The Rise of the Olympians Adam Gale It’s strange. Every four years, it seems, the world goes crazy for sports that for the rest of the time it more or less ignores. For a fortnight or so, canoe slalom, handball, archery, and trampoline gymnastics capture attention and headlines normally reserved for one of the larger, international variants of football. There’s something undeniably special about seeing the best in the world convene in one location, seeing four years’ worth of dreams and a lifetime’s grueling training being reduced to one routine, one race, one moment. Because of this, perhaps, the discipline doesn’t matter so much. What matters is that the Games provide the most brilliant, the most precious, and yet the most cruelly brief opportunity for the best in the world to shine. But can this really be said for tennis? Is tennis not an Olympic sport for which the Olympic event is not the pinnacle? The case for the grand slams being more important is fairly convincing, after all. Tennis wasn’t even played at the Olympics between 1924 and 1988, as a full event. It’s worth far fewer ranking points than a major (685 for the women’s gold and 750 for the men’s, versus 2000 for a slam), and for good reason. The difficulty of winning the event is clearly less, with a smaller draw and a weaker field as a consequence of caps on players per country. The very fact that tennis wasn’t an Olympic sport for so long disconnects it from the many powerful, collective memories of the sport’s illustrious past. Would Wimbledon matter as much if names like Lenglen and Tilden, Laver and Court, Navratilova and Borg were absent from the winner’s roster? Wouldn’t it be just another tournament, on an obsolete surface?
Of course, there’s more to the Olympics than points and purely tennis pedigree. For a start, the athletes compete as much for their country, and for their team, as they do for themselves. Tennis can be a lonely sport, so being part of a team and having the chance to do something that matters for their country can mean a lot, particularly to those who love Davis and Fed Cup, and thrive in that context. Just as importantly, the Olympics capture the popular imagination in a way that no tennis event could. They represent the summit, the highest achievement in sports in general. Everyone knows what it means to be a gold medalist. From Iraq to Mongolia, from Guatemala to Cyprus, children dream of the Olympics, of standing atop a podium with a medal around their necks. The fact that the Games transcend in this way, and mean so much to so many people, enables tennis players to connect to and be part of something bigger than tennis. It is possible also, that the Olympics touch upon something else, something deep and forgotten within our sport’s psyche. Athletes at the Olympics play only for medals, not money. For today’s professional tennis players, this is the only real opportunity they get to play a big amateur event. This may not seem so important, at first glance, in the modern world, but remember that amateurism was central to the culture of tennis for a very long time.
The famous words from Kipling’s ‘If’, above the players’ entrance to Wimbledon Centre Court — “if you can meet with Triumph and Disaster, and treat those two impostors just the same…” — reflect the Victorian sporting ethos in much the same way as these from Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympics: “the important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle; the essential thing is not to have conquered, but to have fought well.” There was always more to amateurism, in tennis and in other sports, than simply not playing for money. To be an amateur was literally to play for the love of sport, and to place decency, respect and fair play at the heart of the sporting life. Crucially, it was to place these things above winning. In essence, the amateur philosophy was about sportsmanship. While the Olympic Games may not always witness the greatest in sportsmanship (see the match-throwing debacle in Badminton), it remains the ideal, and as such sportsmanship and the Olympics are still intimately connected. This might not be as important to everyone, but it would be nice to think that it is still part of the reason why athletes of all disciplines value the Olympics so highly. Of course, it’s obvious that not everyone has caught the Olympic bug in the past and, from the reinstitution of tennis as an Olympic event in 1988, this quadrennial upstart has been unable to challenge the supremacy of the slams in most people’s minds. Indeed, there can be no greater illustration of this than the fact that top players (Roddick in ’08 being the most notable in recent times) often chose not to play at the Games at all, in order to better rest and prepare for the US Open, only a few weeks later.
Lately, however, something seems to have changed. The allure of those lustrous medals seems to have become stronger and stronger. Top players haven’t stayed away, at least not voluntarily. In fact, many of them have been talking for a long time about how getting a medal was one of their most significant goals for this year, right up there with winning a major. It doesn’t appear they were exaggerating. Just look at the reaction of Serena Williams after crushing Maria Sharapova to claim her first singles gold medal (she also won doubles gold with sister Venus for the third time). Williams was bouncing around with unbridled exuberance, a broad smile beaming from her face. “I didn’t think there could be anything better than winning Wimbledon.” She later said. The men’s singles champion, Andy Murray, had a somewhat more muted response, which surprised many. After all, the world had witnessed and shared his heartache only one month before, when tears flowed in the post-match interview following his defeat in the Wimbledon final. There were no tears this time though, on the occasion of his greatest achievement so far. Perhaps it shouldn’t surprise. Murray is, after all, not the most comfortable in the limelight. He doesn’t like interviews and press conferences. He doesn’t like his emotions to come under the microscope, which often leads him to appear tetchy and defensive. The fact that he was under control upon winning takes nothing away from the undoubtedly immense emotional significance of the win. It wasn’t just the winners for whom this meant a lot. Roger Federer, for instance, who was badly defeated in the final, and who has seen his dreams of completing the career ‘Golden Slam’ thwarted, seemed genuinely delighted with his silver medal, kissing it and saying later that he felt he’d won the silver rather than lost the gold. That the Olympic Games have assumed a greater importance to tennis, an importance that comes close to rivaling that of the slams, seems undeniable. So why the change? The most obvious answer is the choice of venue. Rather than being played in some brand new, purpose built facility, tennis at the Olympics has come home to Wimbledon, the sport’s greatest stage. Winning on Centre Court, with its unparalleled history, can’t be anything other than special.
It is perhaps equally significant that tennis has been an Olympic sport now for 24 years. This is no small thing. Unlike previous generations, today’s tennis players were among those children dreaming of Olympian glory. They saw Graf win in Seoul, Capriati in Barcelona and Agassi in Atlanta. Is it any wonder that they would grow up wanting to be a part of the magic of the Games? I think it is safe to say that, in London 2012, tennis has had its most successful incarnation yet. Perhaps it won’t be surpassed, at least until another of the grand slam venues is able to host the event. Whatever happens, Olympic tennis now clearly matters in a big way, a way that far exceeds the attribution of points that success there brings. In fact, I’d imagine that the great majority of those who went to London to compete would have done so anyway had it been worth no ranking points whatever, and that Serena and Venus Williams, Andy Murray, the Bryan brothers, Victoria Azarenka and Max Mirnyi would still have been every bit as delighted with their medals and their achievements. Exactly how much it matters compared to the grand slams will surely vary from individual to individual, and will continue to do so. It is, however, undeniably good for the sport of tennis that it has been able to commune with the special magic of the Olympiad, that so inspires the athletes of today and the stars of tomorrow.
As always, we would love to hear from you! Questions, comments, personal experiences all create helpful dialogue for everyone! Please click here to send us your email.
TennisOne Writers Store One of your many new benefits as a TennisOne membership is your ability to purchase selected instructional DVDs at 20% off ($7.50 off each) in our new TennisOne Writers Store (login in first to access members links):
Copyright Notice: The contents of the TennisONE web site and contents forwarded to you by TennisONE are intended for your personal, noncommercial use. Republishing of TennisONE content in any way, including framing or posting of these materials on other Web sites, is strictly prohibited. See our full copyright statement If you wish to be removed from our newsletter list, please send an email to newsletter-unsubscribe@tennisone.com and leave the subject line blank. A confirmation email will be sent to you, and you will be removed from our newsletter list once you reply to that confirmation. If trouble unsubscribing, simply email us with a request to unsubscribe at: t1staff@tennisone.com |
||||||
