PDA

View Full Version : Woods vs Federer & Tennis vs Golf


byealmeens
02-07-2006, 09:45 AM
Let me first say that I personally believe tennis is fine. We've had more coverage the last couple years than I can recall - not to mention the new Tennis Channel. That being said, I do think there's a lot of room for improvement. I feel that tennis is still not viewed as a "real sport" by sports enthusiasts and the networks would rather show Seinfeld re-runs than a Grand Slam tennis match. I've also noticed quite a few threads that have touched on what "should be done" to get tennis back on the map. I don't really want to re-hash these concepts as I personally don't feel we should change our sport to accommodate changes in ratings. What I'd like to touch on is marketing & advertising. Is tennis marketed well? Do we advertise appropriately, and promote the sport well enough to increase ratings?

Some of you may have noticed a bit of discussion on this topic in another thread. Unfortunately, that was not the intention of the original post (my apologies if I managed to get off topic) so I'd like to re-visit this here. Personally, I find a good basis of comparison to be golf. There was a time when golf had many of the same labels as tennis - a sport for the rich, too snobbish, boring, etc. Though both sports have come a long way, I feel golf has made amazing strides in comparison. Today, it's difficult to find anyone that doesn't play golf at least a couple times a year, and even the fanatical football fan can be found on a Golf course now and again on Sunday afternoon. It's not considered a "sissy" sport anymore, it's now a "real" sport that everyone can enjoy. And even though it's still on the expensive side, you can sometimes find entire families on the Golf course, even the youngsters.

So what's going on? Did Tiger Woods revolutionize the game - in terms of popularity? Is his dominance that much more impressive than Roger Federer's dominance in tennis? Does Woods have a better personality than Federer, or is he more appealing in other ways? Is race an issue, in that Wood's impact on golf is more significant from a social standpoint? Or is the problem with tennis marketing? Is Woods promoted better than Federer? Does tennis tend to focus too much on gossip and controversy and too little on the sport? Does golf approach things differently? I have my own thoughts, but I'd like to read yours....

Moose Malloy
02-07-2006, 10:08 AM
Did Tiger Woods revolutionize the game - in terms of popularity?
Yes.

Is his dominance that much more impressive than Roger Federer's dominance in tennis?
Among the general sports media, yes. Don't know much about golf, but I gather what he is doing(or has done) is unprecedented in the sport(the margin of victory, setting course records, winning so many majors in a short time, etc) What Federer is doing is great, but not unprecedented(see Budge, Laver, McEnroe, Sampras etc.)

Does Woods have a better personality than Federer, or is he more appealing in other ways? Is race an issue, in that Wood's impact on golf is more significant from a social standpoint?
Yes. From interviews I've seen, Tiger is much more charismatic than Federer. He has a rare prescence like a Jordan or a McEnroe. He's very confident when he speaks & likes the limelight. Federer seems like a quiet shy guy who happens to be doing amazing things. Not sure he really cares for the attention.

And considering pro golf & pro tennis are 99% white, it's very understandable that more people(of all races) would be more interested in Tiger than Federer.

Or is the problem with tennis marketing? Is Woods promoted better than Federer?
I hear this "marketing" thing brought up in tennis a lot(with the doubles problem as well) I think it's BS. The reason the Williams sisters didn't cause a tennis boom like Tiger did for golf, shows that Americans just don't care for tennis. No amount of marketing, etc can change that. Tiger has been playing for many years now, its clear that he brought people to the game & they are staying there because they like the game, not just because of him.

tenalyser
02-07-2006, 10:16 AM
I feel that tennis is still not viewed as a "real sport" by sports enthusiasts and the networks would rather show Seinfeld re-runs than a Grand Slam tennis match. I've also noticed quite a few threads that have touched on what "should be done" to get tennis back on the map

:confused: I don't know where you live but tennis is viewed in all Europe as a sport? and i haven't seen threads that discussed getting tennis back on the map. And can I ask you a question are you from the States?


It's not considered a "sissy" sport anymore, it's now a "real" sport that everyone can enjoy. And even though it's still on the expensive side, you can sometimes find entire families on the Golf course, even the youngsters.


:mrgreen: I'm sorry but this had me laughing hard since when did golf get considered as a sport? I mean common how can you qualify this as a sport when a 74 year old man can play it without breaking a sweat. And in France golf is considered as a sissy sport. I put Golf and Chess in the same plate, in Golf the eye coordination is the most important and not the power (you can also add the mental strength if you want). And it really bugs me when people put golf in the same plate with real sports as Tennis, Soccer, and Basketball.

So what's going on? Did Tiger Woods revolutionize the game - in terms of popularity? Is his dominance that much more impressive than Roger Federer's dominance in tennis? Does Woods have a better personality than Federer, or is he more appealing in other ways? Is race an issue, in that Wood's impact on golf is more significant from a social standpoint? Or is the problem with tennis marketing? Is Woods promoted better than Federer? Does tennis tend to focus too much on gossip and controversy and too little on the sport? Does golf approach things differently? I have my own thoughts, but I'd like to read yours....

To answer your question he is an American I think that sums it up. If Woods wasn't black nor American golf wouldn't be so popular as it is. It quiet sad if you think about it now that there are no Americans dominating tennis the media in the States suddenly don't care anymore about tennis.:-(

vllockhart
02-07-2006, 10:22 AM
Let me first say that I personally believe tennis is fine. We've had more coverage the last couple years than I can recall - not to mention the new Tennis Channel. That being said, I do think there's a lot of room for improvement. I feel that tennis is still not viewed as a "real sport" by sports enthusiasts and the networks would rather show Seinfeld re-runs than a Grand Slam tennis match. I've also noticed quite a few threads that have touched on what "should be done" to get tennis back on the map. I don't really want to re-hash these concepts as I personally don't feel we should change our sport to accommodate changes in ratings. What I'd like to touch on is marketing & advertising. Is tennis marketed well? Do we advertise appropriately, and promote the sport well enough to increase ratings?

Some of you may have noticed a bit of discussion on this topic in another thread. Unfortunately, that was not the intention of the original post (my apologies if I managed to get off topic) so I'd like to re-visit this here. Personally, I find a good basis of comparison to be golf. There was a time when golf had many of the same labels as tennis - a sport for the rich, too snobbish, boring, etc. Though both sports have come a long way, I feel golf has made amazing strides in comparison. Today, it's difficult to find anyone that doesn't play golf at least a couple times a year, and even the fanatical football fan can be found on a Golf course now and again on Sunday afternoon. It's not considered a "sissy" sport anymore, it's now a "real" sport that everyone can enjoy. And even though it's still on the expensive side, you can sometimes find entire families on the Golf course, even the youngsters.

