Olympics

6-14 August
Perhaps in need of own thread.
Discuss build up and matches here.

Top of the billing with be Djokovic and Murray, and then Rafa who is currently scheduled to play, and planning to travel to Rio, but still not completely clear that he will play singles.

TRuffin copied this list from aother site and put it on the Toronto thread, I've added Federer, the rest is per July 23 post of Truffin. Edited August 2nd to add Wawrinka.

Out from top 10
#3 - Federer
#4 - Wawrinka
#7 - Raonic
#8 - Berdych
#9 - Thiem

Out from 11 - 20
#14 - Gasquet (also out of RC with injury)
#16 - Isner
#18 - Kyrgios
#19 - Tomic

Out from 21 - 30
#21 - F Lopez
#22 - Pouille
#29 - Querrey

Out from 31 - 40
#33 - Anderson
#35 - Karlovic
#37 - Dolgopolov
#38 - Chardy

I haven't heard about withdrawals on the women's side of the singles, but a lot of big names seem to be in.

Is there a separate area of the forum to discuss other Olympics events such as athletics, swimming, or whatever else? If there isn't, then I suggest we could make this thread about Olympics in general, and not just tennis?

Bryans pulled out of doubles today.

Have many top stars pulled out of marque events like in athletics, gymnastics, swimming citing zika? Or is just tennis and golf stars that pull out because of Zika?

Halep & Pliskova (citing Zika) and Bencic (concentrating on US Open) have withdrawn from the ladies side.

It does seem to be mainly tennis and golf - because, let's face it, the Olympics are not as important to tennis players/golfers as they are to athletes/gymnasts/swimmers.

Zverev is out as well - apparently he's not been feeling great for a few weeks.

Thanks for the updates.

Djokovic:
"I don't need to explain that every athlete dreams of being a part of the Olympic Games," he said. "I'm competing in singles and doubles.

"Hopefully I'll get at least one medal."

I've always struggled to generate any (serious) interest in Olympics tennis ; and with at least eight absentees from the Top 20 rankings alone, I can feel myself struggling even more this time.

Same where golf is concerned - there are certain past golf Majors where my memories of watching things unfold in the closing stages will last a lifetime. But it's inconceivable - to me, that is - that a similar scenario could ever happen with Olympics golf. I had a lot of respect for Rory McIlroy's honesty when questioned just recently about the Olympics and its 'status' within different sports.

Have always said that I don't think tennis should be part of the Olympics. However the fact is that at present it is. There are no points to be gained for playing this year. So the 12 top 20 players currently scheduled to play are doing so because they want to. Federer definitely wanted to be there and there was no mention of Gasquet not wanting to go. They are both out through injury. Think there were only 14 of top 20 playing Toronto last week with more higher ranked players not there. Therefore I would put them on a par with each other.

Obviously from an overall view tennis is only one of many sports at the Olympics. So in that context it is not the headline act it is at Slams and to a lesser extent Masters events. However I'm pretty sure that the players that are going will be giving their all to win the medals. Think the Federer, Del Potro semi at 2012 is a good indication of how seriously some of the top players take it presently.

In tennis I think it's important for some players, including the "Big 4", less so for others. In golf it seems most of the top players couldn't care less TBH, with Zika just being a convenient excuse. As per the list of missing players, some are injured (Feds, Gasquet), the Aussies seem to be arguing with their federation. Some obviously just don't want to be there, and with the absence of ranking points (and, presumably, prize money) it's hard to blame those who had no realistic chance of a medal. Unlike swimming, athletics, judo, etc., and for all its increased importance over the last couple of games, Olympic tennis is not the pinnacle of the sport. That Murray and Djokovic will be there gives the others even less of a chance obviously...

If we are discussing other sports, the situation with Russia is a bit of a mess. Feel the IOC have gone for a bit of a cop-out by putting the burden back on individual sports, with an odd ruling that previously banned athletes can't compete. Not sure that one will hold up as similar bans have been overturned by the CAS before. I know three of the swimmers have filed an appeal (Efimova - who really shouldn't be competing anyway, Lobintsev and Morozov), so we'll see what happens with that.

Back to the sport, I'm fairly interested in the swimming. I have a cousin who used to be a very good prospect (got to about fourth or fifth in Aus) until she ran into health problems, so know a few of the swimmers who'll be competing. Fancy the Brits to get 4-6 medals or so, with one or two golds. US don't seem as strong as recently, and wonder if Australia will challenge them. Australia have had a history recently of looking great at their trials but not bringing their form to the big meets, but if they could do so they have a really strong squad this year.

Don't think GB will be as dominating in the track cycling as they were in the last two games. They haven't found a proper replacement for Hoy yet. They should still do very well though, probably about 8 medals including anything from 2-6 golds. Think athletics will be roughly similar to London, maybe a slight improvement. Farah looks set to repeat his performance, Ennis-Hill or KJT might actually manage a 1-2 in the heptathlon, Rutherford has the ability to pull out the wins in the big meets, while all four relay squads are looking good. Also, watch out for Pozzi in the men's 110 hurdles. If he can stay fit through the rounds I'm tipping him for a medal. Don't really know a huge amount about other sports, though traditionally GB will be strong in the rowing and sailing.

Finally, a lovely story here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/36604675

I'm sure the players take it seriously...however when Agassi, Kafelnikov, Mahut and Berdych were winning OG where was the interest or relevancy to the sport as a whole?

Its a side show to the main track & field events. Not one of the multislammers will have OG thrust forward as a main achievement. For the Big 4 its just a resume filler...why not try to get that as they've won everything else.

I think you're thinking of Massu?

Also worth remembering that tennis is still a relatively young Olympic sport. There's no doubt that interest has been rising among the top players.

But yes, it's not the pinnacle of the sport, and I doubt it ever will be. Tennis revolves around the four slams (used to be rather more 3+1 of course), although I think "resume filler" is a bit harsh. Feds made no secret of Rio being a big motivation for him in carrying on, Murray, Djokovic and Nadal have all made plenty of noise about how important the Olympics are to them, etc.

How important to the fans is Olympic Tennis - evidently not very important to some. How important is Olympic tennis to the players - evidently very important. The Zika virus concerns and no ranking points on offer is not enough to deter all of the relevant players from attending and the majority of the key players sidestepped a Masters to be as prepared as can be. So the fans (some of them) may not be keen on the Olympic Tennis but the players are.

lags72 wrote:I've always struggled to generate any (serious) interest in Olympics tennis ; and with at least eight absentees from the Top 20 rankings alone, I can feel myself struggling even more this time.

Same where golf is concerned - there are certain past golf Majors where my memories of watching things unfold in the closing stages will last a lifetime. But it's inconceivable - to me, that is - that a similar scenario could ever happen with Olympics golf. I had a lot of respect for Rory McIlroy's honesty when questioned just recently about the Olympics and its 'status' within different sports.

The fact that all the Big 4 plus Stan and Nish are entering or wanted to go tells you everything about why they are the Top 6. They all believe they can win. Berdych and Raonic, simply don't 

The Olympics is not simply a matter of comparing it's value to a slam, it's a separate and wonderful unique event. 

Fans obsessed with their own sport, seem to forget that non-fans will watch the tennis in this event, where they probably wouldn't bother with any of the slams

I have many friends who rate Murray entirely due to his Olympic win, not his Slams

This is why McIlroy's comments were spectacularly ignorant and naive and note he's now paying the price for his 'up yours' comments 

You simply would not get any of the Tennis Top 4, making any of the utterances that Spieth etc, have made. Not even in 2004.

banbrotam - I hear what you say re 'non-fans' watching Olympics tennis. And I don't deny that many people who do not follow tennis year-round will remember and rate Murray highly for his OG medal. But do those same people really not take a similar interest in his two hugely-publicised Wimbledon victories .....??  Especially his first, being a watershed moment and a superb achievement, after nearly 80 years of British tennis (male, at least) famine.

