Tennisanity
Legend
Surely holding all 4 slams twice in your career shows more dominance than doing it only once. One would have to be kinda dumb to think otherwise, no? Or am I wrong?
2 Serena slams are better than 1 CYGS.
Graf had 2 Graf Slams too and 1 was a Calendar Slam. Serena will try and match that in Flushing.
Surely holding all 4 slams twice in your career shows more dominance than doing it only once. One would have to be kinda dumb to think otherwise, no? Or am I wrong?
She does.Graf does not have 2 Grand Slams....
The Grand Slam is the zenith of tennis achievement - mastering the sport in the complete frame of the calendar year, and its four majors within that year.
^ Nonsense. If Serena wins the 2015 US Open, she has completed the 2015 Grand Slam.
IF tennis were the logic puzzle that many posters on here make it out to be, then it would be true that a Serena Slam = a calendar slam. But it's not. It's a game played by humans with all the messy problems of emotion that comes with that.
The thing is that players behave as though the beginning and end of a year matter. They plan their efforts around it.
For that reason, a calendar Slam is a more noteworthy achievement than a streak of four in a row. It needn't be that way, logically, but it IS that way in practice.
IF tennis were the logic puzzle that many posters on here make it out to be, then it would be true that a Serena Slam = a calendar slam. But it's not. It's a game played by humans with all the messy problems of emotion that comes with that.
The thing is that players behave as though the beginning and end of a year matter. They plan their efforts around it.
For that reason, a calendar Slam is a more noteworthy achievement than a streak of four in a row. It needn't be that way, logically, but it IS that way in practice.
I certainly see your point about CYGS being distinct from 4 in a row, but I don't exactly understand why it would be better. Even from an emotional standpoint, just because some yahoos back in the day defined it as such? It's kinda ridiculous.
mastering the sport in the complete frame of the calendar year
Maybe Williams is going to win the next 3 FO and make it 6 in each slam 24 overall.
Doubt it. Serena needs 3 more to beat Court and become overall GOAT. Serena may elect to win 2 more USOs and 1 more AO. RG is hard on the body.
Funny how no sensible commentary ever talks about the (nonexistent) pressure of winning majors across years, yet nothing except the true pressure of winning the Grand Slam is the subject dominating all conversation. It is a historic achievement within the accepted frame of the calendar year. Some should not be so bitter that their favorite players could not reach the zenith of the sport by trying to damn the Grand Slam.
i don't think they recognize the non-calendar slam officially.What's ITF's definition of Grand Slam? I don't think calendar year is taken into consideration.
CYGS and NCYGS are both nothing more than any other set of 4 Slams. What matters is the sum of your achievements, not the sequence of it.
2 Serena slams are better than 1 CYGS.
In mathematical terms, yes, it does not matter if a grand slam was completed at the same year, all that matter is the amount of slams completed.
My bias would favor a CYGS though, since it show complete dominance in that year.
Your definition of calendar is different from what is in China. The CYGS is a meaningless term.
Exactly. It's just bias. I don't see any logical reason for why a CYGS is worth more than the 4 Slams won over a longer period of time.In mathematical terms, yes, it does not matter if a grand slam was completed at the same year, all that matter is the amount of slams completed.
My bias would favor a CYGS though, since it show complete dominance in that year.
Your definition of calendar is different from what is in China. The CYGS is a meaningless term.
Exactly. It's just bias. I don't see any logical reason for why a CYGS is worth more than the 4 Slams won over a longer period of time.
that is incorrect, actually.. . . ITF, however, defines a Grand Slam as winning all 4 slams consecutively, regardless of being in the same calendar year or not.
oh, yes, because a slam already means that, winning the four championships at the same year. I should just say majors and slams.
If I am in China, my CYGS is FO-Wimb-USO-AO. So, you see how the sequence can be arbitrary ?
If you hold all 4 majors, it is a slam.
If I am in China, my CYGS is FO-Wimb-USO-AO. So, you see how the sequence can be arbitrary ?
If you hold all 4 majors, it is a slam.