So what's going on? Did Tiger Woods revolutionize the game - in terms of popularity? Is his dominance that much more impressive than Roger Federer's dominance in tennis? Does Woods have a better personality than Federer, or is he more appealing in other ways? Is race an issue, in that Wood's impact on golf is more significant from a social standpoint? Or is the problem with tennis marketing? Is Woods promoted better than Federer? Does tennis tend to focus too much on gossip and controversy and too little on the sport? Does golf approach things differently? I have my own thoughts, but I'd like to read yours....

Ad nauseum with this topic.

Indiantwist
02-07-2006, 10:22 AM
:confused: I don't know where you live but tennis is viewed in all Europe as a sport? and i haven't seen threads that discussed getting tennis back on the map. And can I ask you a question are you from the States?




:mrgreen: I'm sorry but this had me laughing hard since when did golf get considered as a sport? I mean common how can you qualify this as a sport when a 74 year old man can play it without breaking a sweat. And in France golf is considered as a sissy sport. I put Golf and Chess in the same plate, in Golf the eye coordination is the most important and not the power (you can also add the mental strength if you want). And it really bugs me when people put golf in the same plate with real sports as Tennis, Soccer, and Basketball.



To answer your question he is an American I think that sums it up. If Woods wasn't black nor American golf wouldn't be so popular as it is. It quiet sad if you think about it now that there are no Americans dominating tennis the media in the States suddenly don't care anymore about tennis.:-(

It is true that a 74 yr old man can play Golf. What really matters is what is the objective of the game. Golf is different from Tennis. The games differ in what players should do to win it.

If you are talking sports as in Athletic ability, you do have a point. But then we have to take Formula1 out of sports (as those guys need driving skills but not necessarily need atheltic skills)

I have played both game and still continue to play. Any given day i would prefer Tennis instead of Golf but i dont dislike Golf.

Moose Malloy
02-07-2006, 10:25 AM
And in France golf is considered as a sissy sport.
Do you speak for all of France? What about that Val De Velde guy? Isn't he pretty popular in France?
There are many pro golf events in Europe & they have so much more prize money than in tennis. More $= more popular. Golf is more popular wordwide, not just in the US.

It quiet sad if you think about it now that there are no Americans dominating tennis the media in the States suddenly don't care anymore about tennis.
Uh, speaking as an American, the media & fans really didn't care about tennis in the 90s(the decade that was dominated by an American-Sampras)

byealmeens
02-07-2006, 10:29 AM
I'm sorry but this had me laughing hard since when did golf get considered as a sport? I mean common how can you qualify this as a sport when a 74 year old man can play it without breaking a sweat. And in France golf is considered as a sissy sport. I put Golf and Chess in the same plate, in Golf the eye coordination is the most important and not the power (you can also add the mental strength if you want). And it really bugs me when people put golf in the same plate with real sports as Tennis, Soccer, and Basketball.
Yes I do live in the US, and though I agree that tennis is more popular overseas, in the States, golf is doing significantly better. And yes, it IS considered a sport, more so than tennis is by many who watch sports. And though I personally agree that it requires more athletic ability to play tennis, I still feel tennis has this stigma of being "wussy", unlike football or basketball or even golf.

byealmeens
02-07-2006, 10:35 AM
I hear this "marketing" thing brought up in tennis a lot(with the doubles problem as well) I think it's BS. The reason the Williams sisters didn't cause a tennis boom like Tiger did for golf, shows that Americans just don't care for tennis. No amount of marketing, etc can change that. Tiger has been playing for many years now, its clear that he brought people to the game & they are staying there because they like the game, not just because of him.
Thanks for your input Moose. I agree that people play golf because they enjoy the game, and not because of Tiger - and that is what I wanted to address. Do you feel that tennis promotes more of the nonsense - what the women are wearing, who's hot and who's ugly, who can't get along with others - than the sport? This is where I personally feel tennis can improve. I think golf marketing is based more on promoting the sport, while tennis is not.... Wouldn't that get more people to play? Just a thought.

tenalyser
02-07-2006, 10:50 AM
Do you speak for all of France? What about that Val De Velde guy? Isn't he pretty popular in France?
There are many pro golf events in Europe & they have so much more prize money than in tennis. More $= more popular. Golf is more popular wordwide, not just in the US.


:confused: who the hell is Val De Velde? And because one Frenchman is pretty good at it doesn't mean that everyone likes it. And no Golf isn't as popular in Europe as In America ( may be in England :mrgreen: hahaha). But you're right about the prise money that is something I will never get how can you pay someone $10.000.000 just because he hit a small ball into hole ? You hardly even see Golf matches on TV if you don't have cable.

Yes I do live in the US, and though I agree that tennis is more popular overseas, in the States, golf is doing significantly better. And yes, it IS considered a sport, more so than tennis is by many who watch sports. And though I personally agree that it requires more athletic ability to play tennis, I still feel tennis has this stigma of being "wussy", unlike football or basketball or even golf.

If tennis is a wussy sport what is Golf then grandpa sport :roll: . But in all seriousness you seem like a big golf fan you do have to understand that this Tennis board, Tiger woods is a big inspiration for me and for almost every collard man/woman cause he managed to succeed in golf because it is always seen as a Whitman's "sport" but so are the Williams sisters their impact in sport is at least equal to Tiger Woods if not bigger.

jgunnink
02-07-2006, 10:55 AM
I think golf is more popular because it is truly a rich person's game. Rich golfers will pay money for anything, including midnight coverage of a tournament in Dubai.

I'm a casual golfer, but I am often amazed at how poor the programming is sometimes on the Golf Channel, and yet it's still successful. The commentators are humorless and wooden, sitting there in their stuffed shirts, not wanting to risk offending anyone.

So I don't think think it's how it's promoted, but the financial means of the fan base. People love that they can still play golf at 74, and by that time they actually afford it after saving all of their lives.

I went to a tournament here in San Francisco and thank god the tickets were complimentary from my wife's company because they were $60 a head for one day with $50 parking pass. Of course Tiger was there and it was great, but I think this air of exclusivity permeates the whole sport.

