Will the Olympic Gold in mens tennis gain prestige...

[Pironkova's Forehand]

Originally Posted by Strobe Lights

Will it ever be at the level of a Major? No.

I agree with your post completely, but I wanted to comment on this last part. It won't ever be the same because it is only every 4 years. It's timing is unfortunate too, but on the assumption that the best in the world compete for the singles again in 4 years time it will matter nearly as much as the Slams.

[roberttennis54]

Originally Posted by Strobe Lights

The prestige will increase if Federer wins it. Top players now care about the event and if they can claim that Federer, Nadal and Agassi (three of the Open era's most successful players) are Olympic champions, then the likes of Rosset and Massu can be glossed over. If the top players continue to care about the Olympics then its prestige in tennis will continue to grow. If in 4 years, Djokovic or Murray (if he has multiple Majors) or some new top player wins, then that enhances its prestige again. Of course there is a still an element of fortune to it, in terms of your form at the time. If 2011 was an Olympic year, it would have been very surprising to not have seen Novak win it.

Similar to how the prestige of the Australian Open increased in the 80's when all the top players started competing for it.

Will it ever be at the level of a Major? No.

Pretty much this.
Add in the fact that these Olympics were played at Wimbledon. If Brazil decide to use clay and have Guga present the gold, then that would make it jump again. However, ultimately for me it will sit behind the Masters. Slams, WTF and the Olympics 6th biggest tournament.

For me the top players not playing the Australian Open in the late 70s early 80s was stupid. Forgetting that it was a slam, forgetting that you needed to win it to complete your grand slam, forgetting that travel would only improve in time; there was always likely going to be another great Australian. As soon as a a current Wimbledon/US champion busted his gut to win the Aussie slam it changes everything.

[OrangePower]

^^^^^

Good post. One measure of how prestigious an event is, is by looking at past winners - the more accomplished they are, the more it lends to the event's prestige.

Right now it's hard to say Olympic champion is a title reserved for the very best, because there have been just as many mediocre players who have won as there have been greats winning.

But if Fed wins this year, and then say Djokovic in 2016, and so on, and in 20 years time the likes of Rosset / Mecir / Massu are the exception, then it will be viewed as more prestigious.

[kragster]

Originally Posted by Strobe Lights

The prestige will increase if Federer wins it. Top players now care about the event and if they can claim that Federer, Nadal and Agassi (three of the Open era's most successful players) are Olympic champions, then the likes of Rosset and Massu can be glossed over. If the top players continue to care about the Olympics then its prestige in tennis will continue to grow. If in 4 years, Djokovic or Murray (if he has multiple Majors) or some new top player wins, then that enhances its prestige again. Of course there is a still an element of fortune to it, in terms of your form at the time. If 2011 was an Olympic year, it would have been very surprising to not have seen Novak win it.

Similar to how the prestige of the Australian Open increased in the 80's when all the top players started competing for it.

Will it ever be at the level of a Major? No.

I think as long as it is worth 750 it will never have slam level status but IF and only IF points are raised to 2k, I can easily see it have slam status, similar to how the AO now is considered an equal.However given this is a once every 4 yrs event, I highly doubt the ATP would increase points that much.

At present I consider the Olympics to be just slightly higher than the level of a Masters 1000. (I'm pretty sure almost every player would choose an OG gold over a win at Rome/Cincy/Toronto etc and I don't think any player would choose an OG gold over a slam win).

[NamRanger]

Originally Posted by kragster

I think as long as it is worth 750 it will never have slam level status but IF and only IF points are raised to 2k, I can easily see it have slam status, similar to how the AO now is considered an equal.However given this is a once every 4 yrs event, I highly doubt the ATP would increase points that much.

At present I consider the Olympics to be just slightly higher than the level of a Masters 1000. (I'm pretty sure almost every player would choose an OG gold over a win at Rome/Cincy/Toronto etc and I don't think any player would choose an OG gold over a slam win).

Miami, the YEC, among various other 1000 level tournaments are more prestigious than the Olympic Gold currently. You may view them as lower, but a vast majority of players would much rather win a major title such as Miami over winning the Olympic Gold (unless you are an ultra nationalist).

