Over and Under Djokovic slam totals next year, or who are your slam winners next year

First topic message reminder :

It is a good time of year as the season is winding down to do some predictions for next season. How many will Novak get? Or Murray? Can Nadal return to greatness, will there be a new kid on the block?

I personally see Djokovic winning at least two slams next year and I think they will be the first two slams Aussie and FO. For wimbeldon I am going with Murray and I see most likely Novak winning the USO next year, so I guess my actual prediction is three slams and one for Murray. We will be disappointed that no new boy wins a slam. If a new guy is going to win a slam I see it being Nishikori.

olympic medal in tennis has to one of the most over rated in my opinion. I have said it once and will say it again, tennis for me has no place in the Olympics. As much as I am sure the players would like to win a medal, for me it doesn't come close to winning a grand slam or even a world tour finals for example.

I just think it is a nice to have for the players, I am sure you if you asked most players, they would take a grand slam or year end championship ahead of it any day of the week

I'm sure you're right - just look at the expressions of the losers; they look way happier than they do at Slams.

I'm absolutely with slasher on this.

If they started awarding Oscars for the best tennis player, I'm sure players would enjoy winning one.

But that wouldn't make it important.

Until your favourite player wins it and when that delightful debate comes up about GOAT's and you can't get a fag paper between candidates and someone throws in that gem........"But he won an Olympic Gold"

It's like any lesser achievement in sport...Only relevant when trying to enhance credentials of a preferred team/athlete.

It strikes me its more the other way around. Fans of players who haven't won OG downplay its current importance.

The Olympics isn't on a par with a slam. However, I would think it is now fairly clearly more of a priority to the players than the WTF - it is a more prestigious achievement; occurs once every 4 years; earns worldwide and lasting recognition and involves competing for your country.

Fed would take another slam over an OG in singles. However, I suspect Fed knows he has far more chance of adding a singles gold to his collection than another slam, given the stamina issues of 7 Bo5. I have no doubt he would far prefer to win that event than a random Masters or even the WTF.

If it wasn't important, he wouldn't identify it as something he desires to win.

In his mind it might be a box ticking exercise, but it's a box he clearly wants ticked. Like the DC.

The top players increased their interest in the Olympics from 2004 to 2012. In 2004 it was considered about on a par with a masters. Look at who won it on 2004, 2000, and the years before that. I can't even remember half of them.

In 2008 the players started to take it a couple of notches more seriously. Definately above a masters and perhaps on a par with Davis Cup or World Cup finals, or still below a slam.

By 2012 it became bigger still. Several top players were quoted saying things like it was on a par with a slam.

I think some of you are understating how important the OG is.

Nadal, the 2008 gold medalist, called his withdrawal (from 2012 OG) “one of the saddest days of my career.” http://www.stevegtennis.com/2012/07/how-important-is-an-olympics-gold-medal/

After falling to Federer in the Wimbledon final and disappointing British fans again, world No. 4 Andy Murray said he is “desperate” to win an Olympic gold medal at the All England Club. “I think a gold medal is the pinnacle of every sport. Novak Djokovic won a bronze medal at the last Olympics and was in tears,” asserted Murray. Serena Williams says the gold medal she won playing doubles with her sister Venus at the Sydney Olympics is “my favorite thing I have” and the only award she shows off to friends.
http://www.stevegtennis.com/2012/07/how-important-is-an-olympics-gold-medal/

Andre Agassi, who boasts a career Grand Slam and a gold medal at the Atlanta Games, summed it up best: “To win a Grand Slam [title] is the greatest thing in the sport, but to win an Olympics is the biggest thing you can do in all sports.”
http://www.stevegtennis.com/2012/07/how-important-is-an-olympics-gold-medal/

There were definately other quotes as well players saying OG as important as slam or more so. These were big 4 quotes in 2012. But can't really find them now.

^A lot of players talking nonsense. They may love taking part in the Olympics and winning a medal but that doesn't make it the "biggest thing" or the "pinnacle" of tennis.

To win a slam you have to win seven bo5 matches against of field 128 of the world's best players.

To win Olympic gold, you win five bo3 matches and one bo5 against a field of 64 players which is defined partly by having played enough Davis Cup matches and not having too many fellow countrymen also in the competition.

It's clearly not as difficult to win, so why does it have the prestige? Because the Olympics is the most prestigious event in other sports.

Nobody was swooning over the Olympics when it was being won by Rosset, Kafelnikov, Massu, or even Agassi.

It wasn't until Rafa won in 2008 and it allowed a school of thought that Olympic gold made 5 slams a bit more equal to 12 slams (as it was then).

And then in 2012, it allowed a school of thought that Olympic gold made zero slams about equal to 1 slam.

It's a construct.

It's not about being the pinnacle of the sport.

It's simply recognising it as an achievement and it's merit.

I actually think the Olympics is a big deal, but in tennis terms and it's achievement I rank it below a Masters and on par with the DC.

The problem with the Olympics is people separating the sport from the event itself and question it's involvement which I understand and is a valid point.

A Gold Medal I think has it's uniqueness. It's not a CV winner, but I think to play down it's prestige as an achievement is a little cheeky.

If players weren't that interested in it, they wouldn't compete. It's like the DC. When they see an opportunity to win it and box tick it off the CV, they will.