PDA

View Full Version : can we petition for this to be considered a Grand Slam??


tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:25 AM
OK i know the rules. a Grand Slam occurs when the player wins all the tournies in one calendar year.

so Agassi, for example, who has won all four Slams, is not considered with the same regard as his wife who won all 4 majors in the same year.

amazing!

however, technically, Serena also won the 4 of her titles [/]in sequence. [/i] i know that the year officially starts in January but why does it HAVE to? why aren't 4 sequential Slams not considered a Grand Slam??

and whom can we petition for a considered revision of the rules?

rules have been changed in the past when historic developments occured. why not again?
:confused: :confused:

Mikey
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:30 AM
where have you been? go to the steffi vs. serena slam thread ;)

disposablehero
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:32 AM
Nope, can't petition. Some people already think it is a Grand Slam, and some think it isn't. Few of either will ever change their mind.

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:35 AM
why can't we petition the WTA or the ITF or whichever body changed the rules in the past?

sorry i didn't realise that this was already being discussed. from the title i assumed that it was an argument over which one was the REAL Grand Slam. i don't wanna waste time on that. i want to know if we tennis fans all over the world can get the rules changed. why can't we? it's been done before.

*will go check the other thread and decide if to delete mine*

VS Fan
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:45 AM
Hi Tennischick!

I agree with you, the ONLY real difference is Chase points.
I stated this in the other thread.

But it might be easier to get the powers that be to change the beginning of the year to February 1.

The AO used to be played in December, right? So the new year must be in February now!!

"Topaz"
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:45 AM
The irony is suppose we do petition and they do change the rule, they might not make it retroactive. :( :o

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:49 AM
hey they were just thinking of changing the AO from January to May! OK so the change wasn't effected but it was being considered! changes happen all the time. and since this one will be as a result of Serena's accomplishment, it will have to benefit her.

listen to me. you'd swear i got the damn change already! lol!

checked the other thread. i didn't even take part in the poll. it's just pointless and divisive. both Steffi and Serena did great and i luv 'em both. but that's not the point of this thread. this is about changing the rules. where there's a will i say...

Car Key Boi
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:50 AM
tennischick, yuo know i like yuo and all, but do yuo honestly think the WTA or whoever, are going to change the rules because they receive 10,000 or whatever e-mails from us wtaworldtards??

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:55 AM
yes!!!

next question?? :p

hey i looked at the latest Probe and you were not there. so the guy told me he will bring me his last week's copy from home. can i get it autographed?

VS Fan
Jan 26th, 2003, 12:59 AM
Danm, If they change AO to MAay, there will be THREE slams back to back to back, and probably no four slam title holders.

It has been stated that it is VERY hard to win the French and Winbledon since they are only two weeks apart. Imagine playing AO May 1-14, then RG May 21-June 7, then Wimby June 23-July 7.
Then only six weeks to prepare for the US Open!!!??

Serena will become the LAST of the players to hold all four.

Car Key Boi
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:00 AM
lol, sorry the Car Key Boi doesn't do autographs

i have to be very careful about my Bruce Wayne like identity

i was even wearing gloves when i sent that letter to The Probe so there wouldn't be any finger prints :p

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:01 AM
so how are you going to sign my petition then??? :confused:

Car Key Boi
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:02 AM
i'm not ;)

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:06 AM
yuo tool!!! :p :p

Jeff
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:10 AM
You know...how about Serena defends the remaining slams this year and then see what that's called? A Double slam? ;)

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:14 AM
i was wondering the same thing Jeff. rules schmules!! grrrrr...:(

Car Key Boi
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by tennischick
yuo tool!!! :p :p

disposablehero
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:29 AM
tennischick, the problem is that there IS no rule. Winning all 4 in a calendar year does not count as the official Grand Slam, because there is no official Grand Slam. The term was coined long ago, but there is nothing actually in a rulebook.

