When did the Australian Open become a Major?

[timnz]

Hello there,

Even though the Australasian (Australia and New Zealand combined) tournament started in 1905 it is clear that it wasn't regarded as a major from 1912 to 1924 where the ILTF had said that there were 3 World Championships (Majors) - World Covered Court Championships (Indoor), World Hardcourt championships (Clay) and Wimbledon (World Grass Court Championships- Grass). In 1933 when Jack Crawford just missed by 2 sets the 'Grand Slam' (Australian, French, Wimbledon and US) - someone commented about him missing the 'Grand Slam'. Hence, 5 years later it was setup for Don Budge what tournaments would be the majors.

Hence, we know that in 1924 (because it wasn't one of the World Championships) it still wasn't regarded as a major but in 1933 it was. What happened between those 2 dates for it to be regarded as a major? In 1927 it became the Australian Championships (New Zealand was dropped - to my great sorrow as a New Zealander) - but that didn't seem significant.

I always believed that the 4 grand slam tournaments came from which countries had won the Davis Cup - but Australasia had won back in the first decade of the 20th century (Wilding, Brookes) hence if that was the reason then it should have been a major many years earlier than the 1924-1933 window.

Hence, what event turned the Australian Championship into a Major Tournament? (as we have said somewhere between 1924 and 1933).

 

[newmark401]

I think there was an awareness early on, certainly in the 1920s, that the Australasian Championships, later the Australian Championships, now the Australian Open, constituted a major tournament, especially because of the tennis tradition in Australia and New Zealand – its popularity and the quality of the players that came from there.

However, the present-day idea of a “major” is probably very different from people’s ideas of a “major” back in the 1920s, when the term “Grand Slam” hadn’t even been coined. Some people argue that the Australian tournament couldn’t be regarded as a major for a long time because it didn’t attract a lot of the top players for many years. Then again, a lot of the top players in the world, especially the men, came from Australia for decades.

What makes a tournament a “major”? Its age? The country in which it is held? The surface on which it is played? Can a tournament be a “major” even if the world’s top players don’t take part in for many years? Or even if only a few do sometimes? Why not have a “major” on every continent? Or an indoor “major”? These questions are not easy to answer because there are so many differing views. But the topic is still interesting.

 

[fireice]

Well, before, the Australian Open was played in December, as one of the last tournaments of the year. When it got moved to January, it started attracting more and more top players who wanted to play outdoors in the middle of winter.

 

[timnz]

Time of year

Well, before, the Australian Open was played in December, as one of the last tournaments of the year. When it got moved to January, it started attracting more and more top players who wanted to play outdoors in the middle of winter.

It was only played in December from Dec 1977 through to Dec 1985. But I agree that was a contributing factor to its diminished status during that period.

However, the thread was about when initially did the tournament take on 'Major' status? Obviously it had that status by 1933 otherwise it wouldn't have been included in that 'Grand Slam' statement.

 

[AndrewTas]

1924

The first Australian championships that were recognised as a major tournament on the same level as Wimbledon, the Hard Court Championships, and the US Champs was the 1924 Melbourne meeting. The ILTF recognised the tournament in a meeting in 1923 and the Australian committee changed the structure of the tournament to include seeding. This year fits in with the 1935 tournament programme cover (for those who have it on page 33 of Our Open) which has "The 12th Official Championship Tournament" written on it.

See this article on the National Library newspaper website. http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/16104993?searchTerm=Tennis

 

[timnz]

Interesting

The first Australian championships that were recognised as a major tournament on the same level as Wimbledon, the Hard Court Championships, and the US Champs was the 1924 Melbourne meeting. The ILTF recognised the tournament in a meeting in 1923 and the Australian committee changed the structure of the tournament to include seeding. This year fits in with the 1935 tournament programme cover (for those who have it on page 33 of Our Open) which has "The 12th Official Championship Tournament" written on it.

See this article on the National Library newspaper website. http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/16104993?searchTerm=Tennis

Wow that is really interesting.

