CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles

1986 tennis event results

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionFeb 17, 2025
Entity authorityQ3973697 ↗
Source-derived summary

Guy Forget and Andrés Gómez were the defending champions, but Gómez did not participate this year. Forget partnered Kevin Curren, losing in the semifinals.

Sherwood Stewart and Kim Warwick won the title, defeating Pat Cash and Slobodan Živojinović 6–4, 6–4 in the final.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles” is 1986 tennis event results. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Stockholm, Doubles and tennis, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current 43-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Stockholm, Doubles and tennis is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “1986 tennis event results” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 17, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q3973697. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles primary sources, 1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles archive and Stockholm research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles”?
  2. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
  3. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “1986 Stockholm Open – Doubles” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.