Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by TTMR, Oct 2, 2012.
Microsoft.....so I don't lose my brain cells and synapses.
Microsoft. I think being able to tell people with pride "I work for Microsoft!" is worth the $25k I'd be missing out on.
That and I worked or McDonalds 6 years ago and it was awful
GOAT contenders would be Massu and Nadal right ? Actually Massu, since he won both doubles and singles Gold at same OG, whereas Nadal won only singles.
MS for $75,000??? What kind of a ???? job do they offer 75k for? Janitor's work ? Doorman ? Their software should be abolished anyway :twisted:
Olympics are some of the most overrated sports events there is. Only since Nadal won it it became the big deal it is now.
Borg and Sampras are candidates, since Borg is the #2/3 all-time dirtballer, while Sampras is one of the greatest grasscourt specialists of all time.
For GOAT posters like you, they give 75k$ per week!!
OK, 3000 for the silver medal and 5000 for the gold one but that's as high as I'll go
Interesting, what about Nadal fans who refer to WTF (a potentially 1500 points worth tourney valued greatly by nobodies such as Sampras, Lendl, Becker and Federer) as a worthless, cheesy exo (as in worth zero points, outclassed by tourneys like say Stockholm and Serbia Open)? Are you scared for them to have children too?
Thing is, Olympics' relative worth regarding tennis is very subjective and varies greatly from player to player (and from fan to fan) and as much as there are Fed fans around here who downplay it's significance there are Nadal fans who overrate it to high heavens mainly because it's one of the rare things Fed lacks in his resumee and their Spartan hero happenes to have won it.
Sure top players put a great effort at the Olympics this year but that wasn't always the case in the past (heck, during the reign of some past great players, tennis wasn't even an Olympic sport so they couldn't participate even if they wanted to) and if we value personal opinions of players so much we'd have to agree that for example Fed's 7 Wimbledons are clearly worth more than Nadal's 7 FOs since the vast majority of players holds Wimbledon in higher regard than any other slam, somehow I doubt Nadal fanboys around here would agree with that.
I can see the gist of where you're coming from but this isn't actually correct, at least not for the Olympics. Some (displaced) athletes compete under the flag of the IOC. Also, unlike DC, no country 'wins' the Olympic games overall, or at the individual event level e.g. Great Britain is not the reigning men's singles tennis Olympic champion - Andy Murray is, whereas Spain are the regining DC champions, not Nadal, Ferrer et al.
This also explains why, unlike DC, individual names are used in the scoring rather than countries e.g. 'Murray leads, 2 sets to 1' rather than 'Great Britian lead, 2 sets to 1'.
In terms of prestige, Olympics > Masters. It is obvious considering how the players responded to winning the medals.
In terms of difficulty, Olympics = Miami, IW > All the Other Masters. Olympics has the 5 set final whereas Miami and Indian Wells has the larger draw so they even out.
I don't want to speak out of turn, but I think the point was that it was that while a lot of people might say it, for various reasons, it's a worry if they actually mean it. Nadal fans might claim the WTF is worthless during banteer, but that doesn't mean they actually mean it. If they do mean it, then they are also deluded.
The debate either way is skewed by people who have a vested interest in promoting one tournament as more worthy than another, and a handful Federer and Nadal fans are the most obvious culprits. Personally, I wouldn't trust the opinion of someone who claims WTFs is worth nothing just as I don't trust the opinion of someone who claims the Olympics are worth less than a Masters.
That said, while serious tennis fans will rate the WTF as something worth achieving, the general public couldn't care less. I was speaking to colleagues about it recently, and while most of them know about the WTFs - it's hard to move on the London tube without seeing the posters, most actually did think it was a big money exhibition event. This included people who enthusiastically follow the action at Wimbledon.
On the other hand, people who have only a passing interest in sport, never mind tennis, in virtually every country in the world, knows about and values an Olympic Gold medal as something to be impressed by. The tennis community may not have taken it very seriously for a while, but the rest of the sporting world did.
