More Impressive for a Legacy: NCYGS or Olympic Singles Gold?

[uscwang]

Haven't been here much since the USO. Haven't missed much.

 

[TripleATeam]

I'm really hoping this meant equal number of slams, just one of the players managed to win 4 of them in a row at one point and the other managed to win OG.

Kinda like Nadal and Djokovic if you strip away all their other titles and weeks at #1.

 

[Autodidactic player]

4 Olympic singles golds in a row might, for sustained excellence, arguably, be more impressive than a NCYGS. Even then, no great player's legacy is based on success in the Olympics. Any player who achieved a NCYGS would be an automatic, no-brainer, entry into the International Tennis Hall of Fame, even if they never achieved much else. 4 Olympic singles golds in a row, without any slam title. I don't think that player ever makes the Hall of Fame.

 

[Sysyphus]

Olympic Singles Gold < NCYGS = CYGS < Double & Defended Olympic Singles Gold.

The Golden Defense essentially entails being the reigning champ of the biggest stage in sport for 8 years straight (or 9 in Murray's singular case). Hard to beat that.

 

[bluetrain4]

Singles gold is tennis coattailing on international brand marketing without much substance to back it up. But, it's worked brilliantly - evidenced by this very thread. A sub-Masters quality tournament but with VERY cool and well-known hardware has become a point of contention in ATG and GOAT debates in a mere few decades.

 

[tsp_207]

Thats easy. They would be ones who have no chance of a medal but need the money and rankig points. Tennis is hard at the lower levels.

Which is precisely why the Olympics' prestigiousness is overrated, because you can end up having random gold medal winners like Massu who never achieve anything else of note on the tour.

 

[Spencer Gore]

You're obviously right - but I always thought you were a neutral tennis historian, first and foremost.

When it comes to documenting and calibrating the history of the game I am scrupulously neutral.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Failure to win the Olympic Gold (post 90s) is a blot on any GOAT candidate's record, just as a failure to win the Tour Finals is a blot on the record. But winning Olympic gold nor winning the Tour Finals can compare as an achievement to winning all four slams in a row. Gold is won every four years, the Tour Finals every year -winning four slams in a row has happened only four times in male tennis history.

 

[goldengate14]

Which is precisely why the Olympics' prestigiousness is overrated, because you can end up having random gold medal winners like Massu who never achieve anything else of note on the tour.

Same is true of majors. Johansson. Gomez.
Yesterday in Zverev match the commentators must have mentioned the olympics 20 times. It seems to me the Olympics are massive until they are mentioned in respect of Nadal.

 

[Lgoel]

So even if Medvedev goes on to win Aus 2022, followed by RG2022, and then wimbledon 2022, we will still rate zverev ahead as he has the gold medal !!