What tournament is the 7th slam? Davis Cup or one of the Masters 1000's? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What tournament is the 7th slam? Davis Cup or one of the Masters 1000's?

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 12:41 PM
Now that we have basically established Olympics Gold and TMC as the 5th and 6th slams, regardless of order, the question now turns to identifying the 7th slam.

Is it Davis Cup? Or one of the Masters 1000 events?

Chris Kuerten
07-31-2012, 12:42 PM
Every 1000 tournament > Davis Cup

bounccer
07-31-2012, 01:04 PM
Davis cup= team sport

Irrelevant

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 01:09 PM
Bullshit it's irrelevant.

Roddick says winning in 07 with Blake and the Bryans meant as much as his USO in 2003. Or Safin and the Russians in 06? I recall Marat saying it was "better than sex". Ask Verdasco what winning in 2008 in Argentina meant. Ask Djokovic how much that 2010 Davis Cup win meant to him. You think he'll exchange it for Cincinnati?

Looner
07-31-2012, 01:12 PM
Davis Cup is irrelevant.

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:14 PM
Davis Cup is irrelevant.

Typical response of a fanboy whose man has never won it :stupid:

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 01:16 PM
Stupid thread... Davis Cup is a team event. :facepalm:

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 01:17 PM
Typical response of a fanboy whose man has never won it :stupid:

Unlike fans of the mighty Troicki, right? :rolleyes: Regardless, no "man" can ever win it, because it's a TEAM event.

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 01:18 PM
Look, Fedfans, just cause Federer has never won Davis Cup doesn't mean its irrelevant and unimportant. I guarantee your tune would change if Roger had a Davis Cup title. "Oh, Davis Cup has so much history, so important, like Basel or Dubai" :rolleyes:

Litotes
07-31-2012, 01:18 PM
Stupid thread... Davis Cup is a team event. :facepalm:

It's not stupid. It is a response to the 5th slam thread. If you have five, why stop there? Why not seven, or seventeen? Myself, I am happy with four.

Looner
07-31-2012, 01:19 PM
Typical response of a fanboy whose man has never won it :stupid:

Are you all stupid or what? Calling me a fanboy and then saying Federer has never won it :stupid:. SWITZERLAND HAS NEVER WON IT. This is one of the dumbest threads on MTF.

So, again, Davis Cup is irrelevant.

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:20 PM
Look, Fedfans, just cause Federer has never won Davis Cup doesn't mean its irrelevant and unimportant. I guarantee your tune would change if Roger had a Davis Cup title. "Oh, Davis Cup has so much history, so important, like Basel or Dubai" :rolleyes:

This.

Fedtards are pathetic. Butthurt much :awww:

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 01:21 PM
Look, Fedfans, just cause Federer Switzerland has never won Davis Cup doesn't mean its irrelevant and unimportant. I guarantee your tune would change if Roger had a Davis Cup title. "Oh, Davis Cup has so much history, so important, like Basel or Dubai" :rolleyes:

Fixed. No player has ever won the Davis Cup.

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 01:22 PM
Football, that is a team competition, 11 guys, plus more on the bench.

Davis Cup? 4 guys at the most. In the old days, it was 2 guys playing all 5 rubbers. For a country like Swiss or Serbia or British, it is a 1 man show basically.

Remember last September? "60% Djokovic is better than 100% Troicki" :lol:

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:24 PM
We're talking about it's importance as an achievement numbnuts :stupid:

It's irrelevant whether it's a team tournament or not :rolleyes:

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 01:25 PM
Fixed. No player has ever won the Davis Cup.

So what if it isn't an individual event? Doesn't mean it isn't prestigious and means a lot to the players. Doesn't mean it isn't the 7th slam.

If Roger can ever carry Wawrinka to the title, I can bet we'll see the waterworks from Federer, I guarantee you that, 1.05 odds.

