Youngest grand slam champion (Del Potro) being 25 - ever happened before?
- Thread starter Locotus
- Start date
Goosehead
Legend
you overlooked being accurate for a bloody start..
del potro is 24yrs old not 25, ..this is a thread for after sept 23rd when jmdp is 25.
Last edited:
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
Lucas Pouille
PrinceMoron
Legend
Donald Young.
Very Young, and very Donald too.
Very Young, and very Donald too.
grandmaster
Rookie
op Is Saying That Del Potro Is The Youngest Grand Slam Champion Alive
Op Is Correct
Op Is Correct
Mainad
Bionic Poster
I'm guessing the OP means that Del Potro is currently the youngest active player to have won a Slam. Not sure what he means by has it 'ever happened before' though!
austintennis2005
Professional
he means that at this time delpo at 24 is the youngest slam champ (is this the only time we have had the youngest slam champ that old before among active players)
you overlooked being accurate for a bloody start..
del potro is 24yrs old not 25, ..this is a thread for after sept 23rd when jmdp is 25.
That's why the OP added the qualification "or at least it will be if one of the usual suspects wins USO this year" (seeing as the USO is the only slam before September 23). Considering it's very unlikely we're going to see a new winner at the USO, this thread doesn't seem too premature.
He's asking whether it's ever happened that, at any given time, there was nobody under the age of 25 who could call themselves a Slam winner. I'm also somewhat curious about this and suspect it would be a first. This is just another way of reflecting how a handful of well-established players have completely swept every Slam over the past several years and precluded the emergence of any new/younger Slam winner.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
torpantennis
Legend
But is he 20 or 21 NOW?
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
It's not about the youngest GS champ (we have Becker, Wilander, Chang who were 17 etc in that case)
It's about the youngest player on tour today to have won a GS, which is Delpo. And he is old!
The other slam winners currently playing, Nadal, Fed, Djoko and Murray are all older.
It's about the youngest player on tour today to have won a GS, which is Delpo. And he is old!
The other slam winners currently playing, Nadal, Fed, Djoko and Murray are all older.
not_federer
Rookie
I can't believe how dumb some of the posters in this thread are to not understand the question. Or maybe I can because it really explains the idiocy in this forum.
OP is surprised to learn that the youngest active slam champion is 24, which is very old in tennis terms. Yes, we are all aware that others have won slams at a younger age - that is the point of this thread you fools. I too wonder if we will ever have another teen slam champ, and when the younger generation will step up.
OP is surprised to learn that the youngest active slam champion is 24, which is very old in tennis terms. Yes, we are all aware that others have won slams at a younger age - that is the point of this thread you fools. I too wonder if we will ever have another teen slam champ, and when the younger generation will step up.
Desertman
Hall of Fame
I just picked a year at random...... end of 1972
Ilie Nastase: 26
Stan Smith: 26
Andres Gimeno: 35
Ken Rosewall: 38
John Newcombe: 28
Jan Kodes: 26
Arthur Ashe: 29
Rod Laver: 34
William Bowery: 29
Roy Emerson: 36
Manuel Santana: 34
Fred Stolle: 34
Tony Roach: 27
Chuck McKinley: 31
That's going back 10 years so I doubt if any 15 year olds won a GS before that!
Ilie Nastase: 26
Stan Smith: 26
Andres Gimeno: 35
Ken Rosewall: 38
John Newcombe: 28
Jan Kodes: 26
Arthur Ashe: 29
Rod Laver: 34
William Bowery: 29
Roy Emerson: 36
Manuel Santana: 34
Fred Stolle: 34
Tony Roach: 27
Chuck McKinley: 31
That's going back 10 years so I doubt if any 15 year olds won a GS before that!
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
Talk Tennis Guru
to get on a more serious note, it 's just logical as we noticed players winning big tournaments are older than before
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
The slam winners in 1973 were Newcombe, Nastase and Kodes, so by the end of 1973, there would be no-one under the age of 27 who'd won a slam. :shock:
Sometimes I think posters just want to point out that one of their favourites achieved something great, so before they've finished reading a question, they seize their moment.
Also, as soon as someone reads something they think is stupid. They just assume it's stupid. They don't stop to think if there is an alternative interpretation which would be more meaningful.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
As I've mentioned before, Janowicz is the only man born in the 1990s who has reached a slam semi-final. Considering that now includes everyone aged up to 23, that's pretty shocking.
MonkeyBoy
Hall of Fame
I think he means that there has never been an older youngest active GS champion.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Shocking indeed. Tennis needs help.
Lukhas
Legend
En même temps, le titre/premier post du sujet sont mal fichus.../The thread's title/OP are vague...Yeah i was thinking the same(and my native language is not even english
)
You'd think it's about "The youngest slam champion on Tour", but the OP mentions Moya... You could think it's about "The youngest slam champion ever", but then JMDP is out of question since some players won a slam while being much younger. You could also think it's about "The youngest USO champion" since the OP mentions Moya and Del Potro but while the USO is being mentioned in the OP, it isn't specifically mentioned in the title of the thread. But I guess we're talking about either Sampras or Chang.
And of course, when the question needs clarification, the OP is nowhere to be found.
Last edited:
newpball
Legend
It is kind of peculiar isn't it?
I hope we will not find out 10 years from now that that was due to the fact that the top players had access to certain 'doctors' the young players could not afford.
