Countries with most Grand Slam titles in men's singles in the XXI century (so far)

[ActualTennisPlayer]

In most of Western Europe, hockey is definetely not mainstream. Germany is one of the exceptions, not the rule.

According to the United Nations Western Europe is: Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, France ( I exclude micro states).

Your list has field hockey listed at 3. Field hockey is popular in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium. That’s half of Western Europe.

Ice hockey is very popular in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Again half of Western Europe.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Australia has no presence in football? Dude they have played many knock out rounds in world cup and played tough against team like Italy and Argentina. What presence Spain has in Rugby and Cricket , the two most followed team sports after Football? Australia has always done well at Olympics.

No way rugby is more followed than basketball.

 

[Sport]

According to the United Nations Western Europe is: Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, France ( I exclude micro states).

Your list has field hockey listed at 3. Field hockey is popular in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium. That’s half of Western Europe.

Ice hockey is very popular in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Again half of Western Europe.

What is considered Western Europe varies according to source. The CIA does not include Germany as Western Europe, but includes UK, and a subset of Western Europe called "Southwestern Europe", which includes Spain, Portugal and Andorra. On the other hand, the United Nations do not include UK nor Southwestern Europe as Western Europe.

I'm sure in a colloquial sense, most people associate "Western Europe" with "countries in Europe part of the Western world". In this colloquial/popular sense I was refering to, ice hockey is not that popular among most countries. If you don't want to call all the countries in blue "Western Europe", fine by me, it's just semantics, then let's call it "European countries part of the Western world". In most European coutnries part of the Western civilization, ice hockey is definetely not mainstream.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

But that was back in the 20th century. OP is talking about 21st century Slam winners.

It’s not a comment on the list. People should use the quote function so you could see what’s replied to.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

Some interesting facts:

-The United States of America, the nation which has produced historically the most men’s Slam winners in singles, has not produced a Grand Slam winner in men’s singles since 2003 (that is, more than 20 years ago).

Not a surprise, when the American tennis PTB aggressively worked overtime pushing the one-dimensional, net-phobic, baseliner game championed by idiots like Nick Bollettieri with players such as Agassi. Remember, the whining of the late 90s and early 2000s in U.S. men's tennis was about how "boring" the S&V game--exemplified by Sampras--was. Hence the overblown celebration of one-dimensional Roddick. At that point, the failure of U.S. men's tennis was a guarantee and the institution has lived to regret that belief / practice. Deservedly so.

 

[JMR]

In Western and East Asian high schools it's relatively common to see ping-pong tables at the school gym. Ping-pong tables are also relatively common at houses. And almost everyone born in Europe, Australia, America or Asia has played table tennis at least once during their lifetime. Who has played a cricket match having been born outside of India and Pakistan?

Yes, a problem with these rankings is that they measure only one dimension: how many active followers does a sport have? Cricket scores well in that department for the reason you give. But I'd argue that people with a milder interest, and also people with no great current interest but at least some familiarity and/or experience with the sport, also should be considered. I think cricket would score poorly on these measures. Outside of its devoted fan base, which is admittedly large, most people don't ever think about it, have never seen a cricket match, and don't know how the sport works at all. In the U.S., American football is more popular and commercially successful than soccer, but still almost everyone has seen a soccer match, knows the basic structure of the game, and has probably played soccer as well. But something like cricket gets mostly ... crickets.

 

[NeutralFan]

Australia in soccer lost in the group stage in 2010, 2014 and 2018 and only won 1 game in those tournaments. At the 2022 World Cup they had an easy group and passed the group stage but lost in the first knockout game. Nobody considers them good.

Not sure how mainstream cricket is. I mean sure there is a huge number of players because of India and Pakistan… but in a lot of countries nobody plays it. It’s a bit like saying table tennis and badminton are mainstream because a bunch of Chinese play it.

Australia’s last two Rugby Union world cups were terrible. Also if you consider rugby union as mainstream why not also handball, ice hockey, volleyball and Winter Olympics? Australia is not good at those sports.

You forgot 2006 world cup when they played tough to Italy ? The eventual champion ?I said historically they have been Rugby union power. Rugby union is more mainstream than the sports you mentioned , also Australian has been a historical power in Hockey . In cricket there's no need to say .wher is Spain in Cricket and Rugby? They're miles behind in field hockey . I am not buying Spain being the number oj country in mainstream when they have zero representation in Cricket,Rugby union and have historically far behind Australia in filed hockey.

 

[Razer]

Decade, century and millennium always end with zeros.

Decades end with 9, not 0.

1990s is 1990-1999

199X where value of X varies from 0 to 9.

