Is US OPEN now the worst slam?

[KingCarlitos]

RG has for a while been considered the worst slam since pretty much only clay specialists do well on it and then the insane foretold conclusion of every RG happened when Nadal arrived and the narrative became rather than who can win it but can anyone else other than Rafa win it. However recently Rafa is on the verge of retirement and RG is much more open now meanwhile the USO has significantly declined in quality.

It first began declining when Federer was dominating since he won pretty much every tournament from 04-08, however after this we got a few good finals including the Del Potro slam and also the Nadalovic trilogy, (2010, 2011, 2013). However since then the finals and competition have diminished and in recent years US Open has definitely fallen off in terms of prestige.

 

[insideguy]

RG has for a while been considered the worst slam since pretty much only clay specialists do well on it and then the insane foretold conclusion of every RG happened when Nadal arrived and the narrative became rather than who can win it but can anyone else other than Rafa win it. However recently Rafa is on the verge of retirement and RG is much more open now meanwhile the USO has significantly declined in quality.

It first began declining when Federer was dominating since he won pretty much every tournament from 04-08, however after this we got a few good finals including the Del Potro slam and also the Nadalovic trilogy, (2010, 2011, 2013). However since then the finals and competition have diminished and in recent years US Open has definitely fallen off in terms of prestige.

Sigh. Ok dude you are right. What the hell is even the purpose of this. Who thinks about crap like this?

 

[timmyy]

Terrible OP.

 

[Nappa]

It is still AO and forever will be. It adds little to ones legacy.

 

[GloW]

It is still AO and forever will be. It adds little to ones legacy.

says a nadal fan

 

[MeatTornado]

It's been the worst ever since they put that abomination of a roof over Ashe

 

[austintennis2005]

It’s funny how no one has more that 5 usopens on mens side
AO has 10
W has 8
RG 14

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

It's been the worst ever since they put that abomination of a roof over Ashe

This.
Its a bloody Sauna whenever they put that damn roof on.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Too many lies in the OP including declining because Fed won 5 in a row.

 

[Bartelby]

Everything after Wimbledon is an anti-climax.

 

[kevin qmto]

Yeah. The event that leads all others in attendance and prize money is somehow the worst. Good thread…

 

[MrFlip]

Not by fault of the tournament but because this late in the season, players are injured, burnt out and it's a bit of a free-for-all outside Djokovic

 

[LuckyR]

Depends what one means by "worst". Worst prestige? Worst prize money? Worst conditions? Most mean prestige, thus most say AO.

 

[Cortana]

If you think about greatness in slams, you think about 10 AO from Djokovic, 14 RG from Nadal and 8 Wimbledon from Federer. What about the USO? You have Connors, Sampras and Federer with 5 and Djokovic, Nadal and McEnroe with 4. Doesn‘t really feel special at all?

 

[dadadas]

in terms of prestige Wimbledon is the best but in terms of competition its the worst because most players do not spend alot of time to play on grass. Roland Garros has been called the worst slam due to having the worst infrastructure and not being as well organized as the other 3 slams but in terms of competition, clay is better than grass since Europeans grow up playing on clay. AO is the least prestigious but the competition on hard is better than on clay & grass and the tourney is organized at the beginning of the season so there is an arguement that winning AO shows that you are the best hardcourt player. As for US Open, its not as prestigious as Wimbledon but its hard court so the competition is still tougher than RG & Wimbledon but the US Open is organized near the end of the season so the top players are more worn down and do not play at their best level.

in short every slam is not perfect. How good or bad a slam is really based on your own judgement of it.

 

[bigbadboaz]

You have Connors, Sampras and Federer with 5 and Djokovic, Nadal and McEnroe with 4. Doesn‘t really feel special at all?

This actually implies that titles are harder to come by, making each individual win more special.

Also, it wasn't long ago that having 4-5 titles at ANY of the events was huge. The achievements of the Big Three, again, skew perception. Believe me, when Borg had five straight Wimbledons it was a big deal.

 

[Nappa]

Everything after Wimbledon is an anti-climax.

Roofbledon you mean

 

[thrust]

It is still AO and forever will be. It adds little to ones legacy.

ALL top players compete in ALL of the slams, therefore, they are equal.

