Could Brooks Win a Slam? (Update: NO, Duh!)

[iacas]

If Brooks Koepka wins the first two majors of 2019… then he will have won four majors in a row. But… two of those majors will be the PGA Championship, as he won last year at Bellerive and would win in 2019 at Bethpage Black. So his four majors would be: U.S. Open, PGA, Masters, PGA. No British Open.

I contend that Tiger holds a Grand Slam because he:

• Won and held all four major championship trophies.
• Won all four in a row (i.e. there wasn't a year where they held one twice or something goofy).

Brooks wouldn't have done that - he'd be missing the British Open. So, while winning four majors in a row is a pretty remarkable achievement, because it doesn't include the British Open… I'm tempted to say it's not even a slam at all. Consider that if the next U.S. President banned golf (just go with me here) and only the British Open was played for his one and only term in office, would someone who won all four of those be considered to have won a slam? I don't think so.

So… I'm waffling between "slam but not a grand slam" and "not a slam at all." I think I'll end up on the latter, and that's the choice I made for now.

P.S. Tiger's grand slam is still a grand slam IMO even though they weren't won in a calendar year, because they were still won within a year. Hell, he added The Players Championship within that same year-long span. I think just because the year changed is too arbitrary a distinction, particularly when waiting eight months to play the fourth of the four majors is probably a lot tougher than just winning four majors April through August. Winning June through April is tougher. You have to be playing at a high level for that much longer.

[David in FL]

No

[saevel25]

I am voting not a slam.

[rehmwa]

interesting twist due to the schedule change for sure.

I've gone with the three Slam descriptions as follows:

1 - Career Grand Slam - you just get all 4 eventually.

2 - Grand Slam - All 4 in the same season

3 - Tiger Grand Slam - All 4 in a row, but not the same season. 

(I understand the OP's contention the 2 vs 3 aren't meaningful enough to separate, but I still differentiate just for sake of the discussion - though in this case it doesn't change or effect my answer)

Tiger GS is the question in play - I don't consider any Slam to consist of anything but the 4 different Majors.  He doesn't have The Open in the scenario.  But he does have the first 3 legs of the 'pure' Grand Slam.  So that would exciting going into July....

 

Edited January 8, 2019 by rehmwa

[boogielicious]

Not a slam in current definition, but definitely impressive.

[TN94z]

Not a slam although it would be very impressive and for sure deserves some higher recognition for the 4 in a row!

[DaveP043]

I'm going to agree with the consensus, a Slam would consist of one each of the four majors.  And of course I recognize that any definition or a grand slam is by its very nature arbitrary.  My personal definition of a Grand Slam would be all four majors in a single calendar year, and I agree that's an arbitrary distinction, but that's the way I've always thought of it.  Anyway, that's the topic of another thread.

[Wally Fairway]

Not a slam; the golf slam is winning the 4 major tournaments - Tiger is the only won to have held those titles at the same time, using a calendar to somehow diminish that achievement seems very arbitrary to me.

If Brooks (or Spieth) wins even 1 more major then they will be the second player to win 4 majors since Tiger won his last major. (I'm using that to show how hard it is to win more than one.
FWIW here is the list of players to win more than one major in the last 10 years>
4 - Rory
3 - Spieth & Koepka
2 - Kaymer & Bubba & Phil

[GolfLug]

I am just writing the first thing that came to my empty mind. I am going to say a Slam with an *.

PGA has a much deeper field than the British Open AFIK, so that would make it more impressive. Also if he wins the next two, I am betting on him winning the third one in succession and then there will be another thread trying to name 5 in a row! .....................you heard it here first.. 

[Yukari]

"Slam" in my definition is winning all majors (i.e., four different majors) in succession.

So NO.

[MacDutch]

Its a slam, the Koepka slam. Never done before. In ranking its below the grand slam (1st) and the Tiger slam (2nd). But before the career grand slam (4th).

[HJJ003]

Not a slam because of the British like OP stated. To me you gotta have all four majors at one time to have the grand slam (or win all four in a career for the career slam). 

[turtleback]

47 minutes ago, MacDutch said:

Its a slam, the Koepka slam. Never done before. In ranking its below the grand slam (1st) and the Tiger slam (2nd). But before the career grand slam (4th).

This is also my position.  Although it will be moot, since it is most unlikely he will do that.

[rehmwa]

1 hour ago, Yukari said:

"Slam" in my definition is winning all majors (i.e., four different majors) in succession.

So NO.

^^^ yes

I think the massively accepted criteria of the "Career Slam" meaning each of the 4 majors (not just 4 majors total) pretty much disqualifies the concept of a "Koepka Slam".

Though I do agree 4 in a row is more unique than a Career Slam...Perhaps a "Koepka Series"

I'd be pretty disappointed if this scenario happens and they bastardize the term SLAM for it.  But then I'd go on with life, sadder, with the world a lesser place and not as bright and full of hope as the day before.

Edited January 8, 2019 by rehmwa

[jimnm]

No, it would not be a grand slam if he won the next two majors. He needs to hold all 4 major trophy's at the same time.

Edited January 8, 2019 by jimnm
added grand

[iacas]

Uh, guys, nobody here (including me) has pointed out the obvious.

Derp.

Thanks @tristanhilton85.

[MacDutch]

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

Uh, guys, nobody here (including me) has pointed out the obvious.

Derp.

Thanks @tristanhilton85.

Not 4 in a row so no slam what so ever 

[JetFan1983]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

Uh, guys, nobody here (including me) has pointed out the obvious.

Derp.

Thanks @tristanhilton85.

Lol!! I totally wiffed on this too. Thanks, Tristan!