Did Sarazen really win the Grand Slam?

[brocks]

Watching the Masters, I think I heard them mention a time or two that if Rory wins Sunday, he will be the sixth player to win the pro Grand Slam, the others being Sarazen, Hogan, Player, Nicklaus, and Woods.

But should Sarazen get credit for winning a major before it was a major?

Sarazen's only Masters win was in 1935, the second year of the event.  He famously made a double eagle on the 15th hole of the final round ("the shot heard round the world"), which got him into a playoff against Craig Wood, which he won.

The event had a small but strong field -- only 55 pros, including some past their prime, but most of the big names (almost all Americans, of course), along with a handful of amateurs.  And it paid well --- $1500 to the winner, when the US Open only paid $1000.  However, some regular events, like the LA Open ($1350) and the St Paul Open ($1200) also paid more than the US Open that year, and the Miami Biltmore Open was the richest of all, paying $2500.

More importantly, nobody called it a major, or a Grand Slam component.  It was only five years removed from the original Grand Slam of Bobby Jones, which included two amateur events.  The term "Grand Slam" continued to mean the "Jones version" for decades -- in Jack's autobiography, he talks about the Grand Slam being his goal, and agonizing over the decision to turn pro, because a pro couldn't win it. 

In 1935, there was not 100% consensus on which pro events were majors, but most people agreed on the US and British Opens, and the PGA.  After that, there was less unanimity on the Canadian Open, the North and South Open, and the Western Open.  Some sportswriters, hyping the fledgling Masters, opined that it had a potential to become a major one day, but that was about it.

Half the difficulty of winning a major is the crushing pressure that comes when contending for a MAJOR.  Today, it's a life-changing event.  But that wasn't the case even as late as 1960, before Arnie revived the British Open.  Most American pros never played the Open, others did it once, as a bucket list item.  Nelson, Snead, and Hogan each played it just once during their primes, the latter two not even bothering to defend their titles.

In 1935, the Masters was less analogous to a major than to Tiger's Hero Challenge --- a small but strong field, hosted by a contender for GOAT (although the old-timers would tell you that Vardon in his prime would have eaten Jones's lunch).  There was nothing like the major pressure that can paralyze players today. 

I have no dog in this hunt --- I have never, ever heard Sarazen ranked in the top 5 of all time, let alone challenging Jack or Tiger for supremacy.  But I'm curious about how other golf fans feel about his claim to a Grand Slam.  I don't think you should get credit for winning a major before it's a major.  What do you think?

[Shorty]

5 hours ago, brocks said:

I have never, ever heard Sarazen ranked in the top 5 of all time, let alone challenging Jack or Tiger for supremacy.  But I'm curious about how other golf fans feel about his claim to a Grand Slam.  I don't think you should get credit for winning a major before it's a major.  What do you think?

What has his status amongst the greats of history past and present got to do with the Grand Slam? He won the tournaments. 

[David in FL]

9 hours ago, Shorty said:

He won the tournaments. 

Brevity is the soul of wit...

[dennyjones]

17 minutes ago, David in FL said:

Brevity is the soul of wit...

If only this was reality...

[iacas]

Poll added. It's pretty easy to do, folks:

https://thesandtrap.com/how-to/create-a-poll/

[turtleback]

2 hours ago, David in FL said:

Brevity is the soul of wit...

Or a way of ignoring the complexity of most real situations.  18>14 - brief, but doesn't come near to covering the picture.

I've made the case before that slams define majors, not the other way around.  I haven't done an exhaustive search, but I doubt you will find many pre-1960 sources that even talk about majors.  But in 1960 Arnie revived the idea of a professional Grand Slam, and while it took 15 years for the British Open to grow into the role, the 4 modern majors were defined.

[WUTiger]

In the 1920s, the Grand Slam generally consisted of The (British) Open, the US Open, the British Amateur and the US Amateur.

After World War II, the Grand Slam (or some call it the pro slam) consisted of the (British) Open, the US Open, the Master's and the PGA Championship.