 

[ibbi]

I really don't know that there's very much between them at this point, it just depends which style you favour/where your faves do their best.

Wimbledon is at a disadvantage given how few of the top players are really good on the surface compared to how they do at the other majors, and all the footing problems we see people having year after year make it clear as day the surface is not conducive to the modern game, but whenever you get guys who can actually go on it, the style of tennis is still so nice to watch.

Honestly I think the weather at US Open might be the biggest mark against it. The wind is not as much of an issue as it used to be, but whenever it rains and we have to see people out there drying the court because they just refuse to put covers on it is truly embarrassing.

 

[ollinger]

RG has for a while been considered the worst slam since pretty much only clay specialists do well on it and then the insane foretold conclusion of every RG happened when Nadal arrived

the USO has significantly declined in quality.

It first began declining when Federer was dominating

Bizarre thread. The OP rates tournaments based on whether anyone has had a winning streak there?

 

[jmacdaununder2]

AO has always been the least prestigious, occurring just after Christmas and interrupting the ‘off season’ in the middle of a northern hemisphere winter with a massive time difference, long flight & extreme temperature change for many to deal with.
Many great champions simply didn’t bother turning up.

 

[NoleFam]

Wimbledon is the best/greatest/king of tennis tournaments and the other 3 are all equal. Anybody saying "least prestigious" when talking about any Slam in 2024 is seriously still living in 1975. The reason they were less prestigious 40+ years ago is not because of the name of the Slam but because top players didn't play them which devalued their importance, namely AO and then less so RG.

For me personally, RG has been the worst Slam for the last 20 years because of terrible scheduling, no roof causing players to have to play 4 and 5 days in a row, and the weather. Also, it's been the worst organized of the 4. I think it has been upgraded since then but it's still my least favorite Slam.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Wimbledon is the best/greatest/king of tennis tournaments and the other 3 are all equal. Anybody saying "least prestigious" when talking about any Slam in 2024 is seriously still living in 1975. The reason they were less prestigious 40+ years ago is not because of the name of the Slam but because top players didn't play them which devalued their importance, namely AO and then RG.

For me personally, RG has been the worst Slam for the last 20 years because of terrible scheduling, no roof causing players to have to play 4 and 5 days in a row, and the weather. I think it has been upgraded since but it's still my least favorite Slam.

RG was worst because Nadal made it boring

But in general as well, I hate slowest surface and grinders

 

[NoleFam]

RG was worst because Nadal made it boring

But in general as well, I hate slowest surface and grinders

Well it's also my least favorite surface so that probably played a role in my dislike of it as well.

 

[a10best]

in terms of prestige Wimbledon is the best but in terms of competition its the worst because most players do not spend alot of time to play on grass. Roland Garros has been called the worst slam due to having the worst infrastructure and not being as well organized as the other 3 slams but in terms of competition, clay is better than grass since Europeans grow up playing on clay. AO is the least prestigious but the competition on hard is better than on clay & grass and the tourney is organized at the beginning of the season so there is an arguement that winning AO shows that you are the best hardcourt player. As for US Open, its not as prestigious as Wimbledon but its hard court so the competition is still tougher than RG & Wimbledon but the US Open is organized near the end of the season so the top players are more worn down and do not play at their best level.

in short every slam is not perfect. How good or bad a slam is really based on your own judgement of it.

Tougher? Winning on clay has proven for decades to be the hardest surface to win on for GOATs and all-time greats. Most American men are out by the 3rd round.
Clay is very challenging because it eliminates advantages for serve bots and the +1's who are less agile on the court, less strategic, and have less brains in point construction.

Simply playing more tournaments or slams on hard courts doesn't mean a player is better or more complete than a multi-slam RG or Wimby winner. Yes, there's player exceptions. Just saying in general. The US Open is usually a fast hard court but I heard players complain Ashe, Armstrong and Grandstand play at varying speeds and never hear of that about AO.

RG has always had prestige as does Wimbledon. from the backdrop of the grounds to the way people dress, It's better because it's Europe .
While at the USO, it feels like you're with your kids or buddies going to Universal Studios in shorts and ready to eat and drink.
-- Plus, Ashe stadium has some very high elevated seats that should never be sold. Prestige is earned not given.
Add in that a lot of players are hurt by this time of the year. So, yeah the USO is not the best of the slams and likely last for the GOATs. For US ATGs, they'd probably rank it as 2nd best but that was back in the 90s, not today.

