MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: Courier: Olympics = 5th major! Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

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.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
01-22-2013 11:22 AM
Litotes
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjurra View Post
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?
No, they don't. Many have concrete qualification limits, such as 11,29 in the Women's 100 meter sprint. Anyone running below that will be qualified, except of course for those countries with more than three qualified athletes.
01-22-2013 11:13 AM
August
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.
01-22-2013 11:03 AM
bjurra
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?
01-22-2013 10:55 AM
bjurra
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?
01-22-2013 09:39 AM
Litotes
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.
01-22-2013 09:36 AM
bjurra
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.
01-22-2013 03:35 AM
Geo
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.
01-21-2013 09:40 PM
stewietennis
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.
01-21-2013 03:55 PM
Litotes
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.
01-21-2013 09:33 AM
FleetSeb
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.
01-21-2013 03:08 AM
Han Solo
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...
01-21-2013 02:52 AM
Zelyony
Re: Courier: Olympics = 5th major!

No!
01-21-2013 01:30 AM
stewietennis
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.
01-21-2013 12:39 AM
alypen
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.
01-20-2013 10:17 PM
bjurra
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.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

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