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:25 PM
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/images/stories/large/2011/12/04/Nadal134855902-424x590.jpg

emotion
07-31-2012, 01:27 PM
Probably can't be considered Davis Cup for all its history

If Gilles Muller were the greatest player ever, Luxembourg would still never win a match

Looner
07-31-2012, 01:29 PM
No point in arguing, Davis Cup is irrelevant.

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:30 PM
No point in arguing, Davis Cup is irrelevant.

No point in arguing, you are butthurt.

The Prince
07-31-2012, 01:32 PM
As a Federer fan, I would trade 10 of his TMS victories for a Davis Cup title.

The Prince
07-31-2012, 01:33 PM
No point in arguing, Davis Cup is irrelevant.

You are in denial, then, it seems.

duarte_a
07-31-2012, 01:36 PM
There's no such thing.

Davis cup doesn't even come into consideration.

Grand slams

WTF

Olympics

Masters 1000 (some are more prestigious than others because of their history and MC is non-mandatory now....).

Looner
07-31-2012, 01:37 PM
Just because there's some discussion - Davis Cup is as irrelevant as this thread.

The Prince
07-31-2012, 01:41 PM
So Golfers don't value the Ryder Cup, then?

It's the same principle.

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 01:41 PM
Football, that is a team competition, 11 guys, plus more on the bench.

Davis Cup? 4 guys at the most. In the old days, it was 2 guys playing all 5 rubbers. For a country like Swiss or Serbia or British, it is a 1 man show basically.

Remember last September? "60% Djokovic is better than 100% Troicki" :lol:

Hands down the most stupid statement I've read on here. The Serbian Davis Cup team won the tournament in 2010, with players in the team including Zimonjic, Troicki, Tipsarevic, and Djokovic. Not one of those players has the right to say, "I won the Davis Cup". They might say, "I was on the winning team" or "I helped the team win it", but it would be arrogant and simply erroneous to say they won it.

Also, the real reason it should have no place in discussions like these, is because it's not fair to players that come from smaller countries and have few (if any) compatriots. Troicki was on the winning Davis Cup team -- so does that make him a more accomplished player than the likes of Bellucci, Baghdatis, or Nieminen, who are probably better players overall, but come from countries which produce almost zero ATP Tour level players? Of course not, and that's why TEAM events should not factor in discussions regarding individual player achievements.

The Prince
07-31-2012, 01:43 PM
If Davis Cup had no value…

Why does practically everyone play it then?

Motoflou
07-31-2012, 01:45 PM
Do you get some sort of prize here for posting shit threads?

I only ask because I see so many of them on a daily basis.

Is candy involved?

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 01:49 PM
We're talking about it's importance as an achievement numbnuts :stupid:

It's irrelevant whether it's a team tournament or not :rolleyes:

As an achievement to an individual player, silly billy -- which it can never be because it's a national team event. :)

manadrainer
07-31-2012, 01:49 PM
I think Davis Cup it's a great achievement in tennis, but you have to win as a team, no player can win it alone.

As for the 7th slam I don't think it exists such a thing.

There are 4 slams BTW. :)

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:51 PM
As an achievement to an individual player, silly billy -- which it can never be because it's a national team event. :)

It can still go on the player's resume as an achievement :facepalm:.

So what's your point? It's irrelevant whether or not it's an individual player achievement.

uxyzapenje
07-31-2012, 01:54 PM
No point in arguing, Davis Cup is irrelevant.

In some moments you can be so reasonable poster, prepared to discuss using arguments. In other you are such a fedtard with your head in his behind. And no poster beside Fedtards ever said DC was irrelevant. Only bitter Fed girls who would change their story in a sec if Fed somehow won it say that.

Revan
07-31-2012, 01:55 PM
There is only 4 slams. So this thread is irrelevant.

uxyzapenje
07-31-2012, 01:56 PM
It can still go on the player's resume as an achievement :facepalm:.

So what's your point? It's irrelevant whether or not it's an individual player achievement.

Give it up bro, if Fed never won it, it's irrelevant.

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 01:57 PM
It can still go on the player's resume as an achievement :facepalm:.

So what's your point? It's irrelevant whether or not it's an individual player achievement.

