Olympic Day 9 Thread

[The Special Juan]

First topic message reminder :

Centre Court: Hlavackova/Hredecka v Williams/Williams for Gold then Federer v Murray for Gold then Azarenka/Mirnyi v Murray/Robson for Gold

Court 1: Del Potro v Djokovic for Bronze then Huber/Raymond v Kirilenko/Petrova for Bronze then Bryan/Raymond v Kas/Lisicki for Bronze

[Danny_1982]

You'll get the usual negatives spouted about how this not a big tournament, but that won't dampen the Murray fans. Nor should it.

On Federer's best surface, in a match he desperately wanted to win, in a BO5 match, on the most prestigious court in the world... Murray came of age. No matter what anyone says, no matter who tries to dilute the importance of it, this is huge for Andy Murray.

[I hate fish]

brilliant silver medal from Federer.

I don't think anyone else would've beaten Delpo on Friday.

Do you think you could find the grace to congratulate Murray? You keep telling us that you often complement him - well now's a good time

We won't hold our breathe

wow man Roddick could've taken atleast 2 sets from Federer today after the Delpo marathon.

Murray has played 4 sets and 2 tie breakers since Fed finished.

[break_in_the_fifth]

His next mixed doubles match I will watch with more interest than I probably ever will watch a doubles match. I really hope he can get another gold, that would be too good.

[barrystar]

We know that Murray can win his way through to a slam final. So far in the biggest match he's come up short.

This is the first Bo5 final in a big tournament on a big stage against a top player that he's won. It can only help him going forward.

[bogbrush]

I think it's above the WTF, the Olympics is once every four years and is a real once in a lifetime chance to make a name for yourself worldwide. It's also right in the heart of the season compared to the WTF finals at the end when everyone is tired and often injured (Murray,Nadal,Roddick in recent years). All a matter of preferance but also the fact the finals five sets means you get no lucky winners ala Davydenko in 2009, taking on Del Potro in the final who had hardly won a match since his US Open win.

Have you compared the lists of WTF and Olympics winners?

WTF is a massive part of the TENNIS season, this is a separate ocassion, alongside but parallel to the real season.
It's quite possible for these guys to crave a Gold because as well as being tennis pros they like to be part of something else.

[Guest]

Oh here we go....... As anticipated, it's being anointed a sub-Slam

Yes. Not as good as having a Slam

Where's the issue in that?

It's a significant victory as it was for Olympic Gold something Fed in particular had targetted

Don't tell us BB, that Roger, a player who wants to lay down an untouchable legacy, doesn't want to be in the same league as Steffi, Rafa and Serena.

Incidentally, I don't think it matters one jot.

Err no.. only Fed and Steffi are comparable.

The rest are way behind.

A trinket in the OG doesn't change that.

BTW, does anyone remember Dementieva? No didn't think so. Well she won OG.

Don't get me wrong.. I thought Murray played fab today, but I detest this convenient elevation of the OG as if it's some sort of rival to the slams. It's below the WTF and just above the Masters level. That was a point I've consistently made before the games even started.

Exactly Emanci, too add more Do somebody remember Marc Rossett ? he won Olympics in 1992, a field that consisted Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, M Chang, Jim Courier.

Great win for Murray to get his confidence back but this doesn't impact anything in terms of legacy, Tennis still don't belong to Olympics, I find it very awkward.

Lets pretend it does until he wins something better Hopefully it will serve most of the purposes of a 'slam' win he's convinced it's the biggest win of his career.

That's a fair compromise..

after all Murray did celebrate like it was a slam

[banbrotam]

But as a joint Federer and Murray fan, I never enjoy their matches anyway. Federers Wimbledon win was the most bittersweet victory, and so is this one. Would rather one of them got knocked out before a final, or play in the semis, that I can take better

Very familiar feeling - but for me it's worked out perfectly. I wanted Fed to get his last Wimbledon and go to No. 1. I was pretty neutral about today, but from now on I want Murray to win the slam encounters (should they happen).