What I don't understand though is that from 1912 to 1924 there were the 3 World Championships (Indoor, Grass (Wimbledon), World Hard Court (France)) - the US wasn't among them. Why would it say recognize the Australasian Championship on the same level as the US Championship when the US Championship wasn't one of the majors ie one of the three world championships? Guess it starts the whole question of when the US Championship became a major.

BTW: Thanks for this information - I hadn't seen it anywhere - so great!

 

[newmark401]

"What I don't understand though is that from 1912 to 1924 there were the 3 World Championships (Indoor, Grass (Wimbledon), World Hard Court (France)) - the US wasn't among them. Why would it say recognize the Australasian Championship on the same level as the US Championship when the US Championship wasn't one of the majors ie one of the three world championships? Guess it starts the whole question of when the US Championship became a major."

The International Lawn Tennis Federation (ILTF) met for the first time in 1913 and came up with those three world championship titles (on grass, clay and wood).The United States wasn’t a member of the ILTF at this point and didn’t recognise the three designated world championships as such, although American players were allowed to take part in them.

Ten years later, in 1923, the USA restated its resolve not to join the ILTF until it dropped the “world championships” titles. A new category of official championships was thus created for the tournaments we now know as the majors.

 

[jimbo333]

It was only played in December from Dec 1977 through to Dec 1985. But I agree that was a contributing factor to its diminished status during that period.

Interesting, I didn't know this!

So from 1977 all the way through until 1985, was the Australian Open actually the last Grand Slam tournament of tennis season?

Instead of the first GS of tennis season?

 

[timnz]

End of Year

Interesting, I didn't know this!

So from 1977 all the way through until 1985, was the Australian Open actually the last Grand Slam tournament of tennis season?

Instead of the first GS of tennis season?

Correct. That is why Borg played it only once. His thinking was I will only play the Australian if I win the US Open in September - to get the Grand Slam. But since he never won the US Open, that is why he only played the Australian Open once as a teenager.

 

[timnz]

US Championships

"What I don't understand though is that from 1912 to 1924 there were the 3 World Championships (Indoor, Grass (Wimbledon), World Hard Court (France)) - the US wasn't among them. Why would it say recognize the Australasian Championship on the same level as the US Championship when the US Championship wasn't one of the majors ie one of the three world championships? Guess it starts the whole question of when the US Championship became a major."

The International Lawn Tennis Federation (ILTF) met for the first time in 1913 and came up with those three world championship titles (on grass, clay and wood).The United States wasn’t a member of the ILTF at this point and didn’t recognise the three designated world championships as such, although American players were allowed to take part in them.

Ten years later, in 1923, the USA restated its resolve not to join the ILTF until it dropped the “world championships” titles. A new category of official championships was thus created for the tournaments we now know as the majors.

This is great stuff. (though it was 1912 not 1913 since the World Hard Court Championships started in 1912 Otto Froitzheim won it that year) Hence is it fair to say that the majors of tennis were:

1912-1924 World Covered Court Championships, World Hard Court Championships, Wimbledon

After 1924 - US Championships, Australasian Championship (changed to being Australian Championships in 1927 - darn it!! (Kiwi writing here)), French Championships, Wimbledon

So the current Grand Slam has existed since 1924 (actually 1925 because there was no open French Championships in 1924).

So now I just have to work out what were the Majors of tennis before 1912!

Interesting wonder what Bill Tilden thought of his first 4 US Championships not been recognized as a Major - 1920 to 1923. In fact should any of the US Championships or Australasian Championships be recognized as Grand Slam wins on someones Resume if they were won before 1924?

Thanks again - this is great!

 

[Tshooter]

I won't be popular for this answer.

For practical purposes, not until Pete Sampras came on to the scene and all the top players actually took it seriously.

Borg and Connors barely went down there.

 

[timnz]

I won't be popular for this answer.

For practical purposes, not until Pete Sampras came on to the scene and all the top players actually took it seriously.

Borg and Connors barely went down there.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion - but I don't think it has anything to do with Sampras' emergence. McEnroe, Lendl, Mecir, Becker, Wilander, Edberg (& Connors) all went multiple times.

I agree it wasn't of Grand Slam standard between 1972 and 1982. But 1983 and beyond it definitely was.

Anyway the point of my thread was to determine when it was given Major status. The answer appears to be 1924 was the first event with this status.