 

[NoleFam]

Tougher? Winning on clay has proven for decades to be the hardest surface to win on for GOATs and all-time greats. Most American men are out by the 3rd round.
Clay is very challenging because it eliminates advantages for serve bots and the +1's who are less agile on the court, less strategic, and have less brains in point construction.

Simply playing more tournaments or slams on hard courts doesn't mean a player is better or more complete than a multi-slam RG or Wimby winner. Yes, there's player exceptions. Just saying in general. The US Open is usually a fast hard court but I heard players complain Ashe, Armstrong and Grandstand play at varying speeds and never hear of that about AO.

RG has always had prestige as does Wimbledon. from the backdrop of the grounds to the way people dress, It's better because it's Europe .
While at the USO, it feels like you're with your kids or buddies going to Universal Studios in shorts and ready to eat and drink.
-- Plus, Ashe stadium has some very high elevated seats that should never be sold. Prestige is earned not given.
Add in that a lot of players are hurt by this time of the year. So, yeah the USO is not the best of the slams and likely last for the GOATs. For US ATGs, they'd probably rank it as 2nd best but that was back in the 90s, not today.

This is false. Back in the old days, it was Wimbledon and then the USO as far as prestige goes. From the 1968-1987, the participation rate at the Slams (percentage of top players who played them) was:

AO - 32.6%
RG - 63.8%
Wimbledon - 73.9%
USO - 81.2%

So the USO had the most participation in those years, despite Wimbledon being more prestigious because of history, and the players and powers that be held it in a higher regard than AO or RG. From 1988-2023, the Slam participation rate was:

AO - 86.9%
RG - 91.2%
Wimbledon - 87.1%
USO - 91.6%

So all Slams in the last 36 years are basically close to equal as far as how top players view and play them, and make them on an even level in that aspect. However, saying the USO has less prestige than the others just isn't true because historically, it always had it so saying being in Europe has something to do with it is also incorrect.

 

[a10best]

This is false. Back in the old days, it was Wimbledon and then the USO as far as prestige goes. From the 1968-1987, the participation rate at the Slams (percentage of top players who played them) was:

AO - 32.6%
RG - 63.8%
Wimbledon - 73.9%
USO - 81.2%

So the USO had the most participation in those years, despite Wimbledon being more prestigious because of history, and the players and powers that be held it in a higher regard than AO or RG. From 1988-2023, the Slam participation rate was:

AO - 86.9%
RG - 91.2%
Wimbledon - 87.1%
USO - 91.6%

So all Slams in the last 36 years are basically close to equal as far as how top players view and play them, and make them on an even level in that aspect. However, saying the USO has less prestige than the others just isn't true because historically, it always had it so saying being in Europe has something to do with it is also incorrect.

We're talking about today. The topic of the thread is the US Open "now" the worst of the four slams. I agree it is the worst "now".

I did comment the USO was 2nd pre-2000, but now I'll revise that to likely a tie with Wimbledon in terms of prestige and being highly regarded. Maybe even No. 1 as I remember some great matches there. Since Agassi and Sampras retired, the USO has lost a lot of exciting final matches except for Fed-Delpo, Nadal-Djokovic.
Carlos and SInner are bringing some excitement back but we need another two players to make it interesting.

 

[NoleFam]

We're talking about today. The topic of the thread is the US Open "now" the worst of the four slams. I agree it is the worst "now".

I did comment the USO was 2nd pre-2000, but now I'll revise that to likely a tie with Wimbledon in terms of prestige and being highly regarded. Maybe even No. 1 as I remember some great matches there. Since Agassi and Sampras retired, the USO has lost a lot of exciting final matches except for Fed-Delpo, Nadal-Djokovic.
Carlos and SInner are bringing some excitement back but we need another two players to make it interesting.

I think I misunderstood your point then. You feel USO is the worst today as far as excitement and a tournament as a whole. Fair enough. It's not my #1 or #2 either, but I would still put it above RG.

 

[Bill Lobsalot]

No, it's the French Open on the red dirt.

