History worth talking about? - MensTennisForums.com

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 12:02 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: TV Box on Banhofstrasse (Zurich)
Posts: 1,107
                     
History worth talking about?

Apparently, if Murray wins Australian Open he will be the first player to follow up with winning AO after winning its maiden Slam at the US Open. Ok, once you comprehend what it actually that I'm trying to say (took me a few minutes), could you explain the significance of this achievement? I was watching ES and the commentators kept talking about it (especially, G.Rusedski).

Thanks for your time!
Rosa Luxembourg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 12:18 AM
Banned!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sen'jin Village
Age: 32
Posts: 18,509
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

After winning your first slam, winning second one straight away is almost impossible. Nadal, arguably the greatest player of all time, couldn't do it, so I don't see Murray doing it.
Topspindoctor is offline  
post #3 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 12:28 AM
Registered User
 
Fujee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,674
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Definitely worth talking about!

Eufemiano Fuentes

“I worked with cyclists but also footballers, boxers, tennis players and athletes,”


For Posterity

Quote:
Originally Posted by Certinfy View Post
I honestly don't think Brown has much of a chance at all, think he might get a set at best though.
Fujee is offline  
post #4 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 01:22 AM
Registered User
 
Roy Emerson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,769
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Connors did it in 1974. He didn't play the FO from 1974-1978, so he won his first 3 slams back to back. AO, Wimbledon, USO, all in 1974. The next three slams he entered, he lost in the finals in 1975.
Roy Emerson is offline  
post #5 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 01:56 AM
Registered User
 
arod3425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 668
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

The media hype on these "momentous" milestone achievements is mostly questionable. There are so many historical distinctions that exist in tennis, that sometimes I feel that their abundance makes more "worthy" distinctions less appreciated.

That being said, if Andy does win the AO, it would be a big deal in my opinion, especially considering his troubles winning one.

B-Nard
Nole
Borna
Kei
arod3425 is offline  
post #6 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 02:25 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,041
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Just to confirm what you mean – so the player must win the USO as their first major then win the following Australian Open as their second major? Is this really a historical moment if it happens? It seems rather arbitrary. It's like saying a player wins the French Open as their third major then win the Australian Open as their fifth but only if they lose Wimbledon in between.
stewietennis is offline  
post #7 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 02:30 AM
Lurrrkin'
 
Sham Kay Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 16,472
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stewietennis View Post
Just to confirm what you mean – so the player must win the USO as their first major then win the following Australian Open as their second major? Is this really a historical moment if it happens? It seems rather arbitrary. It's like saying a player wins the French Open as their third major then win the Australian Open as their fifth but only if they lose Wimbledon in between.
No, any slam.

So for example Fed won Wimbly 2003 as his first slam, but didn't go on to win the next slam, USO 2003. So he failed in ever gaining this monumental achievement.
Sham Kay Adams is offline  
post #8 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 02:49 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,041
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

^ Ok, so the phrasing could have been reworded to say – a player's maiden slam is immediately followed by winning the next slam?
stewietennis is offline  
post #9 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 02:53 AM
Registered User
 
bry17may's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Age: 22
Posts: 15,802
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Here is a list about this http://www.tennis28.com/slams/nextsl...n_summary.html
bry17may is online now  
post #10 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 02:56 AM
Registered User
 
fluffyyelloballz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London
Age: 38
Posts: 691
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Of all the possible consecutive first and second slam combos Murray has the easiest seeing as the US and Australian Opens are both on 'hard' and there is the off season to get some rest and prepare.
Murray also has the advantage of being the tenth oldest Major winner in the Open era and thus a lot of experience already at the Australian Open with two final appearances. It is more difficult as a 19 or 20 year old to follow up on an achievement like winning a slam.
It would be historic in the sense it is rare but how noteworthy it is is debatable.

www.thetennisreview.com
Roland Garros Final Preview
fluffyyelloballz is offline  
post #11 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 03:00 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,041
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

All Time – Winning their first and second majors consecutively:
1879/1880 John Hartley – Wimbledon is the only tournament
1920 Bill Tilden – Wimbledon and US Open
1925 Rene Lacoste – French Open and Wimbledon
1933/1934 Fred Perry – US Open and Australian Open
1937 Don Budge – Wimbledon and US Open
1950 Budge Patty – French Open and Wimbledon
1953 Ken Rosewall – Australian Open and French Open
1956 Lew Hoad – Australian Open and French Open
1967 John Newcombe – Wimbledon and US Open
Open Era – none
stewietennis is offline  
post #12 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 03:03 AM
Lurrrkin'
 
Sham Kay Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 16,472
                     
Re: History worth talking about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bry17may View Post
So Nastase and Connors won their next slam after their maiden slam, but they skipped a slam in between. Nobody even made the Final on the very next slam. Djokovic with his Semi did better than Fed and Nadal of course.
Sham Kay Adams is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome