World Tour Finals or the Tennis Singles Olympic Gold
- Thread starter Eragon
- Start date
Eragon
Banned
You have it.
Olympic Singles gold. And it's not even close.
It's incredible how important the Olympics has become to players now, especially since it was only introduced to the Open era in 1988. All the top players are desperate to win it these days. You get guys like Federer and Nadal planning their careers 4 or 5 years ahead to be able to be competititive at the next Olympics.
The WTF are simply not held in the same level of esteem, despite having a longer presence in the open era, under a variety of names. To many players, an Olympic Singles Gold is worth almost as much as a slam win. When Elena Dementieva won it, she felt it completed her career, despite never getting a slam. No one feels similarly about the end of season championships on either tour, and no one equates it near to a slam in terms of prestige of career accomplishments.
Let's put it this way....if you asked Federer if he could trade his 5 of his WTF titles for one Olympic Singles gold, chances are he'd take that trade.
It's incredible how important the Olympics has become to players now, especially since it was only introduced to the Open era in 1988. All the top players are desperate to win it these days. You get guys like Federer and Nadal planning their careers 4 or 5 years ahead to be able to be competititive at the next Olympics.
The WTF are simply not held in the same level of esteem, despite having a longer presence in the open era, under a variety of names. To many players, an Olympic Singles Gold is worth almost as much as a slam win. When Elena Dementieva won it, she felt it completed her career, despite never getting a slam. No one feels similarly about the end of season championships on either tour, and no one equates it near to a slam in terms of prestige of career accomplishments.
Let's put it this way....if you asked Federer if he could trade his 5 of his WTF titles for one Olympic Singles gold, chances are he'd take that trade.
Last edited:
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
What an original thread. Bravo!!!
Hood_Man
G.O.A.T.
World Tour Final. It's a tournament exclusively for the best players of the year, and if you win it you have to beat the best.
And even if someone pulls out, they're replaced with another top player who just missed out of a top 8 ranking.
No lucky draws of the draw here.
I feel like the constant comparisons between the WTF and the OG are putting the OG on an unfair pedestal that it hasn't earned. They're both fantastic achievements, but the more pressure we put on it the more scorn it will attract as well.
And even if someone pulls out, they're replaced with another top player who just missed out of a top 8 ranking.
No lucky draws of the draw here.
I feel like the constant comparisons between the WTF and the OG are putting the OG on an unfair pedestal that it hasn't earned. They're both fantastic achievements, but the more pressure we put on it the more scorn it will attract as well.
Eragon
Banned
The WTF often has the air of being a glorified exhibition. No player ever states their "dream" is to win a WTF title, yet plenty say it's their dream to win Olympic singles.
If anything, you should blame the players for seemingly valuing the Olympics much more than the WTF.
In fact, the only place I've ever seen the WTF discussed with so much fervour is on these boards, mostly by Fedrerer fans, because he's won it a bunch of times. You get the distinct impressions that most top players would not lose any sleep if they never won WTF, but would rate Olympic singles as one of their greatest achievements.
Eragon
Banned
If it's not even close, then explain these:
1. Why does the WTF potentially award its Champion with twice as many ATP points as the SOG? Haven't the tiers of Tennis events always been decided by ATP points?
2. Why does the WTF have more history and the more celebrated past-champions than the SOG?
3. Why is one of Federer's priorities each year to qualify for the WTF? Not win, just qualify. And Djokovic called it the "pinnacle" of the ATP Calendar when he won there last year.
That's hilarious, 5 WTF for one 750-point event? Wow wow wow, that really is some bias.
Last edited:
As a tennis achievement: WTF > SOG.
WTF includes the best 8 players of the year. SOG only has the best players from a number of countries. Not to mention a number of players skipped it for Washington instead. Only 14 out the top 20 played at the olympics.
The draw is also slightly weaker than the past Masters when they had no byes and BO5 finals, not to mention more players at IW/Miami and more top 20 players.
In terms of value: SOG > WTF at the moment but it was different in the past. A lot of players would love to win a medal for their country these days. Olympics is arguably the greatest sporing event and any athlete would want to win a medal their country. So it would be common for players to say it would be their dream to win a medal over the WTF.
