Wouldn't it be fairer if there were only 3 slam titles (one clay, one grass, one hard)?
And back when Laver twice won 4 slams in the Calendar Year there were 3 slams on grass and one slam on clay.
Either the slam distribution becomes fair by taking away one of the hardcourt slams, leaving just 3 slams, or replace one of the hardcourt slams with a 2nd clay slam (because clay is the only surface never to have hosted multiple slams).
Nah, I reckon all 4 should be played on clay just for your little Nadal boy
Oh, except Djokovic might still be able to beat him.