Hard Records I: Calendar Grand Slam

There are many things that attract us to watch sports: excitement of a match point in tennis, penalties in football, touchdowns in american football, home runs in baseball, and so on... but... if there is something that excites people more than anything is when a record is going to be broken, or in some cases, a very hard achievement.

I want to start a series of blogs discussing some of the toughest and hardest records I am aware of in sports, and it is likely I may overlook some, so feel free to contribute to any in the comments section. Today I begin by writing about how hard it is to win a Calendar Grand Slam in Tennis.

By now you must know that the greats of Roger Federer, Pete Sampras, Rafael Nadal, Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe, all of them haven't or weren't able to win a career grand slam. Some of then got (or have been) closer than others. The only man: Rod Laver, who did it in 1969; so what I'm going to do is briefly summarize each year of the open era from the beginning, starting with the tennis player who won the first Grand Slam -hence the one who could have potentially won the calendar Grand Slam (note that until 1985, the first GS of the year was Roland Garros. Australia was the last, then it became the first).

1968: Ken Rosewall won RG defeating Rod Laver in the Finals. He was eliminated in the semi finals of Wimbledon and failed to win another Slam for the year.

1969: Rod Laver wins all four GS Tournaments. The only man in the open era to do so.

1970: Jan Kodes wins RG. A clay court specialist, he was clobberd in Wimbledon. He would repeat his French triumph in 1971, with the same fate in Wimbledon.

1972: Andres Gimeno, another clay court specialist wins RG. Once again he would exit early in Wimbledon.

1973: Illie Nastase was in his best years, winning his second GS in Paris. But he would be eliminated in the 4th round of Wimbledon.

1974: Bjorn Borg wins his first Grand Slam at RG and overall. Still immature for grass, he would be eliminated in the third round. Interestingly, in this year Jimmy Connors would go on to win the remaining three Grand Slams and what's ironic about the whole thing  is that he didn't play at RG. Had he played, would he won it? We'll never know. Borg wins RG again in 1975 and in Wimbledon he loses to eventual champion Arthur Ashe in the quarterfinals.

1976: Adriano Panatta wins RG and as it happens before with clay court specialists, he exits early in Wimbledon.

1977: Guillermo Vilas faces the same fate Panatta did the previous year.

1978-1981: Bjorn Borg wins RG each year and goes on to win Wimbledon as well, putting him in good position to win the other two slams. He becomes the only player since Rod Laver to achieve this. He would hit a brick wall however at the US Open, losing in the 1978 finals to Jimmy Connors, the 1979 quarters to Roscoe Tanner and the 1980 finals to John McEnroe. During all this time Bjorn did not make the trip to play in Australia, and his reasoning was simple: It wasn't worth it, due to not having conquered the third GS of the year in New York. Finally in 1981, Bjorn's reign ends at Wimbledon losing the finals to McEnroe.

1982: Mats Wilander wins RG, and again as a clay court specialist, exits early at Wimbledon.

1983: Same as above for Yannick Noah.

1984: Same as above for Ivan Lendl. Interestingly, finalst John McEnroe had the match in the bag, up 2 sets to none against Lendl. Amazingly, Ivan built the comeback and ended up winning the title.

1985: Mats Wilander wins RG a second time and exits early at Wimbledon a second time as well.

1986: Ivan Lendl wins at RG, but loses at the Wimbledon finals. He wins at the US Open though.

1987: Australian Open becomes the first Grand Slam of the year. It also changes surface from grass to hard courts. Stefan Edberg wins it but exits early at RG.

1988: Mats Wilander wins in Australia and at Roland Garros. He becomes only the third man after Laver and Borg to win the first two GS of the year. He loses at Wimbledon though in the quarterfinals to Miloslav Mecir. Wilander would go on and win the 1988 US Open, collecting three of the four Slams. Only Connors and Laver before him achieved the same.

1989: Ivan Lendl wins at Australia and in one of the greatest upsets in the history of the sport, loses to 17 year old -underarm serving- Michael Chang in RG quarters. Lendl repeats his Aussie win in 1990, but did not play the 1990 RG.

