Courier: Olympics = 5th major! - Page 7 - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #91 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-18-2013, 02:59 PM
Banned!
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 180
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Pinktards out in full force.
Lemon Water is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-20-2013, 10:17 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,421
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SliceAce View Post
Wow Murray really degenerated the brains of his fans in 2012...
I am a Federer fan and I put down his woeful performance in the Olympic final to him wanting the gold too badly.
bjurra is offline  
post #93 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 12:39 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,433
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

I don't agree. (I've spent the last half-hour trying to find it, but no luck, but) I read an article or interview recently (it was about Andy Murray, but never mind) which described precisely the emotional letdown, I think it was, after winning an extremely hard-fought match, and I thought at the time that was a virtually perfect description of Federer after that titanic struggle in the semi. If I find it again, I'll quote it, but trouble is there's been a lot about Murray in the British press over the last month.
alypen is offline  
post #94 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 01:30 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,041
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Don't know why a point is being made about whether a player would prefer a gold medal to a major. Some say the World Tour Finals is more prestigious than an Olympic Gold because only the Top 8 players are involved. However, the Top 8 players are usually vying for the Olympic Gold too, along with 56 others. Another point of difference is a loss during the Olympics makes it impossible to win the gold. A loss, or even two losses, during the RR in the WTF still gives a player a chance to win the whole thing. The World Tour Finals is an exclusive tournament where you have to be ranked #8 (or #9 sometimes) to even enter, meaning a handful of QF and SF appearances in Masters 1000 and Majors, so it's hard to qualify for this tournament. The Olympics are held every four years so a player has one maybe two windows of opportunity to realistically win it.

People point to Mecir, Rosset and Massu and mock that the OG can be won by nobodies. Mecir AFAIK has won as many Masters 1000 as Tsonga, Ferrer, Berdych and Del Potro combined. As for Rosset and Massu, I believe this just indicates that, as in any normal tournament, a player can get hot and win the whole thing on any given day. Who won the Rogers Cup in 1997? Who won the AO in 2002? Who won Rome in 2003? Who won the FO in 2004?
At the 1992 Olympics Rosset beat Ferreira (SF at the AO, W at Queens Club), beat Courier (W at AO, W at Rome, W at the FO) and Ivanisevic (F at Wimbledon)
At the 2004 games, Massu beat Andreev (F Gstaad, 4R at FO), beat Spadea (4R at Wimbledon), beat Moya (W Acapulco, Rome, BA), beat Fish (F at Halle)

It's not as though the Olympics were attended exclusively by nobodies pre-2000 either. Just look at some of the named entrants who played in those past Olympics - even though some were demonstration sports.
1984 (Edberg, Cash, Muster, Forget)
1988 (Edberg, Ivanisevic, Masur, Leconte, Gilbert)
1992 (Edberg, Ivanisevic, Courier, Sampras, Becker, Stich, Chang)
1996 (Agassi, Ivanisevic, Bruguera, Henman, Rusedski, Philippoussis, Costa, Enqvist)

That's not including the women's elite such as Graf, Davenport, Capriati and doubles specialists like the Woodies. When you get into the 2000s before the Fedal era, with names such as Safin, Kuerten, Hewitt, Kafennikov, Henman, Ferrero, Rios, Rafter and Chang, the entrants start to look like names you would draw on a major, or at least a Masters 1000. The Olympics lack the history of the majors and as such this achievement is difficult to quantify and equate to the eras of Laver and Borg however this doesn't detract from it's current importance.
stewietennis is offline  
post #95 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 02:52 AM
Registered User
 
Zelyony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 226
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

No!

Roger Federer Mikhail Youzhny Pablo Andujar
Zelyony is offline  
post #96 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 03:08 AM
Registered User
 
Han Solo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Age: 39
Posts: 2,322
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by stewietennis View Post
Don't know why a point is being made about whether a player would prefer a gold medal to a major. Some say the World Tour Finals is more prestigious than an Olympic Gold because only the Top 8 players are involved. However, the Top 8 players are usually vying for the Olympic Gold too, along with 56 others. Another point of difference is a loss during the Olympics makes it impossible to win the gold. A loss, or even two losses, during the RR in the WTF still gives a player a chance to win the whole thing. The World Tour Finals is an exclusive tournament where you have to be ranked #8 (or #9 sometimes) to even enter, meaning a handful of QF and SF appearances in Masters 1000 and Majors, so it's hard to qualify for this tournament. The Olympics are held every four years so a player has one maybe two windows of opportunity to realistically win it.

People point to Mecir, Rosset and Massu and mock that the OG can be won by nobodies. Mecir AFAIK has won as many Masters 1000 as Tsonga, Ferrer, Berdych and Del Potro combined. As for Rosset and Massu, I believe this just indicates that, as in any normal tournament, a player can get hot and win the whole thing on any given day. Who won the Rogers Cup in 1997? Who won the AO in 2002? Who won Rome in 2003? Who won the FO in 2004?
At the 1992 Olympics Rosset beat Ferreira (SF at the AO, W at Queens Club), beat Courier (W at AO, W at Rome, W at the FO) and Ivanisevic (F at Wimbledon)
At the 2004 games, Massu beat Andreev (F Gstaad, 4R at FO), beat Spadea (4R at Wimbledon), beat Moya (W Acapulco, Rome, BA), beat Fish (F at Halle)

It's not as though the Olympics were attended exclusively by nobodies pre-2000 either. Just look at some of the named entrants who played in those past Olympics - even though some were demonstration sports.
1984 (Edberg, Cash, Muster, Forget)
1988 (Edberg, Ivanisevic, Masur, Leconte, Gilbert)
1992 (Edberg, Ivanisevic, Courier, Sampras, Becker, Stich, Chang)
1996 (Agassi, Ivanisevic, Bruguera, Henman, Rusedski, Philippoussis, Costa, Enqvist)

That's not including the women's elite such as Graf, Davenport, Capriati and doubles specialists like the Woodies. When you get into the 2000s before the Fedal era, with names such as Safin, Kuerten, Hewitt, Kafennikov, Henman, Ferrero, Rios, Rafter and Chang, the entrants start to look like names you would draw on a major, or at least a Masters 1000. The Olympics lack the history of the majors and as such this achievement is difficult to quantify and equate to the eras of Laver and Borg however this doesn't detract from it's current importance.
The thread title implies the Olympics tennis tournament is on a par with the majors. It's not, clearly.

While I take the point in the post above, I would argue that the list in bold is hardly a roll call of the tennis elite...
Han Solo is online now  
post #97 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 09:33 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Age: 24
Posts: 820
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Olympics is not on a par with the majors. But it is more important than any other tennis tournament after them. That is evident from the number of players that retired following the olympics, indicating that it was the olympic tournament that they were holding on for.

Players have stated pretty clearly that they care a lot about the olympics. A lot more so than the masters events. The WTFs is a bit different because of its heightened exclusivity but I still think a gold medal winner will be more remembered than a WTF winner.

Andy Murray

Gilles Simon - Juan Martin del Potro - Grigor Dimitrov

Pablo Andujar - Philipp Petzschner - David Ferrer - Mikhail Youzhny - Simone Bolelli

Julien Benneteau - Juan Monaco - Tommy Haas - Gianluigi Quinzi - Tommy Robredo - Guido Pella - Lleyton Hewitt
FleetSeb is offline  
post #98 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 03:55 PM
ALT-0
 
Litotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norway
Age: 43
Posts: 56,525
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FleetSeb View Post
Olympics is not on a par with the majors. But it is more important than any other tennis tournament after them. That is evident from the number of players that retired following the olympics, indicating that it was the olympic tournament that they were holding on for.

Players have stated pretty clearly that they care a lot about the olympics. A lot more so than the masters events. The WTFs is a bit different because of its heightened exclusivity but I still think a gold medal winner will be more remembered than a WTF winner.
You can't really compare with the WTF that way, because the retirees had no chance of reaching it. Had they been ranked close to top-8 it might have been a different story.
Litotes is offline  
post #99 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-21-2013, 09:40 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,041
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Han Solo View Post
The thread title implies the Olympics tennis tournament is on a par with the majors. It's not, clearly.

