Why tennis’ once tenuous relationship with the Olympics has changed
Premium
In earlier eras, many of the sport’s stars viewed themselves as ‘independent contractors’, defined by their ranking, not their nationality. But modern players, in part because of tennis’ increasing global footprint, now also cherish the larger purpose of competing for their country
Familiar stage, different act: The iconic Roland-Garros, playing host to the Olympic tennis event for only the first time in its history, has been filled with spectators eager to catch the action. | Photo credit: Getty Images
Among the most striking images from Paris 2024 have been those of the jam-packed stands at the iconic Roland-Garros. Seat of the second Major of the year, the French Open, it is now playing host to the Olympic tennis event for only the first time in its history.
The jamboree may be because of the star appeal. Five of the ATP’s top-10, including four of the top-five, and eight of the WTA’s top-10 featured in the draw in Paris.
And there is a special following for a battered Rafael Nadal willing himself through matches, a bruised Andy Murray escaping reality and hiding the timelessness of an athlete’s struggle, and an ambitious Novak Djokovic looking to add that one singles gold medal which will make his the best CV in men’s tennis history.
Stark contrast
This is a far cry from the late 1980s and 1990s when tennis was reintroduced as a medal sport (in 1988) after a lengthy hiatus since 1924. Though the legendary Steffi Graf won the gold at Seoul 1988 and went on to complete the ‘Golden Slam’ (winning all four Majors and the Olympic gold in a single season), Stefan Edberg was the only notable name among men that year.
Pete Sampras, the best player of the 1990s, turned up only for Barcelona 1992, and that came when he had won none of his 14 Major titles. At Atlanta 1996, only three of the ATP’s top-10 were present.
Fellow racquet sports, table tennis and badminton, made their debuts as official medal disciplines in 1988 and 1992 respectively, and in no time the Olympic gold became the ultimate honour in those sports. Tennis, in contrast, gave the greatest sporting extravaganza in the universe the cold shoulder.
Special occasion: Former World No. 1 Angelique Kerber says it’s ‘a different feeling when you’re wearing the outfit with the national colours’. | Photo credit: Getty Images
But not anymore. Tennis’ once tenuous relationship with the Olympic movement has seemingly ceased and the two are now moving hand in hand. If Naomi Osaka lit the Olympic flame at Tokyo 2020, tennis had an outsized presence at the opening ceremony in Paris, with Nadal, Serena Williams and Amelie Mauresmo all being part of the torch relay.
The United States of America, which has no dearth of Olympic champions, gave debutant tennis player and World No. 2 Coco Gauff the pride of place, bestowing the opportunity to be the nation’s flag-bearer alongside basketball legend LeBron James.
Nadal, injured for a good part of the last two years, skipped Wimbledon to get ready for the Olympics. Murray could have had a poetic farewell at home at Wimbledon, where he won two of his three Majors, but instead chose the Olympics as the finish line.
Djokovic, who has a singles bronze from Beijing 2008, braved a surgically repaired knee and a radical shift in surfaces — from clay to grass to clay, with the hard courts to follow — to go on a hunt for the singles gold.
The duality of the sport
Tennis has long been characterised by a certain duality. Competitors prize themselves for being ‘independent contractors’, defined only by their ranking and not nationality.
Fan support has mirrored this, with allegiance more to the player than the country. Until Roger Federer retired, a ticket to his match was the most important possession. In recent years, the four Grand Slam tournaments — Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and US Open — have only grown in popularity and stature despite having a negligible percentage of homegrown winners.
But the sport has also been a vehicle for national identity and tribalistic fandom. In the Davis Cup and Billie Jean King Cup (erstwhile Fed Cup), tennis has two team competitions with decades-long history.
Sampras may have once famously said that winning Slams and staying No.1 were his priorities and that if he tried to play Davis Cup, “those other things will be in jeopardy”, but for the smaller nations, Cup success is the ticket to worldwide stardom. As Vijay Amritraj has repeatedly stressed, wherever he played, even at the hallowed Wimbledon Centre Court, it was not he but always “an Indian” who was playing.
Proud Olympian: For 24-time Major champion Novak Djokovic, winning ‘any medal’ for Serbia is one of his ‘greatest priorities and goals’. | Photo credit: AP
What we are seeing now is the shrinking of the space between these two divergent strands. The spirit of tennis is no longer torn between being global and being nationalistic but is comfortable in the skin of both.
This has been primarily driven by top players’ changed approach towards the Olympic Games. They increasingly cherish the camaraderie and the larger purpose of competing for one’s country rather than just the individual self.
“You can only play a match at the Olympics once every four years and it’s a different feeling when you’re wearing the outfit with the national colours,” Angelique Kerber, a three-time Slam titlist, told Vogue. “Being together in the Olympic Village… you don’t get that kind of atmosphere at a normal tournament — not even at the Grand Slams.”
It doesn’t seem to matter that the Games offer no prize money. Ranking points, which were introduced at Sydney 2000, were removed ahead of Rio 2016. The Olympics also doesn’t have an exclusive slot in the calendar. The Citi Open in Washington DC, one of the key tune-ups before the US Open, is on concurrently.
A prominent pit stop
Yet, the big stars of the game have made the Olympics a prominent pit stop, unmindful of the thousands of air miles to be clocked, geographies to be traversed and time zones to get adjusted to.
The last four singles gold medallists among men have been Nadal (Beijing 2008), Murray (London 2012 and Rio 2016) and Alexander Zverev (Tokyo 2020). Venus Williams won the gold at Sydney 2000, Justine Henin at Athens 2004 and Serena Williams at London 2012. Venus and Serena combined to secure back-to-back doubles gold medals in 2008 and 2012.
Jack Sock, who won the doubles bronze with Steve Johnson and mixed doubles gold with Bethanie Mattek-Sands at Rio 2016, said ahead of Tokyo 2020 that those two medals would be the first things he would show his kids.
“If you talk to the average person who doesn’t know tennis and you say you won the Madrid 1000, they will look at you like you’re talking a different language,” the American opined. “If you say you won a gold medal, they will know exactly what you mean.”
The transformation may also be because of tennis’ increasing global footprint. Australia, France, Great Britain and the United States were the early hegemonic forces and the championships in these countries form the four most important events in the calendar. Davis Cup, which began in 1900, gave players from these nations a taste of nationalistic flavour, and until 1974, there wasn’t a Cup winner other than these four.
But the rise of central and eastern Europe, and Asia and the rest of the Americas, has democratised the scene and given a new dimension to tennis’ relationship with nationalism. Russian Yevgeny Kafelnikov winning gold at Sydney 2000, Chile’s Nicolas Massu at Athens 2004 and Puerto Rico’s Monica Puig at Rio 2016 were examples of this. Djokovic, a demigod in Serbia, is desperate to be the next.
“I had the greatest honour of carrying the Serbian flag in the opening ceremony [London 2012],” Djokovic told itftennis.com in May. “It’s so special to be part of the oldest sports event in history. Winning a gold medal or any medal for my country is a great wish and desire. It is one of my greatest priorities and goals.”
Read Comments
- Copy link
- Telegram
READ LATER
Remove
SEE ALL
PRINT