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:37 AM
TRADITION...grrrrrrrrr...:( :(

i hope the records at least acknowledge Martina's latest accomplishment. she has won her last remaining tourny!

i accept that Martina has a Career GS but i still think that an exception can be made in Serena's case bec they are sequential.

i wonder if BJK can be persuaded to take this up as a cause?? :eek: :eek:

"Topaz"
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:44 AM
Tennischick, you did find a cause to fight for, didn't you? Oh boy! ;)

the cat
Jan 26th, 2003, 01:46 AM
TC, trying to claim that Serena Williams has won the grand slam or Eldrick "Tiger" Woods won the golf grand slam actually cheapens the traditional calendar grand slams won by previous tennis greats. Both Serena and Tiger won the last 3 grand slams one year and the first grand slam the next year. But that does not constitute the grand slam. Those are phenomenal accomplishments and Serena and Tiger deserve to be praised for them! And Serena Williams and Tiger Woods are the greatest female tennis player and greatest golfer I have ever seen! :D But neither of them won the grand slam. Case closed! :eek:

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 02:00 AM
hey Cat:
did you really say "cheapens"? wow. :eek: :eek:

OK the men's final is about to start. my weekend has been semi-perfect so far. first of all, Serena won. :D

i would have preferred Paola and Viv to win the doubles but you can't have everything. :(

Martina won mixed dubs with Leander Paes!!! i love them both. :D

i would have loved it if my Caribbean boy had won the doubles finals but at least he lost to Santoro and his bird-killing sidekick -- both of whom i like. ;)

so far the score for my weekend is 2-2...

now if only Agassi will hoist that trophy aloft and declare himself the AO winner. then the balance would have been shifted in my favor. :D :)

and nothing you say can cheapen that...:p :p

the cat
Jan 26th, 2003, 02:04 AM
Sorry TC! :sad: I really didn't mean cheapen. Can I take it back?

TC, how come your tennis favorites play great and mine underachieve? :confused: :sad: :mad:

Shane54
Jan 26th, 2003, 02:54 AM
Read Darren Cahill's post in the Steffi vs. Serena slam. The guy hits the hammer on the nail!!!!!!!!

tennischick
Jan 26th, 2003, 04:06 AM
Originally posted by the cat
TC, how come your tennis favorites play great and mine underachieve? :confused: :sad: :mad:

bec you back losers?? :confused:

congrats Agassi!! :) :) http://racquety-yak.com/images_main/yak_cup.gif

OK now i can catch up on my sleep. bye folks! see you at the next tourny...:wavey: :wavey:

darren cahill
Jan 26th, 2003, 04:13 AM
thanks Shane for the kind words!

i just never understand why people want to change things to suit a particular situation....its like when golf recently changed the requirements for the hall of fame because it was too hard for people to qualify and there were never new players inducted. well thats too damn bad...by changing the requirements you belittle the players who acheived what they did the hard way and cheapen the ones who got in under half assed rules. change is good sometimes, but not ALL the time. i just think the press and all were excited about this Serena domination and it seems to be so long between real grand slams that any ray of something new promotes this chaos.

darren cahill
Jan 26th, 2003, 04:19 AM
and while we are on this subject, did this type of talk ever come up when Graf won the 3 events in 93 and then the aussie open in 94? did anyone insist on a "grand slam" being named then either? or is this because its Serena? is this all because we as fans really believe that 4 in a row is a grand slam no matter who the player is---if it were Capriati, (who we all know is a board fave here:rolleyes: ) would this conversation be happening? not trying to start something. I really do wonder cause it does fascinate me...to me, the 2002 year ended, wiped the slate clean..this is a new year...serena has 1 major now for the year...i dont look back and say BUT she has 4 in a row...those 3 were last year

Shane54
Jan 26th, 2003, 05:20 AM
Darren Cahill- I like the roll of the eyes on your last post. And as a Capriati fan, I understood exactly what you were trying to convey. Too many people on these boards have double standards. If Capriati would have done what Serena did, Most of the Willie fans would have been shooting that idea to the ground. NO Way they would say. Just like Serena can say "Fuck you bitch under her breath-"it was just the heat of the moment and competition"???:rolleyes: But Jenn is just being an evil bitch when she curses..These boards really humor me sometimes. The median age can't be more than 16 or 17 if you read some of the posts....

per4ever
Jan 26th, 2003, 06:41 AM
it's really simple: a grand slam = winning 4 GS-tournaments in a calender year.