In terms of prestige: WTF > SOG. WTF has a lot more history than tennis SOG.
WTF includes the best 8 players of the year. SOG only has the best players from a number of countries. Not to mention a number of players skipped it for Washington instead. Only 14 out the top 20 played at the olympics.
The draw is also slightly weaker than the past Masters when they had no byes and BO5 finals, not to mention more players at IW/Miami and more top 20 players.
In terms of value: SOG > WTF at the moment but it was different in the past. A lot of players would love to win a medal for their country these days. Olympics is arguably the greatest sporing event and any athlete would want to win a medal their country. So it would be common for players to say it would be their dream to win a medal over the WTF.
In terms of prestige: WTF > SOG. WTF has a lot more history than tennis SOG.
Last edited:
The prestige of the Olympics is not reflected in the points on offer, because it's got a very strange place on the tennis calender, being held only once every 4 years. The players don't realy care how many points are on offer, and just want to win it. I do agree that the Olympics merits more points, but the ATP has always been slow to get things correct. I imagine it'll be worth more points by Rio.
WTF is valued for one thing: MONEY.
That's why so many top players turned up, even when the WTF offered ZERO RANKING POINTS, between 1970 and 1990 (when it was won by the likes of Becker, Lendl, Conners, Borg, McEnroe etc). Why was this event attracting all the best players, when no ranking points were on offer? Hard, cold cash.
That tells you all you need to know about why top players value the WTF...cold, hard cash. They play the Olympics for free because it means so much more in terms of personal and national pride. Take away the prize money for the WTF, and you'd see a lot of top players skipping it for a longer off-season. No one plays the WTF out of love for the tourney, like the Olympics.
Last edited:
Nadal missed it due to injury. 15 of the top 20 turning up for a tournament that offers no prize money is incredible. I think if WTF offered no prize money, they'd have to cancel the whole thing. Unlike the Olympics, WTF cannot attract players on prestige alone.
Last edited:
Eragon
Banned
The prestige of the Olympics is not reflected in the points on offer, because it's got a very strange place on the tennis calender, being held only once every 4 years. The players don't realy care how many points are on offer, and just want to win it. I do agree that the Olympics merits more points, but the ATP has always been slow to get things correct. I imagine it'll be worth more points by Rio.
WTF is valued for one thing: MONEY.
That's why so many top layers turned up, even when the WTF offered ZERO RANKING POINTS, between 1970 and 1990 (when it was won by the likes of Becker, Lendl, Conners, Borg, McEnroe etc). Why was this event attracting all the best players, when no ranking points were on offer? Hard, cold cash.
That tells you all you need to know about why top players value the WTF...cold, hard cash. They play the Olympics for free because it means so much more in terms of personal and national pride. Take away the prize money for the WTF, and you'd see a lot of top players skipping it for a longer off-season. No one plays the WTF out of love for the tourney, like the Olympics.
So let me understand your logic. The WTF has more money and more points on offer. So the Olympics is better. Got it
kalyan4fedever
Legend
Olympics is not tennis exclusive event..this thread is joke, everyone knows the answer is wtf
Eragon
Banned
Everyone knows that the Earth is round. But it can't hurt to remind people once in a while, lest they forget.
RoddickAce
Hall of Fame
As a standalone achievement, I think winning the WTF is more valuable/prestigious.
As an addition to an accomplished career, I think the SOG is more valuable/prestigious because it happens every 4 years, and is probably more rare to achieve in one's career given that you don't have many chances to win it. Also, it rounds out one's resume.
- Player ABC has 0 slams and wins 1 WTF, thereby proving he can beat the top players and proving his consistency by making it to the top 8 at year end.
- Player ABC has 0 slams and wins 1 SOG. People write it off as a fluke.
As an addition to an accomplished career, I think the SOG is more valuable/prestigious because it happens every 4 years, and is probably more rare to achieve in one's career given that you don't have many chances to win it. Also, it rounds out one's resume.
- Player ABC has 10 slams and wins 1 WTF. Fans will not claim he has achieved the Career WTF slam?. He has already proven his consistency and can beat the top players by winning the 10 slams, the WTF is played every year and is not regarded as a slam-caliber tournament, so it doesn't add too much value to one's career.
