Olympics

First topic message reminder :

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.

As to the discussion about the value of Olympics, which we really have done comprehensively this time (and note there will a slight bias on this thread since those who think the Olympics is great are more likely to be watching it and hence posting on this thread) one thing to keep in mind is it's different when you are seeing it from a British perspective now that we seem to be an absolutely top Olympics nation these days.

We have won how many medals, 10, 20, 25? I don't even know. So the tennis only matters to us as much as the tennis matters.

But if you're from a minor country, ANY medal matters. You just want SOMEONE from your country to win at least one in something, anything.

I am sitting here in Chile and they acutely feel that. Luckily they can fall back on how good the are at football lately, so that at least feels as a consolation, they are all saying to themselves "at least we are good at football". Some countries don't even have that, or any other sporting achievement, or any other achievement of recent note in the world to fall back on. There must be 50 or 100 countries in that position.

These countries are never going to win gold in the 100 metres final or the marathon but as long as they get one, tennis, golf, shooting, anything, they don't care. They have an inferiority complex and just don't want to be embarrassed with a zero in the medal table.

So I bet that Puerto Rico tennis gold for Puig was watched by a lot, and got a load of press back home, and I bet she gets a good welcome the next time she goes to Puerto Rico. Similar story for the Fijians in the rugby. In Britain we were like "let's check the BBC news website, oh we lost that one, whatever", the Fijians were probably glued to the TV. Mind you, I'm not sure what time that was on in Fiji actually, so maybe not, but you get my point.

I think I'm not the first to make this point in this thread, and it kind of comes back to the Djokovic crying. How many medals have Serbia won? Any? probably not a lot. He was probably their top hope.

It must be pretty rare for a great player not to have an obvious defining shot, without which they wouldn't be quite so special. Doesn't make them limited.

I want to be a limited tennis player.

Just like JMDP

lags72 wrote:Our posts crossed Aut0Gr4ph !

(as an aside ....your user name is really awkward to type

Auto is fine. I only went with that because Autograph was already taken. A prize for anyone who can spot the in-joke behind it (the clue is I'm a Murray fan).

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:It must be pretty rare for a great player not to have an obvious defining shot, without which they wouldn't be quite so special. Doesn't make them limited.

Pretty much every great player has a defining shot. No player who has won 2 or more slams in the last 30 years is more limited than Potro. 

Second utter mug game of the set by Andy. He won't make this easy.

Murray starting to turn on the variety. Best slice backhand in the game?

This has been a pretty poor quality match.

Did anyone hear the story that Nadal and Murray have booked a private jet to travel to Cincinatti tonight? It says online they mentioned it on the BBC. What are they playing at (especially in Nadal's case)? They ought to be planning a walk down the Copacabana, seeing which parties they can attend, and trying to arrange a good seat for the 100 metres final.

As a collective, this might be Murray's worst 'major' since his injury comeback , but I love the way he gets some perverse delight out of guiding down his opponent

Considering how little competitive tennis Delpo has been able to play this year prior to Rio - just 20 matches all season - he has acquitted himself very well.

Henman Bill wrote:Did anyone hear the story that Nadal and Murray have booked a private jet to travel to Cincinatti tonight? It says online they mentioned it on the BBC. What are they playing at (especially in Nadal's case)? They ought to be planning a walk down the Copacabana, seeing which parties they can attend, and trying to arrange a good seat for the 100 metres final.

Be amazed if either are daft enough to turn up at Cincy. If so they might as well give Novak the US Open now

banbrotam wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Did anyone hear the story that Nadal and Murray have booked a private jet to travel to Cincinatti tonight? It says online they mentioned it on the BBC. What are they playing at (especially in Nadal's case)? They ought to be planning a walk down the Copacabana, seeing which parties they can attend, and trying to arrange a good seat for the 100 metres final.

Be amazed if either are daft enough to turn up at Cincy. If so they might as well give Novak the US Open now

They will definitely be there. Murray may tank though - he's got a very tough draw.

Why bother going and tanking? Murray easily has enough excuse to pull out here.

