Is an olympic gold medal more prestigious than wtf?
- Thread starter Sorana fan
- Start date
D
Deleted member 810491
Guest
Whenever something is best-of-5-sets, its automatically more valuable than best-of-3-sets.
The WTF is best-of-3-sets, and sadly Zverev's 2021 gold medal was only best-of-3-sets.
But the olympics final is usually best-of-5-sets and is therefore the highest level of prestige.
The WTF is best-of-3-sets, and sadly Zverev's 2021 gold medal was only best-of-3-sets.
But the olympics final is usually best-of-5-sets and is therefore the highest level of prestige.
James_Bolt
Rookie
Level of difficulty and level of prestige are not the same thing.
It is more difficult to win all 9 Masters1000 in a calendar year than to win all 4 GS in a calendar year.
But it is more prestigious to win all 4 GS in a calendar year.
Pheasant
Legend
Look at the numbers. In 2023, Djoker bagged 4.7 million for winning the WTF, along with 1500 points in the rankings. An Olympic gold medal gives you 0 prize money and 0 points h the rankings.
That said, to a guy like Djoker, it’s got to be worth a ton more than the WTF these days.
My answer is it depends on the player.
That said, to a guy like Djoker, it’s got to be worth a ton more than the WTF these days.
My answer is it depends on the player.
Prestige is, like beauty, a subjective term bound to personal beliefs.
So, there is no discussion about rationale stuff here, just some trying to impose their point of view onto others.
zakopinjo
Professional
the tennis olympics have artificial prestige for the last 16 years thanks to the big 3. In reality, tennis lacks a real qualifying tournament for the olympics. They have no weight and meaning because they do not have an Olympic standard and only the ATP ranking list is the measure, which is extremely ridiculous and frivolous.
Sometennisfan
New User
Of course!
A medal you can win only once in 4 years vs once in each year.
If u give me the argument that in ATP Finals only 8 best players of the year compete, i will ask: is someone stopping that 8 players to also compete for Olympics?
Ok, i think also that medals won in tennis at Olympics rised in prestige in last myb 2 decades, before their werent seen by tennis players as important as today.
But myb im wrong being not so old so i could lived and capture the feelings and truths about this topics from before '00.
I will end by saying this ipotethicals, for me personally, if u ask me now what i would choose to win between 1 trophy at Olympics vs 1 at ATP Finals, i will choose the Olympics one.
A medal you can win only once in 4 years vs once in each year.
If u give me the argument that in ATP Finals only 8 best players of the year compete, i will ask: is someone stopping that 8 players to also compete for Olympics?
Ok, i think also that medals won in tennis at Olympics rised in prestige in last myb 2 decades, before their werent seen by tennis players as important as today.
But myb im wrong being not so old so i could lived and capture the feelings and truths about this topics from before '00.
I will end by saying this ipotethicals, for me personally, if u ask me now what i would choose to win between 1 trophy at Olympics vs 1 at ATP Finals, i will choose the Olympics one.
PMChambers
Hall of Fame
Will it never stop!
soldat
Semi-Pro
It can only stop if no one responds, yet we did
Also I value a tournament based on the prize money received, and prestige based on the media coverage. Probably Wimbledon and US open are the two most covered tournaments and WTF is the most valuable tournaments
Getting top 8 in the world seems harder than getting selected to play for your country in the Olympic Games for tennis, and it makes WTF more selective than slams
PMChambers
Hall of Fame
My context was in regards to someone 2017 complaining the thread was bumped. 7 yrs on and it's Bumped again. 2032 here we come.
Historically interesting thread as Big 3 BS was very strong in 2013.
Regarding the Olympics vslue, it's personal bias. Prestige is perception and value is as well. I don't hold Olyp in tennis high. Below Masters. I see a lot of arguments that are from "special pleading". Replace Tennis with Football, Flag Football, Golf, Basketball, etc and arguments used fail. If it's the event that makes it important then Gold in the Free Style BMX is more prestigious than Wimbledon, or F1, Tour De France, etc.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
By this logic even challengers and futures would be more prestigious than OG as they give points and prize money. The fact that despite no money or points, players eagerly want to win it, shows how prestigious it is.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Well said. It is also likely tougher to win Barcelona 15 times in a row than Wimbledon 3 times in a row or winning a match without losing a point (in a slam match) tougher than a CYGS.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
WC is still more prestigious. In CHL you also have mug teams and the home/away games in every round allows to lose various games and still win the whole thing. In WC you can only lose one match (theoretically two but will never happen).
Rovesciarete
Hall of Fame
Frankly for basically all the last 5-6 slam winners gold is clearly more precious then (another) slam, thus I have adjusted my view accordingly some time ago...
No.1 > Gold/slam > 2nd major/first ATP finals
I would actually put a medal above the second masters title as well…
No.1 > Gold/slam > 2nd major/first ATP finals
I would actually put a medal above the second masters title as well…
Similar threads
