Take Nadal out of the equation on French Open winners. You'd have Borg as the one who has win the most tittles, with 6 of them. Now, take Federer out of Wimbledon winners. Well, you'd still get Sampras with 7 and Borg with 5 tittles over there. So, why not as many people have won RG before Nadal?
Wilander believes that RG is the most difficult major to win
- Thread starter Sorry_to_tell_you_mate
- Start date
Take Nadal out of the equation on French Open winners. You'd have Borg as the one who has win the most tittles, with 6 of them. Now, take Federer out of Wimbledon winners. Well, you'd still get Sampras with 7 and Borg with 5 tittles over there. So, why not as many people have won RG before Nadal?
Mainad
Bionic Poster
There are actually more than twice as many 1 time Slam winners at RG in the open era (Gimeno, Panatta, Noah, Chang, Gomez, Muster, Moya, Costa, Ferrero, Gaudio) than at any other Slam.
Same for the women (Barker, Jausovec, Ruzici, Majoli, Myskina, Ivanovic, Schiavone, Ostapenko, Halep, Barty).
Subway Tennis
G.O.A.T.
Hey, he's not selfish. He's gifted one to Fed and to Novak each, and said he'll give one to Thiem now
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Total coincidence that that was Wilander's must successful Slam.
If it is the easiest why do they have only 1 French Open, with so many finals? Something's not right here ...
It's simple: what is difficult for someone is easy for someone else
Exactly. That was my point. Since winners are so spread, it can be said that it is quite an accomplishment to win over there several times.
Anyway, I wouldn't say it is easier or not. That just depends on the player.
Pheasant
Legend
Wilander is such an idiot. Wilander played in 10 Wimbledons and never once made it to a semi. He was bounced before the quarters 7 times, which includes 6 straight.
Why would he call RG the toughest when he was shredded at Wimbledon? If Sampras made that statement, then I would get it. It 100% depends on the player.
Wilander is the GOAT troller. If parents want to teach their young kids not to ever use drugs, then all they have to do is have them listen to Wilander’s idiotic remarks for 5 minutes. That’ll keep those kids drug free for life.
Why would he call RG the toughest when he was shredded at Wimbledon? If Sampras made that statement, then I would get it. It 100% depends on the player.
Wilander is the GOAT troller. If parents want to teach their young kids not to ever use drugs, then all they have to do is have them listen to Wilander’s idiotic remarks for 5 minutes. That’ll keep those kids drug free for life.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
More players seem to have a chance at winning RG than at the other Slams (prior to Nadal for the men anyway). That was my point.
DerekNoleFam1
Hall of Fame
90% of the tour grew up on clay?
A quick check of the Top 100 shows 25 from outside of continental Europe or South America, where clay is the mainstay.
Clay courts are very rare down here, as they are in Asia and North America.
And places like Russia, do they grow up on clay?
On the OP the French is no doubt very hard to win, and the big server or big hitters are usually not very successful. It does take a lot more practice on point construction, but that isn't always the only factor in winning a Major.
A quick check of the Top 100 shows 25 from outside of continental Europe or South America, where clay is the mainstay.
Clay courts are very rare down here, as they are in Asia and North America.
And places like Russia, do they grow up on clay?
On the OP the French is no doubt very hard to win, and the big server or big hitters are usually not very successful. It does take a lot more practice on point construction, but that isn't always the only factor in winning a Major.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Total bias here.
Wilander never made it past the Quarters at Wimbledon. Don't listen to Wilander or Agassi (loved him as a player though).
Wilander never made it past the Quarters at Wimbledon. Don't listen to Wilander or Agassi (loved him as a player though).
Ivanisevic was no fluke, he was a great grass court player. It is a surprise that he only managed to win wimbledon one time.
Roddick was also no fluke, he was the best player in the hardcourt summer season in 2003.
guitarra
Professional
Not sure if true but read the opinions the Australian Open grass played much slower compared to Wimbledon grass at that time.
nochweiterroger
Rookie
Wilander believes RG is the most difficult slam because he won it - 3 times, I believe?
Sorry_to_tell_you_mate
Professional
It could also be argued that on grass players can rely more on their serves and win a match even if on that particular day they are not feeling physically well, which wouldn't be possible on clay.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
So epic, so true, so crispy.
Purplemonster
Hall of Fame
Funny though how on clay you can play every shot in the book which requires talent.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Reflex and serve for instance are not that critical
Enga
Hall of Fame
Its got more to do with tennis culture than the surface. People have focused way more at trying to win grass, and now that the tour is mostly hardcourt, that is the focus as well. Very few actually focus on clay, and those that fully design their game for clay get the best results, whilst suffering for the rest of the year. Thiem and Nadal are clay specialists. Even when on hardcourt, they still hit the ball as if it were a clay court.
Powderwombat
Semi-Pro
Because you can't just fluke a win. To win the French you have to be a physical beast and have an allround game, you cannot be slow and you can't rely on your serve, you have to generate more power for yourself. Nadal is virtually the perfect clay court player, hence he has only lost the FO twice. It's not the hardest to win for Nadal...Mats is talking in generalities. Not sure why people saying if Wimbledon has more upsets that means it's harder...surely that means it's easier because you don't necessarily have to be a "better player".
No idea why everyone is assuming Mats is meaning for Nadal it's the easiest surface...he's talking about the average player. So because it's the least competitive surface is the EXACT REASON it's the toughest to win. How is it easy when Nadal is basically a lock to win it? Makes no sense. People are saying that beating Nadal at the French is not only the toughest task in tennis, but in all sports. Yea a real easy tournament LMFAO.
mightyrick
Legend
Dude. Sampras isn't my boy. I don't have a boy. And by the way, Rafael freaking Nadal, a homegrown dirt-court specialist, beat your boy twice at his palace. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
Yep. The surface lends itself to more players being more offensive. i.e. it's more difficult to win since more players in the field can hurt you on their day. Points are shorter so there's fewer avenues to claw your way back into matches.
Yep. Fewer players can usurp the top clay court players. i.e. it's much easier for the top players to win there.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
All of this.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
You might have noticed that the link to the item you read was blocked here. That's because that site is nothing more than a tennis-related spam farm. Their articles are just patchworks of disparate quotes found elsewhere made to look more interesting. The main writer, Luigi Gatto, writes at the level of a 10 year old. No doubt he wrote the item you tried to link to.
Enceladus
Legend
I don't believe that any of the four GS tournaments are generally the most difficult, for part of the tennis players the RG is the hardest, for another part Wimbledon and for some US Open or Australian Open. It depends on, how much the tennis player suits or doesn't suits the conditions of a particular tournament. E.g. for Nadal is RG with 12 titles the least difficult GS tournament, while AO is his most difficult GS tournament, where he has only one title. Or for Borg was US Open the most difficult GS tournament, which never won.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
...said the man who three RG titles.
Not looking to boost his legacy or anything eh?
Not looking to boost his legacy or anything eh?
Similar threads