I can't agree with you re the McIlroy comments. I am convinced he was articulating what many, many top golfers also believe deep down ; but who are afraid to say the same publicly because it is considered politically incorrect. AND that he speaks for the vast majority of true golf fans too. Perhaps you just happen not to like Rory McIlroy as an individual - which is fine, but a somewhat different issue.

lags72 wrote:banbrotam - I hear what you say re 'non-fans' watching Olympics tennis. And I don't deny that many people who do not follow tennis year-round will remember and rate Murray highly for his OG medal. But do those same people really not take a similar interest in his two hugely-publicised Wimbledon victories .....??  Especially his first, being a watershed moment and a superb achievement, after nearly 80 years of British tennis (male, at least) famine.

I can't agree with you re the McIlroy comments. I am convinced he was articulating what many, many top golfers also believe deep down ; but who are afraid to say the same publicly because it is considered politically incorrect. AND that he speaks for the vast majority of true golf fans too. Perhaps you just happen not to like Rory McIlroy as an individual - which is fine, but a somewhat different issue.

I made it clear that some of my friends remember that more than his slams. Remember, these are people who rarely take interest in any sport

Dunno why you should assume I don't like McIlroy, I root for him at every major. Liking someone and been critical of them plus been able to see when they've clearly put their foot in it, are not contradictions 

However, I did dislike the hiding behind Zika. Hilarious that this is the person so afraid of catching Zika, but thought it fine to holiday in Barbados, arguably the closest Island to the epicentre in April.

He then found his hypocrisy rightly challenged by the media, resulting in the petulant outburst 

A sporting icon like him simply has a responsibility to think about how his words can affect the sport that's given him the millions. Like it or not Golf, like Tennis is less subtle than Trump in its quest for world sporting domination. He can't pick and choose

He should simply look how Jason Day handled it, who, like a colleague of mine who cancelled their Mexico honeymoon at least has a genuine set of reasons, rather than just a convenient excuse - unless Rory is planning to start a family in the next 7 months

Incidentally, I still think Day is very wrong as well

Fans may not like it but the facts are facing us. Even Zika virus and no ranking points could not deter the top players in the world from competing at the Olympics. Some gave a Masters event a miss to prepare for it (passing up a bucket load of ranking points for it). Says it all really. Like I said some fans may not rate or even value tennis at the Olympics or the worth of Olympic Gold but the players clearly do.

Of the 14 singles winners (men and women) ten have been multi slam winners and 9 have been number 1 at some point. No player has won more than once. It's an impressive list.

I don't really get the constant desire to put down the Olympics tennis on here. It's an event the top guys care about and we know they will put full effort into winning. The last event gave us dramatic matches, Federer's tears of joy in the SF and a great atmosphere in the final. Compare that to Toronto last week and it was worlds apart - I'm not sure Novak even bothered to celebrate winning.

I don't think any sport should be in the Olympics unless it is the pinnacle of the sport. For tennis that is not the case. It's all part of the gross commercialisation of the Olympics. Lots of 'lesser' sports, who would appreciate it/need it a lot more, get left out because organisers want the 'showcase' sports. It erodes what little is left of the Olympic ideal.

For the players it is a unique (or at least only once every 4 years) experience and a chance to win something that is 'rare' but the idea that it is anywhere near a slam is ludicrous, and I don't think any of them would shed many tears if it got removed from the Olympics.

I think we can see that the players who have a good chance of winning are fairly keen on it, the ones who aren't don't seem that bothered, except for the chance to stay in the athlete's village, play in a different atmosphere etc - i.e. for the experience more than anything else.

Who cares if it should or shouldn't be? I don't.

I am glad that there is another high class tennis tournament on, which I can watch with great interest.

I went to some of the tennis at London 2012 and it was a different atmosphere to Wimbledon, but still very enjoyable.

Well it's certainly the pinnacle where synchronised swimming is concerned (or at least I think it is ......)

Let's hope it's never dropped. What tennis match could possibly offer the same excitement as watching a good Side Fishtail or Double Ballet Leg.