In Del Potro's case, you could even argue for skipping the US Open. I don't know if he is ever going to be 100% confident in his wrist. Fair enough if it is really definitely healed this time, but it not certain, play a few events in Asia and Europe in the autumn, 3-4 events or so for the rest of the season but don't overdo it.

Re the Olympics, as HB says, the significance will vary considerably from player to player. If you have no realistic chance of winning a medal, then the lack of ranking points and prize money will render it less than top priority for some of the tour (although the lure of representing your country and participating in an iconic festival of sport should not be discounted).

However, while player interest may vary, I think that overall the event clearly ranks above Masters level, although I'm not convinced about WTF. In terms of a player's CV, I think the Olympics is largely irrelevant, as it takes place far too infrequently. In this regard, WTF wins are probably more significant to the tennis purist when assessing a player's legacy, although I do agree that the event can be marred by end of season burn out.

I had a wry smile when reading Slasher's comments about the Olympic matches lacking tension. He clearly thinks the Olympic tennis event is pretty worthless, so is it any surprise that the matches lack tension from his perspective? Judging by Novak's reaction on losing, he clearly wanted the title badly and I'm sure the match had plenty enough tension from his perspective.

I have changed my mind regarding inclusion of sports like tennis and golf into the Olympics.  In my changed view they should be included but not at the expense of "minor" sports such as squash.  If tennis and golf are to be included, in my view, they have to be extra medals, and not included by removing sports like squash.

Now tennis and golf have a huge infrastructure and can be run using that infrastructure - without the need to incur any new building costs.  These sports can take care of themselves without costing the host Olympic nation anything.  In fact they should be run at a profit.  Only under these circumstances should they be included, but in my view they should be included, because the Olympics is about sporting excellence.

Now with regard "meaning" in terms of contributing to a players achievement in their sporting career - well that is a different question.

Born Slippy wrote:

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:It must be pretty rare for a great player not to have an obvious defining shot, without which they wouldn't be quite so special. Doesn't make them limited.

Pretty much every great player has a defining shot. No player who has won 2 or more slams in the last 30 years is more limited than Potro. 

Second utter mug game of the set by Andy. He won't make this easy.

So you're rating him as limited in relation to the 2 slams or more bracket, but that's a bracket he's not even in! I think you'd need to qualify your earlier statement if that's what you meant.

Henman Bill wrote:Why bother going and tanking? Murray easily has enough excuse to pull out here.

In Del Potro's case, you could even argue for skipping the US Open. I don't know if he is ever going to be 100% confident in his wrist. Fair enough if it is really definitely healed this time, but it not certain, play a few events in Asia and Europe in the autumn, 3-4 events or so for the rest of the season but don't overdo it.

I haven't checked but I'm pretty certain Andy only has one Masters exemption per year - which he took in Canada.

I think the Olympics is slightly above WTF, but there's very little in it. Who knows, I may even have said the opposite in the past. I can't remember.

I think the Olympics was lower in 2000 and 2004 but in the last few has got higher due to all the current top players consistently taking it seriously and rating it highly.

The WTF doesn't have a best of 5 final. Which I think it could have, but you would need to add a rest day otherwise it would be carnage, coming at the end of a tough season and tough matches in the tournament, right from the first match.

The quality is a bit on the down in this set.

I think despite his very obvious fatigue, JMDP is actually enjoying the drama and is (rightly) proud of his efforts in making this a respectable Final.

He is guaranteed a Silver Medal to top the bronze he won in 2012.

Murray is a tough nut to crack.

Now in terms of "meaning" in terms of a players sporting achievement in their sport - well the Olympics has little meaning for a sport such as tennis.  In other sports the Olympics is the pinnacle and those sports are built around a four year cycle.  This is not the case for tennis nor golf.

For tennis the sporting achievements are built around the four slam tournaments on an annual basis.  Clearly success in the slam tournaments is the number one measure of success in tennis as a sport.  The next most important measure of success in tennis is the highest ranking achieved.  Reaching number one is an important milestone and then weeks at number one.  The next most important achievement is the WTF, the end of year tournament which requires a) having a good year to get into the top 8 then b) to win the tournament.  The next most important is winning Masters events.  Then 500 events.  Then 250 events. That is the bread and butter of the sport and in assessing a players career achievement in their sport (tennis) it is these that have to be considered.

