If a grand slam is a 10 how much do you value the 2020 Olympics?

If a grand slam is a 10 how much do you value the 2020 Olympics?

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1

Results are only viewable after voting.


Slam - 10
YEC - 8
Olympics - 7
Masters - 5
Davis Cup - 4 (for an individual)

Or maybe a bit more accurate,
Slam - 10
YEC - 7.5
Olympics - 6
Masters - 5
Davis Cup - 4 (for an individual)

Sent from my GM1901 using Tapatalk
  • Like
Reactions: DSH


Hall of Fame
Heights of hypocrisy: posters who preach here daily abt why they shouldn't hate Federer , respecting every player are viciously spitting venom on Olympics as exho.


New User
when you say Olympics sportsman how many people think about Nadal or Murray in the world or how many think about Phelps or Bolt?For me Olympics feel like only games played in this stadium and swimming.Tennis,basketball or football,this type of games and sportsman, i never define them as Olympic sportsman.
Because for an athlete, Olympic gold is the highest achievement in the world you can get.But for other sports it is not like that.I even think that this type of sports must not be in Olympics at all.If there are higher targets in your sports like a Slam or World cup,you must not be in OIympics.


To the athletes themselves, it's close to a 10. For legacy purposes, a 2, if that.

If an OGM is so important in tennis, why does nobody mention Agassi has one? How about Mecir or Kafelnikov? If an OGM is "huge" for a tennis player, then I wonder why every single article about Agassi in the past 10 years never mentions it, just that he's an "eight-time major champion?"

Fed has an OGM which is never mentioned for his legacy. Stan has one too-- never mentioned, just his three slams.
agree, probably because Agassi was awful for the rest of 96, and also because in any other sport a double olympic champion is the GOAT, but that's obvs not the case for Murray, and there's never been a decent Olympic final between two ATGs, there's always that feeling that winner is somewhat random, much like the Davis cup. Watch Federer's interview after losing the 12 final, he really didnt care at all because it was meaningless compared to Wimbledon. + Djokokic cried in 16 not because it was the Olympics because his of sudden unexplicable loss of form generally


Fed has an OGM which is never mentioned for his legacy. Stan has one too-- never mentioned, just his three slams.
Federer has an OG in doubles, not in singles. It follows that Federer's OG ads to his legacy in doubles, not in singles.

And it is false that people ignore it for his legacy in doubles. When Federer's abilities in doubles are discussed, it is usually mentioned the OG in doubles he achieved.

As for Wawrinka... well, people typically does not discuss his legacy in doubles. That is he reason why his OG in doubles is largely ignored.

James P

Assuming a Masters is a 5, I'd rate it as a 7.5, splitting the difference. Since that's not available, I'll rate it a 7, because I think it's closer to a Masters than a Slam.


Hall of Fame
Voted 8... IMO an Olympic gold is comparable to WTF title. Way less important than a slam title, but more than a M1000...
A tournament that is played only once every four years and awards no ranking points or money, is nothing more than a glorified exhibition. Also, in the Masters players are required to play, in the Olympics they are not. Therefore: Slams, WTF and Masters are the MOST important tournaments, in that order

Nole Slam

Wimbledon - 12
Other Slam - 10
YEC - 7
Olympics - 5
Golden Masters - 5
Masters - 2
Berrettini Open - 1
Dirtball Championship - 0.5


New User
Close to zero. Voted 3 but overall don't really see it being that meaningful unless it's in the context of a golden slam.


I would give it a 7 because the latter stages of it are always really epic to watch but it's still worse than Slams/WTF and the majority of Masters events (imo) which are great to watch the entire event.


Hall of Fame
Not every person will understand the value of a Australian Open title. But everyone knows what an Olympic Gold Medal is.
I give it a 10.
I didn't give it a 10 because slams are and should be undoubtedly the pinnacle titles in tennis. I did give it a 9 however because all of the top players play if not injured (despite the lack of rankings points or prize money) and they all covet the gold medal. It is acknowledged though that the Olympic Tennis Tournament hasn't always been hightly contested and coveted since it's return in the 80's.