I've made my point. Not going to waste any more time with a brick wall.

BroTree123
07-31-2012, 01:57 PM
Give it up bro, if Fed never won it, it's irrelevant.

Exactly.

If Fed can't win it before the end of his career, then that's too freaking bad. You can't have everything in life.

Individuality is irrelevant when regarding the importance of tournaments. I can't stress this enough.

ServeVolley
07-31-2012, 02:03 PM
Exactly.

If Fed can't win it before the end of his career, then that's too freaking bad. You can't have everything in life.

Individuality is irrelevant when regarding the importance of tournaments. I can't stress this enough.

So should a player's slam tally include men's and mixed doubles titles then? Does Emerson in fact have 28 slams? Is Federer's gold medal in doubles as great an achievement as Nadal's in singles? Should Davis Cup be listed under tournament wins for a player? FYI, your line of reasoning is incredibly flawed.

Looner
07-31-2012, 02:07 PM
In some moments you can be so reasonable poster, prepared to discuss using arguments. In other you are such a fedtard with your head in his behind. And no poster beside Fedtards ever said DC was irrelevant. Only bitter Fed girls who would change their story in a sec if Fed somehow won it say that.

I'm always reasonable. I troll when I see no point in being reasonable :p. Plus I when I said it's irrelevant, I meant it as part of the 7th slam discussion. Davis Cup has its place but Federer (or any other great for that matter) cannot win it by himself. Anyone who says Djoko won it alone is an idiot and I don't think any of his fans believe that.

Had Stan stepped up when Fed was in his prime, they might have won.

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 02:08 PM
Irrelevant is the word of the day, it seems :hatoff:

Just because there's some discussion - Davis Cup is as irrelevant as this thread.

Keep saying it over and over, mate. It might be true if you say it enough times! :lol:

Hands down the most stupid statement I've read on here. The Serbian Davis Cup team won the tournament in 2010, with players in the team including Zimonjic, Troicki, Tipsarevic, and Djokovic. Not one of those players has the right to say, "I won the Davis Cup". They might say, "I was on the winning team" or "I helped the team win it", but it would be arrogant and simply erroneous to say they won it.

Total Live Rubbers won, 2010 Davis Cup Serbians

Djokovic- 7
Tipsarevic- 2, also won a doubles match
Troicki- 2

Yes, it is a team event, but clearly Djokovic led the show.

Also, the real reason it should have no place in discussions like these, is because it's not fair to players that come from smaller countries and have few (if any) compatriots. Troicki was on the winning Davis Cup team -- so does that make him a more accomplished player than the likes of Bellucci, Baghdatis, or Nieminen, who are probably better players overall, but come from countries which produce almost zero ATP Tour level players? Of course not, and that's why TEAM events should not factor in discussions regarding individual player achievements.

It is very arguable, Troicki vs. Bellucci vs. Baghdatis vs. Nieminen. I could start a thread on it, I predict a couple pages and lots of trolling, and an even poll.

So where would you place Davis Cup in terms of importance to an overall career?

Do you get some sort of prize here for posting shit threads?

I only ask because I see so many of them on a daily basis.

Is candy involved?

:lol:

Looner
07-31-2012, 02:13 PM
Can you also include how many tiebreaker rubbers players outside of Djoko won? One can lead but if there's no team to lead (the Serbs have a good doubles team AS WELL), then you'd lose. You can argue all you want, Groove, it's still not going to make your point correct.

Action Jackson
07-31-2012, 02:17 PM
This thread or the reactions not sure what is worse.

Looner
07-31-2012, 02:18 PM
Yup, Davis cup is indeed as irrelevant as this thread, AJ.

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 02:18 PM
Can you also include how many tiebreaker rubbers players outside of Djoko won? One can lead but if there's no team to lead (the Serbs have a good doubles team AS WELL), then you'd lose. You can argue all you want, Groove, it's still not going to make your point correct.

Blaming on Wawrinka, eh? :lol:

I see what you did there.

buzz
07-31-2012, 02:19 PM
7th slam??

There are only four slams. this thread is about the 7th most important tournament.

Looner
07-31-2012, 02:19 PM
Mods, Groove is obviously trolling with the sole aim of increasing his post count. Please do the deed on this thread :wavey:.

sportstennis
07-31-2012, 02:21 PM
Now that we have basically established Olympics Gold and TMC as the 5th and 6th slams, regardless of order, the question now turns to identifying the 7th slam.

Is it Davis Cup? Or one of the Masters 1000 events?





I think that Davis cup is important of one. Roger Federer held many games, when young. his number of games is already over Sampras or Nadal. However, His efforts were not rewarded. The top player was only him in Switzerland. And, Roger and Stan now.



Many top players are in Spain. Actually, Even if Spain has no Nadal, They can win the victory repeatedly. also Spain is always final with clay.




boring.


.

uxyzapenje
07-31-2012, 02:22 PM
I'm always reasonable. I troll when I see no point in being reasonable :p. Plus I when I said it's irrelevant, I meant it as part of the 7th slam discussion. Davis Cup has its place but Federer (or any other great for that matter) cannot win it by himself. Anyone who says Djoko won it alone is an idiot and I don't think any of his fans believe that.

Had Stan stepped up when Fed was in his prime, they might have won.

Ok, I get it. And to me DC isn't '7th Slam' bcs there are only 4 slams and no more. But to me after 4 GS comes th Ogs, then DC and then WTF. Bcs on WTF players come injured, tired and not willing to play. And then regular masters. But ok, I can get thet I'm not completely objective about that, I can see why would ppl rate WTF higher than DC and even OG (no way to me, but ok), but rating regular masters higher than DC is just stupid.

@Johny Groove: Novak couldn't win it alone. Without Janko who beat Berdych and Stepanek in SF and Troicki to beat Llodra in the finals he wouldn't have won it. But saying Fed didn't win it bcs he has no goo players in his country is stupid bcs he has Wawrinka who is good enough player at least to get to the final one year. You are then saying Tipsarevic is much better than Wawa so he could contribute and Wawa can't. If you say it like that, I can agree :lol:

Looner
07-31-2012, 02:24 PM
Tipsy is much better than Wawa though. Just look at career ranking. Wawa has never been consistent enough, at least not during RF's prime. They're from different generations.

IOFH
07-31-2012, 02:26 PM
What's with comparing DC to the other events? Clown team event in an individual sport :smash:

As to 7th slam, WTF seems about right

1st Wimby
2nd USO
3rd Basel
4th Cincy
5th RG
6th AO

shadows
07-31-2012, 02:31 PM
DC is shit.

There are 4 slams.

There are the Olympics

and there are the WTF

everything else is insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

uxyzapenje
07-31-2012, 02:39 PM
Tipsy is much better than Wawa though. Just look at career ranking. Wawa has never been consistent enough, at least not during RF's prime. They're from different generations.

What are you talking about? Jankos career ranking is 8, Wawas is 9. They both have 3 titles in their careers, but Tipsarevic also has a DC and 2 World team Championship (has to be said bcs he won 4 matches, 2 of them were Berdych and Kohli) and Wawa has doubles gold from Beijing. Also Wawa has 9 total finals (3-6) and Tipsy 10 (3-7).

And they are not from different generations, Tipsy is only 1 year older (not even full year). So, as much as I would like to say Janko had better career, they had almost the same achievements. If Janko can stay on this level for some time, then you could say he is 'much better'. Now you can only say slightly better.

And about being consistent, well Tipsy before that DC was just a dangerous jurneyman who could beat any1 but lose to some total mug. He started 2011 as ranked 49 with a career high ranking of 33.

Can't bealive I'm arguing against Tipsy being a better player then some one :facepalm:

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 02:43 PM
The poll results don't lie :drink:

Looner
07-31-2012, 02:45 PM
What are you talking about? Jankos career ranking is 8, Wawas is 9. They both have 3 titles in their careers, but Tipsarevic also has a DC and 2 World team Championship (has to be said bcs he won 4 matches, 2 of them were Berdych and Kohli) and Wawa has doubles gold from Beijing. Also Wawa has 9 total finals (3-6) and Tipsy 10 (3-7).

And they are not from different generations, Tipsy is only 1 year older (not even full year). So, as much as I would like to say Janko had better career, they had almost the same achievements. If Janko can stay on this level for some time, then you could say he is 'much better'. Now you can only say slightly better.

And about being consistent, well Tipsy before that DC was just a dangerous jurneyman who could beat any1 but lose to some total mug. He started 2011 as ranked 49 with a career high ranking of 33.

Can't bealive I'm arguing against Tipsy being a better player then some one :facepalm:

I mean Fed and Wawa are. Djoko won it with his peers in the sort of prime.

The Prince
07-31-2012, 02:52 PM
Looner, if this thread is irrelevant, why are you posting on it? :shrug:

uxyzapenje
07-31-2012, 02:52 PM
I mean Fed and Wawa are. Djoko won it with his peers in the sort of prime.

But Tipsy wasn't in his prime until after the DC (talk about late prime). And who cares about when Wawas prime was. Fed is from 2003 to this day good enough, so whenever Wawas prime was (around 2009?) they could do it. But ok, when ever ppl say about Troicki, it's nice to have 3rd player ranked in top30 that you can caount on (or at least hope for) to contribute. Fed and Wawa have no support, but that rly doesn't degrade DCs importance in any way.

Revan
07-31-2012, 02:55 PM
Davis Cup is not irrelevant, however, if there were to be a 7th slam, it would have to be the Monte Carlo 500. :haha:

Action Jackson
07-31-2012, 02:56 PM
The poll results don't lie :drink:

Are you actually bored posting this thread?

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 02:58 PM
Are you actually bored posting this thread?

Little bit.

To me, MTF is participatory entertainment.

shadows
07-31-2012, 03:02 PM
The poll results don't lie :drink:

Indeed, more people think winning one of the masters titles is more important winning than winning the DC.

Let's petition to scrap it.

Johnny Groove
07-31-2012, 03:03 PM
Indeed, more people think winning one of the masters titles is more important winning than winning the DC.

Let's petition to scrap it.

You do know that DC has the most votes, right?

Looner
07-31-2012, 03:05 PM
Looner, if this thread is irrelevant, why are you posting on it? :shrug:

Your comment is irrelevant.

shadows
07-31-2012, 03:05 PM
You do know that DC has the most votes, right?

9 votes for various masters, 7 for the DC.

while masters are always going to split the vote because it's a retarded poll to even have, you still get more people thinking a masters is better than the DC on the whole.

which they are =)

uxyzapenje
07-31-2012, 03:12 PM
9 votes for various masters, 7 for the DC.

while masters are always going to split the vote because it's a retarded poll to even have, you still get more people thinking a masters is better than the DC on the whole.

which they are =)

yes, bcs 40% of this forum are Fed *fans* You could ask DC vs Basel, they would vote for Basel

Action Jackson
07-31-2012, 03:14 PM
Little bit.

To me, MTF is participatory entertainment.

I can tell, there are only 4 Slams for one. I'm sorry I can create a tournament in my paddock calling it Grand Slam doesn't mean there is one.

Second of all we have numerous threads about events under Slams and prestige blah blah. Davis Cup as well.

August
07-31-2012, 04:43 PM
DC in this poll is irrelevant. If there would be a GOAT from Mugland, a country full of hopeless mugs, that GOAT should win all his singles DC matches, and he should be a doubles god to win doubles matches partnering a mug. That's why DC is irrelevant, doubles titles in this poll would be more relevant.

Anyway, there's really no 7th slam, not even 5th or 6th slam. And I don't think any specific M1000 title is more important than other, in today's tennis even no other slam than Wimbledon is really more important. But, of M1000s I'd say IW is best. Miami or Rome may have the status of the 5th slam, but IW unlike Miami is an M1000 where players are fresh and top players play even doubles. The other M1000s, incl. Rome, are just build-up for slams, except for Beijing and Paris which feel a bit tired as all the slams have already gone.

IOFH
07-31-2012, 04:51 PM
yes, bcs 40% of this forum are Fed *fans* You could ask DC vs Basel, they would vote for Basel

Must be a knowledgeable forum then :hatoff:

Basel is ranked 3rd atm, about to surpass USO for 2nd. Depends on whether Fed wins it this year or not, amirite?

Leo
07-31-2012, 05:10 PM
Why is IW leading the poll out of the MS events? :lol:

It goes like this:
4 Slams
Olympics
Masters/WTC ==> much less prestigious in recent years, they've fucked this up
Davis Cup
Miami
Rome
Paris

IMO, Miami, Rome, and Paris are the three Masters events that have the greatest history, legacy, prestige. They've hung onto their prestige more so than the others. Monte Carlo is great, but the ATP doesn't even make it mandatory anymore :o - and anyway, the Italian Open has always been more significant a title. All the new ones (Madrid & Shanghai or wherever the fuck they play in Asia in September that's outdoors and stupid) are so pathetic.

Drugs Ruin Lives
07-31-2012, 06:37 PM
No-one cares about Davis Cup.

Mountaindewslave
07-31-2012, 06:42 PM
7th slam conversations.... you can't be serious.... how is there any room to discuss such a ludicrous thing. there isn't a 5th slam let alone 7th, my god you all have lost your minds

BigJohn
07-31-2012, 07:27 PM
There are 4 slams. Everything else is not a slam. WTF and Olympics are also important tournaments, one being the most difficult to qualify for, the other one prestigious. But those other two are not slams...

So 7th slam? :spit:

Looner
07-31-2012, 07:38 PM
Why is IW leading the poll out of the MS events? :lol:

It goes like this:
4 Slams
Olympics
Masters/WTC ==> much less prestigious in recent years, they've fucked this up
Davis Cup
Miami
Rome
Paris


Bullshit. Anything you write after that is ridiculously delusional. So when RN and RF played the final it was still prestigious then, right. What a joke some posters on this forum are. I fully expect to be called biased after this, of course :rolleyes:.

Corey Feldman
07-31-2012, 07:39 PM
Cincinnati

place NoleDal have never won

IOFH
07-31-2012, 07:47 PM
Bullshit. Anything you write after that is ridiculously delusional. So when RN and RF played the final it was still prestigious then, right. What a joke some posters on this forum are. I fully expect to be called biased after this, of course :rolleyes:.

Exactly. Fed being too good for the field = organisers fucking up WTF apparently. :facepalm:

There is nothing less special about the WTF now than there was 10 years ago, otherwise RG must be one of the most unimportant tournaments by now, no?

River
07-31-2012, 07:58 PM
Davis Cup I guess.

With the way people make Federer's Gold Medal in doubles look like a prestigious dream come true of his, you wonder why people think Davis Cup is irrelevant.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
07-31-2012, 08:14 PM
Davis cup is a team effort
Doesn't require as much effort as a 500 never mind a masters

Overall it's nice to have but not essential

thrust
07-31-2012, 11:09 PM
Davis Cup is irrelevant.

Tell that to any player who was on the winning team.

thrust
07-31-2012, 11:14 PM
Davis cup is a team effort
Doesn't require as much effort as a 500 never mind a masters

Overall it's nice to have but not essential

Tell tha to Sampras, who collapsed after his third victory in 3 days, winning both singles and the doubles to give the US a 3-2 win against Russia, on his worst surface, a very slow clay court. That court was chosen so that Pete would not win a match-LOL!!

Chase Visa
08-01-2012, 12:13 AM
It's hard to say. DC is a team effort, but you can lead a team to a DC. However, the fact that the big names don't always play DC....

RForever
08-01-2012, 12:43 AM
Right, DC is so important to players that:
-once they become top players they skip it if they can
-they participate in final rounds
-they play when the olympics are behind the corner
-they are Serbian

I believe it is very special for player to play for his country in DC - for the first couple of times, when they are not the top players. But olympics top it easily. How deeply are you watching DC matches between some unimportant countries (no good players)? I bet all of us watch Masters much more. DC is just a category outside of all. Not a 7th slam/most important tournament.

Jimnik
08-01-2012, 12:44 AM
One of the best threads we've had recently.

Looner
08-01-2012, 12:55 AM
Right, DC is so important to players that:
-once they become top players they skip it if they can
-they participate in final rounds
-they play when the olympics are behind the corner
-they are Serbian

I believe it is very special for player to play for his country in DC - for the first couple of times, when they are not the top players. But olympics top it easily. How deeply are you watching DC matches between some unimportant countries (no good players)? I bet all of us watch Masters much more. DC is just a category outside of all. Not a 7th slam/most important tournament.

SO. MUCH. TRUTH. Thank you :).

stewietennis
08-01-2012, 02:07 AM
I would say the Indian Wells - Miami double because it's difficult to win together

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
08-01-2012, 03:28 AM
Tell tha to Sampras, who collapsed after his third victory in 3 days, winning both singles and the doubles to give the US a 3-2 win against Russia, on his worst surface, a very slow clay court. That court was chosen so that Pete would not win a match-LOL!!

it was against the russians

pete was born in the 70s and grew up in the HATE-COMMUNIST 80s america


it wasnt for DC, it was for his personal prejudices

if there was an arab country playing against america in the next decade you can be sure most american players will give it 110% because their media has force fed them so much anti arab propaganda that they hate anything brown

DC is irrelevant as an individual achivement- just a nice team goal but not essential

what pete did (on clay, no less) was impressive
but he'd trade in a thousand of those for a RG

Leo
08-01-2012, 05:15 PM
Bullshit. Anything you write after that is ridiculously delusional. So when RN and RF played the final it was still prestigious then, right. What a joke some posters on this forum are. I fully expect to be called biased after this, of course :rolleyes:.

You're an idiot. I don't even know what the section in bold means, as I am neither a RN or RF fan and I don't think either of them warrants being the only barometer for "prestige," although they would certainly like to think so (and many MTFtards as well). They may have skipped their fare share of Paris Indoors out of exhaustion and/or fear, but I still consider Paris very prestigious for its history.

Numerous things have gone wrong with the year-ending championships. It's not what it once was, if you think back to the Masters of the past in MSG.
- They've changed the name numerous times. Masters to Masters Cup was okay, but now World Tour Finals which abbreviates to WTF?! WTF indeed.
- More importantly, they've changed the surface and the shape of the fall season. One mistake years ago was having Houston host the tournament and hold it outdoors, after a season of mostly indoor events in Europe. Then it went back to Shanghai as indoors. Now it's indoors in London but an absolutely horrific and embarrassing surface - never before have I seen an indoor court play so slow. It's like the ball is landing in mud and the points look very awkward - difficult to hit a winner. The Masters used to be carpet or a fast indoors and it was the fitting conclusion to a fast indoor season. Now that they have their September mess of outdoor events on slow hardcourt in Asia, WTF is a real WTF. It used to be the culmination of the entire tennis season and the culmination of a distinct, whole indoor season.
- Changed from best-of-5 final to best-of-3. Just dumb. It's supposed to be the epic conclusion to the season now?

Julián Santiago
08-01-2012, 06:05 PM
Davis Cup in the team competition clearly.

And in individuals, a Master Series with a lot of history, like all except for Shanghai.

I think it will be Miami, but i choose Paris Indoors because is my favourite TMS. But in the team is Davis Cup, is not irrelevant, is a glorious competition.

BK 201
08-01-2012, 06:12 PM
Now that we have basically established Olympics Gold and TMC as the 5th and 6th slams, regardless of order, the question now turns to identifying the 7th slam.

Is it Davis Cup? Or one of the Masters 1000 events?

Who's we?


I consider TMC to be a complete lottery; You can lose two matches and still win the tournament, same with Davis cup, olympics has a best of three format, slams are unique and nothing compares.





Delete thread.