The Tennis Olympics lose another protagonist with Aryna Sabalenka who decides to give up a few weeks before the tournament in Paris 2024, a decision that causes discussion given that she is one of the best tennis players in the WTA circuit and which could also hide political motivations.
The no’s from Rublev, Khachanov and Samsonova
They were the first to say no to the Paris Olympics Andrey Rublev, Karen Khachanov and Lyudmilla Samsonova. Just a couple of days ago the decision was announced by the president of the Russian Tennis Federation. And the first allegations immediately began, the federal president spoke of injuries affecting the player, while the Russian’s mother referred to tonsillitis that affected him last spring. Busy and demanding calendars and the need to take some rest except to discover that he is number 6 in the world this week he will play the Halle tournament in both singles and doubles.
Sabalenka’s forfeit
Now comes the announcement of Aryna Sabalenkathe current number 3 in the WTA ranking, announced today her decision not to take part in the Olympics: “I will also not play in the Olympics due to WTA rules on mandatory tournaments. I have to sacrifice something. Unfortunately I have to sacrifice the Paris Olympics. At this moment in my career, especially with some difficulties I’ve had in recent months, I have to take care of my health”.
Russia and Belarus: a reverse boycott?
A cliché says that “three clues make a proof”, but for the moment we are stuck. The feeling, however, behind the declarations of circumstance of Rublev and Sabalenka there is something different. The calendar in the world of tennis is undoubtedly brutal with many close commitments, constant travel and little opportunity to rest, but it is difficult for the choice to take a week or two of rest to happen during the Olympics, one of the most sought-after events in the world. of all athletes where, however, Russians and Belarusians will have to present themselves “without flag“. Time ago Russia and Belarus and their political leaders look with a bit of “suspicion” at their representatives in the world of tennis, considered too “pro-Western”. And the feeling is that behind these decisions there may be a political motivation and a sort of reverse boycott. Sensations only perhaps waiting for the third clue.