[Bartelby]

The no tie break final set and the five set final place it above Masters events in terms of sheer difficulty

[NamRanger]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

The no tie break final set and the five set final place it above Masters events in terms of sheer difficulty

The fact that top players routinely skip the Olympics demonstrates that it isn't anywhere close to as difficult to winning as a Masters (or as prestigious). Some people believe that doing the double of Toronto/Cincinnati or IW/Miami is the hardest thing to do in Tennis, because you have to play back to back weeks with almost no rest, against the best players in the world from round 2 (not like the slams where you get a bunch of mugs the first 3 rounds if you are a top player).


And let's not even talk about the YEC which is infinitely harder to win than the Olympics, and in certain years probably harder to win than a slam by virtue of having to play against the very best in the world (the YECs during the early 90s for example were stacked from top to bottom and were extremely difficult to beat, not to mention in the late 70s/80s).

[Talker]

I never thought too much of olympic tennis.

Until I saw the emotions and the 100% effort of the players today.

It won't push the olympics up too much for career importance but those SF matches I saw today had me watching every point.
Some of the best matches of the year.

[zam88]

Originally Posted by NamRanger

Miami, the YEC, among various other 1000 level tournaments are more prestigious than the Olympic Gold currently. You may view them as lower, but a vast majority of players would much rather win a major title such as Miami over winning the Olympic Gold (unless you are an ultra nationalist).

simply because of the money involved, i agree.


The olympics should be at a minimum on par with a masters 1000... it should be 1000 points.


I could even buy into it being a 1250 or 1500

I think that if money weren't part of the equation that any player would rather have a gold medal to look back on 20 years after they are gone from teh sport than a random masters 1000 tournament that everyone has forgotten about and that may no longer exist.

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by GOAT BAAH!!!

...once Federer wins it...?

I wouldn't be so confident that he's a lock to win it. And NO, it won't gain anymore prestige IF he wins it. It will stay the same as it has been.

On another note, I want Murray to take it. Would be great to see him win it in front of the home crowd, and in the most prestigious stage in the history of the game.

[tudwell]

With so many top players playing the Olympics and now skipping Toronto, I think it's obvious it means more to them than a Masters, and it's certainly harder to win with no tiebreak in the third and a best of five final. It's near the level of a WTF, maybe a bit less, maybe a bit more - I'm not sure.

[jelle v]

Originally Posted by GOAT BAAH!!!

...once Federer wins it...?

It has been deemed as mostly a superfluous achievement...a trifle of a tournament.

Will the GOAT increase it's stature....?

I think it gained prestige when Rafa and Federer both showed big interest in the Gold Medal, with Rafa having gold but not Federer.

[syke]

In the eyes of the players, the Olympics do seem more important than winning a masters.

Just look at the emotions displayed on court... I never see them on a masters tourney.

[TheNatural]

Originally Posted by tudwell

With so many top players playing the Olympics and now skipping Toronto, I think it's obvious it means more to them than a Masters, and it's certainly harder to win with no tiebreak in the third and a best of five final. It's near the level of a WTF, maybe a bit less, maybe a bit more - I'm not sure.

Its a lot more prestigious than the wtf these days. Muzz and Joker are indicating that its as big or bigger than a slam (Fed rates it alongside Wimbledon, so above other slams and so obviously above wtf), they make no mention of the wtf as the wtf doesn't rate anywhere near.

[TennisBatman]

A good percentage of tennis fans in this era (that is, casual fans pulling for Federer or Nadal because of their great rivalry) have never heard about the WTF, but hear about the Olympics as a huge event that includes tennis as one of its sports...

I would have to agree that if Federer wins, it would increase the significance of the event, as then he and Nadal would have won the gold medal right after the other.

On the other hand, if Murray beats Federer, it would be major payback that would involve denying Federer that prize (probably for life) that he failed to win in four serious attempts (including this one)...in a rematch of the Wimbledon final in the same year, played on the same exact court, and watched by the same entire nation that is hosting both events (not even mentioning the tennis fans themselves).

It's all about recognition.

[Russeljones]

Everything Federer touches turns to gold. End of thread.

[Sentinel]

Originally Posted by MariaRafael

Of course, Rafa changes the universe. Let's wait till the end of the Olympic tournament, clap to Feddy's bronze medal and see what will be going on here. We'll definitely have some posts explaining us that the Olympic bronze medal is much bigger than the gold because copper is more expensive and elegant.

LOL, what a joke you are.