As one last point in this rambling post, let me say that every year the CEOs of major companies are ranked on their Golf handicaps. They don't mention their USTA ranking. Golf is the sport of business, and some measure of success on the course can translate to success in your career.

With all of this going for golf, I'm not surprised that tennis hasn't enjoyed the same success.

arnz
02-07-2006, 10:58 AM
If you enjoy tennis, then play tennis. If you like golf play golf. Stop worrying if other people like what you like, or if its popular or not.

Many people say they like football, or basketball, or baseball. What they really mean is that they like watching it. I think when most people say they like tennis, they actually mean they get out there and play it.

If the whole world stopped watching tennis, will you stop playing???

byealmeens
02-07-2006, 11:10 AM
If tennis is a wussy sport what is Golf then grandpa sport :roll: . But in all seriousness you seem like a big golf fan you do have to understand that this Tennis board, Tiger woods is a big inspiration for me and for almost every collard man/woman cause he managed to succeed in golf because it is always seen as a Whitman's "sport" but so are the Williams sisters their impact in sport is at least equal to Tiger Woods if not bigger.
I think you're missing my point. I'm not a golf fan at all. I'm a tennis fan that's wondering why tennis is not enjoying some of the same popularity that golf is. Maybe this is not an issue in France, but it is here....

hyperwarrior
02-07-2006, 11:13 AM
If you enjoy tennis, then play tennis. If you like golf play golf. Stop worrying if other people like what you like, or if its popular or not.

Many people say they like football, or basketball, or baseball. What they really mean is that they like watching it. I think when most people say they like tennis, they actually mean they get out there and play it.

If the whole world stopped watching tennis, will you stop playing???

Idem.

I never consider Golf like a real sport. I played mini-putt a few years back and it was fun. I should try golf one day. It seems to be fun to play but not fun to watch at all...

eric draven
02-07-2006, 11:19 AM
is largely the responsibility of the ATP and those that govern it. Unfortunately, it is difficult to market a sport as individual as tennis in its current format. You've got too many people vying for a number one slot that only one person can fill.

I would play up the drama of a tennis match. Put a microphone on the sidelines so we can hear the trashtalking. Mike up the area around the chair umpire so we can listen to those conversations. Give the players the right to challenge (where Shotspot technology is available). Allow coaches on court or during changeovers. Allow sideline questions from the media between sets.

Some or all of these adjustments could be made and still the basic integrity of the game would remain intact. The most popular players are often those that feed off of the crowd, show their personality, play to it and involve the fans. If they were to make it easier on the fans to see all that goes on in a tennis match more people would become interested.

Edward Clipperhands
02-07-2006, 11:29 AM
I've been playing tennis consistently since about 2001 and just picked up golf in the summer of 05. I never really cared much for golf or had an appreciation for it until I played it. Tennis was a sport that my parents generation viewed as for the wealthy. My sisters generation viewed tennis as a form of exercise and a way to stay fit. They both view golf as a boring sport played by wealthy professionals. So after asking them their views I looked introspectively as to my views on the sports. Starting with golf, it's hard to think of it as a sport because you can wear basically business casual clothes and if the weather is right, not break a sweat. Golf to me is competitive recreation. A means to get out the house for about 4-5 hours and just enjoy time with coworkers, clients, or buddies. I will say that when you hit a good shot or just hear that click of the ball on an iron when it is well struck, it's a great feeling. Tennis I enjoy playing and enjoy watching, I have players I like and always try to watch live when events are being played close to where I live. I play tennis to stay fit, socialize and because I love it. If I'm not playing, I feel like something in my life is missing. Golf I can go weeks between playing but then when I'm out on the range and have a good practice session, I want to get out there see what I can do. It's unfortunate that golf has more sponsors than tennis but like tennis is an iternational sport with a large following. I think people today have too many distractions and there are so many other sports that you play golf to relax from the other sports. How many pro atheletes golf? Even Rafael Nadal golfed to relax during Roland Garros. It's a sport you play when you have the money and the desire to get out there and test yourself.

byealmeens
02-07-2006, 12:05 PM
As one last point in this rambling post, let me say that every year the CEOs of major companies are ranked on their Golf handicaps. They don't mention their USTA ranking. Golf is the sport of business, and some measure of success on the course can translate to success in your career.
Very good point, and one I hadn't considered. It certainly does seem that golf is more associated with business. Even small companies sponsor their own "tournament" for employees. Rarely do you find a tennis tournament of this sort.

shawn1122
02-07-2006, 12:21 PM
And thats because anyone can play golf without any experience and still have some fun, whereas beginners playing tennis would just lost a lot of balls over the fence. Also, the fact that you actually break a sweat when you play tennis, makes it less appealing to "businessmen"

bigserving
02-07-2006, 12:51 PM
I enjoy golf and tennis but they are completey different games and really should not be compared to each other because they really don't have much in common.

Tennis does not translate to TV very well at all. The format of golf allows the announcers to build the drama from hole to hole and from shot to shot. Last weekend, Tiger Woods drove the green on one hole, perfectly straight and 349 yards. People can relate to how far he hit it. In tennis, it is difficult to feel how hard a 130 mph serve or 80 groundie is. We go to the courts with no radar and can only guess at the speeds. The speed of a tennis ball and the speed of the players does not translate to television at all.

A televised golf tourney may have ten or fifteen players with an outside chance to win beginning play on Sunday. With that many players, it is much easier for fans to find a favorite. In tennis, come the Sunday broadcast, there are only two players remaining. If one of those players is not one that fans like, or the match is a blowout, it makes for bad television. The TV broadcast will also replay great shots hit earlier in the day or the tourney.

Watching tennis in person can be spectacular you can see the whole court and every shot. Watching live golf can be pretty mundane. You watch one swing, then walk, wait, watch another swing.

The scenary at a golf tournament is much nicer than a tennis stadium.

In golf, you don't play against your opponent, you play against the course.

Golf is much better socially because anybody can play with anybody. A scratch golfer can compete against someone with a 20 handicap. A group of people of different skill levels can all play at the same time. In social tennis, a 5.0 will beat a 4.0 player 99% of the time. The better player almost always wins.

byealmeens
02-07-2006, 01:07 PM
And thats because anyone can play golf without any experience and still have some fun, whereas beginners playing tennis would just lost a lot of balls over the fence. Also, the fact that you actually break a sweat when you play tennis, makes it less appealing to "businessmen"
I agree that tennis is more difficult, particularly physically, and that golf can be played more leisurely. However I disagree that anyone can play golf without any experience. The first time I ever played golf, I had that same mentality, and it was no picnic. I had trouble making solid contact with the ball, and it took forever to finish 9 holes....

byealmeens
02-07-2006, 01:20 PM
I enjoy golf and tennis but they are completey different games and really should not be compared to each other because they really don't have much in common.

