The thing that has prompted this thread was reading Lew Hoads wikipedia article, where the author had listed Hoads 1959 tournament of champions win of 1959 as one of his pro slam wins. Now regardless of your view of wikipedia, it is clear that wikipedia has defined and consistently used the pro slams as only being wembley, the us pro and the french pro. So for consistency reasons the tournament of champions win should be taken out. HOWEVER its clear that having said the above, in 1959 forest hills tounament of champions was regarded as the premier event of that year . It was in feature articles in Sports Illustrated and Time magazine, and had coverage by Allison Danzig in the N.Y. Times. My feeling is that a new definition of pro slam needs to be developed, which is the wembley, us pro & crench pro plus whatever event was the most prestigous event of the year outside of those events. Some years are clear on that eg 1967 wimbledon pro. 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959 tournament of champions etc. Some are less clear eg should the 4th event of 1966 be the Madison Square Garden Pro or Forest hills pro? Its crazy not to include as 'majors' those events in a particular year are possibly the most prestiguous of all of that year. Also since pro. Slam was a made up concept of certain tennis historians where does one go to modify their definition?