PDA

View Full Version : 5.2 Millions watched the women's final


jt1224x0
09-11-2012, 08:25 AM
(LA TIMES NEWSPAPER) Serena Williams' three-set win over Victoria Azarenka in the U.S. Open drew about 5.2 million viewers for CBS on Sunday afternoon against heavy NFL competition from Fox, which broadcast a highly anticipated match between the San Francisco 49ers and Green Bay Packers.

The audience was a 5% improvement over the 2011 women's final, which drew 4.9 million viewers.

On Monday, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray will square off in the delayed men's finals. Originally, the men were supposed to do battle on Sunday, and the women on Saturday, but as has been the case for the last several years, weather got in the way and high winds forced the matches to be delayed.

Last year's men's final, also played on a Monday due to weather delays, averaged just 3.3 million viewers.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...,3718415.story

I know its not an exact "apples to apples" comparison against the ATP final because it was played on Monday last year., But the Williams match was going directly against the Green Bay Packers and a highly touted NFL showdown. Therefore I thought it was relevant.

CBS finished with a 3.9 TV rating for the match, which given the extreme competition it was up against, wasn't too bad.

jt1224x0
09-11-2012, 08:26 AM
this shows that wta and atp are toe to toe when it comes to popularity, at least in the U.S, in fact more people watched the women's final last year

augustobt
09-11-2012, 08:28 AM
Only in the US because in the both finals, one of the players are from the US.

I'm pretty sure that in Brazil at least, almost nobody watched the women's final.

flyinghippos101
09-11-2012, 08:29 AM
this shows that wta and atp are toe to toe when it comes to popularity, at least in the U.S, in fact more people watched the women's final last year

Errr, you do know that the fundamental difference is that one of them was played during the weekend and one was played during the work week?

jt1224x0
09-11-2012, 08:32 AM
Errr, you do know that the fundamental difference is that one of them was played during the weekend and one was played during the work week?

Well most people here think that the men's game is far more popular but according to the rating, it is a lot more close when it comes to popularity but I do understand your point though

shazbot
09-11-2012, 08:38 AM
Well most people here think that the men's game is far more popular but according to the rating, it is a lot more close when it comes to popularity but I do understand your point though

Like augustobt said, one of the women was an AMERICAN. These are American television numbers... Plus the Men's final started at 4PM on the east coast, which is 1PM on the west coast, most people are still at work or commuting home from work.

flyinghippos101
09-11-2012, 08:41 AM
Well most people here think that the men's game is far more popular but according to the rating, it is a lot more close when it comes to popularity but I do understand your point though

Lot of factors to consider, the use of CBS viewership statistics to explain the relative popularity of the WTA and ATP is moot.

For one, Serena happens to be American and thus as marketable, of not, more than most top male players. Americans will be more inclined to check it out if an American is in the final and vice versa. Another, the sample size happens to be very small. There is no reasonable way to conclude the WTA is as popular as the ATP based on ratings for one country.

In addition, the time difference in west coast would mean most people would be working as opposed to watching the match

shazbot
09-11-2012, 08:42 AM
Just imagine how high the Men's numbers would be if Roddick was in the final. There were people at my work who don't even like or follow tennis talking about Roddick retiring.

No Federer, no Nadal and no American hurts the TV ratings in the US.

jt1224x0
09-11-2012, 08:49 AM
Just imagine how high the Men's numbers would be if Roddick was in the final. There were people at my work who don't even like or follow tennis talking about Roddick retiring.

No Federer, no Nadal and no American hurts the TV ratings in the US.

Im not saying that the WTA is more popular than the ATP. What I am trying to say that is that the popularity gap is not as large as some people think it is.

tacou
09-11-2012, 09:04 AM
Im not saying that the WTA is more popular than the ATP. What I am trying to say that is that the popularity gap is not as large as some people think it is.

I appreciate the fact you're trying to convey but the point is these numbers don't support what you're saying.

It'd be like me comparing the ratings for a new Simpsons episode Sunday night prime time to a rerun of Family Guy on UPN at 1am and saying the Simpsons are clearly more popular.

kme5150
09-11-2012, 09:05 AM
Im not saying that the WTA is more popular than the ATP. What I am trying to say that is that the popularity gap is not as large as some people think it is.

The popularity gap is still enormous.

During the women's final the majority of the USA was sitting at home.

Yesterday's men's final started at 4:00 EST, when the majority of the USA is working. People on the west coast missed the entire match. Why didn't they play the match at 8:00 PM yesterday? A little thing called Monday Night Football, which just happend to be a doubleheader. The same thing happened last year.

If the WTA was as popular as you think it is, they wouldn't be begging the ATP to share events like Cincy.

That is like me saying the gap between male models popularity are catching up with female models popularity.

TMF
09-11-2012, 09:18 AM
Im not saying that the WTA is more popular than the ATP. What I am trying to say that is that the popularity gap is not as large as some people think it is.

The TV rating comparison doesn't indicate anything about the gap between the ATP and the WTA.

1. Women final was played on Sunday(Prime Time!), but the men final play on Monday when everyone is at work or school. LOL

2. Since it was played on US soil, having an American player(Serena) help boost the rating. Had Roddick was in the final and had announce his retirement, the rating would be higher.

3. CBS is only 1 network and the rating is only in the US, it has nothing to do with outside of the US.

mistik
09-11-2012, 09:30 AM
I have a chance to watch women final,even ı dont care about it all much.I have missed mens final,because ı need to work and most people is like me.

Magnetite
09-11-2012, 09:41 AM
Stupid post is stupid.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 09:45 AM
Lot of factors to consider, the use of CBS viewership statistics to explain the relative popularity of the WTA and ATP is moot.

For one, Serena happens to be American and thus as marketable, of not, more than most top male players

Not according to the sexist rabble on this board. In their wee 'lil minds, no woman is as marketable or popular as any male. That's the kind of shocking ignorance one can find on this board.

Americans will be more inclined to check it out if an American is in the final and vice versa


Not an absolute by any stretch of the imagination, as Borg was one of the biggest sports stars in the U.S. during his reign, and a bonafide pop culture figure with his face gracing endless U.S. publications, posters, etc. Sabatini--while not sharing Borg's success--was wildly popular in America. Graf's USO finals had high ratings and her opponents were not American (finals against Seles not counting as Monica was not native to the U.S., and the perception of her national identity went both ways).

Elsewhere, Beckham has been one of the most popularized athletes in America for the past decade, yet he's not native to this country. In boxing, Manny Pacquiao is that sport's biggest star--by far--in America, and he's Fillipino, and does not live in the U.S..

On that note, history leading up to this era snuffs out the nationalism theory, as big stars not native to the U.S. are celebrated/marketed here successfully. So, it is an erroneous theory which concludes the only reason U.S. ratings are high is due to nationalism.

There is no reasonable way to conclude the WTA is as popular as the ATP based on ratings for one country.

No matter how you choose to cut it, the TV audience--millions at any given time--is the sport's largest, concentrated audience, thus their reaction (i.e. ratings) are the best indicator of support/popularity--certainly more than the limited environment of the events.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 09:45 AM
most people is like me.

Whoa...........

NJ1
09-11-2012, 09:48 AM
Errr, you do know that the fundamental difference is that one of them was played during the weekend and one was played during the work week?

I don't think he does.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 09:55 AM
The popularity gap is still enormous.

During the women's final the majority of the USA was sitting at home.

Illogical. For example, at this year's Wimbledon, the women's final was held Saturday, the men's on Sunday--meaning more potential viewers were at home (your criteria for bigger ratings), yet the rating earned by the women's final (2.3) and the men's (2.9) are far too close to suggest any sort of "gap," of any significance, as the numbers were enormous for both finals--both held on the weekend.

To reiterate, with the sport's largest audience at home (again, you made an issue of this) for both finals broadcast on the weekend, the ratings were not substantially different, thus the notion of a so-called "gap" is flimsy at best.

TMF
09-11-2012, 10:05 AM
Illogical. For example, at this year's Wimbledon, the women's final was held Saturday, the men's on Sunday--meaning more potential viewers were at home (your criteria for bigger ratings), yet the rating earned by the women's final (2.3) and the men's (2.9) are far too close to suggest any sort of "gap," of any significance, as the numbers were enormous for both finals--both held on the weekend.