I disagree. What other "idividual" sport could we use for comparison? Also, golf and tennis were at one time both "country-club" sports. Now, even though it's cheaper to get on a tennis court than a golf course, tennis is probably still considered a sport for "spoiled rich kids".


Tennis does not translate to TV very well at all. The format of golf allows the announcers to build the drama from hole to hole and from shot to shot.
Maybe the format is different in that you can cut away to different players, but golf is still very LONG. I agree there's a lot of drama as you reach the end, yet we never see golf tournament coverage shortened to the last 9 holes. Tennis, on the other hand, ALWAYS gets accused of being too long. And how often have you only seen the last set of a 5-set grand slam match?

In golf, you don't play against your opponent, you play against the course.
I'm no golfer, but I'd have to disagree that golf tournaments are merely about the course. If that were the case Tiger would not dominate the way he has.

Golf is much better socially because anybody can play with anybody. A scratch golfer can compete against someone with a 20 handicap. A group of people of different skill levels can all play at the same time. In social tennis, a 5.0 will beat a 4.0 player 99% of the time. The better player almost always wins.
In an open tournament, golf is very similar to tennis. I agree that it can be more "social" as it is more leisurely, but I disagree that skill level makes no difference in golf. If you really wanted to, you could handicap tennis as well.

Shabazza
02-07-2006, 01:57 PM
If you are talking sports as in Athletic ability, you do have a point. But then we have to take Formula1 out of sports (as those guys need driving skills but not necessarily need atheltic skills)

Do you now how exhausting it is to drive a F1 car?! With all the G-forces, it requires a lot of fitness and stamina to drive 2 hours and even then you're dead tired afterwards. It is much more physical demanding and draining on the body than golf + you need great reflexes, you can't compare it with golf, imo!

And why is golf more popular and more people are playing it? the answer is easy, you don't have to be an athlete and working on your fitness day in and out, it's not as exhausting as other sports, you can have a chat with your friends/opponents etc. while playing!
In short it is way more appealing to normal people who don't want to work on their body or being in a fitness center. Those people are the majority, not only in the US. :-|
Sport is becoming something you rather watch on tv, than doing yourself and if you can do it without putting much effort into it, like golf, it clearly attracts more people to play than tennis or soccer etc.
Lets face it! Society has changed, people are becoming lazy and overweight.

TennisWooh
02-07-2006, 02:16 PM
I honestly don't mind tennis being too popular. It keeps the courts empty so I have a greater oppurtunity to play.

bigserving
02-07-2006, 02:27 PM
I disagree. What other "idividual" sport could we use for comparison? Also, golf and tennis were at one time both "country-club" sports. Now, even though it's cheaper to get on a tennis court than a golf course, tennis is probably still considered a sport for "spoiled rich kids"..

It should not take a lot of thought to understand. In golf there is not a thing that you could do to effect your opponent's shots, nothing. The ball goes exacly where they hit it and you cannot play defense of any kind. If I play by myself and shoot 82, then I shot 82. It would be the same 82 if there were three others playing with me or tourney field of 50. There is nothing anyone can do to effect my shots.

In tennis, the game is direct competition. Every shot I hit, effects my opponent and vice versa. One ball in play, both players hit it.

Maybe the format is different in that you can cut away to different players, but golf is still very LONG. I agree there's a lot of drama as you reach the end, yet we never see golf tournament coverage shortened to the last 9 holes. Tennis, on the other hand, ALWAYS gets accused of being too long. And how often have you only seen the last set of a 5-set grand slam match?.

Tennis gets accused of being long because it is often the same thing over and over for hours. We know about how long a football, baseball, basketball game will last. We even know about how long 18 holes of pro golf will last. When a tennis match is scheduled for the best of 5 sets, it may be five sets five hours, or three sets hour and a half. It is difficult to make a television schedule when no one really knows how long a given match will last.

I'm no golfer, but I'd have to disagree that golf tournaments are merely about the course. If that were the case Tiger would not dominate the way he has..

I am a golfer and that is exactly why Tiger Woods dominates. He is the best player against the golf courses and there is nothing that any of his opponents can do about it. When Tiger plays at or near his best, he will win. Andy Roddick is a great tennis player. I think that most would agree that the more backhands and volleys that his opponent can make him hit, the better chance they will have of winning.

In an open tournament, golf is very similar to tennis. I agree that it can be more "social" as it is more leisurely, but I disagree that skill level makes no difference in golf. If you really wanted to, you could handicap tennis as well.

Do you think that a 5.0 player, preparing for a tournament, would ever call a 3.5 player for a competetive match. A scratch golfer, ten handicap, twenty handicap, and a beginner could all play in a competetive foursome together. Four tennis players of vastly different skill levels can never play competetive match.

I am interested to hear your format on how to handicap a tennis match?

byealmeens
02-08-2006, 05:57 AM
It should not take a lot of thought to understand. In golf there is not a thing that you could do to effect your opponent's shots, nothing. The ball goes exacly where they hit it and you cannot play defense of any kind. If I play by myself and shoot 82, then I shot 82. It would be the same 82 if there were three others playing with me or tourney field of 50. There is nothing anyone can do to effect my shots.

In tennis, the game is direct competition. Every shot I hit, effects my opponent and vice versa. One ball in play, both players hit it.
I agree with you, but I don't think you're understanding my point. Yes, golf is different - of course it is, I'm not claiming that they are identical. But then what two sports are? My point was, as a means of comparison, especially when looking at the change in popularity from "country-club" beginnings, golf is a great choice as a comparison to tennis. If not, what other sport would you compare to tennis??

Tennis gets accused of being long because it is often the same thing over and over for hours. We know about how long a football, baseball, basketball game will last. We even know about how long 18 holes of pro golf will last. When a tennis match is scheduled for the best of 5 sets, it may be five sets five hours, or three sets hour and a half. It is difficult to make a television schedule when no one really knows how long a given match will last.
I agree, and this is a very important point. Tennis can be more unpredictable in length versus other sports. Despite that, even if all tennis was shown taped, do you think they would condense a 5-set match to 2 or 3 hours, or just show the games they think we "need" to see. I guess my point is, tennis isn't popular enough to be worthy of 4 or 5 hour sections of programming that golf tournaments or football games seem to get easily.

