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.

Cracking semi between Del Potro and Nadal who are level at one set all and five games all. Rafa doesn't look fatigued to me the way he is celebrating key point wins. Great to see both of these great players returning to a semblance of fitness and form.

Juan Martin del Potro wins the third set on a tie-break and seal a spot in the Olympic Final. Rafa just comes up short but he can take great heart from his achievements and form here in Rio.

Gutted for Nadal.
Delighted for Del Potro.

Both guys can be happy their games are back in the big time.

This quote from Del Potro post-match surely eliminates all debates about the unimportant of the Olympics: "It means a lot to me. It's very big, maybe even more special than when I won the US Open," said del Potro, who was mobbed by Argentine fans at the end.

CC - I'm really pleased for Delpo - given all he has been through injury-wise, and the hangover of his disappointment in London 2012. He has done tremendously well in Rio, regardless of the eventual Final result.

But I'm not at all convinced that an (understandably) emotional reaction by any particular player in the immediate wake of a hard-fought victory can in itself eliminate "all debates" where the bigger picture is concerned.

I firmly believe that the spectrum of time is a better benchmark. In years to come, Delpo's US Open will be remembered more as a defining career highlight (and perhaps he may even win another Slam ??).

I have yet to hear any tennis player introduced as an Olympics medallist in the way the label "former Wimbledon Champion" or "former US Open Champion" has so often been used - and will, I feel, continue to be used for a long, long time to come in the world of professional tennis.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2016/08/monica-puig-juan-martin-del-potro-rafael-nadal-2016-olympics-rio-tennis/59945/

Excellent article on tennis.com. I'm not sure I totally agree yesterday will be the best day for tennis this year but it was certainly amazing. Sensational for Puig to play so brilliantly to take the OG in the women's and a magnificent match between Rafa and DP.

As for the men's final, Murray has to be favourite in a bo5 given DP's exertions last night. However, these courts suit DP perfectly and I can see Andy being very nervous in this one - defending his Olympic title would be huge for him. I think it's going to be really close!

lags72 wrote:CC - I'm really pleased for Delpo - given all he has been through injury-wise, and the hangover of his disappointment in London 2012. He has done tremendously well in Rio, regardless of the eventual Final result.

But I'm not at all convinced that an (understandably) emotional reaction by any particular player in the immediate wake of a hard-fought victory can in itself eliminate "all debates" where the bigger picture is concerned.

I firmly believe that the spectrum of time is a better benchmark. In years to come, Delpo's US Open will be remembered more as a defining career highlight (and perhaps he may even win another Slam ??).

I have yet to hear any tennis player introduced as an Olympics medallist in the way the label "former Wimbledon Champion" or "former US Open Champion" has so often been used - and will, I feel, continue to be used for a long, long time to come in the world of professional tennis.

I have said the Slams remain as the daddy of them all tournaments to win - no doubt about that. However, the Olympics stand above any Masters or WTF title. Look at noted players reactions to losses at the Olympics compared to losses at Masters and WTF'S
Federer and Djokovic in tears at losses and elation at wins the like of which the players just do not display at Masters and WTF'S. That says it all.

On another note it is quite evident how well the tennis has been attended in numbers by the spectators compared to the more established Olympic events such as equestrian events and athletics. That says a lot. If the paying public had no appetite for the sport in the Olympics this just would not be the case especially given the much-publicised financial difficulties of Brazilians.

Very fair points re the attendance CC.

Always better to see a full - or nearly-full - stadium at any tennis event, regardless of its perceived 'status', than row upon row of empty seats.

That said, let's hope today's Final attracts a larger crowd than Andy's SF v Nishi.

It will be an interesting split. Del Potro will have a large body of supporters coming over the border from Argentina, there will always be possible let's of British and I'd imagine the locals will get behind Murray given the local rivalry between Brazil and Argentina.

It is important to Del Potro because Argentina win very few medals at the Olympics. It is the same reason that Djokovic was upset losing, he probably feels he has let Serbia down a bit as they also do not win many medals at all.

In terms of your tennis CV, I don't think Olympics ranks anywhere near a slam but understandably to win for a nation that doesn't win many medals it is probably a big deal. For the likes of the USA, they win so many medals and dominate across the field so an American player winning for example would be much less of a big deal in tennis.