To reiterate, with the sport's largest audience at home (again, you made an issue of this) for both finals broadcast on the weekend, the ratings were not substantially different, thus the notion of a so-called "gap" is flimsy at best.

The women's final had an American player(Serena), so getting 2.3 rating in the USA was high. Had there were non-US player, the rating might be 1.5

On the flip side, had Roddick was in the final, the rating might reach 3.5

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 10:13 AM
The women's final had an American player(Serena), so getting 2.3 rating in the USA was high. Had there were non-US player, the rating might be 1.5

The Graf example of high ratings where no Americans were involved disproves your nationalism claim.

Moving on....

On the flip side, had Roddick was in the final, the rating might reach 3.5

Roddick was not, therefore your comment means nothing.

TMF
09-11-2012, 10:24 AM
The Graf example of high ratings where no Americans were involved disproves your nationalism claim.

Moving on....
That was decades ago. Women's tennis was wayyyy popular in those day.

Moving on....


Roddick was not, therefore your comment means nothing.

That's my point. No American player, low rating(US network only).

kme5150
09-11-2012, 10:39 AM
Illogical. For example, at this year's Wimbledon, the women's final was held Saturday, the men's on Sunday--meaning more potential viewers were at home (your criteria for bigger ratings), yet the rating earned by the women's final (2.3) and the men's (2.9) are far too close to suggest any sort of "gap," of any significance, as the numbers were enormous for both finals--both held on the weekend.

To reiterate, with the sport's largest audience at home (again, you made an issue of this) for both finals broadcast on the weekend, the ratings were not substantially different, thus the notion of a so-called "gap" is flimsy at best.

OK, I'll use your numbers for Wimbledon, 20% is still a huge difference in ratings, especially from an advertising standpoint.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 10:39 AM
That was decades ago. Women's tennis was wayyyy popular in those day.

History is relevant when one makes broad claims as seen in this thread.


That's my point. No American player, low rating(US network only).

Wrong again: the 2012 Wimbldon final earned massive ratings, and last time anyone checked, Federer and Murray are not Americans. The fact the 2012 Wimbledon women's finals earned nearly as much only speaks to the general interest/ popularity of both finals, not nationalism. Again, the nationalism claim is utterly false.

fed_rulz
09-11-2012, 10:43 AM
Well most people here think that the men's game is far more popular but according to the rating, it is a lot more close when it comes to popularity but I do understand your point though

tickets for mens SF and finals sold out long time ago.
tickets for women's finals was available even a few hrs before the match began.


yeah, it's a lot close when it comes to popularity!!

cknobman
09-11-2012, 10:47 AM
Here is something to think about:

The womens final was played in the original time slot of the mens final.

How many DVRS that were still set to record the originally scheduled mens final help boost the womens ratings on accident???

I know mine did because I forgot to go change my recording schedule.

TMF
09-11-2012, 10:49 AM
History is relevant when one makes broad claims as seen in this thread.
Most fans have agree that womens tennis in the 90s >>> today.



Wrong again: the 2012 Wimbldon final earned massive ratings, and last time anyone checked, Federer and Murray are not Americans. The fact the 2012 Wimbledon women's finals earned nearly as much only speaks to the general interest/ popularity of both finals, not nationalism. Again, the nationalism claim is utterly false.

That's my point. Men's final still has higher rating(despite no US player) than women's final. Now if Roddick was in the final and no Serena, the gap would be huge!

fed_rulz
09-11-2012, 10:50 AM
Here is something to think about:

The womens final was played in the original time slot of the mens final.

How many DVRS that were still set to record the originally scheduled mens final help boost the womens ratings on accident???

I know mine did because I forgot to go change my recording schedule.

you may have very well hit the nail on the head. I was VERY surprised to see tickets for the women's finals still available a few hrs before the match started!

TMF
09-11-2012, 10:53 AM
And we're only looking into the US only and the women's still lage behind. In England, the rating for the men's final would makes women's final almost non-existent.

NikeWilson
09-11-2012, 10:56 AM
Serena Williams is the Greatest American Female athlete.

jones101
09-11-2012, 11:00 AM
Does it matter?

Its a good number of people watching regardless of what day it is.

Serena/Azarenka was the best womans USO final (besides Serena/JJ) in terms of quality in the past 10 years. Casual viewers may be inclined to watch more future finals and now know Azarenka more, which is good, as she be near the top for a while.

The wta is on the up's finally and people are moaning about ratings. SMH!

shazbot
09-11-2012, 11:44 AM
Just one last note on this debate, check out this thread: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=439567

Some CBS stations didn't even show the match. Probably affected people more on the western side of the country, because of the time it aired.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 12:38 PM
That's my point. Men's final still has higher rating(despite no US player) than women's final. Now if Roddick was in the final and no Serena, the gap would be huge!

No, the point some of your ilk is making is that there is some significant gap, when that is nonsense shttered by numbers (see: Wimbledon ratings) just as it was during non-American Graf's finals at the USO.

TMF
09-11-2012, 12:44 PM
No, the point some of your ilk is making is that there is some significant gap, when that is nonsense shttered by numbers (see: Wimbledon ratings) just as it was during non-American Graf's finals at the USO.

That was decades ago. Women's tennis was wayyyy popular in those day.
Most fans have agree that womens tennis in the 90s >>> today.

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 01:21 PM
You could say that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west but those who are butthurt that Serena and Vika earned $1.9M and $950,000 respectively would still argue against that if it doesn't fit their preconceived notions. All that matters is that advertisers and sponsors will see the ratings and possibly say, "MORE WOMEN'S TENNIS ON TV". Sorry boys. :)

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 02:04 PM
this shows that wta and atp are toe to toe when it comes to popularity, at least in the U.S, in fact more people watched the women's final last year

No it only shows that when sport events are broadcasted, peoples will always show more interest to the event where a coutryman is involved.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 02:08 PM
And try compare the worldwide TV ratings when the woman final is played on saturday and men final on sunday (don't be stupid enough to talk about TV ratings of finals played on monday when people have to work instead of watching TV...), then you'll have the real idea of which tennis gender is more attracting.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 02:11 PM
Make an Azarenka/Radwanska final and CBS TV rating woul have been at most barely hal of the Serena/Azarenka final.

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 02:44 PM
And try compare the worldwide TV ratings when the woman final is played on saturday and men final on sunday (don't be stupid enough to talk about TV ratings of finals played on monday when people have to work instead of watching TV...), then you'll have the real idea of which tennis gender is more attracting.

When you get the worldwide TV ratings please post them here so we can all be educated (sarcasm). Why so worked up that the women's final had decent (not blockbuster) ratings that you have to post three successive messages. It doesn't matter what you think, what I think, what anybody on the TW message board thinks about the WTA vs. ATP. I would think that any mature tennis lover would be happy that tennis is able to generate any interest on television, especially when it's competing with the NFL.

I like women's tennis and am pleased that the women's final had good ratings. I hope the men's final had good ratings also. What I get worked up about is the juvenile display of sexism that appears to be rampant among the TW posters. When I go to work, where everybody knows that I'm a tennis fan, it's only during the slams when my colleagues bring up tennis and it's only the finals that they watch. Not people like us who watch the Round of 128 through to the finals. All the rest of the time my colleagues are talking about the NFL, NBA or the MLB. If tennis had to rely on people like us, tennis would have a slow long death or be an even more niche sport than it is now. So knowing that at 5.2M people watched a tennis event rather than the Green Bay Packers is great for tennis.

I can only assume all the "ATP is better than the WTA" people are still quite young that they can't see the forest for the trees.

mellowyellow
09-11-2012, 03:43 PM
The popularity gap is still enormous.

During the women's final the majority of the USA was sitting at home.

Yesterday's men's final started at 4:00 EST, when the majority of the USA is working. People on the west coast missed the entire match. Why didn't they play the match at 8:00 PM yesterday? A little thing called Monday Night Football, which just happend to be a doubleheader. The same thing happened last year.

If the WTA was as popular as you think it is, they wouldn't be begging the ATP to share events like Cincy.

That is like me saying the gap between male models popularity are catching up with female models popularity.