Success in the Davis Cup is a separate achievement and has to be included on its own merit.  Success depends on the team rather than the individual but in Murray's case he more or less won that single handedly for Britain.  That is an additional success that cannot really be compared to any of the above paragraph.  But it is a national / international achievement. You are representing your country and you are winning for your country and the people of that country.

Success in the Olympics is also a separate achievement - again it is a national / international achievement.  You are representing your country and you are winning for your country and the people of that country.  You are also representing your sport amongst all the other sports of the world.

For the players both the Davis Cup and the Olympics can have meaning beyond and above winning an individual grand slam.

So I think tennis players separate out the Olympics from the bread and butter tournaments of their sport.  They are playing for their country as well as representing their sport.  The meaning they give to it is completely different to the meaning they give to any bread and butter tournament of their sport.

As I say for other sports like gymnastics and track cycling the whole sport is built around the four year cycle of the Olympics.  For tennis, golf, basketball, men's football, men's road cycling it isn't.

Murray will kick himself if he lets this match slip away. However, as long as he can maintain his intensity from here, it will take a monumental effort of attacking tennis from DP to win it. It's fair to say that DP is starting to look very leggy and there's no way he can outlast Murray if the rallies continue to go long.

Whatever the result, I think DP has done more than enough to demonstrate he's no soft touch in long matches.

Not been on here for a while, and can't believe some of the statements some come out with.

Firstly, Del Potro 'limited player' - has that poster actually watched Del Potro play? Sure, he has a big serve and forehand, but the guy has some great volleys and has hit some sublime dropshots against Murray in this match. Also, any player who beat Nadal and Federer in their prime to win a slam is pretty special.

Secondly, some are claiming this is a poor match - what planet are you on? I've seen some fantastic brutal rallies, and a variety of sublime winners from both players. Sure, there's a few lulls here and there, but this match more than holds its own against many a slam final we've seen over the years.

I'm a Brit but rooting for Del Potro here. Nothing against Murray but I think Del Potro has done amazingly well to come back into the sport at this level after all his injury woes. I think Murray will win though - if Del Potro takes it to 5 sets Murray is a phenomenal athlete and will have more left in the tank.

So, have I got this right?

Murray - held twice, broken four times.
Del Potro - held once, broken four times.

You're not alone in picking up on the 'limited game' comment re Delpo, MrInvisible

It was indeed a strange description.

I agree with MrInvisible. Some of these players have been playing on average more than one match each day (doubles and mixed doubles).

Henman Bill wrote:So, have I got this right?

Murray - held twice, broken four times.
Del Potro - held once, broken four times.

I think you have one too many breaks ;-).

looked like about 2 argentines being thrown out

2 points from history!

This is a weary Delpo. But all credit to Andy.

If the Argentinian supporters really knew Andy, they wouldn't be shouting out during points. The contents of a pillow and a fan would be far more effective!

100m semi final about to start

lags72 wrote:You're not alone in picking up on the 'limited game' comment re Delpo, MrInvisible

It was indeed a strange description.

Other than Raonic, which player in the top 20 would you regard as more limited than JMDP?

Well done to both players.

Andy Murray 2016: three grand slam finals, One Wimbledon title,  One Olympics title.

Superb match anyway. Murray a long way short of his best but got the job done in the end. Court was far too slow albeit I agree with Mr I - tremendous match.

Henman Bill wrote:100m semi final about to start

Who cares! Bolt is limited in my book. All he does is run really fast. Apparently, he can't even juggle.....

It's a tired cliché, I know..... But - in the context of his last couple of years - if Delpo had been offered a Silver at the start of the event he would have grabbed it very happily.