- Player ABC has 10 slams and wins 1 SOG. Fans will claim he has achieved the career golden slam. The SOG is not regarded as slam-caliber, but occurs every 4 years, so it is rarer and harder to achieve than winning 1 WTF.
Eragon
Banned
I said tiers, not absolute value. Read my post again.
So let me understand your logic. The WTF has more money and more points on offer. So the Olympics is better. Got it
No, the WTF attracted top players for 2 decades without offering ranking points. The tournament has always been about the money. It's like Federer, Djokovic or Nadal regularly turning up to Abu Dhabi....the money on offer is too good, but that doesn't mean they value the title as much as they do a slam or the olympics.
Nothing wrong with wanting to make big money. All the top players do. But people have to distinguish between the tournaments players truly hold in the highest esteem and those that are mainly paydays.
Eragon
Banned
Well, there's the Career Super Slam.
Eragon
Banned
And what do we have, other than your opinion, to suggest players hold the Olympic Gold in higher esteem than the WTF? When last asked, Federer said his goals for the rest of his career were another Wimbledon, and another WTF (despite 6 previous wins there). No mention of the Olympic Singles Gold. I don't believe Federer plans 4 years ahead, or even a few months ahead, for the Olympics like you claim. But we've seen him prioritize and play more tournaments to qualify for the WTF. This despite 6 previous wins there.
Last edited:
Everyone knows Graf has the Career Golden Slam. Everyone knows Agassi has the Career Golden Slam. Everyone knows Serena has the Career Golden Slam. And everyone knows Nadal has the Career Golden Slam.
The term "Career Golden Slam" alone should tell you which has far more value and prestige out of OSG and WTF. It basically puts OSG right next to the slams in terms of the ultimate achievment for a singles career. And it's an instantly recognisable term in the tennis community.
People know this to be the case, but seem to be in denial for some reason. As has been said, there is no Career WTF Slam, as outside of the rabid Federer fanbase, it doesn't hold that type of prestige that comes with winning OSG.
Andre Agassi has won both the WTF and OSG.....Agassi never talks about WTF as being one of his greatest accomplishments. He barely ever mentions it. He talks about his slams and winning Olympic singles gold a lot though. Says it all really. Only in Federer fan land does WTF have as much career prestige as an OSG.
Last edited:
Eragon
Banned
Oh, here come the "fanboy" accusations from the people who can't debate. Let's examine the facts.
1. History: WTF > Olympics
2. Points: WTF > Olympics
3. Money: WTF > Olympics
And yet, Olympics > WTF. If anybody is in lala land, it's you. Give me facts, not your bias-dipped, nonsensical opinions. Or just say, "for me it's better, I don't have facts," and I'll respect that.
FACT: Andre Agassi is the one player to have won both WTF and OSG. So he's in a unique position to say which is worth more, without looking like a sore loser for lacking one or the other.
FACT: Agassi apparently treasures his Olympic Gold Medal as much of his slams. He talks about it regularly.
FACT: Agassi barely seems to remember that he even won the WTF.
FACT: Last year, both Agassi and his wife Steffi Graf did a CNN special devoted soley to their Olympic singles wins. You think anybody is going to devote a CNN segment to winning the WTF?LOL!
FACT:Graf also said winning Olympic Gold was bigger than a grand slam and more special. Graf won the WTA championships 5 times, yet they mean nothing to her compared to her singles gold medal.
Still in denial about how much OSG means to players, compared to the glorified end of season exho?
Last edited:
Eragon
Banned
"Looking like"
"Apparently"
"seems to"
Those don't sound like facts to me :lol: Here are some actual facts.
1. Agassi never said SOG>WTF
2. Agassi is one of 1000s of ATP pros of just the last couple of decades. His opinion should be taken as such, presuming he does favor his SOG over his WTF. If every pro felt the same way you think he does, the Olympics would be worth a lot more points.
3. Graf is a woman, from the WTA. This is the ATP tour we're talking about.
4. In terms of the WTF, Sampras>Agassi. In terms of Gold, Agassi>Sampras. (To be noted that Sampras didn't give two hoots about the all-prestigious, all-coveted Olympics. Ruling out bias from Agassi is ridiculous.)