I am a golfer and that is exactly why Tiger Woods dominates. He is the best player against the golf courses and there is nothing that any of his opponents can do about it. When Tiger plays at or near his best, he will win. Andy Roddick is a great tennis player. I think that most would agree that the more backhands and volleys that his opponent can make him hit, the better chance they will have of winning.
Again, I agree that there are obvious differences between the two sports. I still have to politely disagree with you about golf. I would think it's much tougher to make a birdie on a certain hole at a tournament, knowing that the guy you're paired with just did, or getting to 2 under par knowing that you HAVE to. That's REAL pressure, and not like playing the course by yourself. It's not "direct" competition per se, but it certainly isn't just about the golf course. Much like shooting free throws in basketball - a lot harder during the actual game, especially when it really matters.

federerhoogenbandfan
02-08-2006, 07:24 AM
Personally I find Tiger Woods boring as heck, extremely arrogant and self-absorbed, and I actualy cheer for him to lose when I watch golf on TV. I know I am in the minority though. For some odd reason people seem to think he has charisma and personality, and is a classy guy, but most importantly he is American thus explaining his extreme popular relative to a non-American who is equaly dominant.

BLA7625
02-08-2006, 08:00 AM
I think that attitude towards the game in North America is primarily a result of our attitude towards all sports on this continent. The "sport" is as much about entertainment as at is about sport itself. How many people watching football can tell one formation from the next? How many people watching hockey see more than "angry Canadians with no teeth"? How many people actually realize that the Jazz have been running a screen on every possession of their offense in the last 18 years? How many people watch tennis with an agenda other than "turn your head to the left, turn your head to the right"? The answer is..... not many. Most people coming to the US open courts can't tell a slice from the topspin, let alone other things that go on during the game - nervousness, choking, footwork, shot-making, reading the opponent, etc.

I love sports in general and love tennis more than any other sport. But there is life outside of sports for all of us. Coming home after working for 12 or more hrs is a relief. Last thing you want to do is think. Simple, in some cases stupid entertainment is enough to keep me watching to relax. As such, most sports "fans" are really fans of having a beer while watching sports. And it is also a reason why people go to hockey games not to watch a zone trap but to watch a fight.

North America is fairly narrow-focused with respect to sports. I think we have lucked out a bit with tennis as it could have been worse. I never see any sports shown on TV that were accessible in Europe (handball, table tennis, volleyball, skiing, etc). So why?

There is no "drama". No one is beating each other up, no collisions, and no huge contracts to report. Soccer is the most popular game on the planet but not in NA. Cause it's impossible to advertise during the game; hence it's impossible to bring in revenues for the TV station, hence no one will show it.

Additionally, americans are very patriotic. This is neither a put down nor a compliment, but more of a statement of fact. As a result of this trait, we are ready to jump on a bandwagon of any american doing well (which is great), but at the same time, most of us could care less about a Swiss, British, Croatian, or Polish doing well. Oh, and should the French win a US open..:) I don't even want to think about it, they might rename the French Open to the Freedom Open the next time they show it on USA network ;)

We can't have a Tiger in tennis b/c we already had Arthur Ashe. Should Scoville Jenkings become #1 in the world, he would only be a second Arthur Ashe and not a pioneer.

Personally, I think the game is fine, with a lot of characters, personalities and drama within the game itself. Marketing the game can be improved. However, I just can't see a construction worker in Oklahoma getting interested in Roger Federer after a day outside. He probably just wants to have his beer and watch some highschool football. I don't think I could change his mind. Until Sharapova and the rest of the Russian army starts playing naked, I don't think we can stir up his interests. Nor should we. What bothers me are the sports shows. The so-called "experts in all sports". When it comes to tennis, it is so clear that they have no clue about the game. Why on earth is Dick Enberg in the booth? What is Rod Smith doing in the booth commenting on Cdn Open? That shouldn't happen. All I know that it won't get the kids interested in the game.

frekcles
02-08-2006, 08:39 AM
What I'd like to touch on is marketing & advertising. Is tennis marketed well? Do we advertise appropriately, and promote the sport well enough to increase ratings?

So what's going on? Did Tiger Woods revolutionize the game - in terms of popularity? Is his dominance that much more impressive than Roger Federer's dominance in tennis? Does Woods have a better personality than Federer, or is he more appealing in other ways? Is race an issue, in that Wood's impact on golf is more significant from a social standpoint? Or is the problem with tennis marketing? Is Woods promoted better than Federer? Does tennis tend to focus too much on gossip and controversy and too little on the sport? Does golf approach things differently? I have my own thoughts, but I'd like to read yours....

Just my two cents. Coming from golf and recently taking up tennis I noticed that the marketing for golf is bigger, directed in general towards various people (men, women, juniors, seniors, rich, underpriviledged). Also with regards to Tiger Wood's popularity he's been hyped since he was 5 - remember the show with Bob Hope? So basically he's had a head start compared to Tennis players like Roger, Pete, Andy, and JonnyMac. Golf appeals to the masses because of players like John Daly from Arkansas who came out of nowhere to win a major championship. It has rivalries like Woods vs. Els, Woods vs. Garcia, Woods vs. Singh.

Like BLA7625 says "Additionally, americans are very patriotic. This is neither a put down nor a compliment, but more of a statement of fact. As a result of this trait, we are ready to jump on a bandwagon of any american doing well (which is great), but at the same time, most of us could care less about a Swiss, British, Croatian, or Polish doing well."

But in the end it's just a hobby or a sport depending on who you ask. I will play both golf and tennis unti I could no longer lift a club or a racquet. I like golf because it's sort of a stress relief. I like tennis because it keeps me fit. I'll continue to play both and not really care which one is more popular or which has better marketing.:)

Richard Pur
02-08-2006, 09:50 AM
I've played golf and tennis since high school (in the late 70's) and here are some of my observations/theories on the subject:

- In terms of popularity, golf can retain the fan base for a very long time. For example, someone who grew up in the 50's can still watch Arnold Palmer on a fairly regular basis on the senior tour. When's the last time anyone even saw Ivan Lendl or Jimmy Connors play. These were giants of the game (even though Ivan wasn't popular from a personality standpoint) and yet, even though they are not that old, they're nowhere to be found. So people that were associated with tennis during that generation may be less inclined to keep up with the game or watch it on TV (they might not be interested in watching the Williams sisters).