This is not about counting from 1 to 10, the world existed before 1 AD or 1 BC as well, just because western civilization was primitive to not have the year 0 doesn't means math can be violated. If you plot anything on the XY axis then there will be a 0. The significance of 0 is paramount, the entire fabric of space-time, calculations rest on 0. You remove 0 and everything gets f***ed up.

 

[ActualTennisPlayer]

What is considered Western Europe varies according to source. The CIA does not include Germany as Western Europe, but includes UK, and a subset of Western Europe called "Southwestern Europe", which includes Spain, Portugal and Andorra. On the other hand, the United Nations do not include UK nor Southwestern Europe as Western Europe.

I'm sure in a colloquial sense, most people associate "Western Europe" with "countries in Europe part of the Western world". In this colloquial/popular sense I was refering to, ice hockey is not that popular among most countries. If you don't want to call all the countries in blue "Western Europe", fine by me, it's just semantics, then let's call it "European countries part of the Western world". In most European coutnries part of the Western civilization, ice hockey is definetely not mainstream.

Thanks for clarifying what you meant by Western Europe and hockey.

You are right that in most countries of Western Europe (as per your definition) ice hockey is not that popular. However, the countries in which it’s popular in Western Europe - Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Austria, Finland and growingly Denmark have a large population for Western Europe and are even more important Economically.

Moreover, the list you originally posted refers to all hockey variants though - not just ice hockey. In most of Western Europe (as per your definition) a hockey variant is popular.
- field hockey is popular in Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, UK, Germany, Great Britain
- ice hockey is popular in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Finland and growing in Denmark.

Also note that I asked if you consider rugby union as mainstream, then why not ice hockey.
Rugby union is popular in Western Europe in arguably six nations: England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, France and Italy. So that’s quite similar to the popularity of ice hockey in Western Europe.
Then outside Western Europe ice hockey is popular in the United States, Russia, and a lot of countries of Eastern Europe. Meanwhile rugby union is popular in Argentina, New Zealand, South Africa, japan (and arguably Australia and some pacific islands though they usually follow different rugby codes). I don’t think you can say rugby union is mainstream but not ice hockey.

 

[ActualTennisPlayer]

You forgot 2006 world cup when they played tough to Italy ? The eventual champion ?I said historically they have been Rugby union power. Rugby union is more mainstream than the sports you mentioned , also Australian has been a historical power in Hockey . In cricket there's no need to say .wher is Spain in Cricket and Rugby? They're miles behind in field hockey . I am not buying Spain being the number oj country in mainstream when they have zero representation in Cricket,Rugby union and have historically far behind Australia in filed hockey.

The 2006 World Cup was ages ago and Australia didn’t even make it far. Before the 2006 World Cup they only qualified once over the roughly 80 year history.

I think it’s actually almost impossible to compare spain to Australia and declare a better country. But Sport gave a list of most popular sports, so let’s try:
1) football: Spain
2) cricket: Australia
3) hockey: Australia; though it’s closer than you think - Spain was better at the paris Olympics and Spain is 8th in the world while Australia is 6th
4) tennis: Spain
5) volleyball: both suck
6) table tennis: both suck
7) basketball: currently tie, historically spain
8) baseball: both suck
9) rugby: Australia
10) golf: Spain

So we have a tie currently; but just a few years ago it was Spain when they were better in basketball

Let’s compare Germany to Australia:
Football: Germany
Cricket: australia
Hockey: Germany
Tennis: Germany
Volleyball: Germany
Table tennis: Germany
Basketball: Germany
Baseball: both suck
Rugby: Australia
Golf: Australia

Going by that, Germany is better at sports than Australia.

(Btw on that list rugby is less mainstream than two sports I mentioned - volleyball and hockey).
(Also I’m surprised the list doesn’t have motor sports and cycling - both are mainstream I think. Spain is good in both).

 

[NeutralFan]

The 2006 World Cup was ages ago and Australia didn’t even make it far. Before the 2006 World Cup they only qualified once over the roughly 80 year history.

In any case, I never made the case that Spain is the best nation. I’m saying Australia is not the best either.

I think it’s actually quite stupid to declare a best country as it’s impossible to do. But Sport gave a lost of most popular sports, so let’s try to compare Spain to Australia:
1) football: Spain
2) cricket: Australia
3) hockey: Australia; though it’s closer than you think - Spain was better at the Olympics and Spain is 8th in the world while Australia is 6th
4) tennis: Spain
5) volleyball: both suck
6) table tennis: both suck
7) basketball: currently tie, historically spain
8) baseball: both suck
9) rugby: Australia
10) golf: Spain

So here we have a tie.