 

[a10best]

I think I misunderstood your point then. You feel USO is the worst today as far as excitement and a tournament as a whole. Fair enough. It's not my #1 or #2 either, but I would still put it above RG.

I may be biased because I like clay and the challenges players have to overcome to win.
Plus, the USO (BJK) has progressed into always pushing social issues instead of the players on the court.
It's a great facility and love NYC. I actually may attend.

 

[The Guru]

USO has been the worst slam for a long time. Basically my entire life. And I say that as an American. In terms of tennis I think AO>RG>W>USO. W would've been above RG but the last 5 years RG has been trouncing W. Wimbledon as a total package is still obviously on top and I think the cool factor of RG elevates it above AO even though the tennis has typically been worse so I'd say overall W>RG>AO>USO. That being said they're all pretty close to equal in my eyes.

 

[NoleFam]

I may be biased because I like clay and the challenges players have to overcome to win.
Plus, the USO (BJK) has progressed into always pushing social issues instead of the players on the court.
It's a great facility and love NYC. I actually may attend.

Clay has always been my least favorite surface but I really hated the way Forget ran RG, which definitely made my view of RG get worse over the years. I don't put much weight into off court celebrations at Slams and really am just focusing on the tournament itself. I love NYC too and planned to go to the USO this year, but my family decided they want to fly out and visit during that time and I didn't want to tell them no. Lol.

 

[Subway Tennis]

Honestly they are all amazing. There is no “bad” major because they are far and away the best run tennis tournaments all year.

I hate to say this as an Australian but for me the AO for all the evolution it has achieved probably offers the least pure tennis experience of all the majors now.

It’s very much orientated around event-goers, seasonal tennis fans and party-goers. The party / carnival atmosphere is good but you can get that festival atmosphere anywhere in Melbourne in summer. A major should be a very special experience only occurring selectively during the year but at AO all of the sideshow and music stuff surrounding the AO site forces tennis to almost take a backseat. It’s like the organisers don’t trust the spectacle of the tennis event itself to be enough of a drawcard and the event suffers as a result for me.

The US Open and Roland Garros are the two best. I think the US Open is the event that AO modelled itself on the most because they do the fan service / party atmosphere thing as well but the US Open gets the balance much more even to the extent that the tennis never feels overshadowed. And the atmosphere in those huge main stadiums when the roof is off is something you don’t come close to experiencing at the other majors.

Roland Garros with the new developments is the most pure tennis experience of the majors now for sure. The facility upgrades are absolutely beautiful. There has been a fairly large sacrifice of green space to make it happen but experiencing the venue in person is awe inspiring. The best looking tournament site of the majors by some distance now and it’s all about the tennis in a way that Wimbledon used to be.

 

[Tano]

It’s funny how no one has more that 5 usopens on mens side
AO has 10
W has 8
RG 14

It is the most difficult Major tournament to master, the hardest Slam.

 

[soldat]

US open and AO open are the best, followed by Roland Garros, I think Wimbledon is actually the worst slam.

 

[dadadas]

Most American men are out by the 3rd round.

This is the point. Hard court does not favour one specific playstyle over the others. You can grind or servebot. A mixture of both is usually the way to win on hardcourt. On clay you have to grind.

 

[Subway Tennis]

It is the most difficult Major tournament to master, the hardest Slam.

It’s underrated in terms of how physically and mentally demanding it is. The calendar position, the changeability and extremity of the weather in NY at that time, the ferocity of the crowds….. it’s a tough, tough physical examination even by the standards of a major. I can see why even great players like Borg were driven to insanity trying to master it.

It’s truly insane how easy Fed made winning the US Open look. I still have no idea how he tore through the event so easily year after year in his run of USO titles.

 

[a10best]

This is the point. Hard court does not favour one specific playstyle over the others. You can grind or servebot. A mixture of both is usually the way to win on hardcourt. On clay you have to grind.

Nothing wrong with working the point. It shows you are mentally strong and not just some big one-hit power guy; chess is greater than checkers..
Zev, Med, Hurkacz, Djokovic and Alcaraz are still serving aces at 130+ at RG and still go deep on clay. Fed used to do the same pre-2010.
It's just not the boring grind matches it used to be with 105-110 first serves.

