Are Players Crazy for Entering the Olympics?

[GameSetAndMath]

Olympics Odds for Men's singles.

Novak 1
Andy 3
Roger 10
Rafa 14
Stan 14

Basically, they are giving 50% chance to Novak, 25% chance to Andy and the remaining 25% chance to rest of the field.

Who really cares about the Oods, look what happened in Wimbledon.......

FYI, Andy had the second best odds at Wimbledon.

 

[Carol]

Olympics Odds for Men's singles.

Novak 1
Andy 3
Roger 10
Rafa 14
Stan 14

Basically, they are giving 50% chance to Novak, 25% chance to Andy and the remaining 25% chance to rest of the field.

Who really cares about the Oods, look what happened in Wimbledon.......

FYI, Andy had the second best odds at Wimbledon.

But he won, and what happened to Novak? I believe in the theory to go day by day, tournament by tournament and to see how each player is playing

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Who really cares about the Oods, look what happened in Wimbledon.......

FYI, Andy had the second best odds at Wimbledon.

But he won, and what happened to Novak? I believe in the theory to go day by day, tournament by tournament and to see how each player is playing

Odds are primarily for people interested in gambling on sports. If you believe in a player in a better than the markets do and you know what you are doing, you may pluck down some disposable income on that player.

 

[isabelle]

Olympics Odds for Men's singles.

Novak 1
Andy 3
Roger 10
Rafa 14
Stan 14

Basically, they are giving 50% chance to Novak, 25% chance to Andy and the remaining 25% chance to rest of the field.

Who really cares about the Oods, look what happened in Wimbledon.......

FYI, Andy had the second best odds at Wimbledon.

I'ld be in heaven if he could won a second gold medal...he would be the 1st one and maybe the only one
Hope Ivan can help him the best way, C'mon Scottish warrior !!

 

[lob]

I think Singles Tennis has no place in The Olympics. The Olympics are primarily a competition among athletes/players representing their nations. Even hardly known sports are given a place in Olympics because they are a celebration of sports and also are meant to encourage sportsmen/women in all sports all over the world. Many great sportsmen in less lucrative sports, in terms of ability, are badly in need of recognition. There are numerous Olympic gold medalists who are unemployed. Most don't get to play their sport professionally as a career.

Tennis is more like Golf/Formula1/Nascar/Pool/Billiards/Poker/Snooker/Squash etc. If you are accomplished in these sports then you don't need the Olympics. Ussain Bolt and Michael Phelps may be rich today but they First Had to win an Olympic gold to get rich. Otherwise they'd be nobodies. Why do players like Federer, Murray, Djokovic, Nadal need Olympic medals? They already have all the money and glory in the world. If you want to make your country proud, go win the Davis cup. It is hypocritical to skip the Davis cup and enter the Olympics. In effect it means that a player is doing it primarily for fame. But why do the wealthy and the famous need fame? No one outside ATP top twenty is going to win an Olympic medal anyway.

As to what The Olympics means in Tennis. Nothing. An Olympic medal is not worth the metal it is made from in Tennis. If you can win a singles Olympic medal in Tennis, you can surely win an ATP1000. If you want to make your nation proud, help it win the Davis cup. In fact, keeping Tennis out of the Olympics increases the profile of Davis Cup which badly needs it. What's more. Established players can happily let the less accomplished players share some fame and honor in the Davis Cup. I don't remember the men's Olympic medalists but I remember Marcelo Rios, David Nalbandian, Mark Phllippousis, Marco Baghdatis etc. If you have talent, the tour lets you make a living. You don't need Olympics. If you are outside the top 200 and Pro Tennis isn't enough to make a living? Then make a living Marcus Willis style. Teaching tennis to casual players, futures players, university players etc. pays more money than what most Olympic gold medalists, forget Bronze Medalists, make after they go back to their jobs at home. In many countries, they work themselves to death. Some die in penury.

Team sports are a slightly different deal. The very fact that it's a team sport means that players share credit. So there is some justification for them in Olympics but even there there, sports with less lucrative pro circuits should get the preference. Volleyball, water polo, field hockey etc. Building a soccer stadium or 50 tennis courts with ball boys and girls costs the host nation serious money. Money that can be used for Anti Doping tests.