I would just rather he didn't lose to Nadal and Djokovic all those times as to me it's clear he's better than them anyway. I agree with the bittersweetness of Fed's Wimbledon which I guess after seeing today could so easily have been Murray's. It's so annoying he hasn't won a slam yet but I'm starting to see again in him what he used to have in 2008 which gave him so much potential. Does this victory erase all the mental demons?

What?

It's clear to you that he's better than Rafa and Novak?

How did you come to that conclusion? Murray has never consistently produced the same level that those two have managed. Peak for peak they would beat him more often than not, as reflected by their results against each other and their respective accomplishments in the game.

Murray is as good as Nole, simply because he has more variety of a high level. Andy's problem before has not been smart enough when playing the likes of him and the others at Slams

Remember Murray has won 6 out of the last 10 meetings between them and yes crucially lost the Slam ones - but you cannot see it as ridiculous that the Murray of today may be better than Nole

Likewise Nadal. The last time they met - Murray gave him a beating and a bagel set as match which can now be seen as significant as made out at the time as it heralded the new more aggressive Murray

It's always been a known that once Andy got a consistent serve and forehand, then the other would have to watch out. In the first set he delivered a forehand down the line that totally wrong footed Fed. Nobody would have got that

I think with all these comparisons, we need to wait until the end of their careers to have a proper considered opinion

[break_in_the_fifth]

I think it's above the WTF, the Olympics is once every four years and is a real once in a lifetime chance to make a name for yourself worldwide. It's also right in the heart of the season compared to the WTF finals at the end when everyone is tired and often injured (Murray,Nadal,Roddick in recent years). All a matter of preferance but also the fact the finals five sets means you get no lucky winners ala Davydenko in 2009, taking on Del Potro in the final who had hardly won a match since his US Open win.

It's only recently everyone's been injured since everyone's been playing a clay court game on every court. One thing I will agree though is that the importance of a tournament is not set in stone for instance if everyone somehow decided they didn't care about winning Wimbledon then it wouldn't be worth much. The opposite has happened with the Olympics and . I still think however though that the WTF is more valuable, maybe less so nowadays but a few years ago when players didn't destroy themselves during the season it was still a very sought after prize.

[summerblues]

I detest this convenient elevation of the OG as if it's some sort of rival to the slams.

Why debate this today? A lot of the things said in the heat of the moment will not be as carefully thought out as they would be in a few days' time so I would not anticipate a very interesting debate on a day like this - it is more likely that people on both sides will end up venting their frustrations.

Today is Andy's day and I will let him and his fans enjoy it. Murray played amazing tennis - the best I have seen from him or thereabouts. It is a great win and perhaps a harbinger of things to come. I would have been happier if Roger won, but it was not to be. In the bigger scheme of things, as a Fed fan, hard to be overly disappointed in his career (or even in his summer on the grass of Wimbledon).

I hope Andy's and Delpo's resurgence will last - we need more faces winning the major trophies and the very young guys do not seem to be ready yet.

[banbrotam]

I think it's above the WTF, the Olympics is once every four years and is a real once in a lifetime chance to make a name for yourself worldwide. It's also right in the heart of the season compared to the WTF finals at the end when everyone is tired and often injured (Murray,Nadal,Roddick in recent years). All a matter of preferance but also the fact the finals five sets means you get no lucky winners ala Davydenko in 2009, taking on Del Potro in the final who had hardly won a match since his US Open win.

Have you compared the lists of WTF and Olympics winners?

WTF is a massive part of the TENNIS season, this is a separate ocassion, alongside but parallel to the real season.
It's quite possible for these guys to crave a Gold because as well as being tennis pros they like to be part of something else.

Do you think that Roger's targetting the WTF instead of the Gold then? If so, why on earth has he mentioned that winning the Olympics was his goal then

I repeat that this is not a Slam win. But it's a significant victory simply because it's a unique event that every other player craved winning as much as a Slam this year

We can talk about the quality of the WTF until we're blue in the face - using that logic, we could say that it's above a Slam, because it's the only even where the Top 8 are guaranteed

I repeat The Olympics is not the same as a Slam - but it's important to the two playing today

[banbrotam]

One thing I will agree though is that the importance of a tournament is not set in stone for instance if everyone somehow decided they didn't care about winning Wimbledon then it wouldn't be worth much. The opposite has happened with the Olympics and . I still think however though that the WTF is more valuable, maybe less so nowadays but a few years ago when players didn't destroy themselves during the season it was still a very sought after prize.

