Grand Slams - Is there a 'pecking order'?
- Thread starter batz
- Start date
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
I think anyone who knows a decent amount of tennis, or anything about tennis really, knows that Wimbledon is the most important. I don't think there is really an arguing this. Second should be the US Open, based on history and prestige. Third would be the French, and last by a country mile is the Australian. It has definitely increased it's importance a bit in recent years, but this one was just plain skipped by so many of the top players until only "recently."
Everyone certainly has their favorites, but it seems like ranking them in terms of "prestige" is pretty cut and dry, though I know many will argue this point for whatever reason.
THUNDERVOLLEY
G.O.A.T.
Agreed. In all of the decades watching tennis, it was clear to me that players just put greater energy, talent (that is, the players with talent) and determination when at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. It is then no surprise or coincidence that many of the greatest, sport-defining matches of all time occured at the two slams in question.
federerdomination
Semi-Pro
I agree with you.
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
And any tennis historian will tell you the US Open is more prestigious. This goes to exactly what I said above. People will argue this for no good reason. You're simply not correct in this case and it has NOTHING to do with where people are from. I'm "American" and far and away Wimbledon is the most important major. If this were based on region wouldn't I be saying the US is the most important? Let's be serious here.
Leave personal preference and regional ego issues out of it. There is a clear "pecking order" to answer the question of the OP, and it is what I stated in my original post. It has nothing to do with any kind of nationalistic pride concerns. The French is below the US Open in terms of the caliber of player that has won it historically, and it's level of prestige. There is simply no REAL argument over this.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Britain was in Europe the last time I checked and I disagree with you
Only kidding - you're perfectly entitled to your opinion.
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
I think Wimbledon stands above the rest in the popular imagination. Even casual sports fans know of Wimbledon's significance and prestige.
That said, in this day and age with stellar fields at all Slams and all the Slams fully developed, I personally don't think it is any more of an acheivement to win one Slam or the other. People may assign more prestige to Wimbledon, but I would never conclude that a player who won Wimbledon was any better based on that result than a player who one the USO or the AO, for example.
That said, in this day and age with stellar fields at all Slams and all the Slams fully developed, I personally don't think it is any more of an acheivement to win one Slam or the other. People may assign more prestige to Wimbledon, but I would never conclude that a player who won Wimbledon was any better based on that result than a player who one the USO or the AO, for example.
gj011
Banned
That "any tennis historian" is simply not true.
I am just saying that "your pecking order" as you define it is not clear and determined. What is clear is that Wimbledon is first and AO is last. Who is second RG or USO is debatable and differs depending of who is making the list. It is far from clear like you or Thundervolley tried to make it. RG is not historically in any way less prestigious than USO as you are trying to make it. The fact that it is older has no bearing today or last say 50 years, whatsoever.
Last edited:
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
The fact that it is older, and had more of the tennis greats win it DOES have a bearing on the tournament.
I think you'll find that any person that has a decent knowledge of tennis will admit the US Open is simply more prestigious than the French. The only people who argue otherwise do so out of personal preference or a strange need to try and elevate that tournament. You are stating yourself you prefer it because you're European. That makes no sense to me. It's an international sport and where the tournaments are played has no bearing on their importance.
The US Open has a longer history, greater champions win there, it is more prestigious than the French. End of story.
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
Well you should, the best shotmakers and overall athletes win on grass. It is the toughest all around surface to win on, and that's why the true greats win there often. It requires the most all around tennis skills.
Geezer Guy
Hall of Fame
We may as well argue about which religion is the right one.
It's a personal preference. Many players want most to win the Slam hosted by their country. From what I've heard, if a player doesn't want to win their National slam the most, then they want to win Wimbledon.
Fans - the same thing.
