Grand slam pairs. Hardest: Wimbledon and French. Easiest: US and Australian Open [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Grand slam pairs. Hardest: Wimbledon and French. Easiest: US and Australian Open

Henry Kaspar
09-14-2010, 08:05 PM
Below are some useless stats.

In the open era, the following players won:

Wimbledon and the US Open: 13 players

Rod Laver
John Newcombe
Stan Smith
Jimmy Connors
Arthur Ashe
John McEnroe
Boris Becker
Stefan Edberg
Pete Sampras
Andre Agassi
Lleyton Hewitt
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal


Wimbledon and the French Open: 6 players

Rod Laver
Jan Kodes
Bjorn Borg
Andre Agassi
Rafael Nadal
Roger Federer

Wimbledon and the Australian Open: 9 players

Rod Laver
John Newcombe
Jimmy Connors
Stefan Edberg
Boris Becker
Pete Sampras
Andre Agassi
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

The US Open and the French Open: 9 players

Ken Rosewall
Rod Laver
Ilie Nastase
Guillermo Vilas
Mats Wilander
Ivan Lendl
Andre Agassi
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

The US Open and the Australian Open: 15 players

Rod Laver
Arthur Ashe
Ken Rosewall
John Newcombe
Jimmy Connors
Guillermo Vilas
Mats Wilander
Stefan Edberg
Ivan Lendl
Boris Becker
Andre Agassi
Pete Sampras
Marat Safin
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

The French Open and the Australian Open: 10 players

Rod Laver
Ken Rosewall
Guillermo Vilas
Mats Wilander
Ivan Lendl
Jim Courier
Andre Agassi
Yevgeni Kafelnikov
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

Wimbledon plus another: 15 players
US Open and another: 18 players
French Open and another: 12 players
Australian Open and another: 17 players

So based on this the French Open are the most "idiosyncratic" and the US Open the most "mainstream" tournament.

Ozone
09-14-2010, 08:06 PM
The fact that more players can win/have won USO and Aussie Open should say that those are harder to win, no?

kindling
09-14-2010, 08:11 PM
It's just the time spread that does this.

Henry Kaspar
09-14-2010, 08:30 PM
Only Wimbledon:

Pat Cash
Michael Stich
Richard Krajicek
Goran Ivanisevic


Only US Open: 4 players

Manuel Orantes
Patrick Rafter (2X)
Andy Roddick
Juan Martin del Potro

Only French Open: 12 players

Andres Gimeno
Adriano Panatta
Yannick Noah
Michel Chang
Andres Gomez
Sergi Bruguera (2X)
Thomas Muster
Gustavo Kuerten (3X)
Carlos Moya
Johan Carlos Ferrero
Albert Costa
Gaston Gaudio

Only Australian Open: 8 players

Mark Edmondson
Roscoe Tanner
Vitas Gerulaitis
Brian Teacher
Johan Kriek (2X)
Petr Korda
Thomas Johannson
Novak Djokovic

aloniv
09-15-2010, 12:12 AM
Below are some useless stats.

In the open era, the following players won:

Wimbledon and the US Open: 13 players

Rod Laver
John Newcombe
Stan Smith
Jimmy Connors
Arthur Ashe
John McEnroe
Boris Becker
Stefan Edberg
Pete Sampras
Andre Agassi
Lleyton Hewitt
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal


Wimbledon and the French Open: 6 players

Rod Laver
Jan Kodes
Bjorn Borg
Andre Agassi
Rafael Nadal
Roger Federer

Wimbledon and the Australian Open: 9 players

Rod Laver
John Newcombe
Jimmy Connors
Stefan Edberg
Boris Becker
Pete Sampras
Andre Agassi
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

The US Open and the French Open: 9 players

Ken Rosewall
Rod Laver
Ilie Nastase
Guillermo Vilas
Mats Wilander
Ivan Lendl
Andre Agassi
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

The US Open and the Australian Open: 15 players

Rod Laver
Arthur Ashe
Ken Rosewall
John Newcombe
Jimmy Connors
Guillermo Vilas
Mats Wilander
Stefan Edberg
Ivan Lendl
Boris Becker
Andre Agassi
Pete Sampras
Marat Safin
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

The French Open and the Australian Open: 10 players

Rod Laver
Ken Rosewall
Guillermo Vilas
Mats Wilander
Ivan Lendl
Jim Courier
Andre Agassi
Yevgeni Kafelnikov
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal

Wimbledon plus another: 15 players
US Open and another: 18 players
French Open and another: 12 players
Australian Open and another: 17 players

So based on this the French Open are the most "idiosyncratic" and the US Open the most "mainstream" tournament.