Well I'm not putting it down per se - sure its a spectacle because its wrapped up in the whole Olympics and I'll watch it.
However, if was a choice of Nadal vs Federer in the tennis final against the Mens 100m sprint final, I'd be watching Usain every time.
I don't really care if the top players want to win it...great for them, but they're not me - I'm not led by what they feel is important.
For me its simply a lesser event on a par between a slam & Masters event.
And its not hypocrisy, I'm a staunch Nadal fan but him winning 2008 OG is not something I'll particularly remember him for.

One thing that is interesting is that given its an umbrella event...the best of each sport every 4 years...I'd like to see each round played on a different surface to reflect the tour!
Obviously would never happen but an interesting concept given its on HC every time.

I really do struggle to see the point of Tennis in the Olympics. I know many disagree on here but my own feeling is it doesn't belong there, I feel the same about golf. You can tell by the amount that have pulled out already (citing zika as a concern) that it really isn't that important to most players. Same is the case with golf yet you don't see the other athletes pulling out as they have trained years for this moment.

The slams, WTF and masters series are the ones the players are after. Would they like to win a gold medal? of course but I really don't think it is a top priority. I suspect for many it is more the honour of playing for your country, particularly a nation that maybe doesn't have much chance of winning other medals.

I am not suggesting the top players don't want to win but it is surely lower in value than slams, WTF and masters series.

I completely disagree about it being worth less than a Masters event TBH - see Murray pulling out of Toronto to make sure he's fit and firing for the Olympics. It's worth less than a slam, but would put it on about the same level as a WTF.

lydian:
"One thing that is interesting is that given its an umbrella event...the best of each sport every 4 years...I'd like to see each round played on a different surface to reflect the tour! Obviously would never happen but an interesting concept given its on HC every time."

An interesting concept, and one I would find quite amusing actually, but will never happen for two reasons: first, the resources to have enough courts of each type to get through the first three rounds would be prohibitive, and second players don't like switching between surfaces too much as different surfaces require different preparations.

Also, the bit in bold is a bit odd given the last Olympics were played on grass

Anyway, I think tennis at the Olympics has been discussed quite enough, including on previous threads. Why not talk about the other events (those that we all agree should be there ): anything you're particularly looking forward to?

1992 was also on clay in Barcelona. Just depends where it's held.

slashermcguirk wrote:I really do struggle to see the point of Tennis in the Olympics. I know many disagree on here but my own feeling is it doesn't belong there, I feel the same about golf. You can tell by the amount that have pulled out already (citing zika as a concern) that it really isn't that important to most players. Same is the case with golf yet you don't see the other athletes pulling out as they have trained years for this moment.

The slams, WTF and masters series are the ones the players are after. Would they like to win a gold medal? of course but I really don't think it is a top priority. I suspect for many it is more the honour of playing for your country, particularly a nation that maybe doesn't have much chance of winning other medals.

I am not suggesting the top players don't want to win but it is surely lower in value than slams, WTF and masters series.

Would agree for Slams and WTF but not for Masters series. There are 9 Masters 1000's each year. So 36 chances to win one in a four year cycle as opposed to 1 chance of win an Olympic singles medal over the same period. The competition formats between Masters and Olympics are similar but the Olympic final is best of 5 sets. Therefore I don't think the Olympics are lower in value than the masters events.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

.....................................................

.................................................


Anyway, I think tennis at the Olympics has been discussed quite enough, including on previous threads. Why not talk about the other events (those that we all agree should be there ): anything you're particularly looking forward to?

Indeed.

I've already highlighted Synchronised Swimming ............

lydian wrote:Well I'm not putting it down per se - sure its a spectacle because its wrapped up in the whole Olympics and I'll watch it.
However, if was a choice of Nadal vs Federer in the tennis final against the Mens 100m sprint final, I'd be watching Usain every time.
I don't really care if the top players want to win it...great for them, but they're not me - I'm not led by what they feel is important.
For me its simply a lesser event on a par between a slam & Masters event.
And its not hypocrisy, I'm a staunch Nadal fan but him winning 2008 OG is not something I'll particularly remember him for.

