John Newcombe 1965 mixed doubles shared win

[beernutz]

John Newcombe's wikipedia page says

• Overall, he won 26 Grand Slam titles in singles, doubles, and mixed doubles (27 if his 1965 mixed doubles shared win is added).

What is the story behind the 1965 mixed doubles shared win? I googled and couldn't find more information on that. Is it only being parenthetically mentioned because it was pre-open era? That doesn't seem to make sense though as two of his singles titles were also pre-open era.

 

[treblings]

The 1965 Australian mixed final was obviously shared not played. I haven‘t found out so far, why not.

 

[treblings]

Newk played with Margaret Court, and the 65 Australian mixed appears on her list of majors won.
Their opponents in the final were Robyn Ebbern and Owen Davidson

 

[SkeeterSCU]

In response to the question about the number of Slam titles Newk holds, Newk told the story a number of years ago, at his Tennis Fantasy Camp with The Legends (with Owen Davidson looking on with a smile):

The 1965 Australian Mixed Final was rained out, so Newk and Margaret Court had to share the title with Davo and Robyn Ebbern.

Newk then goes on to say, with a HUGE grin, that his partner was Margaret Court, while Davo was teaming with Robyn Ebbern --

" Now who do you think would have won that match?"

 

[jaggy]

Court had to attend a stoning

 

[PDJ]

Court had to attend a stoning

Roared with laughter!

 

[Enceladus]

Shared title is nonsense. There can not be two winners in tennis. The final ACh 1965 is not finished.

 

[PDJ]

Shared title is nonsense. There can not be two winners in tennis. The final ACh 1965 is not finished.

I think every doubles tournament involves 2 winners. .

 

[Phoenix1983]

Shared title is nonsense. There can not be two winners in tennis. The final ACh 1965 is not finished.

True - we should get the four of them to replay it next year (I checked, and all four are alive).

 

[Enceladus]

I think every doubles tournament involves 2 winners. .

Are you stuffy? Of course, the doubles play four players and two of them will win. The point of my comment is that they can not win two singles players or two doubles couples.
I claim that the shared title of Newcombe and Court is just for Australians to artificially improve the biography of both of their legends.
Other tournaments also had an unfinished final. Maybe Rotterdam 1984 Lendl-Connors. None of the shared title is added to one.

 

[PDJ]

Are you stuffy? Of course, the doubles play four players and two of them will win. The point of my comment is that they can not win two singles players or two doubles couples.
I claim that the shared title of Newcombe and Court is just for Australians to artificially improve the biography of both of their legends.
Other tournaments also had an unfinished final. Maybe Rotterdam 1984 Lendl-Connors. None of the shared title is added to one.

Yes, I'm terribly stuffy.
Now where is that parlour maid with my pipe and slippers.....

And The Times of London, one needs to check on The Empire.....

Ps. There are many examples of shared trophies in tennis.