- A big hype was made about Tiger Woods when he turned pro, but he proved himself right away, and continues to do so. A lot of non-tennis people all of a sudden knew who Maria Sharapova was when she won Wimbledon, but has she really come through? I don't think so. There are a bunch of under achievers out there (especially Americans). Look at Roddick. Look at Ginepri. He does well at the USO, then loses early in the AO. Who can Americans attach themselves to? Result, less popularity of tennis in the US.

- As mentioned by someone else here, you see a lot of corporate golf outings. Golf outings for charity as well. Don't see that for tennis. You can also talk business while on the golf course. Can't do that during a social game of doubles.

- The basic game of tennis has changed more than golf. While technology has certainly affected the game of golf, you still have to have finnesse and a short game to win and you still have to hit all the shots to get the ball in the hole. In tennis now, power can win. There are not many players with a complete game. This can possibly affect the old timers as they may not care to watch all the 140 mph serves with minimal (if any) shots afterwards.

- When's the last time ESPN Classics had an old tennis match on. When ESPN Classics first started up, I remember watching some old tennis matches. Are these only done on the Tennis Channel?

- Playing tennis depends on someone else's schedule as well as your own. In golf, you can go to the driving range or play on a course yourself. You can also practice putting on your carpet.

- You don't have to be in shape to play golf. People latch onto John Daly as an inspiration because he can win tournaments being in the same shape as a couch potato.

There are other aspects of the two sports that lend themselves to golf being more popular I'm sure.

It's pretty sad, though,watching the demise of tennis. I foresee the further fall of tennis as the old hardcore park district-type tennis buffs die off and the much-too-busy generation of today can't fill their shoes (or courts). Today's parents don't have the luxury of letting the kids out the door in the morning and have them come home in the evening for dinner. Too many sickoes out there and the kids' friends are too spread out (so the parents have to be a taxi cab and have less time for themselves). Look how hard it is to field teams in USTA and find people for individual matches. People have to prioritize and tennis loses.

How can a large city like Chicago not attract a tennis tournament? We can't even get a charity event with any big names? But yet we have the Western Open for golf as well as a couple of other events (Nike tour, etc.).

Tennis will be a smaller community with less places to play. That's my theory and I hope that I'm wrong. Tennis is a great game, and the one day a week that I sometimes find to play it keeps me feeling young and energetic.

My $0.02.


Rich

jgunnink
02-08-2006, 10:29 AM
I played tennis on my high school team (#6 singles and that was the coach being nice to me because I was on time for practice.) My biggest gripe about tennis is that since then it's hard to find a game.

I don't belong to a racquet club, so there's no natural casual environment for finding playing partners. I tried a league last year where you call a list of players to arrange matches, meet on public courts, and keep track of your record. I found it hard to get people to commit to coming. Some didn't even return calls. I finished 2-2 out of a potential 8 matches I was to play.

Due to the nature of tennis, the quality of your opponent means everything to the enjoyment of it. If the skill level is too mismatched, both sides are liable to get frustrated. When at the public courts, I noticed many long standing Saturday games between people who seem to have played against each other forever. I sometimes wonder if these are the only people they play against, for fear of the mismatch and subsequent disappointment.

Golf, on the other hand, can be enjoyed as a single. You usually get placed with an incomplete 2-some or 3-some and the only way you can really screw it up is if you don't play ready golf. One day I had a great time playing with 3 Korean men who spoke very little English. You can still complement each other shots. As another poster mentioned, it's everyone against the course.

Still I think golf has it's own challenges in terms of the popularity perspective as I still think it's too expensive for just anyone to pick up. With all the free public courts in the U.S., tennis is the more populist sport by far. I think we should draw a distinction between the popularity of a sport as it's played by joe everyman and how marketable it is for television.

From my perspective, I am happy seeing mainly the slams on TV. This is four fortnights of fun a year. Does tennis need to be more popular?

Moose Malloy
02-08-2006, 10:46 AM
Great post, Rich.

BLA7625
02-08-2006, 11:26 AM
Rich, I also hope you're wrong; but I believe you are right. You brought up a number of great points. Thinking of it, every big city in the US and Canada can have tournaments as they most certainly have the funds and should have sponsors lining up too. Chicago, Houston, Seattle, Vancouver, Washington, Boston - we are challenging you to splurge a fraction of your budgets on tennis tournaments :)

byealmeens
02-08-2006, 11:39 AM
Personally I find Tiger Woods boring as heck, extremely arrogant and self-absorbed, and I actualy cheer for him to lose when I watch golf on TV. I know I am in the minority though. For some odd reason people seem to think he has charisma and personality, and is a classy guy, but most importantly he is American thus explaining his extreme popular relative to a non-American who is equaly dominant.
I'm with you. Though I am extremely impressed with Tiger's game, I've never thought he had much personality. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. I am a big Federer fan, not just of his game, but of his class and championship attitude off the court. He really carrys himself like a "true" champion, and represents the game well. Yet, more people seem to find him boring and arrogant, and this just baffles me. Tiger seems to do no wrong....

byealmeens
02-08-2006, 11:45 AM
We can't have a Tiger in tennis b/c we already had Arthur Ashe. Should Scoville Jenkins become #1 in the world, he would only be a second Arthur Ashe and not a pioneer.
Good point. I suppose that's why so many feel Federer adds nothing new to tennis. He's just another dominant player. It's a shame, because I doubt we'll see another player like him.

byealmeens
02-08-2006, 11:48 AM
Just my two cents. Coming from golf and recently taking up tennis I noticed that the marketing for golf is bigger, directed in general towards various people (men, women, juniors, seniors, rich, underpriviledged). Also with regards to Tiger Wood's popularity he's been hyped since he was 5 - remember the show with Bob Hope? So basically he's had a head start compared to Tennis players like Roger, Pete, Andy, and JonnyMac. Golf appeals to the masses because of players like John Daly from Arkansas who came out of nowhere to win a major championship. It has rivalries like Woods vs. Els, Woods vs. Garcia, Woods vs. Singh.
Very true. I wish tennis could focus on getting more diversity in the game, and getting more people to play. Maybe it will never have the "social" appeal of golf, but it can certainly do better.