The FIRST of the year too, the anticipation of this time of year is close to that of the Super Bowl itself.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-11-2012, 03:49 PM
No it only shows that when sport events are broadcasted, peoples will always show more interest to the event where a coutryman is involved.

History debunks this as Graf was no U.S. citizen, but her finals socred high ratings. The same applies to the high ratings for this year's Wimbledon men's final, where no American was present, but the U.S. audiences provided a large share. Again, one only needs to look at facts, rather than post based on bitter emotionalism which is not even flirting with truth.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 04:06 PM
When you get the worldwide TV ratings please post them here so we can all be educated (sarcasm). Why so worked up that the women's final had decent (not blockbuster) ratings that you have to post three successive messages. It doesn't matter what you think, what I think, what anybody on the TW message board thinks about the WTA vs. ATP. I would think that any mature tennis lover would be happy that tennis is able to generate any interest on television, especially when it's competing with the NFL.

I like women's tennis and am pleased that the women's final had good ratings. I hope the men's final had good ratings also. What I get worked up about is the juvenile display of sexism that appears to be rampant among the TW posters. When I go to work, where everybody knows that I'm a tennis fan, it's only during the slams when my colleagues bring up tennis and it's only the finals that they watch. Not people like us who watch the Round of 128 through to the finals. All the rest of the time my colleagues are talking about the NFL, NBA or the MLB. If tennis had to rely on people like us, tennis would have a slow long death or be an even more niche sport than it is now. So knowing that at 5.2M people watched a tennis event rather than the Green Bay Packers is great for tennis.

I can only assume all the "ATP is better than the WTA" people are still quite young that they can't see the forest for the trees.

Where in my posts did I say that it is not a good thing that a tennis final of woman tennis can bring 5.2 millions of americans in front of there television !!!

I just pointed out how and why the orignal point of this thread that uses USA only TV ratings of a sport to deduct its attractiveness is just inadequate, and by the way even when just talking about tennis attractiveness in the USA you still cannot deduct the respective attractiveness of male and female tennis by using the finals TV ratings if there is one american player ina final and no american player in the other final. The the only way to compare male and female tennis attractiveness in the USA would be to compare a Serena Vs anybody US open female final to an Isner or any other american male player vs Anybody US open male final, but I bet it will never be possible...

Tennis_Maestro
09-11-2012, 04:08 PM
this shows that wta and atp are toe to toe when it comes to popularity, at least in the U.S, in fact more people watched the women's final last year

No, jus no. This is an unfair test. Wanna know why? Serena Williams, Afro-American well known tennis player. Tournament's location: America. Population of Afro-American's in America? Combine that with die-hard tennis fans.

Bias test.

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 04:14 PM
No, jus no. This is an unfair test. Wanna know why? Serena Williams, Afro-American well known tennis player. Tournament's location: America. Population of Afro-American's in America? Combine that with die-hard tennis fans.

Bias test.

Wow. I guess you shouldn't tell anyone that I also watched the Andy Murray vs Novak Djokovic match. The "Afro-American" club might kick me out since I'm not Scottish, Serbian or a white male.

Tennis_Maestro
09-11-2012, 04:15 PM
Wow. I guess you shouldn't tell anyone that I also watched the Andy Murray vs Novak Djokovic match. The "Afro-American" club might kick me out since I'm not Scottish, Serbian or a white male.

WTG on completely missing the point @ hand. Brilliantly achieved.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 04:24 PM
History debunks this as Graf was no U.S. citizen, but her finals socred high ratings. The same applies to the high ratings for this year's Wimbledon men's final, where no American was present, but the U.S. audiences provided a large share. Again, one only needs to look at facts, rather than post based on bitter emotionalism which is not even flirting with truth.

History debunks nothing from what I said, because I didn't say that it was impossible for a tennis final (male or female) to score high TV ratings when it is not played by a countyman, I just said that when you compare 2 finals TV ratings, the one that is played with a countryman will always have a boosted TV rating, would you maintain that it is not factual?

And since you ask to look at facts and and use Graf finals TV ratings, then show me if you can an exemple of a Steffi Graf final TV rating scoring higher in the USA than the male final of the same tournament played the same year by an american player. I wihish you good luck...

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 04:36 PM
Some facts that kill the original statement of this thread

Fact 1 : comparing TV ratings of an event played on Saturday or Sunday when a large part of the population doesn't have to work to the TV rating of an event played on monday when most of the population have to work is just obviously unfair and is even noticed by the original poster.

Fact 2 : Comparing the TV rating of a sport event played by a countryman VS the TV rating of the same sport but played without any countryman is also unfair (and that does not mean that nobody can be interested to watch a tennis final played without any countryman, that just says : more interest for the event with a countryman).

pound cat
09-11-2012, 04:43 PM
I watched the women's final as well and it was a great match and was high quality tennis. More people would l watch a 3 set match right through especially a player from the country of origin of the match than a men's 5 set match that dragged on for almost 5 hours and caused a big disruption of regular CBS programming. How do they know how many people actually watched the match? Do peope who " watched" the broadcast for 2 seconds count? People watching for 5 minutes?

Anyone here really know how viewers are calculated???

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 04:53 PM
When you get the worldwide TV ratings please post them here so we can all be educated (sarcasm).

Here is a clear enough statement in the following link http://www.francetvinfo.fr/au-proces-du-tennis-feminin-la-parole-est-a-la-defense_100725.html so that you can be well educated (you asked for it) :

"A l'audimat, les garçons font deux fois mieux que les filles. Lors de l'Open d'Australie, au milieu des années 2000, il a fallu baisser le prix des places pour le tournoi féminin, faute d'amateurs. "La BBC s'était plainte du trop grand nombre de sièges vides", se souvient un ancien directeur du tournoi dans le quotidien australien The Age (lien en anglais) en 2009."

If you don't understand French or if you don't feel to google traduct it, the paragraph above basically explains that men tennis TV rating scores 2 times higher than female tennis TV ratings.

FACT.

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 04:57 PM
Where in my posts did I say that it is not a good thing that a tennis final of woman tennis can bring 5.2 millions of americans in front of there television !!!

I just pointed out how and why the orignal point of this thread that uses USA only TV ratings of a sport to deduct its attractiveness is just inadequate, and by the way even when just talking about tennis attractiveness in the USA you still cannot deduct the respective attractiveness of male and female tennis by using the finals TV ratings if there is one american player ina final and no american player in the other final. The the only way to compare male and female tennis attractiveness in the USA would be to compare a Serena Vs anybody US open female final to an Isner or any other american male player vs Anybody US open male final, but I bet it will never be possible...

That was my point. Nowhere did you mention that it was good that 5.2M people watched a tennis match. Instead all the posters are up in arms about a women's match vs a men's match, an American vs a non-American. I'm just glad that people watched tennis.

By the way, the women's final happened on Sunday, not Saturday. The fact that a decent number of people tuned in when going up against Sunday football is pretty darn good. I hope that we get good numbers for the men's final.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 04:59 PM
And by the way this year's Female US open final was actually enjoyable to watch, really a great match. It is possible to prefer male tennis but still enjoy watching female tennis when it is played at its best, I'm in that case, but still have no illusion about the difference of quality between the 2 genders of tennis.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 05:04 PM
Nowhere did you mention that it was good that 5.2M people watched a tennis match.

By the way, the women's final happened on Sunday, not Saturday. The fact that a decent number of people tuned in when going up against Sunday football is pretty darn good. I hope that we get good numbers for the men's final.

Not mentionning something does not equal to stating the opposite of that thing!!!

I didn't state it because simply stating how it is a good thing that 5.2 millions peoples watched a tennis match has no relation with the original subject of the thread that is about comparing Male and Female tennis interest by using their respecting TV rating to take conclusions.

And being played on sunday instead of saturday is still an advantage to being played on monday in terms of TV coverage.

pound cat
09-11-2012, 05:07 PM
Here is a clear enough statement in the following link http://www.francetvinfo.fr/au-proces-du-tennis-feminin-la-parole-est-a-la-defense_100725.html so that you can be well educated (you asked for it) :

"A l'audimat, les garçons font deux fois mieux que les filles. Lors de l'Open d'Australie, au milieu des années 2000, il a fallu baisser le prix des places pour le tournoi féminin, faute d'amateurs. "La BBC s'était plainte du trop grand nombre de sièges vides", se souvient un ancien directeur du tournoi dans le quotidien australien The Age (lien en anglais) en 2009."

