Question - carrer Grand Slam

Surfie

New User
If a player wins FO, Wim, USO and AO in a row in that order, meaning the first three in the same year and the AO in the following year.

Is this still considered to be a carrer Slam ?

Thanks
 

McLovin

Legend
I think you are mixing up two terms.

A Grand Slam refers to a player winning all 4 Major tournaments in the same calendar year (e.g. Laver, Graf).

A Career Slam refers to a player winning all 4 Major tournaments over the course of their career (e.g., Agassi).

The one case you give (FO, Wimb, US, AO) was done by Serena a few years ago (2002 - 2003). There was much discussion as to whether that counted as a Grand Slam. The consensus was no.
 

deltox

Hall of Fame
If a player wins FO, Wim, USO and AO in a row in that order, meaning the first three in the same year and the AO in the following year.

Is this still considered to be a carrer Slam ?

Thanks
grand slam + all 4 in a row in the SAME calendar year. no matter how bad serena wishes otherwise.

career slam = all 4 in your career in no particular order.
 

Gen

Banned
"A singles player or doubles team that wins all four Grand Slam tournaments in the same year is said to have achieved the Grand Slam or a Calendar Year Grand Slam.

If the player or team wins all four consecutively, but not in the same calendar year, it is called a Non-Calendar Year Grand Slam.

If a player wins all four at some point in his or her career, even if not consecutively, it is called a Career Grand Slam.

Winning three of the four tournaments is called a Small Slam.

If a player wins all the four majors and a gold medal in tennis at the Summer Olympics in the same calendar year, then its known as the Golden Slam."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(tennis)
 
I think you are mixing up two terms.

A Grand Slam refers to a player winning all 4 Major tournaments in the same calendar year (e.g. Laver, Graf).

A Career Slam refers to a player winning all 4 Major tournaments over the course of their career (e.g., Agassi).

The one case you give (FO, Wimb, US, AO) was done by Serena a few years ago (2002 - 2003). There was much discussion as to whether that counted as a Grand Slam. The consensus was no.
Hey thanks. Thats clear.
 

Cyan

Hall of Fame
If a player wins FO, Wim, USO and AO in a row in that order, meaning the first three in the same year and the AO in the following year.

Is this still considered to be a carrer Slam ?

Thanks
Career Slam yes. CYGS no.
 

cknobman

Legend
Well, do TW posters hold more merit for having a Calendar Slam over someone who may hold the title for all 4 grand slams but one of them (AO or USO) was in a different year?

I personally dont feel there is that big of a difference myself. Technically your holding all of the grand slam titles at the same time whether or not you won them all in the same calendar year. Doing that is every bit as hard as a calendar slam, no difference whatsoever.

Good example could be Murray. He went out at the AO semis this year but lets say he turns on fire and wins all 3 remaining slams this year and then the AO next year.
 

Warriorroger

Hall of Fame
Well, do TW posters hold more merit for having a Calendar Slam over someone who may hold the title for all 4 grand slams but one of them (AO or USO) was in a different year?

I personally dont feel there is that big of a difference myself. Technically your holding all of the grand slam titles at the same time whether or not you won them all in the same calendar year. Doing that is every bit as hard as a calendar slam, no difference whatsoever.

Good example could be Murray. He went out at the AO semis this year but lets say he turns on fire and wins all 3 remaining slams this year and then the AO next year.
Since only 5 people accomplished the Grand Slam, I certainly hold the Grand Slam in higher esteem than the career slam, which is also a great accomplishment.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
A career slam with consecutive slams should be ranked higher than a career slam achieved over several years IMO.
 
D

Deleted member 21996

Guest
Well, do TW posters hold more merit for having a Calendar Slam over someone who may hold the title for all 4 grand slams but one of them (AO or USO) was in a different year?

I personally dont feel there is that big of a difference myself. Technically your holding all of the grand slam titles at the same time whether or not you won them all in the same calendar year. Doing that is every bit as hard as a calendar slam, no difference whatsoever.