Let’s compare Germany to Australia:
Football: Germany
Cricket: australia
Hockey: Germany
Tennis: Germany
Volleyball: Germany
Table tennis: Germany
Basketball: Germany
Baseball: both suck
Rugby: Australia
Golf: Australia

Going by that, Germany is better at sports than Australia.

(Btw on that list rugby is less mainstream than two sports I mentioned volleyball and hockey).
(Also I’m surprised the list doesn’t have motor sports and cycling - both are mainstream I think. Spain is good in both).

Again I said historically!! Australia has decent representation in football and played knocked out this year and in 2006 losing barely to eventual champion. Where's Spain in Cricket and Rugby? Yeah not even in map , where's Spain in filed hockey? Miles behind.

Your comparison is outright wrong since Australia has decent to strong presence in almost all sports while Spain are nonexistent in Cricket, Rugby union. Also, in field hockey hockey Australia has been more successful in Olympics ( men) and world cup. Spain has only football and tennis over Australia ( thanks to one player while Australia has produced more multiple slam champions) . ImO even England has a better mainstream representation than Spain.

 

[ActualTennisPlayer]

Again I said historically!! Australia has decent representation in football and played knocked out this year and in 2006 losing barely to eventual champion. Where's Spain in Cricket and Rugby? Yeah not even in map , where's Spain in filed hockey? Miles behind.

Your comparison is outright wrong since Australia has decent to strong presence in almost all sports while Spain are nonexistent in Cricket, Rugby union. Also, in field hockey hockey Australia has been more successful in Olympics ( men) and world cup. Spain has only football and tennis over Australia ( thanks to one player while Australia has produced more multiple slam champions) . ImO even England has a better mainstream representation than Spain.

Let’s do historically then;
1) football: Spain
2) cricket: Australia
3) hockey: Australia
4) tennis: Spain
5) volleyball: both suck
6) table tennis: both suck
7) basketball: spain
8) baseball: both suck
9) rugby: Australia
10) golf: tie?

So Spain 3, Australia 3.

If Spain is miles behind Australia in hockey, then Australia is miles behind Spain in basketball.

True Spain is non existent in cricket. In rugby union it’s a bit more debatable. They are ranked 18th in the world. They are one of the major second tier nations in Europe after the big 6.

but even though Spain is almost non-existent in both sports; Spain is much, much better than Australia in football. And being good in football is way more valuable as it’s by far the most popular and mainstream sport.

Btw: how is Australia decent historically in soccer when they only qualified once between 1930 and 2002, and from 20006 they only qualify because it’s easy for Asian nations? Moreover, at the World Cup they almost always got their ass kicked except of two world cups 2006 and 2022. Is it because of one game in 2006 against Italy? Because you can find a ton of nations with one game like that. It’s the nature of soccer.

 

[toby55555]

It's an individual sport. Nationality doesn't play a role.

It could do if the national federation is awash with money and can support players and get more people playing, but given the woeful record of the LTA in the UK (Murray trained abroad) your argument seems to stand.

 

[KingCarlitos]

Crazy how Djokovic completely carried Serbia. España wins due to blood of the bull.

 

[weakera]

What's the numbers when you combine WTA + ATP?

 

[Gizo]

Clearly the most notable absence from the list is France, with a 41 year and counting 'drought' on the men's side. It will be interesting to see whether Fils can be the man to end that long wait.

Hosting a grand slam of course brings with it huge benefits in terms of revenue, and money to spend on tennis programmes and infrastructure. And France is traditionally one of the most passionate countries about tennis in the world. Numerous smaller tour level and even challenger / ITF events there have been very well followed there over the years. I've read articles in pretty prominent French media outlets about results in men's challenger / women's ITF events held in the country.

And there have been numerous occasions in the 21st century during which France have had among the highest number of players in the ATP 100.

Thankfully Murray ended a much longer and incredibly humiliating wait of 76 years for GB on the men's side (with a 35 year period without singles glory on both the men's and women's sides). Given the amount of money spent on tennis in GB (very few countries across the world would spend more), it was rightly brought up and seen as an embarrassment. The 28 year wait for a Davis Cup World Group victory between 1986 and 2014 was also embarrasing. On the women's side after GB's win away to France in the BJK Cup in April, I was thinking that it was probably the most impressive British victory in the competition for a whopping 43 years since a SF win against Australia in 1981, with British teams not even good enough to be in the same tier / division to face opponents like France during much of the period in-between.