If you don't understand French or if you don't feel to google traduct it, the paragraph above basically explains that men tennis TV rating scores 2 times higher than female tennis TV ratings.

FACT.

So where does it say anything about USO ratings?

mellowyellow
09-11-2012, 05:12 PM
Not mentionning something does not equal to stating the opposite of that thing!!!

And being played on sunday instead of saturday is still an advantage to being played on monday in terms of TV coverage.

Are you for real? how can having the entire west coast at home be an advantage to US TV ratings?

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 05:16 PM
So where does it say anything about USO ratings?

It doesn't specifically speak about USO ratings, it speak about overall tennis ratings, it is obvious when reading the entire article, but when just reading the paragarph I quoted it can mislead peoples and making them think that it only talks about Australian open, why would we reduce tennis worldwide TV ratings to just only the US open?

kOaMaster
09-11-2012, 05:19 PM
Yesterday's men's final started at 4:00 EST, when the majority of the USA is working. People on the west coast missed the entire match. Why didn't they play the match at 8:00 PM yesterday? A little thing called Monday Night Football, which just happend to be a doubleheader. The same thing happened last year.

That may be part of the reason but could it also be because europe (GB) could also watch it then (late evening of course but better than 02:00)?

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 05:25 PM
Here is a clear enough statement in the following link http://www.francetvinfo.fr/au-proces-du-tennis-feminin-la-parole-est-a-la-defense_100725.html so that you can be well educated (you asked for it) :

"A l'audimat, les garçons font deux fois mieux que les filles. Lors de l'Open d'Australie, au milieu des années 2000, il a fallu baisser le prix des places pour le tournoi féminin, faute d'amateurs. "La BBC s'était plainte du trop grand nombre de sièges vides", se souvient un ancien directeur du tournoi dans le quotidien australien The Age (lien en anglais) en 2009."

If you don't understand French or if you don't feel to google traduct it, the paragraph above basically explains that men tennis TV rating scores 2 times higher than female tennis TV ratings.

FACT.

Now we have 2 countries. Still waiting on the other 194.

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 05:32 PM
Now we have 2 countries. Still waiting on the other 194.

No you don't have to wait, the part of the quote about TV rating is talking about worldwide rating, the mention of the Australian open is only about the fact that they had to lower the price of the tickets because women tennis didn't bring enough peoples to the stadium.

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 05:38 PM
Now we have 2 countries. Still waiting on the other 194.

I'm being snarky. If you look at my other posts you will see that I'm generally pretty reasonable but I just get fed up with the "WTA sucks" crowd. I like women's tennis. It is different from men's tennis. I'm glad that there is a sport that women can make a decent living in if they want to become a professional athlete. Maybe golf, but not basketball, not soccer, not lacrosse, etc. The difference between the best women and those not as good is so vast which is not the case with the men. There is a lot of drama in the women's game which I think adds to my enjoyment. The utter dominance of Serena is a great story. That there have been 7 different slam winners in the past 8 slams and makes picking who's going to come out on top a crap shoot (though I think that Serena and Vika are going to stay on top). The complete flame out of the previous slam winners (Kvitova, Li, Stosur) always gives you something to talk about.

That is where I'm coming from. I bid you good night.

r2473
09-11-2012, 05:46 PM
Anyone here really know how viewers are calculated???

Raw tonnage

That's why American viewer numbers are growing exponentially even though the population is staying steady

ninman
09-11-2012, 05:47 PM
I believe the UK ratings for the Wimbledon final this year were crazy high (probably around the 10 million mark). The reason, first British player in the final in nearly 80 years.

You can't look at one match, played at one tournament and say see Women's tennis is just as popular. You need to look at overall viewership of both tours, i.e. what's the average rating of a woman's 500 tournament compared to a men's 500 tournament? Or what's the average rating of the women's matches at the US Open (all rounds), compared to the men's?

fuzzyball
09-11-2012, 05:56 PM
I'm being snarky. If you look at my other posts you will see that I'm generally pretty reasonable but I just get fed up with the "WTA sucks" crowd. I like women's tennis. It is different from men's tennis. I'm glad that there is a sport that women can make a decent living in if they want to become a professional athlete.

I also like woman tennis when played at its highest level, despite its inferior quality compared to male tennis, so to make it clear, I watch women tennis (usually only the big matches) and I'm(was) a big fan of Steffi Graf and Navratilova, I also watch of course more men tennis but I'll never say to peoples "hey women tennis is so shity that peoples shouldn't be allowed to watch it, and the girls shouldn't make money...", but I just like to make the facts straights so when I see deceptive posts giving conclusions based on using unfair comparisons like the original post of this thread, then I feel the need to give my 2 cents.

By the way I'm not far to think that on a financial point of view both female AND male tennis benefit one from the other, in a way that if it is safe to think that females make more money than they should by benefiting from the whole men/women tennis package at slams and masters, I also think that male tennis would make less money if women tennis wouldn't exist because it makes the slams feel like bigger events with both sexes concerned so it genrates more overall revenues, perhaps I'm wrong but I do think that a slam event with a male + a female competition at the same time generates more than twice the revenues it would potentially generate if it would be a male only event, and since it is better for both sexes to each share 50% of slam revenues that are overall more than twice superior than it should be if a slam event would be a male or female only event, then having a male and a female pro tennis is a win-win situation.

Bobby Jr
09-11-2012, 06:24 PM
The TV rating comparison doesn't indicate anything about the gap between the ATP and the WTA.

1. Women final was played on Sunday(Prime Time!), but the men final play on Monday when everyone is at work or school. LOL
End of the discussion basically.

I played some doubles last night and I was the only person who knew Williams and Azarenka were the final pairing when it came up.... and it had been all over the news since the day before. Everyone knew the men's final pairing and that it had gone to five sets.

norbac
09-11-2012, 06:40 PM
http://espn.go.com/tennis/usopen12/story/_/id/8367924/more-16-million-watch-andy-murray-us-open-win

Murray/Djoko 16 millions viewers, compared to 11 million for last year's men's final and 10 million for the year before. So Murray = ratings.

Women's final got almost 18 million viewers.

Tcbtennis
09-11-2012, 06:44 PM
http://espn.go.com/tennis/usopen12/story/_/id/8367924/more-16-million-watch-andy-murray-us-open-win

Murray/Djoko 16 millions viewers, compared to 11 million for last year's men's final and 10 million for the year before. So Murray = ratings.

Women's final got almost 18 million viewers.

That's awesome! Where did the 5.2 million figure come from?

jt1224x0
09-11-2012, 07:11 PM
That's awesome! Where did the 5.2 million figure come from?

That was from the LA times but if the 18 million is correct then thats great. 16 million is great also but those numbers are too high imo.

10is93
09-12-2012, 12:52 AM
Those high numbers are the viewers in all-or-part meaning those above 2 years old who watched at least a few minutes. For example the Djokovic/federer match in 2007 was 16,6 million in all-or-part and above 5 million in number of viewers.

Actually the ratings for CBS were low

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/09/u-s-open-low-numbers-for-yet-another-monday-mens-final/
Airing in the afternoon on a workday for the fifth consecutive year, it should not be a shock that overnight ratings were unimpressive for the men’s final of the U.S. Open.

The Andy Murray/Novak Djokovic U.S. Open men’s final drew a 2.3 overnight rating on CBS Monday afternoon, down 12% from last year (2.6), but up a tick from 2010* (2.2).

The 2.3 overnight is the second-lowest ever for the men’s final of the U.S. Open, ahead of only 2010.

Clearly, the Monday afternoon timeslot did not help matters. Several CBS affiliates opted not carry the match until after switching to national programming at 8 PM ET. According to Sports Business Daily, the overnight rating peaked at a 4.2 from 9-9:15 PM ET.

Overall, the last five editions of the U.S. Open men’s final rank as the lowest rated ever in metered markets. It is no coincidence that all five matches aired on Monday afternoons.