Good example could be Murray. He went out at the AO semis this year but lets say he turns on fire and wins all 3 remaining slams this year and then the AO next year.
in a way you are correct. the 31st december is a date used commonly for the Civil Year (gregorian calendar who replaced the julian year and is comonly accepted as the international civil year), whereas the Liturgical year (for the catholics) ends in a diferent date. Orthodox church countries still use a modified julian calendar (afaik).. so the date is just symbolic for most countries and for a certain standardization of time. but as far as i know, taking them (all 4 slams) in a row within 2 years span is just as important as in the same civil year...

but this is immo
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
grand slam + all 4 in a row in the SAME calendar year. no matter how bad serena wishes otherwise.

career slam = all 4 in your career in no particular order.
It wasn't Serena who was pushing the Grand Slam idea after she won 4 in a row. It was started the by the usual commentators (Carillo, PMac) who quickly moved away from that idea and just dubbed it the "Serena Slam".

I think Navratilova also won 4 in a row, but not in the same calendar year.
 

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
the ITF did officially recognize Martina's 4 straight majors from '83 to '84 (she won '83 W, '83 US, '83 AO(it was held in Dec back then), '84 FO) as being a Grand Slam. They even gave her a bonus check & trophy for the feat.

I was just watching a Wilander match from '85 W, in which Dan Maskell says that Wilander 'has won the 1st 2 legs of the Grand Slam' even though he really just won the AO from Dec '84 & the FO of that year. So there has been some debate over the definition of 'Grand Slam' in the past.
 
Last edited:

krosero

Legend
I was just watching a Wilander match from '85 W, in which Dan Maskell says that Wilander 'has won the 1st 2 legs of the Grand Slam' even though he really just won the AO from Dec '84 & the FO of that year. So there has been some debate over the definition of 'Grand Slam' in the past.
Most interesting, thanks for that.
 

egn

Hall of Fame
It wasn't Serena who was pushing the Grand Slam idea after she won 4 in a row. It was started the by the usual commentators (Carillo, PMac) who quickly moved away from that idea and just dubbed it the "Serena Slam".

I think Navratilova also won 4 in a row, but not in the same calendar year.
Yes Navratilova did she won 6 actually in a row.
 

clayman2000

Hall of Fame
it is true that a Grand Slam must be in a calendar year, however, if one wins 4 straight majors etc Serena, Tiger in golf.....it is equally impressive
 

saram

Legend
There are three slams...

Career Slam (in your playing career)
Calendar Slam (saying you won the FO and ended with the AO consecutively)
Grand Slam (Starting with AO and ending with USO)
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
Hope this clears up the confusion :)

it is true that a Grand Slam must be in a calendar year, however, if one wins 4 straight majors etc Serena, Tiger in golf.....it is equally impressive
A Grand Slam is holding all 4 majors titles concurrently within the same calendar year (Steffi)

A Calendar Year Grand Slam is the same as a Grand Slam (Steffi)

A Non-Calendar Year Grand Slam is a Grand Slam but in 2 separate but consecutive calendar years (Steffi, Serena)

A Calendar Year Golden Slam (or just Golden Slam) is a calendar year GS + an Olympic gold medal - all in the same calendar year (Steffi)

A Non-Calendar Year Golden Slam is any GS + an Olympic gold medal - in consecutive years (possibly Rafa in 2009)

A Career Golden Slam is holding each major title over the course of a tennis career + an Olympic gold medal (Andre)

A Career Slam is holding each title, non-consecutively, over the course of a tennis career (Andre)

A Small Slam is holding 3 of the 4 majors titles either consecutively or within a career (Roger, Rafa)

- - - - -

IMO, what Steffi accomplished in 1988 should be termed a Golden Grand Slam... not simply a Golden Slam (which implies a career slam with an Olympic gold medal)

What Rafa may accomplish should be termed a non-calendar year Golden Grand Slam or a Career Golden Grand Slam (assuming he doesn't win a GS in 2009 but does in 2010, for example).


Hope this clears it all up :lol:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(tennis)
 
Last edited:

Bud

Bionic Poster
There are three slams...

Career Slam (in your playing career)
Calendar Slam (saying you won the FO and ended with the AO consecutively)
Grand Slam (Starting with AO and ending with USO)
No, a Calendar Slam is within the same year.
 
Top