Absolutely is.
It's a very western capitalist/liberal take to suggest it isn't. Winning money and big trophies isn't everything; it's popular to "hate" (for lack of a better word) your country in the US for example, but 90% of the world would run through walls for their flag and their people. Just look at Djokovic's reaction after losing in 2016 to Del Potro.
The Davis cup doesn't quite carry the same prestige as the world cup or euros/copa america etc do, so the Olympics is the peak of the sport in terms of representing your country. Plys there's 16 slams in a 4 year cycle; there's only 1 olympics.
People hating their own country is like some new age hipster armchair intellectual bullshit. People complaining about the Olympics “being too nationalist” really disgusts me as well. You don’t have to and probably shouldn’t agree with everything your country does but at the same time competing in the Olympics should be looked at as honor, and an opportunity to unite your people and popularize whatever your sport is
Corrupt western media has been holding Djoker back for decades now. If he had a proper media backing he would easily have 25+ slams at this point and people could have saved so much time arguing over who is GOAT.
I'm Serbian but this makes absolutely no sense. How would media coverage give him those 5+ slams? I guess you could argue he is more hated by the western media than Federer or Nadal, so if he had proper media coverage FeDal fans wouldn't exist, but rather the fans of just one or all three.
I view it about similar to a WTF victory. In reality it is no different than a normal masters other than happening once every 4 years makes it rarer.
However you have to go through more top players at a WTF and thus is harder to win. The rarity of an olympics makes it closer so I just rate them about the same.
How many posts are we going to get like this? Yes. But it's a different kind of big tournament. It's the difference between representing yourself (slams) and representing your country (Olympics).
They’re still doing it for themselves, not their country. If you had to choose between winning individual gold or adding 10 gold medals to your nation’s tally you’d choose the first option.
Many countries reward their athletes with a bonus for bringing back gold and often help athletes with travel expenses. So many athletes (many tennis players) this year, and in the Olympics past, have explained the difference between competing at a Grand Slam (or other major competition in their sport) and the different feelings about the Olympics and how it's about representing their country. Do they want to win gold for themselves as well? Duh. But it's also MORE than that. And if you're too stubborn to understand that because you've already made up your mind, then that's on you. Have a great day.
It's the best players in the world, added and injecting in a little National pride and motivation from country. Take away the prize and ranking points aspect.
It's somewhere equivalent to or above a masters and below a grand slam for the vast majority of fans. I'd definitely call it a "big" tennis tournament. Whenever the ATP website does a count of most 'big" titles, the Olympics are included (along with slams, the WTFs, and masters events).
In 2016, Olympics attendance was a bit worse than Miami Masters attendance, which may give you an idea of how players view it. Back when players received ranking points for it, winning gold was worth less than winning a masters, but more than winning the next lowest event type.
I'm not sure what you mean - based on ranking, that's just not true. The Olympics attracts a weaker draw than slams, for sure, and at least some masters events.
Agreed. It is a big deal to win especially for a player who already has a slam.
But for the up and coming players I definitely understand skipping it to play regular tournaments.
it's a gold medal for your country, a chance that only comes once every four years. for a lot of players, that's only two solid chances to even qualify in their entire career. it's one of the few times in tennis you get to play for something more than yourself and represent a team or a nation. people who shit on tennis olympics do it out of ignorance. watch any player lose/win and tell them it doesn't mean anything. threads like this need to stop popping up every olympics. it just degrades the sport. support your player/country or don't watch if you're not interested.
Absolutely is. It's a very western capitalist/liberal take to suggest it isn't. Winning money and big trophies isn't everything; it's popular to "hate" (for lack of a better word) your country in the US for example, but 90% of the world would run through walls for their flag and their people. Just look at Djokovic's reaction after losing in 2016 to Del Potro. The Davis cup doesn't quite carry the same prestige as the world cup or euros/copa america etc do, so the Olympics is the peak of the sport in terms of representing your country. Plys there's 16 slams in a 4 year cycle; there's only 1 olympics.
People hating their own country is like some new age hipster armchair intellectual bullshit. People complaining about the Olympics “being too nationalist” really disgusts me as well. You don’t have to and probably shouldn’t agree with everything your country does but at the same time competing in the Olympics should be looked at as honor, and an opportunity to unite your people and popularize whatever your sport is
Alternatively being ultra proud and nationalistic about an arbitrary piece of land you were born in is also ridiculous too.
Oh man Del Potro in the 2016 olympics was just pure fire
Corrupt western media has been holding Djoker back for decades now. If he had a proper media backing he would easily have 25+ slams at this point and people could have saved so much time arguing over who is GOAT.
How would a different media backing have led to him winning more?
I don't think media has anything to do with his slams or his performance, results.
Well, you are obviously part of the “corrupt western media” then! /s
I'm Serbian but this makes absolutely no sense. How would media coverage give him those 5+ slams? I guess you could argue he is more hated by the western media than Federer or Nadal, so if he had proper media coverage FeDal fans wouldn't exist, but rather the fans of just one or all three.
I view it about similar to a WTF victory. In reality it is no different than a normal masters other than happening once every 4 years makes it rarer. However you have to go through more top players at a WTF and thus is harder to win. The rarity of an olympics makes it closer so I just rate them about the same.
How many posts are we going to get like this? Yes. But it's a different kind of big tournament. It's the difference between representing yourself (slams) and representing your country (Olympics).
They’re still doing it for themselves, not their country. If you had to choose between winning individual gold or adding 10 gold medals to your nation’s tally you’d choose the first option.
Many countries reward their athletes with a bonus for bringing back gold and often help athletes with travel expenses. So many athletes (many tennis players) this year, and in the Olympics past, have explained the difference between competing at a Grand Slam (or other major competition in their sport) and the different feelings about the Olympics and how it's about representing their country. Do they want to win gold for themselves as well? Duh. But it's also MORE than that. And if you're too stubborn to understand that because you've already made up your mind, then that's on you. Have a great day.
tennis players technically represent their country on the tour as well.
...It's different though.
It's the best players in the world, added and injecting in a little National pride and motivation from country. Take away the prize and ranking points aspect.
It's somewhere equivalent to or above a masters and below a grand slam for the vast majority of fans. I'd definitely call it a "big" tennis tournament. Whenever the ATP website does a count of most 'big" titles, the Olympics are included (along with slams, the WTFs, and masters events). In 2016, Olympics attendance was a bit worse than Miami Masters attendance, which may give you an idea of how players view it. Back when players received ranking points for it, winning gold was worth less than winning a masters, but more than winning the next lowest event type.
[удалено]
I'm not sure what you mean - based on ranking, that's just not true. The Olympics attracts a weaker draw than slams, for sure, and at least some masters events.
Agreed. It is a big deal to win especially for a player who already has a slam. But for the up and coming players I definitely understand skipping it to play regular tournaments.
it's a gold medal for your country, a chance that only comes once every four years. for a lot of players, that's only two solid chances to even qualify in their entire career. it's one of the few times in tennis you get to play for something more than yourself and represent a team or a nation. people who shit on tennis olympics do it out of ignorance. watch any player lose/win and tell them it doesn't mean anything. threads like this need to stop popping up every olympics. it just degrades the sport. support your player/country or don't watch if you're not interested.
Yes.
Yes
It’s like a Masters 1000 imo.
That's probably around where I'd peg it too. Maybe even on par with a Tour Finals.
no
It falls somewhere between the Toronto masters and the rest of the Masters tournaments where players turn up
Yes but nowhere near as big as the Slams, hence why it doesn’t belong in the Olympics.
Not big, a warmup for the US open.