Personally, as a fan, I've been to the US Open once, and it was great. My second choice is to go the the Aus open. French is probably my least favorite to attend (or to watch, for that matter).
roddickfan90
Banned
everyone wants to win wimbledon, fact. US open is the second biggest slam and i aint american, i would say the australian open is better than the french, bcuz of the atmosphere and francce is just a boring place.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Have to agree with this. The USO has been going for nearly half a century longer. That has to mean something in the overall scheme of things.
ESP#1
Professional
spoken like a true american if you ask me
rubberduckies
Professional
Spoken like an idiot, if you ask me.
ESP#1
Professional
ill tell ya what you can do with your rubberduckies buddy
Absolutely agree. And I would change it into 1.RG and 2.Wimbledon because I like the RG atmosphere a whole lot more! But that's only my personal prefference - I'm from Nastase's country and RG is the only slam he won - it's seen with different eyes here.
Last edited:
VivalaVida
Banned
I completely agree with you T&M. The US open has an incredibly illustrious past.
matchmaker
Hall of Fame
Well, you can look at it from a historical point of view, or a more technical point of view.
My list would be:
1. Wimbledon
2. Roland Garros
3. U.S. Open
4. Australian Open
Wimbledon is first because of many historical reasons, it is also played on grass, which is still the most different surface in comparison with all the others.
For me RG comes in second because I think that it is the most desirable title for any tennis player after Wimbledon. How many people have been able to do the double? Ask McEnroe, Sampras, Edberg, Becker, and now Federer, how much they would have wanted to win it. Or ask someone like Lendl, who won RG, how much he would have liked to win Wimbledon.
I know historically the U.S.O. should be ranked high, but the absence of a full fifth set, degrades the tournament for me almost to an event outside the Grand Slam.
Moreover the fact that semis are played on Saturday and the final is on Sunday afternoon, is completely absurd and very unfair towards the participants of the last semifinal. If they play for 5 hours, then that is difference almost impossible to recover.
The Australian Open is slightly better considering that particular aspect, but it is still unfair that one semifinal is played a day later than the other.
I basically think Wimbledon and RG are the two extremes and that is why they are the most desirable titles.
My list would be:
1. Wimbledon
2. Roland Garros
3. U.S. Open
4. Australian Open
Wimbledon is first because of many historical reasons, it is also played on grass, which is still the most different surface in comparison with all the others.
For me RG comes in second because I think that it is the most desirable title for any tennis player after Wimbledon. How many people have been able to do the double? Ask McEnroe, Sampras, Edberg, Becker, and now Federer, how much they would have wanted to win it. Or ask someone like Lendl, who won RG, how much he would have liked to win Wimbledon.
I know historically the U.S.O. should be ranked high, but the absence of a full fifth set, degrades the tournament for me almost to an event outside the Grand Slam.
Moreover the fact that semis are played on Saturday and the final is on Sunday afternoon, is completely absurd and very unfair towards the participants of the last semifinal. If they play for 5 hours, then that is difference almost impossible to recover.
The Australian Open is slightly better considering that particular aspect, but it is still unfair that one semifinal is played a day later than the other.
I basically think Wimbledon and RG are the two extremes and that is why they are the most desirable titles.
P_Agony
Banned
dirtballer
Professional
Nastasi also won the US Open in 1972. He beat Arthur Ashe in the final.
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
Again, people injecting a lot of personal opinion into their rankings. Saying that because the US uses a fifth set tiebreaker so it's almost not a major, is kinda silly.
I never said that order was my favorite. That's a stupid way to try and rank these things as everyone will like something different for their own reasons, which is cool obviously. I don't know if the US is even my second favorite really. The australian has definitely improved their status, and the French is cool. The US is ok, but has some really dumb schedule that influences the results too greatly. But the fact of the matter is that the US Open is still the second highest major in terms of it's "importance" to a players legacy. Roddick will always be a bigger name than Moya, for example, and there is a reason why...
I never said that order was my favorite. That's a stupid way to try and rank these things as everyone will like something different for their own reasons, which is cool obviously. I don't know if the US is even my second favorite really. The australian has definitely improved their status, and the French is cool. The US is ok, but has some really dumb schedule that influences the results too greatly. But the fact of the matter is that the US Open is still the second highest major in terms of it's "importance" to a players legacy. Roddick will always be a bigger name than Moya, for example, and there is a reason why...
T
TennisandMusic
Guest
It is to anyone that cares to look at it objectively, and know a bit about the history of all the tournaments. I think that order is pretty obvious unless you throw in personal preference such as "but I like clay," and "The US is on American soil unfortunately." :roll:
rubberduckies
Professional
It's something like this:
Wimbledon - 10
USO - 9
RG - 8.5
AO - 6
Wimbledon - 10
USO - 9
RG - 8.5
AO - 6
DarthFed
Hall of Fame
Thats just Silly...before i even got into Tennis i knew about the importance of Wimbledon and The USO
in terms of personal preference Wimby is miles ahead of the others imo, then it's the USO, the AO, and then the French
alonsin
Rookie
If you ask most people in Spain they'll say RG is more prestigious than USO, but that's probably because we kind of "own" the tournament
I also think RG is above the USO. Being the only GS tournament that is held on clay makes it more prestigious IMHO, while USO and AO are kind of interchangeable and both have changed surfaces too many times.
Anyway, nowadays I don't think it makes much of a difference which one you win
I also think RG is above the USO. Being the only GS tournament that is held on clay makes it more prestigious IMHO, while USO and AO are kind of interchangeable and both have changed surfaces too many times.
Anyway, nowadays I don't think it makes much of a difference which one you win
DarthFed
Hall of Fame
If you ask most people in Spain they'll say RG is more prestigious than USO, but that's probably because we kind of "own" the tournament
I also think RG is above the USO. Being the only GS tournament that is held on clay makes it more prestigious IMHO, while USO and AO are kind of interchangeable and both have changed surfaces too many times.
Anyway, nowadays I don't think it makes much of a difference which one you win
That's irrelevant....the surface isn't a factor it's the prestige and History, if Wimbledon was a hard court it would still be the most prestigious Slam
stormholloway
Legend
Have you been to France by any chance? Remember, Paris is not in Texas.
stormholloway
Legend
If you ask most people in Spain they'll say RG is more prestigious than USO, but that's probably because we kind of "own" the tournament
I also think RG is above the USO. Being the only GS tournament that is held on clay makes it more prestigious IMHO, while USO and AO are kind of interchangeable and both have changed surfaces too many times.
Anyway, nowadays I don't think it makes much of a difference which one you win
And if the Australian was played on ice, would that make it more prestigious than the French?
icedevil0289
G.O.A.T.
I haven't been watching tennis for a long time but in terms of prestige I always thought it was
Wimbledon
US open
French Open
AO
In terms of Personal:
Wimbledon by far, then USO, then the french, and AO. I never really cared too much for the AO, although its a great tournament.
Wimbledon
US open
French Open
AO
In terms of Personal:
Wimbledon by far, then USO, then the french, and AO. I never really cared too much for the AO, although its a great tournament.
icedevil0289
G.O.A.T.
lol, what's the difference? btw I'm american myself, atleast nationality wise anyway, born and raised.
ESP#1
Professional
I think the fact that they have changed the USO so much takes away from its prestige, the FO just seems more traditional.
I have nothing against the USO, i like em the same, i wouldnt say that FO is better or anything just a more traditional tennis major.
gj011
Banned
No this is your subjective opinion. Many people rate RG over USO. All I am saying is that is is debatable and it is not unanimous and commonly known like you claim, I am honestly not sure based on what.
From the time I was kid and learned first things about tennis it was always commonly known where I am from, that Wimbledon and RG are the two biggest tournaments in the world. USO and AO were just two other big tournaments.