1991: Boris Becker wins at Australia. Up to that point Boris had never won a clay tournament in his career and RG did not change his luck.

1992: Jim Courier joins the likes of Laver, Borg and Wilander, becoming the fourth player to win the first two slams of the year. He would lose in the third round of Wimbledon. He wins in Australia in 1993 again, but loses in the finals of Roland Garros (to Sergi Bruguera), and Wimbledon (to Pete Sampras). Courier becomes the first man since the 1980 Borg to reach the finals of the first three Grand Slams tournaments.

1994: Sampras wins at Australia and loses in the quarterfinal round of RG.

1995: Agassi wins at Australia and also loses in the quarters of RG.

1996: Becker wins at Australia and you know the rest of the story...

1997: Sampras wins at Australia and exits in the 3rd round of RG.

1998: Petr Korda wins at Australia and hits the nail in the head exiting in RG's first round. Way to go!

1999: Yevgeny Kafelnikov conquers the Down Under, but loses in the second round of RG -almost as good as last years's Korda-

2000-01: Agassi wins in Australia but he never gets a second chance at RG. Ironically, he had came from winning it in 1999, which became the first slam of his resurgence into tennis-.

2002: Thomas Johansson upsets clear favorite Marat Safin to win his only Grand Slam ever. He was never seen again at a final round of any Slam after that.

2003: Agassi conquers his third Aussie slam, and again misses RG.

2004-07: Federer begins his domination of the tennis scene winnig in Australia, but fails to pass the quarters at RG. He loses to Safin in the 2005 Aussie semifinals, and Marat goes on to crown one of his finest performances in his career winning in Australia but loses early in RG. He would never be seen at a late round in a Slam again. As Federer continues to dominate, Nadal begin his domination over Federer. From 2005 and on, Nadal would defeat Federer everytime they met at RG. In 04, 06 and 07, Federer would go on and win Wimbledon and the US Open, which raises the question: Had Nadal not been around, he probably would have won the career Grand Slam in 2006 and 2007!?!?!?!?!

2008: New tennis promise Novak Djokovic wins his first Slam. He is downed by Nadal in the semifinals of RG.

2009: Nadal wins his first Australian open. He unexpectedly loses in the quarters to Robin Soderling, in what has been so far his only loss in Paris. Federer is finally able to win RG, completing his career Grand Slam.

2010: Federer wins in Australia and loses in Paris.

2011: Djokovic wins in Australia but loses to Federer in the semis of RG. Some believe had he won that match, he probably would have defeated Rafa in the finals, as up to that point he had a 6-0 head 2 head in finals that year. Interestingly, Novak would win at Wimbledon and at the US Open... both times against Nadal.

2012: Djokovic wins an amazing 6 hour final in Australia, but Nadal regains his crown at RG.

So as you can see, winning a calendar slam is no easy thing. Lots of players never even had the chance or were close to it. In a nutshell here are the players I consider have been closer to winning the calendar Grand Slam in a year, both of them swedes, and both of them are the only players who were able to win the first two Grand Slams in a calendar year (no tennis player so far has been able to win the first three Slams), other than Rod Laver:

Bjorn Borg in 1978: He wins at Roland Garros and at Wimbledon, but he loses at the US Open finals. Had he won, I really think he would have won in Australia.

Bjorn Borg in 1980: Exactly the same story than in 1978. He wins at Roland Garros and at Wimbledon, but he loses at the US Open finals. Had he won, I really think he would have won in Australia.

Mats Wilander in 1988: He wins at Australia and at RG. He missed his chance at Wimbledon and he went on to win the US Open.

Special mentions to:

Jimmy Connors in 1974, who won all three slams in 1974 without having participated at RG.


Jim Courier in 1993: He wins at Australia and loses a five setter final at RG. Had he won, I think he would have been a different animal against Pete Sampras in Wimbledon.

Roger Federer in 2006 and 2007: He wins Australia both years, and he meets a brick wall called Rafael Nadal at RG's finals both years. He went on to win the other Slams.

Novak Djokovic in 2011: He wins at Australia and had all the odds in his favor to beat Nadal in the finals, had he made it past the semis. He went on and won Wimbledon and the US Open.