Moose Malloy
02-08-2006, 11:52 AM
Thinking of it, every big city in the US and Canada can have tournaments as they most certainly have the funds and should have sponsors lining up too. Chicago, Houston, Seattle, Vancouver, Washington, Boston - we are challenging you to splurge a fraction of your budgets on tennis tournaments

You realize some of those cities used to have tournaments? Back in the 80s when tennis was really popular in the US? Face it, the tennis business in North America is a losing business. There just isn't any interest in the sport. And Rich nailed many of the reasons why.
Chicago,Philadelphia,Dallas were among the most important stops on tour in the 80s. Now they are gone.

byealmeens
02-08-2006, 11:55 AM
It's pretty sad, though,watching the demise of tennis. I foresee the further fall of tennis as the old hardcore park district-type tennis buffs die off and the much-too-busy generation of today can't fill their shoes (or courts). Today's parents don't have the luxury of letting the kids out the door in the morning and have them come home in the evening for dinner. Too many sickoes out there and the kids' friends are too spread out (so the parents have to be a taxi cab and have less time for themselves). Look how hard it is to field teams in USTA and find people for individual matches. People have to prioritize and tennis loses.

How can a large city like Chicago not attract a tennis tournament? We can't even get a charity event with any big names? But yet we have the Western Open for golf as well as a couple of other events (Nike tour, etc.).

Tennis will be a smaller community with less places to play. That's my theory and I hope that I'm wrong. Tennis is a great game, and the one day a week that I sometimes find to play it keeps me feeling young and energetic.

My $0.02.


Rich
Excellent points. I've always wondered about Chicago myself. Can't believe tennis is so unpopular in such a large town. I've been there many times, and could hardly ever find a game.

I also hope tennis can turn things around. My point has been that maybe changing focus toward promoting the sport instead of the nonsense would get more people interested in the game. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe golf has the advantage of being more "social" and simply "easier" to play. I just think if more people could get a real taste of tennis, they would agree that it is a great sport. Unfortunately, I don't see any attempts in that regard.

frekcles
02-08-2006, 12:10 PM
I'm with you. Though I am extremely impressed with Tiger's game, I've never thought he had much personality. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. I am a big Federer fan, not just of his game, but of his class and championship attitude off the court. He really carrys himself like a "true" champion, and represents the game well. Yet, more people seem to find him boring and arrogant, and this just baffles me. Tiger seems to do no wrong....
Right after he turned pro he sort of alienated most of the golfers who were used to conservative ways of expression with his fist pumps. I don't think he is arrogant or serlf-absorbed like Fedhoogenbandfan says. It's self-confidence. He walks into a locker room knowing that he will beat most of the competitors that day. Same with Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Federer, Sampras, etc. Some people look at it as being arrogant. It's just confidence knowing and believing that you will win.

BLA7625
02-08-2006, 12:20 PM
You realize some of those cities used to have tournaments? Back in the 80s when tennis was really popular in the US? Face it, the tennis business in North America is a losing business. There just isn't any interest in the sport. And Rich nailed many of the reasons why.
Chicago,Philadelphia,Dallas were among the most important stops on tour in the 80s. Now they are gone.

So how do we do that? How do we turn it around? What can we do to get tennis back on the map. Millions of fans are on this website all the time. There has to be some corporate sponsorship interests? I don't care who wants to slap their logo on commercials and signs. As long as kids gets exposed to the greatest players in the world. I am sure all of us feel the same way. It's a shame not to see tennis in Philly and Dallas and other cities. I believe more exposure equals more interest, more kids involved, more coaches more academies. But it all starts with interest. Whehter it's a live tournament (which is best) or media (second best). Any ideas out there?

PS: If you guys think it's bad in the US take a trip North of the border. Up here in Canada no one cares about tennis (but I suppose that's true of all sports here that are not played on ice with sticks).

dudero
02-08-2006, 12:26 PM
Comparing tennis and golf's popularity is kind of like comparing Mirka and Elin...

Max G.
02-08-2006, 12:41 PM
If you enjoy tennis, then play tennis. If you like golf play golf. Stop worrying if other people like what you like, or if its popular or not.

Many people say they like football, or basketball, or baseball. What they really mean is that they like watching it. I think when most people say they like tennis, they actually mean they get out there and play it.

If the whole world stopped watching tennis, will you stop playing???

Amen. :)

mr2union
02-08-2006, 12:52 PM
Rich pointed out most of the reasons why Golf can sustain its popularity while Tennis can't. I completely agree.

I just want to add one point, golf is easily accessible now in the US while tennis is less accessible.

Golf is such a social "sport". Most folks can group together and just hit balls at the range during lunch. They don't even need to change their outfit. Shirts and pants and even in their dress shoes, you can hit golf balls for 30 minutes at the range. No need to cut work, school or anything. These folks don't even have to be at a similar skill level. Finding an open spot at a driving range is not too hard either. Golfers can even take turns at the same spot at a range.

The same can't happen in the world of tennis. Tennis players needs to put on shorts, sneakers, crack open a new can of balls (I haven't yet seen a vending machine at a tennis court which sells tennis balls). After the game, it is almost a must to take a shower before doing anything else. A tennis outting can't just be over with in 30 minutes. From the preparation to travelling to playing to the after math, you are talking at least 90 minutes of exercise. Plus, finding an open court may not be easy on a sunny day.

All in all, at least in the US, it takes a more serious tennis player to keep playing tennis. On the other hand, any golfer can continue to play golf since it is so easily accessible.

Richard Pur
02-09-2006, 10:11 AM
I'm with you. Though I am extremely impressed with Tiger's game, I've never thought he had much personality. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. I am a big Federer fan, not just of his game, but of his class and championship attitude off the court. He really carrys himself like a "true" champion, and represents the game well. Yet, more people seem to find him boring and arrogant, and this just baffles me. Tiger seems to do no wrong....

Let me add a new twist here. Are the recent tennis stars Federer, Sampras, and I'll throw in Edberg, Wilander - the stars who are quiet and don't give into the commercialism - actually hurting the game by doing so? I think so. It comes with the territory, that if you are a dominant force in your sport that you should sell the sport. And if that means you are getting paid millions of dollars to sell the Rebel camera or Nike clothes or shoes like Agassi, so be it. There is great exposure for the sport to those people who don't necessarily care for tennis. I'm sure there were a few non-tennis fanatics watching Agassi in the USO, because he has become a great ambassador for the sport. These other stars, even though they are not accepting money for the racquet of clothes to the degree that they could, might not seem to be selfish, but they are since they are shutting out the world with their lives. If Tiger Woods was the same way, golf would not be as big as it is. Who cares if Retief Gossen wins the OS Open, he has zero personality. Tiger Woods has accepted the roll of being an ambassador for the game, just like Arnold Palmer did 50 years ago.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Look at the movie stars that want fame and fortune, and then complain about not having a private life. While the paparazzi if getting out of control, in general, without those pictues in the paper and magazines, they wouldn't be stars, and they wouldn't have the huge mansions and millions of dollars.

