The Olympics has not yet begun and we
already had a thrilling episode wrt the Indian tennis team for London. We saw the personalities come out in full
colour. Mahesh “He is a back-stabber”
Bhupathi, Rohan “no one but Mahesh” Bopanna, Leander “it is all about India”
Paes and Sania “I am a victim” Mirza– what a joke. This was a soap opera playing out in the open
and every actor (and atleast one dad) wanted his or her 15 minutes in the
limelight. For those who didn’t follow
the story, here is one version of it http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/london-olympics-2012/news/Controversies-mark-Indian-tennis-ahead-of-Olympics/articleshow/14861893.cms Amongst all of this, what was lost was the
quality of Team India in Olympics. We
have a 39 year old and a 38 year old representing us in what is clearly a young
man’s sport. Whatever happened to the Yuki
Bhambri’s of the world? I remember seeing Yuki play 4 years ago in the juniors
in US open and being really impressed by him. And wh…
Growing up, we have
been told repeatedly – winning is not as important as competing. Events like the Olympics, with the famed
Olympic spirit mantra, reinforce this message. But how pragmatic is this notion of ‘competing’
as opposed to ‘winning’. Let us leave philosophy aside for a bit and look at
this question from a purely commercial angle. Both Roger Federer
and David Nalbandian have been in the professional tennis circuit for around
the same amount of time. Early evidence
suggests that both of them were equally talented (with David winning almost all
matches he played against Roger). But
over the years Roger has figured out how to win – not just against David but
also against the other players. As of
now - Roger has taken home 8 times more money than Nalbandian has. (73M Vs. 11 M). Both are top-notch tennis players and yet,
the difference is so stark. http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=N301 And this is just
one part of the story. The othe…