Of course every player wants to win the Olympic medal but for me it is nowhere near as difficult to win as a slam or a world tour final where you are up against much tougher opponents more regularly.

That being said I would love to see Del Potro win after all that he has been through with injuries and he has also come through a much harder draw to get to the final than Murray. That is not Murrays fault but he has had a really easy draw in comparision

As for Murray's semi yesterday it was well attended as far as I saw. Certainly not a swathe of empty seats like seen at other venues.

slasher nobody is saying it ranks on a par with slams and don't think anyone ever has. The order in terms of value for me is:-

1st Slams
2nd Olympics
3rd WTF
4th Davis Cup
5th Masters 1000
6th Masters 500
7th Masters 250

Yes Del Potro has had career threatening injuries but don't see that as a reason to merit the win more. After all Muzza has came back after back surgery and cannot recall people rooting for him to beat Federer or Djokovic just because he was coming back from injury. It never changed people's thought patterns. Whoever merits the win today is who wins as they will have been the better player on the day. Personally, it will be a sore one to take should Murray lose but softened by the blow will be that Del Potro cannot be begrudged it after all he has been through.

As for the WTF my gripe with it is when it comes. How many times have we seen the leading contenders in physical bits at the end of the long season or even pulling out? How any times has one of the top players in the season missed out on it because injury blighted part of their season? Many variables determine who wins the WTF and for me it is like an end of season gala event. I see its importance but would I be gutted if Murray never wins one? No.

lags72 wrote:CC - I'm really pleased for Delpo - given all he has been through injury-wise, and the hangover of his disappointment in London 2012. He has done tremendously well in Rio, regardless of the eventual Final result.

But I'm not at all convinced that an (understandably) emotional reaction by any particular player in the immediate wake of a hard-fought victory can in itself eliminate "all debates" where the bigger picture is concerned.

I firmly believe that the spectrum of time is a better benchmark. In years to come, Delpo's US Open will be remembered more as a defining career highlight (and perhaps he may even win another Slam ??).

I have yet to hear any tennis player introduced as an Olympics medallist in the way the label "former Wimbledon Champion" or "former US Open Champion" has so often been used - and will, I feel, continue to be used for a long, long time to come in the world of professional tennis.

There's two different things here, it's not as black and white as you put it

We, as Tennis fans watching, the ATP focused events will of course get past winners introduced for their slams

However, Murray's gold medal is already used as a part introduction to the average joe watcher, i.e. sports personality etc. I have a sister who lives in the states and some people there amazingly, remember Agassi for his Gold Medal first

We have to look at this globally. Ironically, in these big money sport days where all 'stars' are described as selfish overpaid etc. The Olympics, given that it is watched by more and more people, gives those sportsman, who are bothered enough to want to disprove that description a chance to become heroes to the masses, far more than a slam win

There is simply no comparison. Hence why Roger coveted it so much

I've always been a very strong 'believer' in the WTF - and always will be, for as long as the tough qualification criteria remain - simply because of the inherent strength of the field. No cakewalk draws or early rounds here against a rookie or wildcard ranked somewhere in the hundreds !!

Yes, there are occasional withdrawals due to injury but in such cases any substitute is by necessity of very high quality.

The roll-call of past WTF champs is not just impressive but uniquely so.

CaledonianCraig wrote:As for the WTF my gripe with it is when it comes. How many times have we seen the leading contenders in physical bits at the end of the long season or even pulling out? How any times has one of the top players in the season missed out on it because injury blighted part of their season? Many variables determine who wins the WTF and for me it is like an end of season gala event. I see its importance but would I be gutted if Murray never wins one? No.

Agree totally. Never been a big fan of it

CaledonianCraig wrote:slasher nobody is saying it ranks on a par with slams and don't think anyone ever has. The order in terms of value for me is:-

1st Slams
2nd Olympics
3rd WTF
4th Davis Cup
5th Masters 1000
6th Masters 500
7th Masters 250

For me to compare them is the wrong way of looking at it, simply because it's once every four years. How can we compare the importance of something that is played once to every sixteen slams?