The question is how many players won these tournaments at the same year and how many times did they manage to win both at the same year?

Henry Kaspar
09-15-2010, 09:58 PM
The question is how many players won these tournaments at the same year and how many times did they manage to win both at the same year?

Not sure why this is "the question", but thhe answer is:

1969: Laver all 4
1973: Newcombe AO, UO
1974: Connors AO, WB, UO
1977: Vilas AO, FO

1978: Borg FO, WB
1979: Borg FO, WB
1980: Borg FO, WB
1981: McEnroe WB, UO
1982: Connors WB, UO
1984: McEnroe WB, UO

1986: Lendl FO, UO
1987: Lendl FO, UO
1988: Wilander AO, FO, UO
1989: Becker WB, UO
1992: Courier AO, FO

1993: Sampras WB, UO
1994: Sampras AO, WB
1996: Sampras WB, UO
1997: Sampras AO, WB
1999: Agassi FO, UO

2004: Federer AO, WB, UO
2005: Federer WB, UO
2006: Federer AO, WB, UO
2007: Federer AO, WB, UO
2008: Nadal FO, WB
2009: Federer FO, WB
2010: Nadal FO, WB, UO


So it's WB/UO 12X, WB/FO 7X, WB/AO 7X, UO/FO 6X, UO/AO 7X, FO/AO 4X.

thrust
09-15-2010, 10:37 PM
The fact that more players can win/have won USO and Aussie Open should say that those are harder to win, no?

NO!

careergrandslam
09-15-2010, 10:46 PM
winning the FO, Wimbledon and USO in the same year is the hardest thing to do.

BAMJ6
09-15-2010, 10:54 PM
Henry, no one won 2 slams it in 96. Sampras lost Wimby and by hand of god survived the Flushing puke

It's amazing that the only time Agassi won more than 1 slam a calendar year was at 29 (3 if you count that Andre was 29 years old in 4 consecutive finals/3 slam wins)

romismak
09-16-2010, 12:09 AM
It is important what for a player you are. For every player is something else harder to win- about that thing that Wimbledon-RG just 6 players won itīs true it is most difficult double - today grass is slow, but in old times it was just hard to imagine that someone can win on fast grass and on slow clay - Borg did it and some Wimbledon officer or boss i donīt remember told this is the hardest thing in tennis make RG-Wimbledon double- and it is obvious because of surfaces- and win it in one year was so hard- because they are in short period of time together- Wimby after RG- so in old times be master of clay and than few weeks later won on grass was just hard to imagine until Borg did it- i didnīt forgot Laver but he won 3 grassen and one clay GS in one year so for Wimbledon-RG i used Borg in one year

MisterQ
09-16-2010, 02:47 AM
It's extraordinary that Roland Garros and Wimbledon have been won back-to-back for the past three years (by Nadal in 2008 & 2010; by Federer in 2009). After Borg, no one was able to accomplish this feat for decades -- though a few players came close (McEnroe, Lendl, Agassi).

River
09-16-2010, 02:55 AM
Stats alone don't tell the whole story, though.

emotion
09-16-2010, 02:58 AM
I think RG and AO probably easiest now...
RG and USO hardest

Topspindoctor
09-16-2010, 03:05 AM
RG+Wimbledon is hardest
RG+USO is second hardest

Others are easy.

Matt01
09-16-2010, 03:36 AM
winning the FO, Wimbledon and USO in the same year is the hardest thing to do.


Winning those plus AO is even harder :cool:

Infinity
09-16-2010, 03:39 AM
winning the FO, Wimbledon and USO in the same year is the hardest thing to do.


Then what about winning AO, FO, Wimbledon and USO in the same year?

careergrandslam
09-16-2010, 04:08 AM
Then what about winning AO, FO, Wimbledon and USO in the same year?

yea i thought that was obvious to figure out.
of course the calendar slam is the perfect year.

the discussion was about when winning 3 slams in one year, which of the slams are the toughest to win.