You seem desperate. This here is my opinion, not a fact :lol:
Last edited:
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Not strictly true that the top 8 are replaced by another top player who just missed out being ranked in the top 8. In 2008 when A.Rod pulled out in Shanghai, he was replaced by Stepanek who was ranked 27 and just happened to be on holiday in Thailand. He had to borrow Djoker's racquet and Murray's socks because his kit failed to arrived from home.
The whole world knows about Olympic Gold, how many know anything about the WTF? Winning an OG for your country is far more prestigious than winning a few RR matches at the end of the season. That is why the WTF should just be an exho.
Last edited:
Eragon
Banned
Conjecture. Why would the ATP want to force the players to take part in an end of the year exho? Following that line of logic, perhaps the ATP wants to force players to play Wimbledon, lest they pull out citing injuries and fatigue :shock:
DragonBlaze
Hall of Fame
Cool man, good to know that no matter what Nadal accomplishes from here on out he won't be able to match Federer's career ever since
Wimbledon > any other slam.
I mean I would have said RG = Wimbledon = US Open = AO, but you have really enlightened me since you have brought everyone's attention to super objective measures such as
1. Prestige of tournament
2. How much players treasured their wins of said tournaments
Wimbledon has more prestige than any other tournament, that's pretty much beyond question. Federer and Murray obviously treasure it the most, Djokovic has also said he treasures his Wimbledon trophy the most (and is infact what he took over to his first coaches house after he won it). Nadal said that he cried after losing 2007 Wimbledon because he thought he might never win it, again showing how damn much Wimbledon means to everybody.
Here I was worried as a Fed fan, thinking Nadal had a legitimate shot at surpassing Fed as a player but now you have single-handedly relieved the concerns of all Federer fans. Because let's be honest Nadal ain't winning 7 Wimbledons. Thus he shall forever remain in second place. Infact I think you should start getting a bit worried about Murray, there is a good chance he ends up with more than 2 Wimbledons and ofcourse according to your infallible logic surpasses Rafa. Yikes.
Eragon
Banned
Well played, good sir :lol:
Last edited:
zagor
Bionic Poster
LOL! Terrific poast.
Few things are as entertaining as seeing a Nadal worshipper shooting himself in the foot.
P.S. Fed cried when he lost Basel final once (to Henman), I guess that means Basel is on the same level of importance as AO given how much Fed wanted to win both.
NatF
Bionic Poster
The WTF is much more important than Olympic Gold in terms of tennis. Look at the past greats who have won the YEC. Players like Sampras, Lendl, Becker all the way back to guys like Rosewall who won similar tournaments. Players like Mardy Fish have IIRC called qualifying for the WTF the proudest moment of their career. And he competed for the gold medal in Athens.
The OG is prestigious because it means alot to win something for your country. In absolute tennis terms it's about equal to winning a masters 1000 when it had a best of 5 final.
The OG is prestigious because it means alot to win something for your country. In absolute tennis terms it's about equal to winning a masters 1000 when it had a best of 5 final.
M
monfed
Guest
Yea OK, I'm quite sure you'd have a difficult time naming the players who won the OG before 2008(5 editions would do and naming Agassi doesn't count). Even more sure that you'd have hardly seen the winners play(like you do Murray/Ralph/Fed/Djoko etc) a lot of time on TV so save it.
As far as points go, you cant club two events and compare with one event and say they're the same. WTF is ONE event,OG is one event, comparing the two WTF> OG in points. Nothing to debate here.
First off let's get one thing out of the way: An olympic gold in singles is the SAME as an olympic gold in doubles, saying one is more valuable than the the other is just absurd. It's like saying winning an OG in 200 m hurdles isn't the same as winning an OG in 200 m sprint. Winning an OG is the pinnacle of sporting achievement for an athlete in the sport he participated in because they're representing their country at the biggest of stages so it shoudn't matter which event the athlete won it in. I've seen the Olympics and they usually list out medals by country,not by athletes.
This is my main beef with winning the OG. Why do you have to win the OG to "round" out your resume? Tennis have far more prestigious events such as slams(not even talking about the WTF here).