Correct. Some seem to arrogantly imply that The Olympics isn't as important. Try telling that to Fed

I'd wager that he'd trade last years O2 for this

[Guest]

But as a joint Federer and Murray fan, I never enjoy their matches anyway. Federers Wimbledon win was the most bittersweet victory, and so is this one. Would rather one of them got knocked out before a final, or play in the semis, that I can take better

Very familiar feeling - but for me it's worked out perfectly. I wanted Fed to get his last Wimbledon and go to No. 1. I was pretty neutral about today, but from now on I want Murray to win the slam encounters (should they happen).

I would just rather he didn't lose to Nadal and Djokovic all those times as to me it's clear he's better than them anyway. I agree with the bittersweetness of Fed's Wimbledon which I guess after seeing today could so easily have been Murray's. It's so annoying he hasn't won a slam yet but I'm starting to see again in him what he used to have in 2008 which gave him so much potential. Does this victory erase all the mental demons?

What?

It's clear to you that he's better than Rafa and Novak?

How did you come to that conclusion? Murray has never consistently produced the same level that those two have managed. Peak for peak they would beat him more often than not, as reflected by their results against each other and their respective accomplishments in the game.

Murray is as good as Nole, simply because he has more variety of a high level. Andy's problem before has not been smart enough when playing the likes of him and the others at Slams

Remember Murray has won 6 out of the last 10 meetings between them and yes crucially lost the Slam ones - but you cannot see it as ridiculous that the Murray of today may be better than Nole

Likewise Nadal. The last time they met - Murray gave him a beating and a bagel set as match which can now be seen as significant as made out at the time as it heralded the new more aggressive Murray

It's always been a known that once Andy got a consistent serve and forehand, then the other would have to watch out. In the first set he delivered a forehand down the line that totally wrong footed Fed. Nobody would have got that

I think with all these comparisons, we need to wait until the end of their careers to have a proper considered opinion

We can have a considered opinion based on what we've seen so far.. not some hypothetical point in the future when Murray may or may not close the gap in accomplishments. Break, obviously formed his opinion based on what he's seen to date, just as you and I have, and to date Murray has never consistently produced the level that Djokovic did for a whole year, or the level that Rafa has managed for multiple years. Break said 'I would just rather he didn't lose to Nadal and Djokovic all those times as to me it's clear he's better than them anyway' implying that he has been better than them from the start and thus should not have lost all those matches, not that he is only better than them now - clearly a weak position to take.

It's easy to het caught up in the moment and hail the latest winner as the best thing since sliced bread, whilst also forgetting the great champions of the (not so distant in this case) past. Rafa and Novak are far, far ahead of Murray in both accomplishment and performance to date. Murray beating a worn out 31 year old Federer in the OG's doesn't change that.

Of course going forward things can still change.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Come on Laura and Andy!!!!!

[break_in_the_fifth]

But as a joint Federer and Murray fan, I never enjoy their matches anyway. Federers Wimbledon win was the most bittersweet victory, and so is this one. Would rather one of them got knocked out before a final, or play in the semis, that I can take better

Very familiar feeling - but for me it's worked out perfectly. I wanted Fed to get his last Wimbledon and go to No. 1. I was pretty neutral about today, but from now on I want Murray to win the slam encounters (should they happen).

I would just rather he didn't lose to Nadal and Djokovic all those times as to me it's clear he's better than them anyway. I agree with the bittersweetness of Fed's Wimbledon which I guess after seeing today could so easily have been Murray's. It's so annoying he hasn't won a slam yet but I'm starting to see again in him what he used to have in 2008 which gave him so much potential. Does this victory erase all the mental demons?

What?