And like France, again helped by the benefits that come with hosting a grand slam, all things considered tennis is followed pretty well in GB. I go every year to a challenger event (in Ilkley) that has packed and enthuasiastic crowds day after day to watch male and female players ranked outside the top 100 or in many cases outside the top 200, including for qualifiers.

 

[ActualTennisPlayer]

Clearly the most notable absence from the list is France, with a 41 year and counting 'drought' on the men's side. It will be interesting to see whether Fils can be the man to end that long wait.

Hosting a grand slam of course brings with it huge benefits in terms of revenue, and money to spend on tennis programmes and infrastructure. And France is traditionally one of the most passionate countries about tennis in the world. Numerous smaller tour level and even challenger / ITF events there have been very well followed there over the years. I've read articles in pretty prominent French media outlets about results in men's challenger / women's ITF events held in the country.

And there have been numerous occasions in the 21st century during which France have had among the highest number of players in the ATP 100.

Thankfully Murray ended a much longer and incredibly humiliating wait of 77 years for GB on the men's side (with a 35 year period without singles glory on both the men's and women's sides). Given the amount of money spent on tennis in GB (very few countries across the world would spend more), it was rightly brought up and seen as an embarrassment. The 28 year wait for a Davis Cup World Group victory between 1986 and 2014 was also embarrasing. On the women's side after GB's win away to France in the BJK Cup in April, I was thinking that it was probably the most impressive British victory in the competition for a whopping 43 years since a SF win against Australia in 1981, with British teams not even good enough to be in the same tier / division to face opponents like France during much of the period in-between.

And like France, again helped by the benefits that come with hosting a grand slam, all things considered tennis is followed pretty well in GB. I go every year to a challenger event (in Ilkley) that has packed and enthuasiastic crowds day after day to watch male and female players ranked outside the top 100 or in many cases outside the top 200, including for qualifiers.

Great points. France is doing great lately in sports - soccer, basketball, handball, volleyball and at the Olympics. They also got a massive talent in table tennis.

Does it help them or hurt them for winning a slam? Maybe hurt as some great talents might decide to play another sport and not tennis.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

This is the way most people count it, the most logical one.

And the most logical thing is to apply the same format to centuries, millennia, etc.

Finally some reason here.

 

[RS]

Ah the decade debate thing.

 

[socallefty]

It will be interesting to see whether Fils can be the man to end that long wait.

Watched Fils play two matches at IW. He has a great serve, movement and FH, but his BH and returns are not at the top 10 level yet. He has got to improve those if he is going to win Slams.

 

[GloW]

Some interesting facts:

-The United States of America, the nation which has produced historically the most men’s Slam winners in singles, has not produced a Grand Slam winner in men’s singles since 2003 (that is, more than 20 years ago).

-Despite China being the second global sports power as per the last 3 Olympics medal tables, and despite having had Grand Slam winners in women’s tennis (and Olympic Gold winner in women’s tennis), they have yet to produce a Chinese Grand Slam winner in men’s singles.

-Germany, a sports world power that has also produced tennis legends like Boris Becker, has not produced any Grand Slam winner in men’s tennis in the XXI century-

-France, a powerful nation in sports as per their Olympics displays, has also not produced any Grand Slam winner in men’s tennis since 1983.

I dont think thats germany's fault...

 

[Sudacafan]

As per the thread title, here's the list of the countries with most Grand Slam titles in men's singles in the XXI century (so far):

1. Spain: 28 Slams (22 by Nadal, 4 by Alcaraz, 1 by Ferrero, 1 by Costa).
2. Serbia: 24 Slams (24 by Djokovic).
3. Switzerland: 23 Slams (20 by Federer, 3 by Wawrinka).
4. United States: 4 Slams (2 by Agassi, 1 by Sampras, 1 by Roddick).
5. United Kingdom: 3 Slams (3 by Murray).
6-9. Australia: 2 Slams (2 by Hewitt).
6-9. Russia: 2 Slams (1 by Safin, 1 by Medvedev).
6-9. Croatia: 2 Slams (1 by Ivanisevic, 1 by Cilic).
6-9. Argentina: 2 Slams (1 by Gaudio, 1 by Del Potro).
10-13. Brazil: 1 Slam (1 by Kuerten).
10-13. Sweden: 1 Slam (1 by Johansson).
10-13 Austria. 1 Slam (1 by Thiem).
10-13. Italy: 1 Slam (1 by Sinner).

How unfair, this distribution. Slam imperialism is the evil. We must stop this now!

 

[dadadas]

Europe 85 slams (continental Europe 82, Scotland 3)
US 4 slams
South America's big two 3 slams
Australia 2 slams

Complete dominance by Europe

 

[Sport]

Italy climbs now some positions.