 

[gpt]

I won't be popular for this answer.

For practical purposes, not until Pete Sampras came on to the scene and all the top players actually took it seriously.

Borg and Connors barely went down there.

To quote J Mac "you cannot be serious"

 

[jimbo333]

Correct. That is why Borg played it only once. His thinking was I will only play the Australian if I win the US Open in September - to get the Grand Slam. But since he never won the US Open, that is why he only played the Australian Open once as a teenager.

Thanks for this info. I didn't know this!

 

[jimbo333]

Of course you are entitled to your opinion - but I don't think it has anything to do with Sampras' emergence. McEnroe, Lendl, Mecir, Becker, Wilander, Edberg (& Connors) all went multiple times.

I agree it wasn't of Grand Slam standard between 1972 and 1982. But 1983 and beyond it definitely was.

Anyway the point of my thread was to determine when it was given Major status. The answer appears to be 1924 was the first event with this status.

Connors first went to the Australian Open in 1974 and won it and then lost in the final in 1975. He didn't ever play there again. So Connors has the best winning % record at the Australian Open of any of the GOAT contenders

 

[NonP]

For practical purposes, not until Pete Sampras came on to the scene and all the top players actually took it seriously.

Borg and Connors barely went down there.

Not really. As timnz pointed out, the Australian Open was attracting many big names by the 1980s. Connors (and McEnroe to a smaller extent) was an exception as he was a generation or two their senior.

Now it's true that the AO didn't achieve exactly the same standing as the other majors until Sampras became Sampras, but then Agassi, Chang and Corretja are among the few top players who didn't fully commit to the event until the mid-1990s. (Sampras also skipped it twice in '91 and '92, but because of injuries.) So even by that standard your claim is questionable. What matters is the strength of the actual draw at the time, as always.

 

[newmark401]

"This is great stuff. (though it was 1912 not 1913 since the World Hard Court Championships started in 1912 Otto Froitzheim won it that year)"

The first World Hard Court Championships (in 1912) were not held under the auspices of the International Lawn Tennis Federation. They only became official in 1913.

 

[timnz]

"This is great stuff. (though it was 1912 not 1913 since the World Hard Court Championships started in 1912 Otto Froitzheim won it that year)"

The first World Hard Court Championships (in 1912) were not held under the auspices of the International Lawn Tennis Federation. They only became official in 1913.

I wonder if this is why Wilding isn't listed there for 1912. (Did he play that year, perhaps he played but didn't win).

 

[Carlo Giovanni Colussi]

I wonder if this is why Wilding isn't listed there for 1912. (Did he play that year, perhaps he played but didn't win).

Hello timnz,
Wilding played very little in 1912 :

He won the following events
Monte Carlo, Feb 12-18
Beckenham, Jun
Queen's, Jun
Wimbledon Jun-Jul
Deauville

he lost to
- U. de Martino, at the Riviera (amateur) Champs, Menton, Feb 25 - March 2 (?), 1912 in the round of 28 (1st round) w.o (injury to his hand sustained at Monte Carlo),
- André Maurice Henri Gobert, at the British (amateur) Covered Court Championships, Queen’s Club, Apr 22-29, 1912, in the challenge round 36 57 64 64 64 (in the final Wilding had beaten Ritchie 63 64 86),
- Charles Percy Dixon, at the Olympic Indoor Games, Stockholm, May 5-11, 1912 in the semis 60 46 64 64.

Therefore except some missing results we can note he played one tourney in Feb then was injured then came back in April and stopped to play in July (if we except the Deauville tourney).

Once he quit the Southern hemisphere in 1902 or 1903 (I do not remember) he only came back in the South during the summer 1906-1907 and from late 1908 to early 1910 when he definitely quit the Southern hemisphere after his successful South African tour.

Wilding played the Australasian Champs twice, in 1906 and 1909, winning each time

I think you have the Richardsons' book which details all this.