It's clear to you that he's better than Rafa and Novak?

How did you come to that conclusion? Murray has never consistently produced the same level that those two have managed. Peak for peak they would beat him more often than not, as reflected by their results against each other and their respective accomplishments in the game.

For whatever reason I don't think we've seen Murray's true peak. He's got the same game as Novak but with a lot more variety, for some inexplicable reason he took his game down the Nadal path and it cost him. Nadal's game shouldn't bother Murray either away from clay if Murray is playing to his capabilities. That's where he's been really disappointing.

As far as results go, I don't use them as much as others do to decide how good a player is. For example even if Nadal never wins another slam, I'm open to the opinion that he is better than Fed just going on what you see from them playing. It's the same reason I'm not as quick to put Murray at the top of the players that haven't won a slam.

[Guest]

I think it's above the WTF, the Olympics is once every four years and is a real once in a lifetime chance to make a name for yourself worldwide. It's also right in the heart of the season compared to the WTF finals at the end when everyone is tired and often injured (Murray,Nadal,Roddick in recent years). All a matter of preferance but also the fact the finals five sets means you get no lucky winners ala Davydenko in 2009, taking on Del Potro in the final who had hardly won a match since his US Open win.

Have you compared the lists of WTF and Olympics winners?

WTF is a massive part of the TENNIS season, this is a separate ocassion, alongside but parallel to the real season.
It's quite possible for these guys to crave a Gold because as well as being tennis pros they like to be part of something else.

Do you think that Roger's targetting the WTF instead of the Gold then? If so, why on earth has he mentioned that winning the Olympics was his goal then

I repeat that this is not a Slam win. But it's a significant victory simply because it's a unique event that every other player craved winning as much as a Slam this year

We can talk about the quality of the WTF until we're blue in the face - using that logic, we could say that it's above a Slam, because it's the only even where the Top 8 are guaranteed

I repeat The Olympics is not the same as a Slam - but it's important to the two playing today

Roger doesn't go on about the WTF's because he already has six of them.

Even so, he was in tears after he won it last year - so I guess it still means something to him.

In any case, since when did what Federer want become the yardstick for prestige in tennis.

Roger was in tears after he won Basle last year, in fact he cries almost every year after he wins in Basle.

Perhaps we should place it above the USO, since he rarely cries after winning that one.

[Danny_1982]

Let's be clear on one thing, Murray has not achieved his career objective with this win. It is massive, he is Olympic champion... But it is not a slam.

However, I do find this reaction of trying to dilute the achievement a little bit childish. Federer was in tears when he won his semi, that's how important it was to him. Murray the same after his semi.

A little more grace from some people would go down well. Federer has displayed it in bucket loads fortunately.

Well done Andy for a massive win. And well done roger for such humility after what must be a disappointing result for him.

[bogbrush]

I think it's above the WTF, the Olympics is once every four years and is a real once in a lifetime chance to make a name for yourself worldwide. It's also right in the heart of the season compared to the WTF finals at the end when everyone is tired and often injured (Murray,Nadal,Roddick in recent years). All a matter of preferance but also the fact the finals five sets means you get no lucky winners ala Davydenko in 2009, taking on Del Potro in the final who had hardly won a match since his US Open win.

Have you compared the lists of WTF and Olympics winners?

WTF is a massive part of the TENNIS season, this is a separate ocassion, alongside but parallel to the real season.
It's quite possible for these guys to crave a Gold because as well as being tennis pros they like to be part of something else.

Do you think that Roger's targetting the WTF instead of the Gold then? If so, why on earth has he mentioned that winning the Olympics was his goal then

I repeat that this is not a Slam win. But it's a significant victory simply because it's a unique event that every other player craved winning as much as a Slam this year

We can talk about the quality of the WTF until we're blue in the face - using that logic, we could say that it's above a Slam, because it's the only even where the Top 8 are guaranteed

I repeat The Olympics is not the same as a Slam - but it's important to the two playing today

Oh now they wanted it as much as a Slam? You're not wasting any time bumping it are you?