Crisstti
Legend
Lol, there's a lot on this forum that'd make you think how dumb many posters are, but not in this thread. The question really wasn't so clear. So get off your high horse for understanding something others might have missed...
Last edited:
Me neither.
Desertman
Hall of Fame
Then all of a sudden teenagers started winning (Borg etc.)
Beast of Majorca
New User
What? The question isn't confusing in the slightest if you actually read it carefully. Not sure how the mention of Moya gets rid of your first guess considering the context he's used in, I've literally no idea how anyone could think this thread is about the youngest slam champion ever if they read the title, and the USO idea isn't even related to the topic.
There's no excusing the poor reading comprehension in this thread. 'Youngest grand slam champion being 25 - ever happened before?' very obviously translates to 'Has it ever happened before where the youngest grand slam champion on tour was 25?' That isn't hard to understand at all.
OT, it basically just goes to show you how overachieving this generation is and how underachieving the younger generation is. I wouldn't be surprised if the same crop of players remains in the top ten for another few years until they're around 30. Djokovic and Murray could very well be consistent slam winners in their thirties if the younger crop's results right now are anything to go by.
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
You are full or it -- or just full of yourself. The OP's intent was not clear at all.
It's mostly non English posters who understood him. Maybe that sentence construction is how they speak translated literally so the syntax isn't so confusing and full of different possibilities to them.
It's very bad, unclear English though. If you got that from reading it the first time, then (paradoxically) your English probably needs work .
Crisstti
Legend
Guess my English is fine then, lol, didn't get it at all either.
+1
Indeed. The questionmark suggests .... a question, not a statement. Throughly clearified by "Did I overlook someone?"
I mentioned USO because I assume no youngster will win that this year, making Del Potro 25 and still youngest champ - active or not.
Unfortunatly I don't camp this forum. I still appreciate all contribution from those who do though.
Pure randomness....
Still. If noone younger than Del Potro wins a slam until the end of 2015, which isn't that unlikely, we'll have a new record!
Marty Cintron
Semi-Pro
I understand the question of this thread but have no answer.
m2nk2
Hall of Fame
But is it because the youngsters are too bad or that the top 4 are too good?
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
The top 4 are very strong and consistent, yes.
But it's not like positions 5-10 in the world are filled with youngsters who can't quite beat the top 4 but are ahead of everyone else. The guys reaching slam finals and semis outside the top 4 are the likes of Ferrer (aged 31), Tsonga (aged 27?), Berdych (aged 27?) and Delpo (about to turn 25). Even at this year's Wimbledon, where the draw fell apart, you had veterans like Verdasco and Kubot making the QF's, rather than youngsters.
Janowicz has reached one slam semi, his first at the age of almost 23. Tomic made one slam QF as a teenager. That's it for the post-1990 generation.
As I said, shocking.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
nice thread.
probably the open era 'record' in that matter, right before the crowning of connors and borg ?
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
^ Yes, Connors and Borg were the first 'modern' champions in 1974. This was when I consider the modern era to have begun (rather than 1968 ).
Cormorant
Professional
Del Potro is not twenty-five. If Janowicz or Tomic win in New York, we'll still have a current pro below that age.
And since slams went professional, we have had a situation where the youngest winner of a major was 25. At the end of 1968, Arthur Ashe was in his mid-twenties with a USO title to his name. No twentysomething players got a look in come 1969 as Laver hoovered up all the big events. There may have been some formerly amateur players who also held majors in Laver's era-from pre 1968-but we can exclude these because of the different circumstances.
When you get to the 1970 season, there's Jan Kodes-at 24-who becomes the youngest slam winner in the game. JMDP's the same age now, and he won his title much earlier in his career than the Czech did. The same situation recurs in 1971, only Stan Smith is the twenty-four-year-old slam chmapion and he turned twenty-five at the end of that season.
Borg changes everything in 1974 by winning at eighteen.
And since slams went professional, we have had a situation where the youngest winner of a major was 25. At the end of 1968, Arthur Ashe was in his mid-twenties with a USO title to his name. No twentysomething players got a look in come 1969 as Laver hoovered up all the big events. There may have been some formerly amateur players who also held majors in Laver's era-from pre 1968-but we can exclude these because of the different circumstances.
When you get to the 1970 season, there's Jan Kodes-at 24-who becomes the youngest slam winner in the game. JMDP's the same age now, and he won his title much earlier in his career than the Czech did. The same situation recurs in 1971, only Stan Smith is the twenty-four-year-old slam chmapion and he turned twenty-five at the end of that season.
Borg changes everything in 1974 by winning at eighteen.
Last edited:
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
Great insight, BH. Ironic that those who have the best command of the English language were most baffled by the intent of the question. Judging by the OP's response, he still does not acknowledge that his poorly constructed query created confusion.
smoledman
G.O.A.T.
Yes indeed Borg changed the perception of the game. Suddenly people expected teenagers to win grand slams. Of course the next one to do it would be Wilander in 1982, than Becker in '85, Chang in '89, Sampras in '90, Nadal in '05.
So when you consider only 6 men have won grand slams as teens in the 45 year old Open Era it's not the norm!
So when you consider only 6 men have won grand slams as teens in the 45 year old Open Era it's not the norm!
Similar threads