I don't disagree with any of this. And yes Murray's first slam win will always be the best moment as a fan. But remember, we're tennis anoraks  . Like a band who has a cult following, but then aims for  mainstream, we'll always bemoan the casual watchers who in reality dictate the satus

I think it's fair to say that slams are at the top
then WTF, Olympics, Davis Cup (in disputed order)
then masters
then others

There are some who would have the Olympics or Davis Cup as low as masters but probably in a minority.

I would definitely put WTF ahead of Olympics. Granted I might have been a bit overboard saying masters series is bigger than Olympics. Perhaps given the regularity of masters event that Olympics could be placed just above but I certainly think WTF comes ahead of Olympics due to the scale of the competition, only the top players taking part and no easy / lucky draws.

I would probably put Davis cup near masters series as it has become more diluted in recent times. So many of the best players no longer take part or only do so in the latter stages. For me the davis cup is still very important but I don't think it is as hard to win as it possibly once was when more of the top players were regularly taking part.

Djokovic and Murray pretty much won the davis cup for their countries almost single handedly

Strong rumor that nadal and wawrinka both out- further diluting the field. Djokovic can play with one arm and win gold at This rate.

Good spots on the surfaces...tbh I meant most of the OGs are on hard...
1984: hard
1988: hard
1992: clay
1996: hard
2000: hard
2004: hard
2008: hard
2012: grass
2016: hard

So ~80% hard...and yes the multisurface comment was a joke really.

Anyway...let the games begin...tennis starts on Saturday I believe, with the final on the 14th.

Stan the Man has apparently had to withdraw from Rio

Yes, Stan now confirmed out. I'm struggling to remember an event with so many withdrawals. If you think about it, it is rare to have this many injury withdrawals from a slam. You have to suspect that, if it were a slam, some of them would have played on.

Now we wait on Rafa's decision. Reports have him saying in the last 24 hours that he hasn't decided which events to play, and wants to train before deciding in the next few days.

I think the prestige of this event is lower than London 2012, when it was very high, everyone going for it, and making statements that it was on a par with a slam and so on.

If Murray wins he would be the first to defend his title, indeed the first ever to win the event twice.

Vincent Richards, the 1924 winner, to be fair cannot be blamed for not defending his title when the Olympics returned in 1988.

Nadal apparently in for all three events.

slashermcguirk wrote:I would definitely put WTF ahead of Olympics. Granted I might have been a bit overboard saying masters series is bigger than Olympics. Perhaps given the regularity of masters event that Olympics could be placed just above but I certainly think WTF comes ahead of Olympics due to the scale of the competition, only the top players taking part and  no easy / lucky draws.

I would probably put Davis cup near masters series as it has become more diluted in recent times. So many of the best players no longer take part or only do so in the latter stages. For me the davis cup is still very important but I don't think it is as hard to win as it possibly once was when more of the top players were regularly taking part.

Djokovic and Murray pretty much won the davis cup for their countries almost single handedly

It's definitely way above a Masters. No top player would swap an OG for a Masters title. WTF is more difficult. I personally would rate the WTF higher but the players generally give the impression it's a bit of an inconvenience at the end of a long season. If it wasn't compulsory, I suspect we'd have a few drop outs each year and instead we get some players dialling it in. Given that, I'd say OG is probably at least on a par with a WTF win.

In different news, GBs world champ cyclist, Lizzie Armitstead, misses three whereabouts tests but escapes a ban following an appeal to CAS. Apparently there was some issue with the first missed test. Hard to understand how any athlete can miss three whereabouts tests in just over a year. Surely once on a second strike, family emergency or not, you make absolutely sure your whereabouts information is up to date?

While on the subject cycling, watching a Documentary on Brad Wiggins preparation for RIO 2016 last night he stated that winning Olympic Gold was at the top of any awards list, and thats coming from a A Tour De France winner!. The value of winning a medal means a lot to those taking part and as for the negative comments by "Spectators" I don't think they really count for much!