Would Pete's resume be more rounded with an OG or a RG title? I think we both know the answer to that question,don't we? Winning the olympics is important for track and field athletes,swimmers,archers, not for tennis players. I seriously doubt you know who won the OG before 2008? When you think about Michael Phelps or Usain Bolt you think of their achievements in the Olympics,noone other than qualified swimming experts know what they've achieved in their sport apart from OGs. I'd wager Olympics is their biggest accomplishment(the same can't be said for tennis players as slams are the most important to them). An OG would look good on one's resume but it doesn't round out one's resume.
For tennis the prestige/importance of winning an OG just isn't the same as for a track n field athletes like Bolt,Carl Lewis etc. As far as "CareerGoldenslam" sounding better than "CareerWTFslam"? Well "CareerOGslam" or "CareerOlympicslam" doesn't quite have the same ring to it either. :lol:
Last edited by a moderator:
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Every time a thread like this come up and the worshipers of the rusty injured peak Golden Bull line up their arguments I post this quote from one of them. And with great satisfaction, I must add:
nadal_slam_king said:
Apples and Oranges
As a tennis achievement, there is no doubt the WTF is far more impressive. But in a general public sense, in front of a public who doesn't know tennis, Olympics is more impressive, because the general public relates to Gold Medals won for ones country.
The Olympics has only been regarded as an important event for 2 years - 2008 and 2012. The WTF has been a very important event for 43 years. Because it has only been 2 years of opportunity where the Olympic event is important, its value has been inflated....because there are so few opportunities to win it (hence so many players haven't won it...because only 2 guys could). Ironically that makes the absence of the WTF in a players CV that much more pronounced, because they have 4 times as many opportunities to win it.
As a tennis achievement, there is no doubt the WTF is far more impressive. But in a general public sense, in front of a public who doesn't know tennis, Olympics is more impressive, because the general public relates to Gold Medals won for ones country.
The Olympics has only been regarded as an important event for 2 years - 2008 and 2012. The WTF has been a very important event for 43 years. Because it has only been 2 years of opportunity where the Olympic event is important, its value has been inflated....because there are so few opportunities to win it (hence so many players haven't won it...because only 2 guys could). Ironically that makes the absence of the WTF in a players CV that much more pronounced, because they have 4 times as many opportunities to win it.
This has never happened in the entire 43 year history.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Ah, we have the answer why all Rafito worshippers consider the OG more important than WTF.
It is resolved, then.
batz
G.O.A.T.
No. but he does say it's greater than winning any slam. Unless you believe Andre thinks the WTF is also greater than any slam I think it's safe to infer that Andre rates OG > WTF.
It doesn't mean he's right - it's just his opinion.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ol...is-gold-matters-more-than-any-Grand-Slam.html
batz
G.O.A.T.
Which is the more prestigious tournament, Queen's or Washington?
Homeboy Hotel
Hall of Fame
If you consider the length of a players career, they will only get one to three chances to even play the Olympics compared to the annual World Tour Finals (6-7 chances)
Hence, the Tennis Singles Olympic Gold is the most prestigious.
/Thread
Hence, the Tennis Singles Olympic Gold is the most prestigious.
/Thread
Tennis_Hands
Banned
All the tennis Greats (including Laver's (for his fanboys)) should be listened to about the technical aspects of the game and should totally be ignored about anything, that regards the value of the achievements and comparisons in that regard, since there is a vested interest involved.
Last edited:
batz
G.O.A.T.
I don't know - what I do know is that it can happen.
M
monfed
Guest
Mcenroe's opinion is that Ralph is the GOAT when he's a good 5 slams short of Federer, while not too long ago he was calling Fed the GOAT(too lazy to find quotes,look them up if you wish.).Not saying Mcenroe is right,he's just giving his opinion.
Would Murray retire with 1 Wimby or 1OG? IDK bout you but I'm sure he'd pick an OG as he'd like to be mentioned in the company of tennis greats such as Rosset/Massu/Mecir instead of Pete/Fed/Borg etc. Not saying I'm right ,it's just my opinion.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
The only time Nadal won the OG, he was in the form of his life. It goes to show how much the performance at the OG is dependend on accidental peaks of form.
Hardly an argument supporting your view about the rarity being an asset.
Similar threads
- Poll