Offer either of the today the pick of Wimbedon or this and it'd be Wimbedon every day and twice on Sunday.

How would that equate to them wanting it as much as a Slam?

It's. Great day for him as an Olympic competitor. As a tennis pro the real challenges begin shorty,

[Guest]

But as a joint Federer and Murray fan, I never enjoy their matches anyway. Federers Wimbledon win was the most bittersweet victory, and so is this one. Would rather one of them got knocked out before a final, or play in the semis, that I can take better

Very familiar feeling - but for me it's worked out perfectly. I wanted Fed to get his last Wimbledon and go to No. 1. I was pretty neutral about today, but from now on I want Murray to win the slam encounters (should they happen).

I would just rather he didn't lose to Nadal and Djokovic all those times as to me it's clear he's better than them anyway. I agree with the bittersweetness of Fed's Wimbledon which I guess after seeing today could so easily have been Murray's. It's so annoying he hasn't won a slam yet but I'm starting to see again in him what he used to have in 2008 which gave him so much potential. Does this victory erase all the mental demons?

What?

It's clear to you that he's better than Rafa and Novak?

How did you come to that conclusion? Murray has never consistently produced the same level that those two have managed. Peak for peak they would beat him more often than not, as reflected by their results against each other and their respective accomplishments in the game.

For whatever reason I don't think we've seen Murray's true peak. He's got the same game as Novak but with a lot more variety, for some inexplicable reason he took his game down the Nadal path and it cost him. Nadal's game shouldn't bother Murray either away from clay if Murray is playing to his capabilities. That's where he's been really disappointing.

As far as results go, I don't use them as much as others do to decide how good a player is. For example even if Nadal never wins another slam, I'm open to the opinion that he is better than Fed just going on what you see from them playing. It's the same reason I'm not as quick to put Murray at the top of the players that haven't won a slam.

In that case, if Nadal is better than Fed based on what you've seen and Murray is better than Nadal based on what you've seen, does that make Murray the GOAT?

I win again.



emancipator

[break_in_the_fifth]

One thing I will agree though is that the importance of a tournament is not set in stone for instance if everyone somehow decided they didn't care about winning Wimbledon then it wouldn't be worth much. The opposite has happened with the Olympics and . I still think however though that the WTF is more valuable, maybe less so nowadays but a few years ago when players didn't destroy themselves during the season it was still a very sought after prize.

Correct. Some seem to arrogantly imply that The Olympics isn't as important. Try telling that to Fed

I'd wager that he'd trade last years O2 for this

Maybe not as the points from that got him to number 1 but I see what you mean. If it was a choice between having one or the other I still think it's better to have the WTF. I do think though that the Olympics will if it hasn't already surpassed the value of the WTF in years to come as players are devaluing the WTF at the end of the year by not being up for it.

[bogbrush]

Let's be clear on one thing, Murray has not achieved his career objective with this win. It is massive, he is Olympic champion... But it is not a slam.

However, I do find this reaction of trying to dilute the achievement a little bit childish. Federer was in tears when he won his semi, that's how important it was to him. Murray the same after his semi.

A little more grace from some people would go down well. Federer has displayed it in bucket loads fortunately.

Well done Andy for a massive win. And well done roger for such humility after what must be a disappointing result for him.

You're out of order there.

empacipator and myself have responded only to over-exaggeration by others, and are consistent with our views expressed before a ball is struck sat week. You can see my views on the first thread on that subject. I rated it there bigger than a Masters.

[Guest]

Let's be clear on one thing, Murray has not achieved his career objective with this win. It is massive, he is Olympic champion... But it is not a slam.

However, I do find this reaction of trying to dilute the achievement a little bit childish. Federer was in tears when he won his semi, that's how important it was to him. Murray the same after his semi.

A little more grace from some people would go down well. Federer has displayed it in bucket loads fortunately.

Well done Andy for a massive win. And well done roger for such humility after what must be a disappointing result for him.

You're out of order there.

empacipator and myself have responded only to over-exaggeration by others, and are consistent with our views expressed before a ball is struck sat week. You can see my views on the first thread on that subject. I rated it there bigger than a Masters.

Thanks BB.

I congratulated Murray on his fine performance and deserved victory.

But then I responded to the exaggerations. My position too has been consistent for YEARS.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Can we not have some discussion of the mixed doubles final that Murray and Robson are now participating in?

Currently a break up in the 1st set leading 2-0

[break_in_the_fifth]

But as a joint Federer and Murray fan, I never enjoy their matches anyway. Federers Wimbledon win was the most bittersweet victory, and so is this one. Would rather one of them got knocked out before a final, or play in the semis, that I can take better

Very familiar feeling - but for me it's worked out perfectly. I wanted Fed to get his last Wimbledon and go to No. 1. I was pretty neutral about today, but from now on I want Murray to win the slam encounters (should they happen).

I would just rather he didn't lose to Nadal and Djokovic all those times as to me it's clear he's better than them anyway. I agree with the bittersweetness of Fed's Wimbledon which I guess after seeing today could so easily have been Murray's. It's so annoying he hasn't won a slam yet but I'm starting to see again in him what he used to have in 2008 which gave him so much potential. Does this victory erase all the mental demons?

What?

It's clear to you that he's better than Rafa and Novak?

How did you come to that conclusion? Murray has never consistently produced the same level that those two have managed. Peak for peak they would beat him more often than not, as reflected by their results against each other and their respective accomplishments in the game.

For whatever reason I don't think we've seen Murray's true peak. He's got the same game as Novak but with a lot more variety, for some inexplicable reason he took his game down the Nadal path and it cost him. Nadal's game shouldn't bother Murray either away from clay if Murray is playing to his capabilities. That's where he's been really disappointing.

As far as results go, I don't use them as much as others do to decide how good a player is. For example even if Nadal never wins another slam, I'm open to the opinion that he is better than Fed just going on what you see from them playing. It's the same reason I'm not as quick to put Murray at the top of the players that haven't won a slam.

In that case, if Nadal is better than Fed based on what you've seen and Murray is better than Nadal based on what you've seen, does that make Murray the GOAT?

I win again.



emancipator

I didn't say I thought Nadal was better than Fed, I could sympathise with that view though I am of the opinion that Fed is better than Nadal by an amount far more than their respective achievements suggest. Murray is interesting, he never reached what he was capable of and I think he could be close to Fed maybe better but I really haven't seen enough.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Double break for Laura and Andy now!!!

3-0 in the 1st set!!!

[Danny_1982]

Let's be clear on one thing, Murray has not achieved his career objective with this win. It is massive, he is Olympic champion... But it is not a slam.

However, I do find this reaction of trying to dilute the achievement a little bit childish. Federer was in tears when he won his semi, that's how important it was to him. Murray the same after his semi.

A little more grace from some people would go down well. Federer has displayed it in bucket loads fortunately.

Well done Andy for a massive win. And well done roger for such humility after what must be a disappointing result for him.

You're out of order there.

empacipator and myself have responded only to over-exaggeration by others, and are consistent with our views expressed before a ball is struck sat week. You can see my views on the first thread on that subject. I rated it there bigger than a Masters.

Out of order? I don't think so.

I think a lot of comments on here are attempting to undermine the achievement. I'm sure some of it is disappointment, but I still don't think there's any need for it.

I'm sorry if you've taken it personally, even though I didn't direct my comments at any individual, but I stand by what I said.

Anyway, I'll leave it there as it has never been my intention to wind up or upset people on here.

[banbrotam]

In any case, since when did what Federer want become the yardstick for prestige in tennis.

Amazing comment. Greatest ever player publicly targets The Olympics (and even talks about Brazil 2016) but apparently it's barely better than a Masters

As we can see from the Argentineans bouncing around after DP's Bronze

I think you should enter into the spirit a bit more - two or even three Olympics ago, it wasn't seen as a big deal. This time it obviously has and to kind of say that the players wanting it more is irrelevant is plain daft

Look I dunno if this is just a tactic to undemine Murray's great day (I mean when lost at US08' - nobody allowed fitnees as an excuse ) but none of us Murray fans see this as a Slam, but just another significant step forward for him

He's now proved that he can beat his rivals in best of five set finals. Two years ago it was beating Fed in a final. The boxes keep getting ticked

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

4-0 up in the 1st set now for Robson and Murray with a double break

[banbrotam]

empacipator and myself have responded only to over-exaggeration by others, and are consistent with our views expressed before a ball is struck sat week. You can see my views on the first thread on that subject. I rated it there bigger than a Masters.

Come on BB. There's a lot of measly mouthed splitting of hairs from you two. You said yourself you were waiting for someone to declare it bigger or equal to a Slam

The comments on here are quite measured. I've now said six times, that it's not as good as a Slam

However, logically given how the players targeted it (only Nadal missing through genuine injury, we assume - who had won it before) that this year it is bigger than the WTF

I don't see this as 'over-exaggeration' - more an observation of how the players see it

[Jeremy_Kyle]

So now the Olympics, a tournament with no tennis history whatsoever, no prize money and until yesterday snubbed by most top players, has suddenly gotten to a rank close to the WTF only because Muzza has won it?? Who said that idiocy, and by the way, who feels entitled to rewrite the history of tennis and on what grounds?

what a load of crap

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Is nobody at all interested in talking about the mixed doubles final happening right now? Or are we all interested in taking pot shots at each other

[monty junior]

I think Murray's been watching some of Gonzo's old matches, hitting forehands that even the bomber would be proud of.

[Danny_1982]

Laura and Andy cooking on gas here.

[barrystar]

Before comparisons with the WTF start we had better see what happens for the rest of the year.

If the #1 ranking will be determined at the WTF, and it may well be, I think there's not much contest - it's going to have been bigger than the Olympics this year.

Also, if Murray wins the USO the Olympics will immediately become the turning point and staging post to a much bigger win.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

And we take the opening set 6-2

[banbrotam]

So now the Olympics, a tournament with no tennis history whatsoever, no prize money and until yesterday snubbed by most top players, has suddenly gotten to a rank close to the WTF only because Muzza has won it?? Who said that idiocy, and by the way, who feels entitled to rewrite the history of tennis and on what grounds?

what a load of crap

JK

1) This Olympics was seen as above the WTF by the GOAT - simply because it's a once in four year event and Rafa won it last time
2) Murray winning it hasn't elevated it one bit - it was already elevated. Just see the reaction to DP's Bronze

A tournament is quite honestly worth what the player put into it. Obviously a Slam is a Slam and all the players aspire to that. But you've had players here potentially ruining their US Open or / ranking points due to being knackered for the US summer Masters / Open swing

If it's such low prestige, why did Roger and particularly the increasingly tired Novak even bother

Even Mac has the grace to see that The Olympics means more now than it did 24 years ago. It's arrogant of you and others to decide that it's not

[barrystar]

Is nobody at all interested in talking about the mixed doubles final happening right now? Or are we all interested in taking pot shots at each other

Murray and Robson don't say much at the changeover do they?

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Is nobody at all interested in talking about the mixed doubles final happening right now? Or are we all interested in taking pot shots at each other

Murray and Robson don't say much at the changeover do they?

Well old Andy isn't one for a chat at the best of times, although Robson seems bubbly

[skyeman]

Roger Federer is just too good for Andy Murray. This is the simple, plain, easy to recognize truth for all of those with a gram of tennis brain in their heads.

Well done to Muzza for getting into the final though!!

Tennis brain?

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Damn Laura and Andy have been broken. 3-1 down in the 3rd

[barrystar]

Damn Laura and Andy have been broken. 3-1 down in the 3rd

Aye - big momentum shift I'd say.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Second set gone now 6-3.

Into the champions tiebreak we go....