And I am not personally biased here or I don't prefer or like clay over other surfaces. My personal preference list would be different than one I gave above.
the surface in Paris has not changed just like Wimbledon and the USO and the Aussie have changed and has changed
so that's why
Wimbledon
Roland Garros
USO(grass/clay/hard court)
Aussie Open(grass/clay/rebound ace/plexicushion.Make your damn minds Aussies about the surface and its speed already:roll: :lol
these days Pete Sampras I bet would give his right nut just to have 1 Coupe des Mousquetaires and I bet would trade any of his Aussie or US Open trophies for just 1 win in Paris:lol:
so that's why
Wimbledon
Roland Garros
USO(grass/clay/hard court)
Aussie Open(grass/clay/rebound ace/plexicushion.Make your damn minds Aussies about the surface and its speed already:roll: :lol
these days Pete Sampras I bet would give his right nut just to have 1 Coupe des Mousquetaires and I bet would trade any of his Aussie or US Open trophies for just 1 win in Paris:lol:
leonidas1982
Hall of Fame
the surface in Paris has not changed just like Wimbledon and the USO and the Aussie have changed and has changed
so that's why
Wimbledon
Roland Garros
USO(grass/clay/hard court)
Aussie Open(grass/clay/rebound ace/plexicushion.Make your damn minds Aussies about the surface and its speed already:roll: :lol
these days Pete Sampras I bet would give his right nut just to have 1 Coupe des Mousquetaires and I bet would trade any of his Aussie or US Open trophies for just 1 win in Paris:lol:
Correction, Roland Garros has changed its surface:
Roland Garros (grass then clay). Also for a good part of its history it was eligible only for French citizens.
Oz never played on clay. rebound ace and plexicushion are both hardcourts. This is similar to old Wimbledon grass and new Wimbledon grass -- they're both still grass, right?
helloworld
Hall of Fame
1. Wimbledon
2. US Open
3. Roland Garros
4. Australian Open
It's been this way for quite a long time now.
2. US Open
3. Roland Garros
4. Australian Open
It's been this way for quite a long time now.
alonsin
Rookie
Probably not, but if it were played on gold or diamonds I'd have no doubt
rubberduckies
Professional
I think the USO used to be more prestigious than RG, but a lot of low quality players have been winning the USO in recent years. The quality of RG champions, on the other hand, has skyrocketed as of late. Wimby and AO have had this problem in recent years but seem to have turned the corner.
D
Deleted member 21996
Guest
I think the USO used to be more prestigious than RG, but a lot of low quality players have been winning the USO in recent years. The quality of RG champions, on the other hand, has skyrocketed as of late. Wimby and AO have had this problem in recent years but seem to have turned the corner.
Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. (Luke 23:34)
The-Champ
Legend
I agree. In the current era, I think a Slam win is a Slam win. Yes, everyone knows Wimbledon is the most prestigious, because it is the oldest. But they are all special, unique events. Plus since everyone is so fixated on Roger Federer's total # of Slams, and will he break the record, it shows you that all the majors are considered equal. You don't get more "Slam points" for winning Wimbledon than the Australian Open.
With very few exceptions(Sampras, Federer, Nadal), most pros would pick the US Open over Roland Garros if they got to pick a slam to win. Those exceptions are due to the fact that Sampras and Federer haven't won it, and its the only slam that eludes them. And Nadal has never lost there, so its very special to him. This doesn't mean that Roland Garros is not prestigious. It is more prestigious in my mind that US Open. The US Open is loud, busy, used as a stomping ground for tabloid personalities. But the fact that its a larger than life event is so appealing to players. I'm American, so I might see it differently. But I remember seeing a quote by Murray who said he would love to win Wimbledon because he would be a favorite, but his personal dream slam would be the US Open. I think its for the reason I listed. Its not the oldest like Wimbledon, or the hardest to win like Roland Garros. But its the biggest stage in tennis.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 77403
- General Pro Player Discussion
- Poll
- Serendipitous
- General Pro Player Discussion
- Poll