While I take the point in the post above, I would argue that the list in bold is hardly a roll call of the tennis elite...
The names you bolded are definitely not a roll call of the tennis elite but you can only beat the person in front of you. It's not as though Massu was handed the title – he still had to beat players who had achieved something in the lead up tournaments towards the Olympics, notably Moya. It's not really Massu's fault that Federer, Roddick, Ferrero, Safin, Gonzales and Davydenko all lost before the QFs. Should we then downgrade the importance of the Australian Open because when Kafelnikov, Johansson and Korda won their AO titles the only person of note beaten in those three combined tournaments was Safin (by Johansson in 2002)? Should we question the importance of Wimbledon because in 1985 Becker won the title over nobodies? Is the Australian Open unimportant and not worth winning because Johansson and Korda won it? Is the French Open not worth winning because Gimeno and Gomez won it?

I personally don't think the Olympics should be considered one of the majors but I think it's considerably more important than a Masters 1000 and more important than a WTF because of its rarity. That Massu or other unpopular players won it doesn't detract from its importance because it's still building its history. The players know that and want to win it, even those of the previous generation, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered entering.
stewietennis is offline  
post #100 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-22-2013, 03:35 AM
country flag Geo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,610
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Punky View Post
i disagree, it cant be the 5 major bc not every player can get in, theres a Certain amount of player who can enter from each country and it is not fair.

I agree with you Until all the best players by rank and not by country quota are able to enter, the Olympics can't be on the same level as the slams.
Geo is offline  
post #101 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-22-2013, 09:36 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,421
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo View Post
I agree with you Until all the best players by rank and not by country quota are able to enter, the Olympics can't be on the same level as the slams.
We are not discussing fairness here, we are discussing status.

Besides, there were very few players with potential for late rounds that were not allowed to play. Tommy Haas is the only player that comes to mind.

Including mugs for geopolitical reasons is something all individual sports do in the Olympics, that has never harmed the status.
bjurra is offline  
post #102 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-22-2013, 09:39 AM
ALT-0
 
Litotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norway
Age: 43
Posts: 56,525
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjurra View Post
We are not discussing fairness here, we are discussing status.

Besides, there were very few players with potential for late rounds that were not allowed to play. Tommy Haas is the only player that comes to mind.

Including mugs for geopolitical reasons is something all individual sports do in the Olympics, that has never harmed the status.
But that doesn't really matter elsewhere. Another runner, lifter or swimmer won't remove an interesting competitor from the competition. In tennis, however, the number of participants are fixed.
Litotes is offline  
post #103 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-22-2013, 10:55 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,421
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Litotes View Post
But that doesn't really matter elsewhere. Another runner, lifter or swimmer won't remove an interesting competitor from the competition. In tennis, however, the number of participants are fixed.
All Olympic events have a fixed number of participants.

I think table tennis is the only sport where this is a true problem as China is only allowed to have three players in the mens singles.

Who in their right mind thinks the tennis event was less prestigious because a few top 50 players were missing?
bjurra is offline  
post #104 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-22-2013, 11:03 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,421
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Litotes View Post
But that doesn't really matter elsewhere. Another runner, lifter or swimmer won't remove an interesting competitor from the competition. In tennis, however, the number of participants are fixed.
All Olympic events have a fixed number of participants.

I think table tennis is the only sport where this is a true problem as China is only allowed to have three players in the mens singles.

Who in their right mind thinks the tennis event was less prestigious because a few top 50 players were missing?
bjurra is offline  
post #105 of 106 (permalink) Old 01-22-2013, 11:13 AM
Registered User
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Age: 26
Posts: 5,471
                     
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo View Post
I agree with you Until all the best players by rank and not by country quota are able to enter, the Olympics can't be on the same level as the slams.
Also, being only once in four years may make Olympic Gold more difficult to achieve, but on the other hand, as the four majors are annual, Olympics are too seldom.

Olympics suit better to sports like athletics that have only one major championship per year, OG in Olympic years.

Stan Wawrinka
2014 Australian Open Champion | 2014 Monte Carlo Masters Champion | 2015 French Open Champion

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
2008 Paris Masters Champion | 2014 Toronto Masters Champion

My Twitter
August is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome