Who Owns Each Slam - Trophy Name Change?

[Fiero425]

Who owns each Major, worth changing the name of the trophy because of their dominance? Who do you think should have the honor and why? (Off the top of my head)

Australian Open for the men is owned by Novak "Nole" Djokovic: Not only winning 5 so far, and taking 3 in a row! No one's done that in the Open era!

For the ladies, I guess you should give it to Margaret Smith Court, but for many years, the top players in the world didn't even bother going "down under" so she picked up an easy 11 titles with a huge psychological edge over Evonne Goolagong!
----------------
French Open was owned by Bjorn Borg since the 80's with 6 titles, but Rafa Nadal has overtaken him with 9 titles

For the Ladies, Chris Evert is Queen of clay with 7 titles!
----------------
Wimbledon had Bjorn Borg as the apparent King, but Roger Federer not only took 5 straight, he has 2 more titles to have a total of 7!

Without a doubt Martina Navratilova reigns supreme on grass taking 9 singles titles: 5 straight ('82-'87) often without losing a set!
----------------
US Open had several dominant figures with McEnroe, Connors winning on 3 surfaces, and Lendl getting to 8 straight finals, but again Roger Federer dominated with 5 straight titles! This is why he's the GOAT with 1 FO & 4 AO's!

I guess you have to rename the trophy to Chris Evert due to her winning 6 titles on 2 surfaces: 4 on clay and 2 on HC!

 

[EdbergsGhost]

Wimbledon men:  Sampras

U.S. Open men:  Federer

Two named the Federer Cup would be confusing.   :scratch:

 

[britbox]

Djoker is moving into the territory of owning the AO naming rights.

The French... Nadal has secured it lock, stock and barrel.

 

[Mastoor]

I think No1e's cunning plan is to win some more Wimbledons

 

[britbox]

I don't think Nole will enter the realms of Sampras and Federer at Wimbledon.  The AO looks like it might have his name on though.

 

[britbox]

Does Murray now own the Olympics?

 

[Fiero425]

Does Murray now own the Olympics?

No! It would already be changed to "The Williams" if all you needed was to be a multi-winner! I threw this together Sat.:

- http://fiero4251.blogspot.com/2016/08/fan-page-novak-nole-djokovic.html - Enjoy Nole Fans

 

[Moxie]

Nobody owns the Olympics. I liked Andy's quote of earlier in the week, when asked about "defending" the Olympic gold. He said, "I'm not defending it. No one can take (the 2012 one) away from me." No one is going to rename swimming medals for Michael Phelps. Likewise, I think it's goofy to think any Major title should be named for the person who has won it a lot.

 

[Fiero425]

Nobody owns the Olympics. I liked Andy's quote of earlier in the week, when asked about "defending" the Olympic gold. He said, "I'm not defending it. No one can take (the 2012 one) away from me." No one is going to rename swimming medals for Michael Phelps. Likewise, I think it's goofy to think any Major title should be named for the person who has won it a lot.

Well you're no fun! :scratch: :hunting:

 

[Moxie]

Well you're no fun! :scratch: :hunting:

Perhaps. But clearly you've revived this thread for a reason.

 

[Fiero425]

.....

Aussie Open for the men is owned by Novak "Nole" Djokovic: Not only winning 6 so far and taking 3 in a row! No one's done that in the Open Era!

For the ladies, I guess you should give it to Margaret Court, but for many years, the top players in the world didn't even bother going "down under" so she picked up an easy 11 titles w/ a huge psychological edge over Evonne Goolagong!
----------------
French Open was owned by Bjorn Borg since the 80's w/ 6 titles, but Rafa Nadal has overtaken him w/ 10 titles

For the Ladies, Chris Evert is Queen of clay w/ 7 titles!
----------------
Wimbledon had Borg as the apparent King, but Roger Federer not only took 5 str., he has 2 more titles to have a total of 7; tied w/ Sampras!