That brings me to the only justifiable reason why singles tennis might have a place in Olympics. The Stars bring money to the host nation and the Olympics itself. Fair enough. But then, does signing 100 autographs and 300 selfies for the athletes in the Olympic village and the tv coverage of the Tennis stars make up for the cost? Also must be included is the opportunity cost of hogging limelight away from ordinary sportspeople. Imagine being a world beating, serious player of an obscure sport in the Olympic village. Then imagine you just got the loveliest date of your life because for once in your life your strengths helped you stand out. Now imagine she stood you up to wait in line to get a selfie with Rafa Nadal or Roger Federer. Still want them in the village?

Sorry about the rant. No, I am not an Olympic medalist who got stood up.

 

[Kieran]

Great rant, lob! :clap

And you're right: it's hypocritical to skip the Davis cup and then play the Olympics...

 

[Great Hands]

I find it interesting that almost everyone here thinks tennis in the Olympics is meaningless, and yet...among many of the players it means a lot. Why do you think this is?

I have heard Courier, Becker, Lendl and many other past greats, describe the Olympics as a 'major'. Novak said his two priorities for the year were the French Open and the Olympics. Murray still says winning Olympic Gold is his proudest moment, despite being a 3-time Grand Slam Champion. Del Potro cried like a baby when he lost that SF in 2012, and again with joy when he won the bronze. He said winning that bronze medal meant more to him than winning the US Open, and that was the bronze!

So why is there this disparity between what many of the players think and what you guys think here? I'm interested.

 

[Garro]

^ Because not all players feel that way. It is true that the Olympics mean a lot to certain players like Djokovic and Delpo. But historically a lot of players have opted not to play the Olympics. For example, Sampras and Courier only played it once in their career. More recently, Roddick and Hewitt have both skipped the Olympics in order to better prepare for the US Open. The fact that not all players are united about how important the Olympics are means that it is not as meaningful to win one as a slam, because there is no such disagreement when it comes to how important the slams are. No one would skip a slam in order to better prepare for the Olympics.

 

[Great Hands]

^ Because not all players feel that way. It is true that the Olympics mean a lot to certain players like Djokovic and Delpo. But historically a lot of players have opted not to play the Olympics. For example, Sampras and Courier only played it once in their career. More recently, Roddick and Hewitt have both skipped the Olympics in order to better prepare for the US Open. The fact that not all players are united about how important the Olympics are means that it is not as meaningful to win one as a slam, because there is no such disagreement when it comes to how important the slams are. No one would skip a slam in order to better prepare for the Olympics.

Agreed.

And also, the Grand Slams are best of 5 every match, the Olympics is only best of 5 in the final.

I do think that the Olympics has grown in stature a lot though. In 2004 I don't think anyone cared very much and it was won by Massu. By 2008 it had more prestige, Roger, Rafa, Novak all played it. In 2012 all the top guys were there - except Rafa because of injury, but he wanted to be there. Andy had to beat the world no. 1 and 2 back to back to win it. And it was held at Wimbledon, which added to it I feel, because Wimbledon is the home of tennis.

But yes, there is not full agreement on its level of prestige. And with some top players already pulling out this time, the 2016 medals are devalued. I mean, Raonic is no.3 in the race this year and would have had an excellent chance of getting a medal.

 

[lob]

I find it interesting that almost everyone here thinks tennis in the Olympics is meaningless, and yet...among many of the players it means a lot. Why do you think this is?

I have heard Courier, Becker, Lendl and many other past greats, describe the Olympics as a 'major'. Novak said his two priorities for the year were the French Open and the Olympics. Murray still says winning Olympic Gold is his proudest moment, despite being a 3-time Grand Slam Champion. Del Potro cried like a baby when he lost that SF in 2012, and again with joy when he won the bronze. He said winning that bronze medal meant more to him than winning the US Open, and that was the bronze!

Ask each of those players (in private, off the record) how many slams they won will they give to keep their Olympic medal. Sure they will sincerely cherish their Olympic medal. It may have personal meaning to them. Olympics has this sentimental value of having done the country proud. Olympics are held once in 4 years. Only 3 medals. There are 16 slams n 4 years. Still a medal can't compete in status with a single slam.