COME ON ANDY AND LAURA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bogbrush]

So now the Olympics, a tournament with no tennis history whatsoever, no prize money and until yesterday snubbed by most top players, has suddenly gotten to a rank close to the WTF only because Muzza has won it?? Who said that idiocy, and by the way, who feels entitled to rewrite the history of tennis and on what grounds?

what a load of crap

JK

1) This Olympics was seen as above the WTF by the GOAT - simply because it's a once in four year event and Rafa won it last time
2) Murray winning it hasn't elevated it one bit - it was already elevated. Just see the reaction to DP's Bronze

A tournament is quite honestly worth what the player put into it. Obviously a Slam is a Slam and all the players aspire to that. But you've had players here potentially ruining their US Open or / ranking points due to being knackered for the US summer Masters / Open swing

If it's such low prestige, why did Roger and particularly the increasingly tired Novak even bother

Even Mac has the grace to see that The Olympics means more now than it did 24 years ago. It's arrogant of you and others to decide that it's not

More exaggeration.

Nobody's risking their USO, that's shown by Federer dumping Toronto.

Actually, it was this event which was compromised by players coming straight from a Grand Slam event, if you want to be precise about it.

[barrystar]

I've not seen one of these tie-breakers before. Fingers crossed.

[barrystar]

I think we're going to have to settle for silver....

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Yep Andy missed the big return on the Azarenka return at 8-6 to get us back into it. But silver is still a great result!!!

[Josiah Maiestas]

think i've seen enough to know Laura Robson will never make it in tennis.

Net skills are beyond tragic, serve is like dementieva's.

She cannot play tennis for longer than 1 set.

[break_in_the_fifth]

Really disappointing Murray was unstoppable today. How they managed to lose that especially after the first set...

[laverfan]

I detest this convenient elevation of the OG as if it's some sort of rival to the slams.

Why debate this today? A lot of the things said in the heat of the moment will not be as carefully thought out as they would be in a few days' time so I would not anticipate a very interesting debate on a day like this - it is more likely that people on both sides will end up venting their frustrations.

Today is Andy's day and I will let him and his fans enjoy it. Murray played amazing tennis - the best I have seen from him or thereabouts. It is a great win and perhaps a harbinger of things to come. I would have been happier if Roger won, but it was not to be. In the bigger scheme of things, as a Fed fan, hard to be overly disappointed in his career (or even in his summer on the grass of Wimbledon).

I hope Andy's and Delpo's resurgence will last - we need more faces winning the major trophies and the very young guys do not seem to be ready yet.

To echo SB and many others who think Murray has done well and won a title, this is good day for Team GB and should be a day of joy for GBR.

SUI has two medals, a Silver and a Gold.

Let us celebrate the athletes and the Olympic Games.

[I hate fish]

Laura should use the same fitness coach Andy used, in each game she was dead after a set and a half.

[Jeremy_Kyle]

So now the Olympics, a tournament with no tennis history whatsoever, no prize money and until yesterday snubbed by most top players, has suddenly gotten to a rank close to the WTF only because Muzza has won it?? Who said that idiocy, and by the way, who feels entitled to rewrite the history of tennis and on what grounds?

what a load of crap

JK

1) This Olympics was seen as above the WTF by the GOAT - simply because it's a once in four year event and Rafa won it last time
2) Murray winning it hasn't elevated it one bit - it was already elevated. Just see the reaction to DP's Bronze

A tournament is quite honestly worth what the player put into it. Obviously a Slam is a Slam and all the players aspire to that. But you've had players here potentially ruining their US Open or / ranking points due to being knackered for the US summer Masters / Open swing

If it's such low prestige, why did Roger and particularly the increasingly tired Novak even bother

Even Mac has the grace to see that The Olympics means more now than it did 24 years ago. It's arrogant of you and others to decide that it's not

That's exactly what you are getting all wrong: tournaments, are not defined by the reactions of players. The real big events, that are the four slams and the WTF are well above individual players' reaction: players should feel honoured to play in them and not the contrary, and if they don't, nothing changes regarding the profile of those events. The reason is simple if you think about it: it's tradition and prestige that make these tournaments great or more simply it's beacause of the unwritten rules of tennis (which btw are recognized by the ATP score system). Now, wanting to rewrite the rules of tennis seems to me rather arrogant, not the contrary.

[Sponsored content]