The spate of Monday finals and the absence of American stars has slowly but surely eroded the drawing power of the men’s final.

The last time the men’s final was played in the traditional Sunday afternoon window, 2007, the match between Djokovic and Roger Federer earned a 4.2 overnight.
The last time an American played in the final, 2006, the match between Federer and Andy Roddick drew a 5.1.
The last time an American with more than one major victory played in the final, 2005, the match between Federer and Andre Agassi earned a 6.2.
Finally, the last time two Americans met in the final, 2002, the match between Agassi and Pete Sampras earned a now-unattainable 7.9.
Overnight Ratings For Men’s Final of the U.S. Open
Past decade
* The 2010 final, between Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, started on CBS but concluded on ESPN2.

Same for the women
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/09/u-s-open-womens-final-down-from-last-year-but-better-than-usual/

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-12-2012, 04:42 AM
http://espn.go.com/tennis/usopen12/story/_/id/8367924/more-16-million-watch-andy-murray-us-open-win

Murray/Djoko 16 millions viewers, compared to 11 million for last year's men's final and 10 million for the year before. So Murray = ratings.

Women's final got almost 18 million viewers.

Which means the sexist fantasy of some "gap" in interest based on gender does not exist. Several references to ratings from more than one major have been posted, which also kills the wholly false notion of nationalism having anything to do with higher ratings.

fuzzyball
09-12-2012, 05:17 AM
Which means the sexist fantasy of some "gap" in interest based on gender does not exist. Several references to ratings from more than one major have been posted, which also kills the wholly false notion of nationalism having anything to do with higher ratings.

This year's US open final TV rating posted above actually tend to prove exactly the opposite of what you say here, the final with the american player has higher TV rating than the final without american player, so it is impossible do deduct by this years TV rating that nationalism doesn't have anything to do with the ratings.!!!

And when you say that several references to ratings have been posted, none of them have shown that female tennis draws equal or more interest than male tennis when nationalism is out of the equation, if you want to prove that your point has a chance to be right, then you just have to show us one US TV rating the last 20 years where the women final played without american player has a higher score in the USA than the male final the same year and also played without american, or show us just one US TV rating where the woman final has a higher score than the male final the same year when there is an american player in both finals., that way you are sure to take nationalism out of the equation, but i'm afraid that absolutely no reference about it have been posted here, or link them if I'm wrong, good luck...

The only times where US TV ratings are higher for a woman final is when there is an amercian player in the woman final and no amercian player in the men final, like this year, so it proves that nationnalism has a huge impact on TV ratings.

kme5150
09-12-2012, 06:00 AM
Which means the sexist fantasy of some "gap" in interest based on gender does not exist. Several references to ratings from more than one major have been posted, which also kills the wholly false notion of nationalism having anything to do with higher ratings.

One was shown on a Sunday when the majority of the USA is not working and one is shown on Monday when the majority of the country is. Can you seriously not understand this? The last 5 mens US Open finals have been on a Monday afternoon. Even if Sampras and Agassi would be playing on a Monday afternoon, the ratings would be much lower than on a Sunday afternoon. People are not going to take off work to watch tennis, mens or womens. Why do you think the men play after the women at the grand slams? You always put the larger draw at the end. If you don't you end up with the situation like they had in Cincy where when Federer and Fish finished their match there were 500 left in the stands that stayed to watch the women's quarterfinal. My daughter even said how bad she felt for the women that nobody wanted to watch them.

Do you think the ratings for a Monday afternoon baseball game have the same ratings as a Saturday or Sunday evening game?

fuzzyball
09-12-2012, 07:02 AM
Kme5150, I think we can argue as much as we can, it won't help much, we are in front a situation like if we were showing a picture of a red wall and we would always find some peoples to claim "The picture proves that this wall is green!"

I'm done with it.

jt1224x0
09-12-2012, 07:21 AM
I don't know why but to me it seems like many posters are annoyed that the women's final drew more viewers than the men's finals.

mmk
09-12-2012, 09:24 AM
I don't know why but to me it seems like many posters are annoyed that the women's final drew more viewers than the men's finals.

The women played on a Sunday when most of the viewership doesn't have to work. The men played on a Monday, starting before the majority of workers in the eastern time zone have left work, and in the middle of the workday for west coast viewers. How is it surprising that the women might have outdrawn the men?

jt1224x0
09-12-2012, 09:48 AM
The women played on a Sunday when most of the viewership doesn't have to work. The men played on a Monday, starting before the majority of workers in the eastern time zone have left work, and in the middle of the workday for west coast viewers. How is it surprising that the women might have outdrawn the men?

it is not surprising at all, but like i said before most posters here don't want to acknowledge that women's tennis is not that far behind men's tennis when it comes to popularity(18 million viewers for women vs. 16 for men), at least in the U.S as the rating is showing. The men's finals got into prime time by the way, the match ended around 9-930ish pm.

Retaliation
09-12-2012, 09:52 AM
Women's final on Sunday, women's final had an American (while being played in America). Pretty easy to figure this one.

fuzzyball
09-12-2012, 12:38 PM
it is not surprising at all, but like i said before most posters here don't want to acknowledge that women's tennis is not that far behind men's tennis when it comes to popularity(18 million viewers for women vs. 16 for men).


When you base your evaluation of men Vs women tennis popularity on the TV ratings of the 2 finals from the 2013 US open while they are not broadcasted with the same conditions, it's like comparing apples and oranges, in an unfair way, like tasting a rotten apple then tasting a fresh orange and saying "my tasting session proves that oranges are better than apples..."

How is it hard to understand that it is at best inadequate and at worst simply unfair to take conclusions by comparing the TV ratings of 2 events that are not brodcasted with the same conditions (Saturday match with an american player Vs monday match without any american player)?

The rating posted only say 2 comparative things :

1/ A match played on saturday have a wider audience potential than a match played on monday.
2/ A match played by a countryman will attract more peoples in front of their television than a match of the same round played without any countryman.

jt1224x0
09-12-2012, 12:56 PM
When you base your evaluation of men Vs women tennis popularity on the TV ratings of the 2 finals from the 2013 US open while they are not broadcasted with the same conditions, it's like comparing apples and oranges, in an unfair way, like tasting a rotten apple then tasting a fresh orange and saying "my tasting session proves that oranges are better than apples..."

How is it hard to understand that it is at best inadequate and at worst simply unfair to take conclusions by comparing the TV ratings of 2 events that are not brodcasted with the same conditions (Saturday match with an american player Vs monday match without any american player)?

The rating posted only say 2 comparative things :

1/ A match played on saturday have a wider audience potential than a match played on monday.
2/ A match played by a countryman will attract more peoples in front of their television than a match of the same round played without any countryman.


Ok, all I am trying to say is that women's tennis is not as unpopular as many people believe but you can believe whatever makes you happy. 18 million is a higher number than 16 million, I mean you will never see that kind of rating for a WNBA game vs. an NBA. Tennis is only known because of the Federers, Nadals, Williams, Sharapovas, Clijsters, Murrays, Djokivics etc. You take away these players and both tours will suffer tremendously when it comes to popularity.

TMF
09-12-2012, 01:06 PM
I don't know why but to me it seems like many posters are annoyed that the women's final drew more viewers than the men's finals.

What's the point of having a thread if you don't want any discussion/input from other members? You said the comparing the rating between the men's final and the women's final is relevant. Everyone disagree and have analyzed and debunked the poor comparison. You(and thundervolley) shouldn't get so defensive.

jt1224x0
09-12-2012, 01:11 PM
What's the point of having a thread if you don't want any discussion/input from other members? You said the comparing the rating between the men's final and the women's final is relevant. Everyone disagree and have analyzed and debunked the poor comparison. You(and thundervolley) shouldn't get so defensive.

im not getting defensive, it was an observation.

fuzzyball
09-12-2012, 04:30 PM
I don't know why but to me it seems like many posters are annoyed that the women's final drew more viewers than the men's finals.

im not getting defensive, it was an observation.

And once again, an inadequate observation, you failed to understand that instead of being annoyed by the fact that the women final attracted more peoples in front of their TV than the male final, the posters are actually just annoyed by how you take some figures totally out of contexte to come to a conclusion accordingly deceptive in the post you wrote to create this thread.