 

[timnz]

Hello timnz,
Wilding played very little in 1912 :

He won the following events
Monte Carlo, Feb 12-18
Beckenham, Jun
Queen's, Jun
Wimbledon Jun-Jul
Deauville

he lost to
- U. de Martino, at the Riviera (amateur) Champs, Menton, Feb 25 - March 2 (?), 1912 in the round of 28 (1st round) w.o (injury to his hand sustained at Monte Carlo),
- André Maurice Henri Gobert, at the British (amateur) Covered Court Championships, Queen’s Club, Apr 22-29, 1912, in the challenge round 36 57 64 64 64 (in the final Wilding had beaten Ritchie 63 64 86),
- Charles Percy Dixon, at the Olympic Indoor Games, Stockholm, May 5-11, 1912 in the semis 60 46 64 64.

Therefore except some missing results we can note he played one tourney in Feb then was injured then came back in April and stopped to play in July (if we except the Deauville tourney).

Once he quit the Southern hemisphere in 1902 or 1903 (I do not remember) he only came back in the South during the summer 1906-1907 and from late 1908 to early 1910 when he definitely quit the Southern hemisphere after his successful South African tour.

Wilding played the Australasian Champs twice, in 1906 and 1909, winning each time

I think you have the Richardsons' book which details all this.

Thanks. Don't have the book yet - just saw it

 

[bigmatt]

I believe the Ausssie Open took on "major" status when Don Budge decided in 1938 to try and win the championships of all the nations that had won the Davis Cup at that time: Australia, France, Great Britain, and the USA. He, or a writer, took the term "Grand Slam" from bridge, as I recall.
Travel was so long and hard in those days that very few of the top players went to Australia, but Budge decided to take the plunge t make what he deemed to be history.

 

[timnz]

I believe the Ausssie Open took on "major" status when Don Budge decided in 1938 to try and win the championships of all the nations that had won the Davis Cup at that time: Australia, France, Great Britain, and the USA. He, or a writer, took the term "Grand Slam" from bridge, as I recall.
Travel was so long and hard in those days that very few of the top players went to Australia, but Budge decided to take the plunge t make what he deemed to be history.

Didn't the bridge writer frame it over Crawford's nearly Grand Slam 5 years earlier?

 

[smoledman]

I think it's widely accepted that AO didn't become 'glorious' until Agassi played it in 1995.

 

[timnz]

I think it's widely accepted that AO didn't become 'glorious' until Agassi played it in 1995.

No. 1983-1987 part the way back with great players like Lendl, McEnroe, wilander, Edberg competing. 1988 full way back with move to new stadium and hardcourt. Wilander won that year, Lendl the next 2, then becker, then courier 2 years, then Sampras.

 

[Blocker]

The AO started to consistently draw the big names from 1983. Wilander came to the AO that year because he wanted to get used to the grass as Australia was to play Sweden in the DC final at the AO venue. Wilander won the 83 AO beating Lendl (Australia ended up winning the DC 2 weeks later) and Wilander won it again in 84, beating Curran. By 85 Edberg was coming down for it and he won it in 85 and 87 (86 was not held, so instead of December 86 it was played in January 87). In 1888 it moved to the new tennis centre and was growing in stature. By the early 90s even McEnroe was showing up and by 95 it was the real deal, as someone said above, it was only confirmed as a big event once Agassi showed up....in 95. And that's spot on. Agassii was a huge name at the time and he was the one player at the the time who was not playing it. So when he showed up in 95, with a shaved head, it pretty much cemented the AO as a drawcard tournament

One other thing that helped was keeping it in the same city. The AO used to move from city to city. Once it moved to Melbourne it gave it some consolidation.

 

[bluetrain4]

Time of year



It was only played in December from Dec 1977 through to Dec 1985. But I agree that was a contributing factor to its diminished status during that period.

However, the thread was about when initially did the tournament take on 'Major' status? Obviously it had that status by 1933 otherwise it wouldn't have been included in that 'Grand Slam' statement.

Yes. Even if it at times was a "diminished" major, it was still undoubtedly a major, such as when it was held in December.

 

[jean pierre]

Yes. Even if it at times was a "diminished" major, it was still undoubtedly a major, such as when it was held in December.[

Yes, it was a major because it's history. And it's 2 weeks of competition + 5 sets matches.

 

[jean pierre]

Vilas - Marks 78 was a fantastic final !