W/O a doubt Martina Navratilova reigns supreme on grass taking 9 singles titles: 5 str. ('82-'87) often w/o losing a set!
----------------
US Open had several dominant figures w/ McEnroe, Connors winning on 3 surfaces, & Lendl getting to 8 str. finals, but again Federer dominated w/ 5 str. titles! This is why he's the GOAT w/ 1 FO & 5 AO's!

I guess you have to rename the trophy to Evert due to her winning 6 titles on 2 surfaces: 4 on clay & 2 on HC!

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Only Roger has a cup named after him.

 

[Moxie]

Only Roger has a cup named after him.

And that by accident. This campaigning for the renaming of the cups seems fannish and short-sighted to me. I know @Fiero425 loves the idea, (basically because he wants the AO cup named after Djokovic,) but what does it serve, beyond fan vanity? And what happens when another player passes them? Or controversy intervenes? Why name the cups after players? It seems unnecessary.

 

[DarthFed]

I like the thread even though I agree that they will never rename the cups, nor should they. I'd say AO and RG have the obvious "kings" since Nole and Rafa have won the most there respectively. Wimbledon has 2 candidates and USO has a few. Even though Roger has arguments as the king of both I'd call a tie a tie for now. Hoping he becomes the king of both with 1 more victory at each...yeah I'm greedy.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I like the thread even though I agree that they will never rename the cups, nor should they. I'd say AO and RG have the obvious "kings" since Nole and Rafa have won the most there respectively. Wimbledon has 2 candidates and USO has a few. Even though Roger has arguments as the king of both I'd call a tie a tie for now. Hoping he becomes the king of both with 1 more victory at each...yeah I'm greedy.

Let us hope that it happens right this year, #19 and #20 (and thus owning both Wimbledon and USO).

 

[Moxie]

I like the thread even though I agree that they will never rename the cups, nor should they. I'd say AO and RG have the obvious "kings" since Nole and Rafa have won the most there respectively. Wimbledon has 2 candidates and USO has a few. Even though Roger has arguments as the king of both I'd call a tie a tie for now. Hoping he becomes the king of both with 1 more victory at each...yeah I'm greedy.

You like the "who owns each major"-aspect. You're such a world-domination guy. And yes, you are greedy. As far as the USO, on the men's side, no one gets more cred than Connors, who won it on 3 surfaces. That you can't top. As far as the women and RG, the trophy is called the Coupe Suzanne Lenglen. And there is already a stadium named after her. If they wanted to rename it after Chris Evert, that might not be wrong, though I doubt they will.

 

[Moxie]

Let us hope that it happens right this year, #19 and #20 (and thus owning both Wimbledon and USO).

#gag #livinginadreamworld

 

[DarthFed]

Let us hope that it happens right this year, #19 and #20 (and thus owning both Wimbledon and USO).

That's the hope.

 

[DarthFed]

You like the "who owns each major"-aspect. You're such a world-domination guy. And yes, you are greedy. As far as the USO, on the men's side, no one gets more cred than Connors, who won it on 3 surfaces. That you can't top. As far as the women and RG, the trophy is called the Coupe Suzanne Lenglen. And there is already a stadium named after her. If they wanted to rename it after Chris Evert, that might not be wrong, though I doubt they will.

3 surfaces is nice but you're talking green clay and then grass and HC. I'm sure Roger wouldn't complain if they had it on grass a few years. And Fed won 5 straight, that's the argument for him. A 6th would make it a moot point, time for him to win another. I like world domination when it's coming from the proper source B-)

 

[GameSetAndMath]

3 surfaces is nice but you're talking green clay and then grass and HC. I'm sure Roger wouldn't complain if they had it on grass a few years. And Fed won 5 straight, that's the argument for him. A 6th would make it a moot point, time for him to win another. I like world domination when it's coming from the proper source B-)

Once Roger wins one more Wimbledon (similarly, one more USO), there is no question he owns the tourney. It is beyond any arguments.