90's Clay
09-12-2012, 04:32 PM
I think it would have drawn higher then the Men's even if they played the same day..

Say what you want, but no one has the star power then Fed and Nadal and do.. Tennis is going to suffer HUGE when they are gone.. Even though I can't stand the swiss, no denying how popular he and Nadal are

fuzzyball
09-12-2012, 04:35 PM
I think it would have drawn higher then the Men's even if they played the same day..

Say what you want, but no one has the star power then Fed and Nadal and do.. Tennis is going to suffer HUGE when they are gone.. Even though I can't stand the swiss, no denying how popular he and Nadal are

Same day but still with a countryman in one final and no countryman in the other final, then the TV rating comparison would still be unfair.

Imagine the TV ratings with Roddick or Isner instead of Djokovic in the men final and Radwanska or kvitova instead instead of Venus Williams in the women final, would you maintain that the female final would rate higher than the male final in the USA? Of course not, the nationality of the players have a that big impact on the TV ratings.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-13-2012, 06:00 AM
This year's US open final TV rating posted above actually tend to prove exactly the opposite of what you say here, the final with the american player has higher TV rating than the final without american player, so it is impossible do deduct by this years TV rating that nationalism doesn't have anything to do with the ratings.!!!

The Wimbledon men's final rating in the U.S.--with NO Americans, scored slightly higher than the high-rated women's final with one American. Graf was not American, had majors finals against non-Americans, which were were highly rated in US broadcasts.

Moreover, the American Roddick's USO final (with hype increasing as he moved through the draw) only earned a 3.5 share, while a final with no Americans, such as Rafter vs. Rudeski (1997 USO) had a 4.0 share. Nationalism plays no factor whatsoever.

Your theory is debunked .

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 06:52 AM
The Wimbledon men's final rating in the U.S.--with NO Americans, scored slightly higher than the high-rated women's final with one American. Graf was not American, had majors finals against non-Americans, which were were highly rated in US broadcasts.

Moreover, the American Roddick's USO final only earned a 3.5 share, while a final with no Americans (Rafter vs. Rudeski, '97 USO) had a 4.0 share. Nationalism plays no factor whatsoever.

Your theory is debunked .

You debunked nothing at all, because the fact that an event without countryman rates higher than an event with a countryman doesn't prove that the presence of the counrtyman in the lower rated event had no favorable impact on its audience, the fact that nationalism boost the audience doesn't mean that it will always boost it to a point where an event with a countryman has to automatically obtain a higher TV ratings than the event without countryman, because there are of course other variables than nationalism that impact the ratings.

And by using the figures of the wimpledon final you provided, I can return it against you in the Female Vs male tennis popularity debate, by safely concluding that male tennis is so much more popular than female tennis that the nationalism impact on the TV rating is sometimes (or often?) not enough to ensure bigger ratings for a Female event with a countryman Vs a male event without countryman.

And as far as your comparison between the share of the Rafter/Ruzedski final and the share of the Roddick final it also fails, because you compare 2 event with 6 years of distance, which means that they are not compared under the same conditions, so there are several viriables that impacts the results like tennis popularity at that time, popularity of the players present in the finals, what TV programs were competing against the tennis finals at that times, and many other variables that it would take too much time to list them all, as I said before, if nationalism has decidedly an impact on the TV ratings, it is not the only factor.

And when you talk about Grafs finals ratings in the USA, it doesn't contradict anything from what I said, because :

A/ I didn't say that a female final can't obtain a high rating if there is no countryman playing it, instead I said that it can't obtain a higher rating than the male final if there is no countryman in the female final, which is absolutey not the same thing.

B/ I note that you cared to only write that Graf's finals had high ratings, instead of saying that Graf's finals had higher rating than male finals, and I bet that if Graf's finals scored higher TV ratings than the male finals the same years you would have wrote it that way, so once again the Graf argument fails to contradict anything from what I said, it would even tend to confirm it.

And honestly, I don't understand how you can maintain that nationalism has no impact on the TV ratings for tennis, when it is obvious that everywhere in the world, so USA included, there are tons of peoples that watch a some sport events on TV ONLY if there is a countryman present in the final stage. I do that for some other sports than tennis that i don't care much, and many of my friends also, so please don't make a fool of you by trying to maintain that absolutely no american would follow a sport in the same way as the one I described. A US open final is not only followed by tennis addicts who would watch it anyway whatever the nationality of the finalsts should be, that kind of event is also watched by some peoples who usually don't care much about tennis but find an interest to watch it sometimes when a countryman plays the match.


So when you write :

Nationalism plays no factor whatsoever.

It is truely one of the most ridiculous statement that I must have readed on this board, it's just take some common sense for anybody to understand why.

DRII
09-13-2012, 06:56 AM
Nationalism in sport tends to be much more of a European thing.

Not nearly as significant here in the U.S.

Govnor
09-13-2012, 07:15 AM
I wonder what the NBC numbers would have been for the Olympics if they showed all the other countries athletes winning medals in Prime time instead of the Americans....

Russeljones
09-13-2012, 07:24 AM
The Wimbledon men's final rating in the U.S.--with NO Americans, scored slightly higher than the high-rated women's final with one American. Graf was not American, had majors finals against non-Americans, which were were highly rated in US broadcasts.

Moreover, the American Roddick's USO final (with hype increasing as he moved through the draw) only earned a 3.5 share, while a final with no Americans, such as Rafter vs. Rudeski (1997 USO) had a 4.0 share. Nationalism plays no factor whatsoever.

Your theory is debunked .

You are basing your theories on a time when tennis was much more popular in the US and that was largely due to Americans. So, a bit of work to do still. :)

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 07:25 AM
Nationalism in sport tends to be much more of a European thing.

Not nearly as significant here in the U.S.

It's funny because in europe we say exactly the opposite, I guess that peoples always believe the grass is greener at home than at the neighbor, so let's assume that european or american are both humans with the same defects...

Isn't there a few exemples of sport where the americans use or used to call the player or the team who whon the US championship as the "world chamion" it used to be the fact for baseball, Football, basketball. Isn't it a strange way to see things for a country that according to you is supposed to not be prone to nationalism in sport?

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 07:26 AM
I wonder what the NBC numbers would have been for the Olympics if they showed all the other countries athletes winning medals in Prime time instead of the Americans....

Do you understand that thundervolley?

And that?

You are basing your theories on a time when tennis was much more popular in the US and that was largely due to Americans. So, a bit of work to do still. :)

DRII
09-13-2012, 07:29 AM
I wonder what the NBC numbers would have been for the Olympics if they showed all the other countries athletes winning medals in Prime time instead of the Americans....

The Olympics are different. By definition its an international competition, so of course national pride takes precedent including with Americans...

However, in general sporting events shown in America, there is no where near the nationalism you see in Europe. Just because there is an American competing doesn't automatically mean more support. We've seen this many times in tennis matches.

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 07:35 AM
The Olympics are different. By definition its an international competition, so of course national pride takes precedent including with Americans...

However, in general sporting events shown in America, there is no where near the nationalism you see in Europe. Just because there is an American competing doesn't automatically mean more support. We've seen this many times in tennis matches.

So you mean that in the USA, the mecanism that make peoples watch the Davis cup matches of the american team doesn't apply at all when it comes for the amercian players in the slam individual competitions? Seriously doubtable.

DRII
09-13-2012, 07:40 AM
It's funny because in europe we say exactly the opposite, I guess that peoples always believe the grass is greener at home than at the neighbor, so let's assume that european or american are both humans with the same defects...

Isn't there a few exemples of sport where the americans use or used to call the player or the team who whon the US championship as the "world chamion" it used to be the fact for baseball, Football, basketball. Isn't it a strange way to see things for a country that according to you is supposed to not be prone to nationalism in sport?

There's a difference from provincialism, or supposed provincialism in the eyes of Europeans when it comes to Americans, and nationalism!

Yes, human kind tends to have the same defects across regions, but certain characteristics are magnified in certain populations. Nationalism certainly is in Europe! The briefest accounts of history tells the story, and your sporting events are many times a reflection of this...

In America its often times more about meritocracy or rooting for the underdog that drives fans’ support. We’ve seen this over and over at the USO.

