Why is it the Pro Slams weren't seen as the "Official Slams" after Open Era started?

02-08-2012, 02:08 AM
I mean, everyone counts the pre-Open-Era Amateur Slams as the "true Slams" when probably the best players (Arguably, the pros) didn't play it?

It's a big issue, I think.

Pancho Gonzales would have 12 Grand Slams instead of being a 2-time Slam winner, as he's considered now.

Ken Rosewall would have 19 Grand Slams, instead of the "only" 7 he's acknowledged now. He would be quite a GOAT candidate, don't you think?

Rod Laver would have 2 more Slams, etc. etc.

So, what do you think about it?

Don't you think it's unfair to the Pro Players? Or shouldn't both the Pro and Amateur Slam titles be considered?

I was so NOT around that Era, and my understanding of the whole Pro/Amateur differences is not so good so it'd be great if someone could lighten me up a bit about it.

Johnny Groove
02-08-2012, 02:19 AM
Take a look at my Top 55 player thread in my signature as well as the entire "Blast from the past" subforum here.

Also, check out this page.