Serena didn't do this..so no Grand Slam. What's the problem?
Rules are rules

persond
Jan 26th, 2003, 07:45 AM
:) :) People, people, people!!! Serena "coined" it the Serena Slam, knowing full well it was indeed, not the true "Grand Slam". However, it is the "Career Slam", which means she has won all four (4) slams. It was the same with Tiger!! The Tiger slam was only to indicate that he "owned" all four titles at the same time.!!

Why get your panties all bunched up???:rolleyes: :rolleyes: She's really only rejoicing in the fact that she's currently holding all four slam titles!!! That, in and of itself, is quite an accomplishment!!!:kiss: :kiss: :hearts: :hearts:

By the way, wasn't there a thread with a poll asking who would be the first to complete the "Career Slam"??? If, memory serves me right, many thought Martina Hingis and Capriati would accomplish it before Serena!!! HaHahahaHaH...aaahhhHaHaHaHaH Who'd thunk it???:p :p

Brian Stewart
Jan 26th, 2003, 08:37 AM
Tennis folks speak of honoring their "tradition", but in reality, traditions have changed over the years. For example, Wimbledon is often spoken of reverentially for its prestige. Yet in the early years, Wimbledon wasn't even the most prestigious tournament in the UK. That was the Irish Open. Likewise, the current 4 tournaments designated as "Grand Slam" events were chosen on a whim. There were a few other tourneys on equal footing at the time Budge made his quest. He singled out these 4 because those are the 4 countries which had won the Davis Cup. What if another country had won? Would a Slam consist of 5 tourneys?

Once, on a trip to a library, I came across a book that had old newspaper clippings. One of them was the earliest mention of tennis' Grand Slam that I had ever seen. It referenced winning those 4 events, Australia, France, Wimbledon, United States. But it did not say that all 4 had to be won in a single calendar year. In fact, it did not say they even had to be won in succession. The mere act of winning all 4, at any point in one's career, was considered a "Grand Slam", and it cited Fred Perry, not Budge, as the first player to do it.

Back in the 1980's, the ITF made a $1 Million bonus for winning all 4 slams in succession, calendar year or not. Many considered it a Grand Slam. When Martina captured her 4th straight at RG '84, the biggest complaints were from American tennis writers. These same writers said absolutely nothing the prior year, when Chris was pursuing the slam at Wimbledon '83. Their biggest motivating factor seemed to be that they were mad that Martina had done it and Chris hadn't, thus they wanted to deny Martina the recognition. (The American tennis press in the mid 80's was heavily pro-Chrissie and anti-Martina.)

So, if anything, the arguments used against recognizing what Serena and Martina did (and Steffi in 93-4) as a Grand Slam are not grounded so much in tradition as politics. And if you go back to the original definition of the term, winning all 4 in one's career, you'd have to add Andre, Chris, BJK, and a few others.

Sam L
Jan 26th, 2003, 10:45 AM
Thank you Brian for that useful historical perspective, most of you should read rather than argue.

BasicTennis
Jan 26th, 2003, 11:26 AM
I'm not bothered by this....coz Serena will get the grandslam this year 2003.;)

the cat
Jan 26th, 2003, 11:40 AM
Oh TC! I guess I do back losers! :sad:

And congratulations are in order or Andre Agassi on winning his 8th grand slam singles title! Well done! Unfortunately half of those grand slams were won in Melbourne, Australia, which is clearly the least important of the grand slams.