Olympic Tennis

Would the Olympics be above one of the Grand Slams significance wise, given it's only every 4 years? Or would Wimbledon/US/Aus/French still class as more important due to all games being up to 5 sets?
 
There's no doubt Federer is one of the greats but i've no sympathy for him today. He played crap and Andy deserved the win.
 
Ha Federer is basically chaperoning Andy Murray around the Stadium showing him what to do - "now we stand here for a bit....smile":D

It is very hard not to like Roger Federer
 
Would the Olympics be above one of the Grand Slams significance wise, given it's only every 4 years? Or would Wimbledon/US/Aus/French still class as more important due to all games being up to 5 sets?

Slams are probably higher up there, more ranking points available at the Slams too.

I was under the impression it was on Court 1, but I might be wrong.

I think the Gold medal match is on centre, Bronze match is on Court 1.
 
Would the Olympics be above one of the Grand Slams significance wise, given it's only every 4 years? Or would Wimbledon/US/Aus/French still class as more important due to all games being up to 5 sets?

Grand Slams are still the pinnacle being best of five sets all the way through. But the Olympics would probably be next best, above the ATP Masters.

Kinda sad Federer lost, but if I had to choose who he would lose to ...
 
Would the Olympics be above one of the Grand Slams significance wise, given it's only every 4 years? Or would Wimbledon/US/Aus/French still class as more important due to all games being up to 5 sets?

That you get 750 ranking points for Gold to 2000 for a much harder slam tells you all you need to know and 1000 for a masters event.

He played well but it was the one Gold I'd be happy to have seen lost :D

Murrays got the gold and that's what matters I suppose, not that it should be there in the olympics really as most of them can't take this that seriously.
 
Back
Top Bottom