Look at what Jordan and Bird did for the NBA? Does that guy Duncan from the Spurs sell the game? No. He's a great player, but not an ambassador. The NBA is fading away too.

What we need is Federer to date Sharapova (like Connors and Evert) and for him to sell Ipods or something. And have Roddick, Federer, and some other big names do a few smaller round robin-type events across the country in some big cities (they can start with Chicago). Roddick has tried to do more, Saturday night live, American Express. But if his tennis fizzles, that effort will be wasted.

So what can we the grinders do for the game? Probably not much more than we do now, play the game. But the pros can do a lot more.

Rich

federerhoogenbandfan
02-09-2006, 10:20 AM
I'm with you. Though I am extremely impressed with Tiger's game, I've never thought he had much personality. This is one of the reasons I started this thread. I am a big Federer fan, not just of his game, but of his class and championship attitude off the court. He really carrys himself like a "true" champion, and represents the game well. Yet, more people seem to find him boring and arrogant, and this just baffles me. Tiger seems to do no wrong....

It is good to know somebody else shares some of my feelings on Tiger, and Roger for that matter. I too am extremely impressed with the great Tiger Woods skills, his diverse and extraordinary talents, and his competitive instinct and knack for coming through in the clutch(very Roger-like I might add :p ). However I have never noticed what makes him that exciting, or interesting, or charismatic, as far as his personality or
character on or off the golf field, because he pumps his fist after making a good putt sometimes? Sorry does not do it for me. I too find Roger to be very selfless and humble, and he does his best off the court to represent the game as the leader that he is.

Fedubai
02-09-2006, 02:46 PM
These other stars, even though they are not accepting money for the racquet of clothes to the degree that they could, might not seem to be selfish, but they are since they are shutting out the world with their lives. If Tiger Woods was the same way, golf would not be as big as it is. Who cares if Retief Gossen wins the OS Open, he has zero personality. Tiger Woods has accepted the roll of being an ambassador for the game, just like Arnold Palmer did 50 years ago.

You're saying that if your a greedy commercial freak, not a sports athlete but a living markerketing machine, then accpeting your role? Then you're a good ambassador? Please.

What makes Federer different and more credible, in my opinion, than Tiger Woods is precisely that he has not done that. He's pretty real. That's why when he speaks, I usually take a moment to hear what the man has to say, because I know that he means it, that he actually thinks about what he says. He isn't just marketing a view or selling something. He's a great ambassador because he's brought dignity and honour to the sport. He carries himself with class, he's personable, honest, genuine.

He isn't a huge company with Nike stamped on his soul, directing his style, actions, words. It's normal people that I think tennis needs to market to....Federer is the perfect guy for that. A lot of people listen to him because he doesn't shoot his mouth off with outrageous and arrogant comments.

I turn off a lot of today's stars because they are just living in a different world. That's all you can say about them.

Moose Malloy
02-09-2006, 03:00 PM
It's normal people that I think tennis needs to market to....Federer is the perfect guy for that. A lot of people listen to him because he doesn't shoot his mouth off with outrageous and arrogant comments.

Who are these "lot of people" that listen to Fed?
No one listens to him now & no one ever will without more marketing(isn't his team making an effort to get him more endorsements?)
I don't think Tiger says anything outrageous or arrogant. He does make some really cool comercials that appeal to me, since I could care less about golf. When I see that "there are no rainy days" commercial, I pay attention & my interest in the sport goes up just a little.
Tennis is dead as a doornail in the US(& in Germany as well I hear) Marketing Federer's normal boring personality isn't going to bring any new fans to the game. He doesn't need to be outrageous, just have a good commercial director. Heck, Nike even made some cool Sampras commercials back in the day: "and my opponent, history is wondering what to do..."

Do you think Agassi is some greedy commercial freak? I think it's pretty stupid for someone to turn down easy money(for something that will also help the sport), if that's what Fed is doing.

Shabazza
02-09-2006, 04:21 PM
Who are these "lot of people" that listen to Fed?
No one listens to him now & no one ever will without more marketing(isn't his team making an effort to get him more endorsements?)
I don't think Tiger says anything outrageous or arrogant. He does make some really cool comercials that appeal to me, since I could care less about golf. When I see that "there are no rainy days" commercial, I pay attention & my interest in the sport goes up just a little.
Tennis is dead as a doornail in the US(& in Germany as well I hear) Marketing Federer's normal boring personality isn't going to bring any new fans to the game. He doesn't need to be outrageous, just have a good commercial director. Heck, Nike even made some cool Sampras commercials back in the day: "and my opponent, history is wondering what to do..."

Do you think Agassi is some greedy commercial freak? I think it's pretty stupid for someone to turn down easy money(for something that will also help the sport), if that's what Fed is doing.
If u think that'll work in the US, fine, but sorry it isn't Federer's duty to promote tennis in the US while doing some ads, commercials or even those small exhibitions R. Pur suggested. If Roddick couldn't do a **** to promote tennis in the USA, Fed clearly can't. He might be the best player ever, but he is NOT AMERICAN. He is no Agassi, Sampras, JMac or Connors - he can't reach the average sportsfan in America. That's why his focus is on the asian market right now, which has HUGE potential and those people take him as he is, without the need for him to be someone else: no stupid commercials, no arrogant statements to create controversity, NO NEED TO DATE SHARAPOVA :rolleyes: .
He has realized that the US won't accept and embrace him the way he is, thus he's promoting tennis where they do and rightly so. Face it, America isn't the only tennis market on earth. It's the biggest no question, but if their own tennis player can't reach their fans, what should he do?!
The population in Asia is 3.5 billion, half the world population, it has huge potential. Many people, including me, don't think Federer is boring. His following in Asia, esp. China is growing rapidly - seems like he's doing something right there, even so he remains true to himself!

devila
02-09-2006, 05:01 PM
Look at the spin in this thread.