If you win all 4 majors in one year, you've won the Grand Slam.Craig

Nice post, but there isn't agreement even on this. You'll have the majority agreeing with you, but I say winning 4 Majors in a row constitutes a Grand Slam even though it is not a Calendar Slam. Serena has won the Grand Slam. My argument against the conventional definition of a Grand Slam ...Martina Navratilova, another Grand Slam winner. The fact that she won 6 Majors in a row and people don't credit her with a Grand Slam makes the definition of one...not so grand. So, those of you who disagree with this, what is the greater (or ******r) achievement, 6 in a row or a Calendar Slam?

[Tenny]

For me, if I won Wimbledon, USopen in 2005, and AO, FO in 2006, I should be a GrandSlam winner (holding all four MAJORS).

[rhubarb]

Originally Posted by Craig Sheppard

OOoooo throw me a curve with the international part. Not sure about that then, I grew up watching tennis in the US during the '80s. Well, call it what you will. They're majors to me, each of which is only a quarter of a Grand Slam.

Craig

Yep, call them what ever you like <g>. The word "major" certainly gets used a lot over here too, it's just that I'm not very fond of it.

[bigserving]

Actually, the term, "Grand Slam" comes from the card game Bridge. The term was plagarized by baseball, then plagarized and misused by the game of tennis.

[rhubarb]

Originally Posted by Tenny

For me, if I won Wimbledon, USopen in 2005, and AO, FO in 2006, I should be a GrandSlam winner (holding all four MAJORS).

I do agree with you there, but there are quite a lot of sticklers around who require all the wins to be in a single calendar year. There was a lot of hoo-haa in 1984 when Martina Navratilova held all 4 (she won 6 in a row in fact), but didn't win all four in the same calendar year. History records that she didn't win a Grand Slam, and similarly for Serena Williams more recently.

It will be interesting to see if Federer defends the AO successfully and wins RG whether the tennis world would react any differently. I expect not.

[rhubarb]

Originally Posted by bigserving

Actually, the term, "Grand Slam" comes from the card game Bridge. The term was plagarized by baseball, then plagarized and misused by the game of tennis.

True, it did come from bridge. It was a long time ago though, before WWII.

[Camilio Pascual]

Originally Posted by rhubarb

True, it did come from bridge. It was a long time ago though, before WWII.

Rhubarb - Maybe somebody will firure out how to pull a "finesse" on Rajah.

[Tenny]

MICHAEL CHANG: Andre and I are different. I don't really want to go out and compare myself with Andre. I don't think he really wants to do the same. You could easily say that. But then Andre could say, "I have five or six

"Grand Slams"

under my belt, Mike only has one." When you come down to it, Andre and I, we come out and try to play the best tennis we can play. For me, I think what Andre has accomplished in his career is great. I think for me, I don't feel like it's important so much to compare, but just to go out and give my all. Whenever that falls, then great. It's a disappointment for the tournament to lose the No. 1 player, having played so well for the last year, year and a half. Sometimes that's just the way things go.

Not sure whether it's Chang or Agassi though.

[Deuce]

I agree with Craig's first two posts.

As for the argument whether 4 in a row, or 6 in a row, without winning 4 in a calendar year, should be considered a Grand Slam, I say Absolutely Not.

This is like saying that if you hit a three run home run and a solo homer (or a 2 run homer, or another 3 run homer) in one game, you should be credited with a Grand Slam. A Grand Slam in baseball is to hit a home run with the bases loaded. There are no convenient variations. Although it could easily be argued that hitting two 3 run homers in a game is more impressive than hitting one 4 run homer, only the 4 run homer will ever be called a Grand Slam, of course.

On the subject of how to refer to the Aussie Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, and the U.S. Open... how about we call each of them 'Quarters' - as in 1/4 of a Grand Slam...

[Camilio Pascual]

Well, we need some time of meaningful term to describe one who is the concurrent holder of all 4 Majors. My suggestion is, "Grand Slam" with the title "Calendar Slam" to describe the particular instance of holding all 4 Majors in the same year. I'm open to suggestions for an alternate term, but until then, Grand Slam is the term that describes the situation best. So, Serena Williams and Martina Navratilova have won Grand Slams as far as I am concerned.