It's also only important for those who think they can win it. The others, perhaps understandably, see it as an opportunity to take advantage at the US Open

lags72 wrote:I've always been a very strong 'believer' in the WTF  - and always will be, for as long as the tough qualification criteria remain - simply because of the inherent strength of the field. No cakewalk draws or early rounds here against a rookie or wildcard ranked somewhere in the hundreds !!

Yes, there are occasional withdrawals due to injury but in such cases any substitute is by necessity of very high quality.

The roll-call of past WTF champs is not just impressive but uniquely so.

 It rarely comes up with any surprises. It's a bit like watching the slam quarters three times 

banbrotam : yes, I hear what you say re the distinction between casual tennis watchers and more 'serious' aficionados of the sport. Fair comment.

I just wonder whether some of the casual watchers might see a player winning Olympic Gold in tennis, and then assume he/she must surely be at the very summit of the sport having done so. Do they see it in the same way an athletics or swimming event where the very best will always be competing, and where the Olympics are truly the ultimate benchmark......

Some past Olympics Gold winners in tennis have of course been amongst the very biggest names ......eg most recently, Nadal, Murray. Others rather less so.

Then again ..... there have been occasional weird results in Slam Finals too over the years .....

Kei Nishikori beats Rafa Nadal 6-2 6-7 6-2 to take the bronze medal.

Good that Nishi can go home with a medal

Not easy to call this Final.

lags72 wrote:Good that Nishi can go home with a medal

Not easy to call this Final.

I'd be fairly surprised if Andy lost. This is a chance for Murray to write himself some history. Best of luck to him. Would be happy fort Juan if he won so win win situation.

Thought my memory was playing tricks with me : during the warm-up, just heard Simon Reed say on BBC that JMDP "destroyed Roger Federer in the USO Final 2009"

Checked the score - it was (as I thought) a tight five-setter, involving two TB's.

Does that qualify as a destruction....

I too would be (somewhat) surprised if Andy lost.

But.... Delpo has taken out Djokovic and Rafa to make this Final.

lags72 wrote:Thought my memory was playing tricks with me : during the warm-up, just heard Simon Reed say on BBC that JMDP "destroyed Roger Federer in the USO Final 2009"

Checked the score - it was (as I thought) a tight five-setter, involving two TB's.

Does that qualify as a destruction....

No. Reed who's been good at these games has gone back to imitating his brother after one of Ollie's infamous drinking sessions 

lags72 wrote:I too would be (somewhat) surprised if Andy lost.

But.... Delpo has taken out Djokovic and Rafa to make this Final.

But for whatever reason Andy's a nightmare for Delpo

It's good to see Juan competing like it's 2009, as this is typical of their matches from then! i.e. he throws everything at him, Andy gets back that extra ball and he has no answer

banbrotam wrote:

lags72 wrote:Thought my memory was playing tricks with me : during the warm-up, just heard Simon Reed say on BBC that JMDP "destroyed Roger Federer in the USO Final 2009"

Checked the score - it was (as I thought) a tight five-setter, involving two TB's.

Does that qualify as a destruction....

No. Reed who's been good at these games has gone back to imitating his brother after one of Ollie's infamous drinking sessions 

I agree ....Reed has been good here in Rio, so will excuse that comment re USO '09 as an isolated aberration.

Murrays serve just like the french open final completely misfiring and it affects your whole game.

But he has that magic

monty junior wrote:Murrays serve just like the french open final completely misfiring and it affects your whole game.

Murray's game is all about the return

When he's serving well, that's just a bonus ball bonus!!

Where's Andy's drop shot gone?

This is a pretty rank performance from Andy so far. He's letting DP use his limited game, whereas early on he was making sure DP was constantly off balance. He should be way too good for DP but he looks completely out of sorts at present.

There's nothing 'limited' about Delpo's game.

Powerful ground strokes ....top class serving ....can hold his own when rallying with the best.

Yeah agree, nothing is limited about DPs game.
There is no way DP has the energy to last the course here though...might as well hand Murray the Gold now...

Delpo's exertions v Rafa yesterday will eventually cost him.

Not great so far from Murray, but the fact that it has taken well over 2 hours to split the first two sets has to play into his hands. Having said that, DP doesn't have a reputation for fading in long matches and I don't expect him to roll over. In fact, a tiring DP could be a dangerous animal indeed, as he may start hitting the FH even bigger.

Wish Murray would try moving DP around like he was at the start with his DTL backhand! Del Potro is lethal if you let him stand there and unload.

monty junior wrote:Wish Murray would try moving DP around like he was at the start with his DTL backhand! Del Potro is lethal if you let him stand there and unload.

"Moving DP around" is easier said than done once that forehand is truly firing. You soon find yourself into defence mode rather than being able to do what exactly you want.

Not saying it's easy but he's got to try something!

Someone has to be in the unfortunate position of losing twice and finishing fourth, and given that it's Rafa, who already has singles gold and doubles gold this year, it kind of works out as less of a disaster.

Didn't we have a similar debate about Raonic during Wimbledon?

I'm not DP's biggest fan by a long shot, but no way would I describe his game as limited. Sure, he doesn't have a great deal of variety (plus his left hand wrist injury has made his FH dominant game even more lopsided). It's also true that, if plan A isn't working, then I don't think he has a lot of options to turn to. However, that's probably the case for the vast majority of the men's tour and most of them would kill for DP's FH.

I suspect that BS may be falling into the trap of dismissing something as limited because it's simply not to his taste. That FH is an incredible weapon and, when it's on song, only the very best can live with it. He also moves and defends pretty well for a big man and, although he now favours the slice on the BH side, he's shown in this match that he's still capable of ripping BH passing shots on pressure points.

At the start of the second set, DP was leaning on the net struggling to breathe after a point that was long yes, but not ridiculous. I thought it was a bit naïve of him to show that to Murray, and I didn't fancy his chances of winning at all from then on, to be fair he broke in that game and won the second set, but I think he needed set 1 really.

Now he's starting to look really tired already in set 3.

If you think about it, tiredness has been a factor in his career at the business end of tournaments (such as that time he beat Djokovic and Murray in a masters, and had Nadal on the ropes in the final before losing, as well as the WTF Davydenko final).

His US Open 2009 he may have been helped by having such a comfortable semi final win, and the fact that there are rest days in slams, whereas in other events you often play 4 days in a row at the end.

And now with him coming back from injury, to suddenly have to do best of 5 and gruel it out. This is bread and butter for Murray, difficult for Juan Martin.

By the way, although I wasn't in the 'Raonic is just a tedious serve-bot' camp, I do think his game is much more limited than DP's. Possibly a statement of the bleeding obvious, but a peak Raonic wouldn't have been able to lay a glove on the Fed of US 09 form.

There's an element of truth in Del Potro's game being limited, especially with variety on the backhand side, and to a lesser extent with things like creation of angles, lobs, net play. But the statement is pretty harsh as well. He's not a Karlovic that would be ranked about 150 without his top shot. If Del Potro's forehand was average he would still have been around, what do we think, a 10 or 20 or 30 ranked player.

Yes, we constantly hear that the very big guys can't move and are hopelessly limited.

I well remember a very (ahem) robust exchange of views here on 606 in the run-up to Delpo's match v Fed at Olympics 2012.

Some folk were convinced that Delpo would be way out of his depth on the Wimbledon grass .... too big to move well ....and with zero chance against the grass king.

The reality was rather different of course.

What about the last Olympics HB? DP beat Djoko in the bronze play-off immediately after his debilitating marathon against Fed. I actually think he's pretty robust in the longevity stakes for a big man. Sadly, you can't say the same thing about his wrists.....

DP is obviously a far better player than Raonic. However, that doesn't stop his game being limited - albeit incredibly effective given the power/consistency in his serve and forehand. However, he isn't the type of player I want to ever see consistently winning big tournaments and that is my big concern as tennis moves forwards. 

Anyway, mug game again from Andy at the start of the 4th. Probably going 5 now.

Our posts crossed Aut0Gr4ph !

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

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:What about the last Olympics HB? DP beat Djoko in the bronze play-off immediately after his debilitating marathon against Fed. I actually think he's pretty robust in the longevity stakes for a big man. Sadly, you can't say the same thing about his wrists.....

He had a days rest then though, so I'm sure he'd have been fine. This, in fairness, is a lot tougher.