TennisForum.com - View Single Post - How is the Australian Open viewed as a "grand slam"

View Single Post

Old Jan 27th, 2013, 01:02 PM   #23
Olórin
Senior Member
 
Olórin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,143
Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute Olórin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: How is the Australian Open viewed as a "grand slam"

Quote:
Originally Posted by eck View Post
For a MM slam, they offer the largest pot of prize money and the tournament director is actually well loved amongst the players. It's the one slam that actually tries to accommodate the players to fit their needs.


It's regarded as the "fun" slam by many people.

"Wimbledon is the oldest Major, founded in 1877, followed by the US in 1881, the French in 1891, and the Australian in 1905"
Yup, the slams are regarded in prestige pretty much in order of age. I would agree it is the "fun" slam. It kick starts the tennis year, the players and fans alike love it. It has a great tennis tradition, some amazing champions and some amazing matches.

It isn't as "serious" as Wimbledon which marks the tipping point into the latter third of the tennis year and is traditionally dominated by the greatest of champions, but it is as well regarded in its own way. In other words: it is what it is.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlada View Post
From reality... this was Vikapower... back to you delusion.
Olórin is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote