#SmashTalk: Unpicking the Rio Olympics

Published by tennismash

It's hard to see anyone beating Novak Djokovic in Rio. Photo: Getty Images

This week, we’re joined on the #SmashTalk panel by Aussie tennis star Casey Dellacqua!

The former world No.26 and top 10 doubles player continues to rehabilitate from a nasty concussion sustained in October last year and although she’s a few months away from returning, the likeable lefty is feeling healthy and happy and is working on the practice court towards a comeback.

In the meantime, she stopped by to preview the Olympics with our editorial team of Paul Moore and Matt Trollope. Do you agree with the views presented? Have your say on Facebook and Twitter.

The Olympic Tennis Event kicks off this weekend – who do you think will win the gold medals in singles?

CD: I think Murray or Djokovic. Obviously a lot of the top men have pulled out, so the depth in the men’s draw in terms of those top players has probably dropped a little bit. But I think with Novak and Andy it’s pretty stock standard that they’ll be fighting out for the gold. On the women’s side I don’t know if you can really go past Serena. It is different playing for your country and Serena at numerous Olympics has won gold medals in doubles and singles. Coming off Wimbledon, she probably now believes – not that she didn’t before, but she’s kind of got over that hurdle of those couple of finals she lost and has now got a Wimbledon title under her belt.

PM: It would be nice to think that the Olympics could conjure up a surprise or two, but in all probability it won’t. It’s hard to see anyone getting the better of Novak Djokovic on the men’s side, or Serena Williams on the women’s. That said, Serena is starting to show signs of fallibility, and both Kerber and Muguruza will fancy their chances on Rio’s hard courts.

MT: I was leaning towards Andy Murray until Novak Djokovic straight-setted the field in Toronto en route to the trophy, utterly dispelling any concerns that his loss at Wimbledon might have been more than simply a bad day at the office. Olympic gold is the one thing missing from Novak’s glittering trophy cabinet, so he won’t be short on motivation. Serena is the clear favourite on the women’s side after her Wimbledon triumph – she’s reasserted herself as the clear No.1 and has a history of stellar performances at Olympic meets.

Both the men’s and women’s events have been decimated by withdrawals – does this impact on the quality or the significance of the tournament?

CD: I think it’s more purely a case of the Games being in Rio, as opposed to the issue of tennis being an Olympic sport. From my experience, everyone wants to play at the Olympics. But I feel like potentially here it’s Zika virus – for the men in particular it’s played a role because a lot of them probably want to start families and stuff, so that might be a concern for them. I think we’ll probably see the top players win the bigger medals; the rest of the field may not be as strong as at a Grand Slam event. But I think tennis deserves to be an Olympic sport – it was one of the original sports back when the Olympics started. It is a bit of shame that the entry list has dropped so much, because when you think of the Olympics you think of the best of the best of the best. You want the best players there. But it is what it is and I’m sure it will be a great event.

PM: Absolutely. Being brutally honest I do not think that tennis should be included in the Olympics. Unlike events like athletics and swimming – where the Olympics represents the absolute pinnacle of the sport – tennis has plenty of opportunities to shine, and players know that. The raft of withdrawals (for various reasons) shines a spotlight on that (like it does in golf and football), and demonstrates that for many players it is far from being on the same level as a Grand Slam, or even events like Indian Wells.

MT: It does, unfortunately, particularly on the men’s side. While the women’s field is largely unscathed – Halep and Azarenka are the only top 10 absentees – the men’s draw is missing half of the top 10. That will unavoidably lead to an asterisk beside the name of the eventual winner – sure, they’ll have won Olympic gold, but they’ll have done it against a significantly depleted field, where even players outside the top 100 managed to gain direct acceptance.

Where do the Olympics rank for you in terms of importance as an event in tennis overall?

CD: The Olympics is always really important. Growing up, playing for Australia was always really important so the fact that you are representing Australia at the Olympics is always for me one of the most important things you could do. So every four years, it was like a fifth Grand Slam. You would consider it bigger than Indian Wells and Miami. I have the best memories of playing in London and Beijing, they’re better than many other tennis tournaments I’ve played, purely because you’re an athlete in an individual sport and you feel like you’re there as part of a team. Every four years you know that it’s one more big event and it’s a full calendar, but it’s a another big opportunity.

PM: It feels like a second tier event. I think that every pro would like to have an Olympic Gold medal on their mantlepiece. But they build their years – and careers – around the Grand Slams. As I said before, I don’t think the Olympics are treated with the same regard as the Slams amongst either the pros (the raft of withdrawals is indicative of this) or, for that matter, core tennis fans who will be far more interested in the US Open in a few weeks time.

MT: Call me sacrilegious, but I’ve always struggled to get on board with the concept of tennis at the Olympics. If Olympic gold is not what you grow up dreaming of winning, nor the pinnacle of achievement in your sport, then there’s something amiss. Whereas track athletes, swimmers, gymnasts, etc. structure their career in four-year cycles to peak for the Olympics, tennis players have to deal with something of a scheduling inconvenience between Wimbledon and the US Open. Sure, a gold medal is a fabulous addition to a players’ CV, but it doesn’t define them the way a Grand Slam win does, or secure their place in the tennis Hall of Fame.

Share this: 
  • Most popular articles

22 September 2017

Tennis’ obscure traits and trends

In the heat and humidity of the recent US Open series, there was a slow-mo nod to a long-r... More

24 May 2016

Preparing your body for clay court tennis

With all eyes on the red clay of Roland Garros, there's plenty that club players can do to... More

15 September 2016

The 10 most influential players in the history of tennis

The greatest champions, goes the old adage, are those who leave their sport better than th... More

24 February 2017

Why good doubles makes better singles

It is no coincidence that some of the best singles players to ever pick up a racquet all h... More