Today, if your game suffers considerably on clay, it means there are technical, strategic and agility issues.
Even if the USO is worst, it's not more than 5% worse than the 3rd. It could switch like that if the semis and finals become more suspenseful for both the women and men.
I'll say the women's FO finals have been more boring than the USO women's finals once Osaka took time off.

 

[ND-13]

Wimb > FO = USO > AO

The above would be the answer from tennis historians and analysts

But if you ask rabid fans it could be any random order

 

[Gizo]

I agree with comments, that the fact that no man has won more than 5 US Open (excluding the pre-open era days when it was the US National Championships) singles titles, is a positive thing, not a negative thing.

The tournament's place on the calendar is also a positive thing in its favour IMO.

Even more so nowadays due to the clearly decreased importance of the post-US Open tournaments including the YEC compared to previous eras, it feels that the players who win the US Open effectively have the ‘last word’ for the season. Any grand slam winning season is automatically a successful one, but if a player’s one grand slam title in a particular season comes at the US Open, it can feel like they’ve saved their best for last and have ended it on a high.

Historically RG, even after it moved more on a par with Wimbledon and the US Open, has still been kind of been overshadowed by Wimbledon due to the short turnaround time (until 2015 and again in 2021 of just 2 weeks) between the 2 tournaments. The extra week between the tournaments, in addition to being incredibly logical and long overdue, does help there, but does it eradicate that factor completely? I’m not sure.

And has more and more generations of players have emerged that have played so little on grass, while Wimbledon clearly towered above the other majors for a long period of time in the past, that definitely hasn't been the case in modern times IMO.

If players mess up at RG, at least Wimbledon is right around the corner. If players mess up at Wimbledon, there's still the North American hard court season (and every 4 years the Olympics) to come. If players mess up at the US Open, it might feel like a long wait major-wise until the Australian Open the following January.

Plus the US Open has typically paid out the greatest prize money round by round out of the 4 majors, though I think that the difference has decreased in recent times.

 

[nam416]

It’s funny how no one has more that 5 usopens on mens side
AO has 10
W has 8
RG 14

Don't give Djoko any ideas...

 

[Youngheart]

Good comments above. For a different perspective, what's the worst tournament during a rain delay?
I've heard that the non-major Miami is so trashy outside of the court.
USO delay? 〰️ Maybe you can find a booth selling original N.Y. cheesecake!!
RG delay? 〰️ (French Open for the non-worldly types) Maybe you can take the metro to the Louvre Museum!!
Wimbledon delay? 〰️ How about a happy pub, with fun, good cheer, and tall mugs?
AO delay? 〰️ uhhh,...Let me think. Perhaps there's an immigrant selling bowls of rice, topped with roasted lizards?
------ So Be It ⚜ ------

 

[jmacdaununder2]

 

[Sudacafan]

Of course.

 

[Sudacafan]

Terrible OP.

Yes, but the conclusion is exactly the same for other reasons.

 

[Milanez82]

Attendance wise AO is the most popular (1.1 million this year, UO had last year 975k).

Popularity wise UO averaged only a million viewers on TV in USA, women's finals peaking at 3.4 and Men's finals getting only 2.4 last year.

RG men final had in France alone 7.3 million viewers this year.

Tennis itself isn't popular in USA making it the least popular slam overall which is sad.

Its also the least popular among Big 3.
Big 3 have won AO and RG 18 times, Wimb 17 times and UO 14 times.

 

[Newballsplease872]

Still RG

But USO follows closely

The 2010s decade harmed it's reputation the most with consistent rigged draws for Rafael Parera Nadal

 

[Pheasant]

So currently for me, it's:
1. USO-- quick flight and it's the only one that I can afford to go to once every several years. Also, the time zone is perfect.
2. Wimbledon-- tennis was born on this surface. It's not #1 to me because I can't afford to go there and the time zone difference.
3. FO-- This leads the AO, only due to the time zone. I get to watch far more of these matches live.
4. AO-- Time zone puts this in last place for me. I have to record all of the importance matches, then shut off social media and my cell phone until I am caught up on the match.

If the time zone didn't matter and if my place of residence had no impact on the events, then I'd go:

1. Wimbledon
2. USO(richer history than the other 2 below it)
3. AO
4. FO

 

[Incognito]

USO is the greatest and most legendary event on HC. The most successful person on it is the HC GOAT!!