DRII
09-13-2012, 07:42 AM
So you mean that in the USA, the mecanism that make peoples watch the Davis cup matches of the american team doesn't apply at all when it comes for the amercian players in the slam individual competitions? Seriously doubtable.

I guess you've missed the plethora of USO matches that prove as much...

Russeljones
09-13-2012, 07:46 AM
France alone is already way more nationalistic about sports than the US is. And if you talk about Europeans that means even more countries to add to the 'COME ON's' and 'VAMOS's' etc.

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 07:47 AM
Lendl himself stated that when he was chzech peoples not only rooted against him in the USA but they also used to show a lot of pure hostilty against him, but almost immediatly after that he became american he encountered far less hosility from the US crowd when playing in the USA than when he was officially Czech altough he admitted at the same time that if the hotility against him almost disapeared, he still usually stayed the guy the public rooted against when he played against native americans.

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 07:57 AM
There's a difference from provincialism, or supposed provincialism in the eyes of Europeans when it comes to Americans, and nationalism!

Yes, human kind tends to have the same defects across regions, but certain characteristics are magnified in certain populations. Nationalism certainly is in Europe! The briefest accounts of history tells the story, and your sporting events are many times a reflection of this...

In America its often times more about meritocracy or rooting for the underdog that drives fans’ support. We’ve seen this over and over at the USO.

The perfect exemple of what I said before : peoples always believe the grass is greener at home than at the neighbor.

If Amercians believe that nationalism is more an european problem (and I admit that there are several sad exemple in history to support that theory), I can assure you that if you ask a question about nationalism to peoples in Europe, most of them will say that they feel like USA is one of the most nationalist country in the world (and there are also good reasons to think like it, let's take for exemples Hollywood films where it is always about nice americans saving the planet and liberty by spanking asses of naughty communists, naughty muslim terrorists, naughty south american drug dealers, naughty alien invaders, and so...) so who is right, who is wrong? It would be an endless unnecessary debate, since most peoples everywhere in the world so USA and Europe include lack the needed objectivity to judge about themselves ; once again "peoples always believe the grass is greener at home than at the neighbor".

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 08:00 AM
I guess you've missed the plethora of USO matches that prove as much...

Do they exist? Many exemples of matches where the american crowd supported the foreigner instead of the homeboy in a US open match? I guess there are only a few exemples, I wouldn't be surprised that Federer could receive more support if he played Roddick in the US open, like it also arrived in the French open that the crowd rooted for the foreigner during matches played by french players like leconte or Pioline, but it is usually due to the fact that some players tend to attract so much hate against them that it overcomes the nationalism advantage, and it is the exception, not the rule, and as I already said before, if nationalism is a factor that can make peoples root for a certain player, it is not the only one factor that is taken in account, and that applys not only in the USA but also all over the world.

DRII
09-13-2012, 08:16 AM
The perfect exemple of what I said before : peoples always believe the grass is greener at home than at the neighbor.

If Amercians believe that nationalism is more an european problem (and I admit that there are several sad exemple in history to support that theory), I can assure you that if you ask a question about nationalism to peoples in Europe, most of them will say that they feel like USA one of the most nationalist country in the world, so who is right, who is wrong? It would be an endless unnecessary debate, since most peoples everywhere in the world so USA and Europe include lack the needed objectivity to judge about themselves ; once again "peoples always believe the grass is greener at home than at the neighbor".

Actually the phrase you're referring to is: the grass is always greener on the other side, which means people tend to believe that others have it better.

However, I get what you're trying to say, I just disagree...

As a matter of fact there is plenty I admire about Europe and think you all get it right and we don't: such as the U.S.'s horrendous gun violence vs Europe, and our ridiculous incarceration rate...

But nationalism... Naw, you all have it way worse. Actually I think its good America is not so nationalistic most of the time. It's not good for a super power with no substantial military foe to be nationalistic. Just imagine if China had no main rival on the international stage :shock:; then many around the world would more greatly appreciate how the U.S., although far from perfect, behaves internationally!

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 08:25 AM
Actually the phrase you're referring to is: the grass is always greener on the other side, which means people tend to believe that others have it better.

If I would have used the correct phrase of reference it would have meant the opposite to what I tried to explain, but thank you for the correction, TW board is my only source to practice my english and it is sometimes difficult for me to put the right forms.

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 08:49 AM
Just imagine if China had no main rival on the international stage :shock:;

I guess we would all have to think about always saving some money to be able at any time to pay the eventual bullets that would be used to kill the members of our families sentenced to death for having claimed for some more freedom of expression!!!

DRII
09-13-2012, 10:53 AM
BTW, where are you from fuzzyball?

fuzzyball
09-13-2012, 11:35 AM
A country that helped USA to gain its independancy 3 centuries ago and that USA in return, saved 2 times from a german domination last century.

fed_rulz
09-14-2012, 08:16 AM
Here's what I posted earlier -- funny all the "serena is more popular than the murray/djok" crowd chose not to address it:

tickets for mens SF and finals sold out long time ago.
tickets for women's finals was available even a few hrs before the match began.


yeah, it's a lot close when it comes to popularity!!

I was at the USO, paid 3x the price for the mens SF and finals as they were sold out even before the tournament began; after the Djoker SF, the USTA was calling on fans to buy tickets to the Serena/Azarenka finals, as they were still available (this is few hrs before the finals!!). I think that's an accurate representation of the interest level of fans.

of all reasons, to me, the one by cknobman makes the most sense (dvr set to record men's final on sunday). plus, men's tennis played on a weekday didn't help matters.

TMF
09-14-2012, 08:43 AM
When it comes to sport women plays the second fiddle. Even on a tennis board, there's a lot more discussion about men tennis than women tennis.

nereis
09-14-2012, 09:31 AM
To reach the OP's conclusion we would have to further control for:

1. Home player bias

2. Timeslot bias

3. Pre-match hype

Moreover, this is an attempt to run a comparable analysis with only two data points.

DRII
09-14-2012, 09:31 AM
Viva France!

DRII
09-14-2012, 09:32 AM
When it comes to sport women plays the second fiddle. Even on a tennis board, there's a lot more discussion about men tennis than women tennis.

Actually some said, I don't know if its true, that the womens tennis forum is the most popular by google search...

fuzzyball
09-14-2012, 10:20 AM
Actually some said, I don't know if its true, that the womens tennis forum is the most popular by google search...

Probably true, there are so much guys who just want to collect some pictures of kournikova, Sharapova's ***... As proves one of the most popular thread in this forum http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=87961

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-15-2012, 01:43 AM
When it comes to sport women plays the second fiddle. Even on a tennis board, there's a lot more discussion about men tennis than women tennis.

Yet there's more Serena-related threads (for just about anything) or trolls starting anti-WTA threads, perv-on-player threads than one can count. If the WTA could be disregarded to the degree suggested by some, then said threads would not exist at all....


...unless it just proves the long-known point about this board being overpopulated by trolls and their alternate user accounts.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-15-2012, 01:45 AM
Probably true, there are so much guys who just want to collect some pictures of kournikova, Sharapova's ***... As proves one of the most popular thread in this forum http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=87961

I doubt it is for that reason alone, as one can find pics like that all over the 'net without stopping by a tennis forum.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-15-2012, 01:49 AM
You are basing your theories on a time when tennis was much more popular in the US and that was largely due to Americans. So, a bit of work to do still. :)

Wrong--as the highly rated 2012 Wimbledon men's final (no Americans) is recent; the Rafter final simply proves the pattern is seen throughout history, so again, the nationalism argument is false.

fuzzyball
09-15-2012, 04:18 AM
Wrong--as the highly rated 2012 Wimbledon men's final (no Americans) is recent; the Rafter final simply proves the pattern is seen throughout history, so again, the nationalism argument is false.

What you say doesn't take anything out of the nationalism argument, what you fail to understandand (or do you just fake it) is that if nationalism is an indisputable factor that really has an impact on TV ratings, IT IS NOT THE ONLY ONE FACTOR to have an impact on the TV ratings, so it is useless to compare 2 events in the way you do to conclude that nationalism has no impact, it has an impact it is indisputable but simply sometimes there are other combined factors that have higher impacts on the tv rating than just nationalism.