Saracen helped elevate the Master's when he hit "The Shot Heard Round the World" in the 1935 event. On par 5 No. 15, he toed in a Wilson Turfrider 4 wood and sank a 235-yd. shot across the pond for a double-eagle. The shot tied him with assumed winner Craig Wood, whom Saracen defeated in a playoff the next day. 

Intertwined with discussion of slams is a confusion factor on what constitutes a major. The pre-WWII Grand Slam constituted the majors, with an eventual shift to the modern Grand Slam.

At one time, the USA's Western Open was considered a major. Walter Hagen supported this idea.

Quote

And though the term "major" didn't really take hold until Arnold Palmer, thanks largely to the promotional efforts of his agent, Mark McCormack, traveled to St. Andrews in 1960 for the British Open, the various record books continued counting U.S. and British Amateur titles as majors.
                                                      For David Fay's full article, see No Longer a Major

 

Edited April 8, 2018 by WUTiger
Add Saracen paragraph

[Shorty]

5 hours ago, WUTiger said:

 

1. Saracen helped elevate the Master's when he hit "The Shot Heard Round the World" 

2. Add Saracen paragraph

 

 

 

You're going to call him Saracen twice?

Edited April 8, 2018 by Shorty

[iacas]

14 minutes ago, Shorty said:

You're going to call him Saracen twice?

His birth name was Eugenio Saraceni. But… yeah, he changed it to Sarazen. With a z.

[turtleback]

6 hours ago, WUTiger said:

 

After World War II, the Grand Slam (or some call it the pro slam) consisted of the (British) Open, the US Open, the Master's and the PGA Championship.

 

 

I'd be interested to see any contemporaneous reference to the above contention prior to Arnie's revival of the grand slam idea in 1960.

[brocks]

19 hours ago, Shorty said:

What has his status amongst the greats of history past and present got to do with the Grand Slam? He won the tournaments. 

It has nothing to do with the GS.  I was, from long experience, trying to head off replies that accused me of being a Tiger fanboy who was just trying to run down anybody who challenged Tiger's records.  Probably not necessary in this forum, but the old Golf Channel forum was full of guys like that.

1 hour ago, turtleback said:

I'd be interested to see any contemporaneous reference to the above contention prior to Arnie's revival of the grand slam idea in 1960.

Me too.  "Major" was a very loose term before ABC grabbed Arnie's definition and ran with it.  When I was researching something else several years ago, I would see sportswriters of the 30's through 50's call all kinds of tournaments majors, usually because they paid more than average, but sometimes for reasons I couldn't understand, unless they were just hyping them out of habit.

[Buckeyebowman]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

His birth name was Eugenio Saraceni. But… yeah, he changed it to Sarazen. With a z.

Or it got "Ellis Islanded" to Sarazen. Just like Freddie Couple's ancestors or Ellis Island decided to change their last name from Coppola to Couples. And like my Mom's ancestors got their names changed from Mniechnikowski to Mitchell.

Edited April 9, 2018 by Buckeyebowman

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Or it got "Ellis Islanded" to Sarazen. Just like Freddie Couple's ancestors or Ellis Island decided to change their last name from Coppola to Couples. And like my Mom's ancestors got their names changed from Mniechnikowski to Mitchell.

No.

He was born in the U.S. as Eugenio Saraceni.

He changed his name.

[dbuck]

Yes

 

[bkuehn1952]

Yes, to the original question.

Also, it makes the trivia question of, "What players have won golf's lifetime grand slam?", just a bit more difficult. Many casual golf fans can get Nicklaus, Hogan, Player and Woods.  My experience is that Sarazen is the most likely to be missed, perhaps because he did it so long ago.  

[rehmwa]

On 08/04/2018 at 12:06 AM, Shorty said:

What has his status amongst the greats of history past and present got to do with the Grand Slam? He won the tournaments. 

This ^

Sometimes you'll here them say the "Modern Day Grand Slam" - defined as those 4 tournaments.  It's not rocket science or opinion.