It's worth remembering that a lot of tennis players are sports fans and love the whole Olympic spirit and vibe and now that tennis is properly re-established as a proper Olympic sport, they love being a part of it. One of the reasons John McEnroe is now so in love with Olympic tennis is that he is now a fully signed up member of the Olympics fan club. He was on British tv a lot talking about all of the different events he attended and not just the tennis. Michael Johnson did the same. It was fascinating to see how legends in one sport really appreciate watching elite sports of any discipline.
This doesn't apply for those inside the top 16. To win IW and Miami a top 16 player needs to win 6 best of 3 tiebreak matches. To win OG a player must win 5 best of 3 advantage matches and 1 best of 5 advantage match. From a top 16 player perspective, IW and Miami have the same number of rounds as OG - 6.
Olympics is not important at all. Federer just wanted to show his acting skills when he cried after beating Falla in the second round and after beating DelPo in the semifinal.
It doesn't matter what those people think. Those are the same people that think Mike tyson was a possible GOAT.
The olympics are just a bigger sports event. Anyone with 2 braincells to rub together should realize that the WTF is bigger, simply because it has a richer history and you are only facing the best players.
The Olympic champions include people like Rosset and Massu. No such luck with the WTF.
Why? Do you think he was hoping to star in Expendables 3, just to show he can do *that* better than Djokovic, too?
I judge the prestige and value of a tournament by 3 parameters
1. How much it means to the players
2. The quality/esteem of the previous winners
3. The History
While the Olympics may mean more than the WTF for many years (more because of the pride in winning a Medal for their country than as an individual accomplishment), Olympic Tennis has less history than the WTF and the quality/esteem of the previous winners is not even close to the WTF. So WTF has the edge in my book.
It doesn't matter to you what they think, but that doesn't mean that those people don't vastly outnumber hardcore tennis fans.
You can presume those people are stupid if you like. Obviously they are wrong to think that WTF is an exhibition tournament. But to be fair, the way it is marketed is as being all about the top players by invite only, all very showbiz with smoke and music when the players enter the arena and in the past they placed a lot of emphasis on the size of the cash prize.
The reality is, you cannot argue that an event is highly prestigious, then say the wider public are stupid if they don't agree with you. A truly prestigious event would be valued by casual tennis fans too. I'm not saying that no casual tennis fans rate the WTFs, and if Murray were to win it or reach the finals and get considerable press attention, the awareness of what it really is in the UK would rocket.
I also wonder if another factor in how people rate different sporting events is what tv channels they are aired on. In the UK, only Wimbledon and the Olympics are shown on mainstream, terrestrial tv. If fans are watching the Olympics is on a different channel with a different team from who does most of the tennis broadcasting, it will create a different vibe. If your country had a good chance at gold in another event, so was more interested in that than tennis, it would give a different impression of its value.
madrid is a new rich event, no flavour at all, only Shangai sucks more.
And Fed fans might claim Madrid is worth more than Olumpics but that doesn't mean they actually mean it either, your point being what exactly?
Sure but general public by and large cares way more about Wimbledon compared to any other slam including FO so given that (coupled with the fact that the vast majority of players would also take Wimbledon over other slams) so again are we supposed to conclude Fed's 7 Wimbledons are clearly worth more than Nadal's 7 FOs? I mean the general public, hardcore tennis fans and players themselves care more about Wimbledon than about the FO.
That has much more to do with Olympics as a whole than with tennis as an Olympic sport, in that regard it has little history.
And despite all that a tennis legend like Massu managed to win the gold in both singles and doubles.
For the record I definitely consider Olympics to be worth more than any masters title (and enjoyed immensely watching it this year), heck let's say it's worth more than WTF, however it's still nowhere near a slam (in that sense it's vastly overrated by Nadal fans).
Not to mention that Nadal fans are not the ones that should complain given their tendency to disparage a 1500 points worth event (highly valued by guys like Lendl, Sampras, Becker, Fed etc.) to an even higher degree than Fed fans do for the Olympics, forget about comparing it to a masters title, they consider 250 events and challengers to be more important.
My name is TTMR, and I am the 27.94%.
"He simply failed to lose it" :lol:
Separate names with a comma.