Congrats again to Andy

del potro just could not hold his serve in that set, he was spent

great effort to reach the final though

feel sorry for him in the same way he did when he was the best player in a masters beating djokovic and murray, but lost to nadal int eh final

in this case although he did come through the tougher half of the draw, I don't think we can say in the same way he was the better player. murray may not have convinced fully in all performances, but he did what needed to be done in the matches

he never really looked like losing to me, although it was a bit touch and go against steve Johnson for a minute

Utter joke by the way that Andy gets 0 points for that and Novak got 1,000 for winning the Canada Masters. Should really be going into Cincy with the chance to go YE1.

so which of you Europeans stayed up for the 100 metres final, and thought might as well watch the tennis

or is it vice versa - you've stayed up late for the tennis, and now you might as well watch the 100 metres final

Bolt cruising to a 9.86 in the semi without pressing the pedal down, when I first starting watching that was around the world record mark that he just run, and it was cruising

Nore Staat, not a bad year for Andy - also lets not forget Davis Cup last year. He's full of confidence now and is probably favourite for US Open (which Djokovic has only won once). As for Del Potro, I hope he recovers physically after this gruelling final. *If* he can remain injury free rest of this year hopefully we can see him consistently back at his back next year, in contention at the slams.

Murray the first man to ever defend Olympics gold and in fact the only man to win two Olympics singles gold in all history.

Born Slippy wrote:

lags72 wrote:You're not alone in picking up on the 'limited game' comment re Delpo, MrInvisible

It was indeed a strange description.

Other than Raonic, which player in the top 20 would you regard as more limited than JMDP?

Berdych and Isner. I actually think he's got far more variety than he had before, which he's had to find due to his injuries

Yes. He's far more limited than the all the Top 7, other than Raonic but he's not that bad

Born Slippy wrote:

lags72 wrote:You're not alone in picking up on the 'limited game' comment re Delpo, MrInvisible

It was indeed a strange description.

Other than Raonic, which player in the top 20 would you regard as more limited than JMDP?

Pretty much any player who hasn't yet shown the versatility to beat both Rafa & Fed en route to winning a Slam.

What a totally epic match that Olympic Final was. Andy Murray becomes the first male tennis player to win two Olympic singles titles after beating the gutsy Del Potro in four sets in over four hours. Superb match and what a lovely ending. A warm long embrace by both at the end. Welcome back to the big time Del Potro.

Let's hope they introduce a 2 slam entry requirement for the next Olympics, so that we can avoid that kind of rubbish.

Of course, I'm joking. Thought that was a very entertaining match. Sure there were dips from both, but flawless tennis would probably be dull.

Let's not be too hard on BS. When you dislike a certain player's style, it's all too easy to downgrade their abilities and achievements. We all have our preferences and pet hates and the forum would be very insipid without them. Anyway, I know BS likes a good argument, so he probably doesn't give a toss what we think.

Djokovic is at 9040, Murray 7225 in the race.

I think the Olympics should be 1,500 points for the winner.

Do that would be Murray on 8,725, very close to Djokovic.

If Murray wins the US Open it will no longer be clear cut who is the best player in the world. With the last two slams and the Olympics, Murray might have a case that the rankings are out of date. How quickly things can change. This conversation would have been absurd before Djokovic's loss at Wimbledon. He was as dominant as you can be.

This being said, Murray has not actually played well enough in this tournament to beat Djokovic, and I think Djokovic is still the slight favourite - assuming fully fit by the tournament starts that is, which may not be the case.

MrInvisible wrote:Nore Staat, not a bad year for Andy - also lets not forget Davis Cup last year.  He's full of confidence now and is probably favourite for US Open (which Djokovic has only won once).  As for Del Potro, I hope he recovers physically after this gruelling final.  *If* he can remain injury free rest of this year hopefully we can see him consistently back at his back next year, in contention at the slams.

I hope that Del Potro has developed a sustainable game now. I was a little afraid that Murray would test Del Potro to destruction - but I think Del Potro is being reasonable and playing within his physical means. I note that both Del Potro are "slow" players - they take their time between points - as much as they can get away with. But then again they might have the expectation that the umpire would be able to control the crowd - in terms of noise and movement.