Originally Posted by フェデラー
Completely irrelevant. This has nothing to do with the prestige of it as a tennis event. A gold medal means you represented your country and won the highest honor for them. Doesn't matter if it's tennis or any other sport. Unlike a lot of sports, tennis has a ton of big name tournaments. Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon, US Open, the WTF, the masters 1000s, etc. This isn't true for a lot of sports. Getting the gold medal is part of the "Grand Slam" for table tennis because they only have two other large tournaments, the world championships (which occur every two years), and the world cup (held once a year), so they had no other major tournaments until 1988 when table tennis was added to the olympic sports, and only four people have won all three.
I mean if OG means that much, are we willing to say Nadal as surpassed Sampras? I mean he has OG and FO so he has the career slam. Two "major" things Sampras doesn't have. Is anyone willing to make this argument yet?
the importance of gold medals in other sports isn't relevant to anything..
also I didn't say OG was the same as a major..i said its rarer to win an OG than a major..and also Agassi and nadal have put their OG at the top of the list of achievements...if you don't like that reality then tough, its the reality we have got..
if you don't like it..maybe get your *** down to Monte Carlo and give nadal some of your wisdom..get him to see sense.