The ATP singles tour is among the most brutally demanding tours in all of individual sports. Perhaps The most demanding individual tour (if you leave out life endangering sports)? There is a reason why the tour respects the filthy rich, selfish, egotistic ba$*$*ds like the big four. They earned the respect of the tour. Even then, they have to prove their worth over and over and over again. Starting from scratch in each slam 4 times a year. Olympics?

 

[Riotbeard]

I think they should play if they want to play. Zika is not a huge deal for males with good healthcare. For men, it's pretty much the flu. The one thing that is worrisome, is that the police in Rio have said they are unsure if they can protect olympic athletes (I heard this I did not read it...).

That being said, I love Rio and Brasil, so I hope it's successful olympics!

 

[isabelle]

I think they should play if they want to play. Zika is not a huge deal for males with good healthcare. For men, it's pretty much the flu. The one thing that is worrisome, is that the police in Rio have said they are unsure if they can protect olympic athletes (I heard this I did not read it...).

That being said, I love Rio and Brasil, so I hope it's successful olympics!

agree with you, police is a main factor there, much more than Zika
even in Acapulco, ATP said players to stay in their hotel and be careful so I guess it's a South Am's problem

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Tennis is a lonely sport. If you have enough money, you are travelling with a coach, maybe a family member. If not, you are on your own, spending your time on the court or in a hotel room . An event like Olympics gives these players a chance to be a part of something, hang out with the best of the best in any given sport, eat the same food at the Olympic village...get the nationalistic juices flowing. I think it is important to many players. And I think, for that two weeks or so, it is an escape from the tour and they get a chance to play the game they love for a different purpose. I am sure many players value that.

 

[Great Hands]

Nadal and Djokovic certainly rate the Olympics:

From abc news in May:
‘Rafael Nadal says he cannot understand why a host of players are snubbing the Olympics, "the most important event in the world of sport".
Nadal won gold at the Beijing Olympics in 2008 but a knee injury prevented him from defending his title in London four years later where he was also due to be Spain's flag-bearer at the opening ceremony.
"The Olympic Games is the most important event in the world of sport," said Nadal after reaching the third round of the French Open on Thursday.
"I cannot understand people who don't want to go to Olympics. It's an event that you can compete only once, twice, or three in your career maybe, if you are lucky. So you don't want to miss that."
Nadal thought those who choose to skip the Games will end up regretting their decisions.
"Everybody's free to do whatever but I know how tough it was for me when I had to miss the 2012 Olympics in London," added Nadal.
Venus Williams agreed with Nadal.
"Everybody's got priorities. Mine are at the Olympics. Others... I don't know. It's just life choices," said the 35-year-old American who owns four Olympic golds across singles and doubles.
"It's a wonderful experience to be part of something so amazing.
"For me, the Olympics was beyond my dreams to participate and to actually have success there was something I had never dreamed of, and I didn't realise how wonderful it will be. So I always say it was beyond anything I ever dreamed."’

During the French Open this year, Djokovic described the Olympics as ‘arguably the fifth Grand Slam. It's of that importance for all of us, even more, because it happens every four years,” said world no.1 Novak Djokovic in an interview with Reuters after beating Lu Yen-hsun in Paris on Tuesday (24 May).'

Note Novak is saying it’s not only of equal importance with the Slams, but ‘even more’ than the Slams!

 

[isabelle]

The tennis tournament in the Olympics runs from Saturday 6th til Sunday 14th August. It's kinda lumped itself into the summer schedule, driving a huge wedge between the Canada-Cinci double, and disrupting the US Open series of hard court events, causing significant changes to players usual schedules and ideas about "peaking at the right time for the Open", etc.

Plus there's the Zika virus, and a rump of fans beliefs that tennis has no place in the Olympics, it's a bauble, a cheap tin trinket, not a part of our glorious tradition, and it doesn't even have any points to go towards the players rankings.

Against this, the Olympics has its own unique place in sports, it has legends which transcend their own disciplines, it's a celebration of the greatest and the finest, and the most tawdry and scandalous, and all the human elements we bring to sports.