For your point to be right, it would mean that out of the 300 000 000 of americans, with most of them who don't care much about tennis, 0 of them are in the case of beeing attracted in front of their TV by the presence of an american player in match that otherwise they wouldn't have watched if the match would have been without american, would you seriously maintain this?

fuzzyball
09-15-2012, 04:19 AM
I doubt it is for that reason alone, as one can find pics like that all over the 'net without stopping by a tennis forum.

If one can find pics of women tennis players all over the net, isn't a tennis forum supposed to be the place where it will be the easiest to find some and so where someone will logically use to search if he wants some?.

And who said that was the only one reason? Do you just live in a binary world?

vandre
09-15-2012, 04:36 PM
this shows that wta and atp are toe to toe when it comes to popularity, at least in the U.S, in fact more people watched the women's final last year

i think it's more likely that people tuned in expecting to see the men's final...:twisted:

pound cat
09-15-2012, 04:42 PM
I watched the womens' final and the calibre of tennis was much higher than what I saw in the mens' amd much more exciting & do not pay much attention to WTA during the year.

jt1224x0
09-16-2012, 01:15 PM
I watched the womens' final and the calibre of tennis was much higher than what I saw in the mens' amd much more exciting & do not pay much attention to WTA during the year.

Thank you! the men's final was a bore-fest

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-19-2012, 11:50 AM
If one can find pics of women tennis players all over the net, isn't a tennis forum supposed to be the place where it will be the easiest to find some and so where someone will logically use to search if he wants some?.

No, as female tennis players are celebrities, and are treated as such on innumerable celeb photo sites...so once again, no one needs to go to a tennis board if they're seeking images of female players.

And who said that was the only one reason? Do you just live in a binary world?[/QUOTE]

Your accusation flies in the face of its use in relation to "binary" in the formal or informal.

THUNDERVOLLEY
09-19-2012, 12:04 PM
What you say doesn't take anything out of the nationalism argument, what you fail to understandand (or do you just fake it) is that if nationalism is an indisputable factor that really has an impact on TV ratings, IT IS NOT THE ONLY ONE FACTOR to have an impact on the TV ratings


It is easy to refute your statements, because you--and others here--attempt to reject the rock that is repeated historical precedence where high ratings and all-foreign majors finals were concerned.

Historical patterns are not born from coincidence.

To continue, for anyone to start off in rejection mode of the oft-stated history leads me to conclude that this fact-challenged little group realizes said history cannot be rewritten to fit into the completely false "Serena only gets high ratings with U.S. audience because of her nationality" narrative, which I will remind you that none of this group have stepped up to provide evidence to support the argument (otherwise, it would have appeared days ago--on page 1). There's a reason for that lack of data, but it has more to do with certain members' pathological hated of Serena, than some "oversight" in the "quest of truth" (pure comedy).

TMF
09-19-2012, 12:09 PM
No, as female tennis players are celebrities, and are treated as such on innumerable celeb photo sites...so once again, no one needs to go to a tennis board if they're seeking images of female players.

And who said that was the only one reason? Do you just live in a binary world?

Maybe you want to visit this site, they have many cool pictures.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=341587

fuzzyball
09-19-2012, 12:16 PM
No, as female tennis players are celebrities, and are treated as such on innumerable celeb photo sites...so once again, no one needs to go to a tennis board if they're seeking images of female players.


Nobodody said it was needed to go on a tennis board to find images of female players, but it is still logically the best place to go for for someone who wants to find thoses kind of images, so tennis forums are boosted by the need for some peoples to find some female players pictures. This thread proves my point http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=6908188#post6908188, since it is one of the most popular thread of the tennis warehouse forum, it means the presence of female pictures in that thread boost the audience of this message board, and I wait with impatience to see how you will as usual distord the facts to declare that the kind of threads I've linked above have no impact on the the fact that threads related to female tennis are popular on the tennis message boards.

TMF
09-19-2012, 12:26 PM
Every tennis board has pictures of players. It's everywhere, to try to avoid it is merely impossible.

fuzzyball
09-19-2012, 12:48 PM
It is easy to refute your statements, because you--and others here--attempt to reject the rock that is repeated historical precedence where high ratings and all-foreign majors finals were concerned.

Nobody said that all-foreign majors can't obtain high audience in a country, are you just blind or do you fake to believe that someone said that? so I repeat once again, nationalism does have an impact on TV ratings, but there are many other factors than nationalism that have also positive or negative impacts on TV ratings, so when you see a good audience for an all foreign Final, it can't be used to say "nationalism have no impact", and for all the exemples of all-foreign finals that obtain high ratings, just imagine how much higher these ratings would have been if these finals would have beeen played by the same players but with just one of them who would have been american instead of his nationality of origin, imagine for exemple that steffi Graf would have been american, and imagine on the other side if Serena williams would have been Austrian instead of american, but I guess that I'm stupid to ask you this effort of imagination because you will say anyway that it wouldn't change anything on the TV ratings...


Historical patterns are not born from coincidence.

No they are born for multiple reasons, and anyway historical patterns actually proves that events with countrymen usually obtain higher TV ratings than event without countrymen, there are many exceptions to that rule, but they are only exceptions, not the rule, and it amazes me how to prove your points, you list some exceptions and act like if they were the usual rule by omiting to list the many more figures that prove that you are wrong.

To continue, for anyone to start off in rejection mode of the oft-stated history leads me to conclude that this fact-challenged little group realizes said history cannot be rewritten to fit into the completely false "Serena only gets high ratings with U.S. audience because of her nationality" narrative, which I will remind you that none of this group have stepped up to provide evidence to support the argument (otherwise, it would have appeared days ago--on page 1).

As ususal you distord the truth :

1/ I didn't see anybody saying that Serena ONLY gets high ratings with U.S. audience because of her nationality

I only saw peoples saying that her nationality has a positive impact on U.S. TV audience, which is a totally different thing than saying "Serena ONLY gets high ratings with U.S. audience because of her nationality"

"Serena only gets high ratings with U.S. audience because of her nationality"[/I] narrative, which I will remind you that none of this group have stepped up to provide evidence to support the argument (otherwise, it would have appeared days ago--on page 1).

Of course nobody provided evidence of that, simply because they don't have to, since as I said above, nobody said "Serena only gets high ratings with U.S. audience because of her nationality", on the other hand, since the begining of this thread multiple evidences that nationalism have an impact on TV ratings have been posted, but of course you won't aknowledge that.

Sid_Vicious
09-19-2012, 01:03 PM
I am happy that the WTAs popularity is not as low as people on this forum make it seem.

However, I think the US Open has been begging for low ratings for the past 5 years. Seriously, 4 p.m start on a Monday? The 2010 final was very entertaining, but it was a disaster as far as T.V. coverage was concerned. Monday start, rain delayed, and CBS decides to not show the conclusion of the match and allow the remainder of the match to be played on ESPN2.

They did not even show the trophy presentation that year. They just cut right to the pre-game show of a college football game.

Gizo
09-19-2012, 11:31 PM
It's great that the women's final got such excellent ratings.

However let's face it those high ratings were due to the popularity and star appeal of Serena, and not women's tennis as a whole. I doubt that many of the people who tuned in cared about who Serena's opponent was.

In fact Azarenka has been described as one of the most anonymous world no. 1 players in WTA history, often giving interviews in front of near empty press conference rooms. Plus she is hugely unpopular with crowds all over the world for obvious noise-related reasons.

Serena is the TV draw and the attraction. Even Sharapova who is also a genuine star got very poor TV ratings in the US for her fairly recent slam finals against Kvitova, Azarenka and Errani. However her Olympic final against Serena got excellent TV ratings. Go figure.

When Serena and Venus do eventually retire, women's tennis is going to decline drastically in popularity in the US, and be in terrible shape. Despite the huge number of players from Eastern Europe in the top 10/20/50 etc, women's tennis is not exactly hugely popular in many of those countries either, with Eurosport losing interest in the WTA.

Russia's home Fed Cup ties and the Kremlin Cup tournament in Moscow were often played in front of a sea of empty seats, despite Russia being such a powerhouse in women's tennis over the previous decade.