Andy Murray is selected to 'carry the flag' for Team GB at the opening ceremony

lags72 wrote:Andy Murray is selected to 'carry the flag' for Team GB at the opening ceremony

I'm sure he will be delighted and let's hope he can get back to back Golds.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of Tennis as an Olympic sport, to be named flag bearer of your country for the Olympic Games is a huge honour, so congrats to Murray on that

I agree with what you say on this MfC, and I believe Andy has described it as the greatest sporting honour he could wish for (I don't have the exact quote).

Yes, congrats to him

A great honour for Andy Murray to be the flag-bearer at the opening ceremony of the Olympics. Something I am sure he will have get pride in doing. Well done Andy.

Djokovic v Del Potro in R1. Yowsers!

Yes, definately the stand out. I find this quote from Del Potro in 2012.

"I don't have the words to explain," Del Potro said. "It's similar to winning a Grand Slam (title) or maybe even bigger. It's amazing."

And that just for winning the bronze! Perhaps he get over excited there.

Surely Djokovic to win the rematch, although a bad draw for both. Anyone know how fast the court is?

To continue banging the drum on the merits of the Olympics, if Rafa really has just come back from a borderline injury and decides to play all three events, that also to me says something about the prestige of the event, especially if he is risking his fitness for the US Open by playing all three. And this from someone who already has gold in the bank from a previous Olympics.

Dimitrov-Cilic also a notable R1. Paire-Rosol looks a little interesting to me, as well.

It's a big honour for Murray and congratulations but I would have said Jessica Ennis-Hill who carried the burden of being the golden girl at the last Olympics with tremendous grace, achieved a great victory and seems a nice person, and is in the medal hopes again, would also have been a good choice. She is also from athletics, which is more of an Olympic sport.

That makes three in a row being male flag bearer, and 8 out of the last 10. I'd also have been tempted to lean towards a woman this time for that reason, not so much political correctness as sending a good message about equality.

We certainly weren't short of contenders. There were about 6 good ones.

I read somewhere that the players were reporting that the courts were slow. Can't remember where now.

Amused to see that the Brazilians were discussing with Pele if he was going to light the flame or not and this was like 2 days before the ceremony that they were looking at who would do it. Typical Latin American advance planning there.

Found this article in the telegraph agreeing with me:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/olympics-2016/brazilian-football-legend-pele-to-light-the-olympic-flame-if-he-can-find-the-time/news-story/bc335d33eacfc66a20bcaa23aa1b9d84

As for the Brits, you have to wonder how much thought they put into their choice.

Andy Murray? Please. Ok, at least the guy is an Olympian – and a gold medallist to boot – unlike Pele, but he’s a tennis player for crying out loud.

Tennis players spend their entire lives dreaming of winning four tournaments, and the Olympics isn’t one of them.

The honour of carrying a nation’s flag should go to an athlete who epitomises the Olympic ideals – maybe even makes a statement. Great Britain had the opportunity to do just that this year, and they blew it badly.

Of their 26 Olympic flag bearers Britain has chosen just three women, and of those only one was a Summer Olympian. All of their flag bearers have been white.

In Jessica Ennis-Hill and Mo Farah, they had two Olympic champions who could break those stereotypes.

Both are national heroes who will be defending their Olympic titles in Rio. Both are black. Ennis-Hill, whose father was Jamaican, is a mother. Farah, born in Somalia, has won more titles than anyone in British athletics history.

There is no question that Murray is a great athlete who has reached some amazing career highs, with two Wimbledon titles and leading Britain to the Davis Cup since the last Olympics.

But unlike Ennis-Hill and Farah, he is not an athlete who will be remembered for his feats as an Olympian. That part of his life will be a footnote, a novelty even.

And unlike them he polarises public opinion.

OK, a bit weird that it says Jessica Ennis is black. She looks white to me. Interesting fact nonetheless that all flag bearers have been white.