So are you for it, or against it? Should tennis players bother? Can you cheer for your favourite when he might be a Serb playing under the Serbian flag, against a US player, representing your country? Or any other combo of nationalities could be used here. What you think?

in fact...players would be crazy to play Toronto...that's why they all pull out...I hope it's cleat this time : OG matters much more than another tourney for them, some people may think they're wrong, but that's a fact

 

[lob]

Tennis is a lonely sport. If you have enough money, you are travelling with a coach, maybe a family member. If not, you are on your own, spending your time on the court or in a hotel room . An event like Olympics gives these players a chance to be a part of something, hang out with the best of the best in any given sport, eat the same food at the Olympic village...get the nationalistic juices flowing. I think it is important to many players. And I think, for that two weeks or so, it is an escape from the tour and they get a chance to play the game they love for a different purpose. I am sure many players value that.

Couldn't put it better. But..what you are describing is a feel good vacation and picnic for tennis players. 'hanging out with the best of the best .. nationalistic spirit etc.' does not a sport make.

I didn't know who Kendra Harrison was until yesterday. This brought a smile to my face and I don't even follow women's sports. Just watch the last minute. Btw, she didn't qualify for the Rio Olympics. I just hope to God she didn't dope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8anuMyJU2k

The world is not likely to remember Rio OG Women's 100m hurdles gold medalist for even 6 months.

 

[the AntiPusher]

The tennis tournament in the Olympics runs from Saturday 6th til Sunday 14th August. It's kinda lumped itself into the summer schedule, driving a huge wedge between the Canada-Cinci double, and disrupting the US Open series of hard court events, causing significant changes to players usual schedules and ideas about "peaking at the right time for the Open", etc.

Plus there's the Zika virus, and a rump of fans beliefs that tennis has no place in the Olympics, it's a bauble, a cheap tin trinket, not a part of our glorious tradition, and it doesn't even have any points to go towards the players rankings.

Against this, the Olympics has its own unique place in sports, it has legends which transcend their own disciplines, it's a celebration of the greatest and the finest, and the most tawdry and scandalous, and all the human elements we bring to sports.

So are you for it, or against it? Should tennis players bother? Can you cheer for your favourite when he might be a Serb playing under the Serbian flag, against a US player, representing your country? Or any other combo of nationalities could be used here. What you think?

in fact...players would be crazy to play Toronto...that's why they all pull out...I hope it's cleat this time : OG matters much more than another tourney for them, some people may think they're wrong, but that's a fact

I think it matter less to some of us weekend warrior tennis players. I would loose ever GOAT discussion if I focused on the fact that Rafa has a gold medal in singles but Roger or Novak doesn't

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I just read this this article on tennis.com and I like the suggestion.

Tennis being part of Olympics have certainly increased the number of players from different countries playing in the ATP and WTA tour. The article gives statistical evidence of this for the WTA at least. So, it is a good idea to keep tennis in Olympics.

However, there is also the feeling that Olympics is inferior to GS and that it is just like any other tourney in the tour, probably comparable in prestige to a tourney below the 1000 level but above the 500 level. This does not go along well with the view that Olympics victory should be considered the pinnacle of that sport.

The suggested solution is very nice, keep tennis in Olympics, but make it a team event. No separate men's singles, women's singles, men's doubles, women's doubles, mixed doubles events. Just organize it as a team event. Don't give ranking points at all. Don't organize the regular davis cup and fed cup events in Olympic years to reduce burden on players.

The details of the team format needs to be worked out. One possibility is to have two separate events, one for men (similar to Davis cup) and one for women (similar to Fed cup) with the only difference in format being that all the different rounds will be played during the two weeks of Olympics in the same venue. Another possibility is to have just one event for men and women bundled together, modelled somewhat like Hopman Cup.

What do you guys think?

 

[Kieran]

I like that. It would at least make it more about players representing their country. And it would do no harm to skip the DC on an Olympic year...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I like that. It would at least make it more about players representing their country. And it would do no harm to skip the DC on an Olympic year...

Ya, I too like that. But, we don't know whether there is any traction to this idea or is it just wishful thinking of some creative folks.