American commentators affect the popularity of tennis?

[BeHappy]

Sometimes I am forced to watch tennis on the internet, often with American comentators like Justin Gimelstob, Patrick McEnroe or Mary Carillo etc.

You have TERRIBLE commentators who have bad speaking voices, talk WAY too much and always right through the point, often aren't even talking about the match a lot of the time. I mean "THE DROPPER!"?

Back when you had Tony Trabert, one of the absolute greatest players of all time commentating it was great:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoJpd4wJ-aA

But the commentators you have now approach it like it's radio, and they don't want "dead air". It's terrible, and I wonder if it's affecting the popularity of the sport in your country?

[marc45]

Originally Posted by BeHappy

Sometimes I am forced to watch tennis on the internet, often with American comentators like Justin Gimelstob, Patrick McEnroe or Mary Carillo etc.

You have TERRIBLE commentators who have bad speaking voices, talk WAY too much and always right through the point, often aren't even talking about the match a lot of the time. I mean "THE DROPPER!"?

Back when you had Tony Trabert, one of the absolute greatest players of all time commentating it was great:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoJpd4wJ-aA

But the commentators you have now approach it like it's radio, and they don't want "dead air". It's terrible, and I wonder if it's affecting the popularity of the sport in your country?

good question...i'd like to see a detailed study, seriously

[The Bawss]

I think Courier is good. And Agassi was a great commentator once during the US Open.

I know Rusedski isn't american but when he is commentating Wimbledon, I die a little inside.

[TheF1Bob]

Absolutley. Here in the UK, we don't get it alot compared to you guys but for the FO, they've brought Courier on ITV 4 for the commantary and boy... the biggest ******* and Nole hater outside TT lol. And he never shuts up too haha.

[TheF1Bob]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

I think Courier is good. And Agassi was a great commentator once during the US Open.

I know Rusedski isn't american but when he is commentating Wimbledon, I die a little inside.

Rusedski needs to go, the biggest hypocrite there is, he has no choice but to cheer Djokovic now as he's world No.1 but before.... don't get me started.

[skip1969]

well, the commentators aren't helping, that's for sure.

but seriously, tennis is a niche sport in this country. and the casual tennis fan is like a miami heat fan: they only show up when times are good. i think the fact that the top ten isn't festooned with americans is the main reason there's not more buzz.

[Moose Malloy]

Back when you had Tony Trabert, one of the absolute greatest players of all time commentating it was great:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoJpd4wJ-aA

we also used to have Bud Collins, Dick Enberg, Barry McKay, & Donald Dell.

I remember readers writing many nasty letters to Tennis magazine in the 80s about how these guys talked too much/were ruining their enjoyment of tennis on tv.

What I've noticed about tennis commentary & writing is how fanboyesque they all sound now. John McEnroe said Raonic has 'one of the best serves of all time' yesterday. really? and after '08 Wimbledon, the SI cover said 'the best match ever.'

I never heard stuff like that in the 80s (and surely someone like Becker probably did have one of the best serves of all time in the mid 80s. maybe Bobo Zivojinovic as well. but no one ever said it, that I recall. and SI didn't call Borg-McEnroe the 'best match ever' in 1980)

why is every commentator so eager to say 'best ever' whatever about so many players today?

but seriously, tennis is a niche sport in this country. and the casual tennis fan is like a miami heat fan: they only show up when times are good. i think the fact that the top ten isn't festooned with americans is the main reason there's not more buzz.

ratings dropped like a log in the 90s compared to the late 80s. and americans dominated the 90s. weird that so many fans/commentators think this, its like we all forget how little sampras' great success in the 90s did as far as ratings etc here. I mean lendl-becker/lendl-wilander USO finals had way more ratings than any Sampras USO final(except the ones with Agassi, he's the only American of the last 20 years that gave any boost to tennis' popularity in the US) And his wimbledon finals generally drew crickets(except the one with you know who in it) as well.

heck SI had its famous cover "Is Tennis Dying?" right after the best run at the majors an American male had in the Open Era(Sampras winning 3 straight majors). Casual tennis fans & mainstream sports writers in the US circa 1994 could have cared less about Sampras, American or not. They seem to care a bit more about Fed, Nadal, Djokovic, their rivalries & domination of the majors has helped tennis get more press outside of the tennis world.

Andy Roddick could have won 10 majors & tennis probably would still be a niche sport here(his '03 USO final had pathetic ratings) as others have mentioned in other threads, tennis missed the boat in the early to mid 80s, that's when it started to noticeably decline in the US in terms of participation & ratings (& it hasn't stopped since) while golf - a sport that tennis was on equal footing with, perhaps even more popular than in the 70s, has left tennis in the dust. This was never really about 'Americans not doing well' there was something else lacking, perhaps in marketing or player accessibility(I've heard many journalists saying that tennis players are incredibly hard to get interviews with compared to golfers. and that was 20 years ago)

[BevelDevil]

Pete Sampras was boring to the casual fan (and probably some serious fans), both in his playing style and his demeanor.

Michael Chang was/is an Asian male, which would have been great if the U.S. Asian population were >4%. If he were a hot Asian female, that might have netted more viewers.

Agassi probably turned off at least as many older people as he attracted young people with his image and style of play. He was also pretty inconsistent in his results, except when it came to getting pwned by Sampras. I also wonder how his hair loss affected his marketability....

Courier was a solid slice of Americana, but was overshadowed by Pete and Andre. Also, his slams were at AO and RG, the two least marketable in the U.S.

Todd Martin was Todd Martin.

Overall, a better situation for U.S. tennis would have been if Agassi and Sampras switched records, and if Agassi slightly toned down his early obnoxious image.


RE: Commentators/Announcers: In the era of grinder tennis, I'd prefer more commentating during the points as long as the comments weren't embarrassingly bad. Play-by-play like, "Inside out... backhand down the line!" in a Marv Albert-like voice would be a win for the game. I actually prefer sports streams with Arabic announcers (who I don't understand) to no announcer at all.

Play-by-play, done right, brings out emotions, which make even simple things seem more exciting. That's why there is play-by-play in other sports, even though they are usually not needed to know what is happening on the court/field. But play-by-play also educates viewers, which will make it more interesting for them in the future.

Also, more extensive discussion or explanation during the point makes sense when one guy is playing terrible and is far behind, or when the rallies are ridiculously long and monotonous.

But play-by-play commentary takes skill. You can't just get any random former pro to do it.


RE: Chatty and over-dramatic U.S. commentators: Aside from cultural norms, I think there's economic pressure to be more dramatic. Historically, I'd guess that the U.S. TV-programming market has been pretty competitive, so there's been a lot more to watch on TV other than tennis. Therefore, U.S. tennis has to take that extra step to draw and keep those viewers. Also, historically, the US has had a pretty low unemployment rate and high hours worked, meaning tennis is competing more with non-TV activities.

Or course, some of these factors has changed over time, but the habits have stuck.

The networks have turned tennis matches into nothing but talk shows for their hosts, it isn't about tennis primarily, it's about being a talk show. The US commentators are nothing but talk show hosts. But then, even they are not the worst. TennisVadim46 on youtube has a lot of matches uploaded which are completely unwatchable due to the absolute non stop talking.

[Narcissist]

Originally Posted by TheF1Bob

Absolutley. Here in the UK, we don't get it alot compared to you guys but for the FO, they've brought Courier on ITV 4 for the commantary and boy... the biggest ******* and Nole hater outside TT lol. And he never shuts up too haha.

Truth. He talks right through points sometimes even about other players/matches. Wish I still had eurosport.

[sureshs]

I like commentary and learn from it and get entertained by it. I am able to see the match and hear the commentary at the same time. There is always the mute button if I don't like it. I like the commentary for the personal tidbits that are provided and the behind the scenes information. I don't go around irrationally hating this commentator or that but appreciate all of them. Their knowledge of tennis is based on actual high-level play unlike most posters here, and perhaps that is the key to the disconnect. I think it is a situation of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Posters here know a little about tennis and play at a low level (4.5 and below), but they have no clue about how things are in the pro game, and get upset when they have to listen to qualified people who can actually play.

[rainingaces]

Originally Posted by sureshs

I like commentary and learn from it and get entertained by it. I am able to see the match and hear the commentary at the same time. There is always the mute button if I don't like it. I like the commentary for the personal tidbits that are provided and the behind the scenes information. I don't go around irrationally hating this commentator or that but appreciate all of them. Their knowledge of tennis is based on actual high-level play unlike most posters here, and perhaps that is the key to the disconnect. I think it is a situation of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Posters here know a little about tennis and play at a low level (4.5 and below), but they have no clue about how things are in the pro game, and get upset when they have to listen to qualified people who can actually play.

I think you missed the point of this thread.

Originally Posted by TheF1Bob

Absolutley. Here in the UK, we don't get it alot compared to you guys but for the FO, they've brought Courier on ITV 4 for the commantary and boy... the biggest ******* and Nole hater outside TT lol. And he never shuts up too haha.

how do you know loud mouths like Courier, or for that matter fart faces like Gilbert et all, aren't already regular posters here?

[DRII]

Some are horrible, like Gimlestob...

I think Davenport is pretty good! I love hearing commentary from a recent great; it provides for a very interesting and informative perspective.

Originally Posted by rainingaces

I think you missed the point of this thread.

He's just trollin' as usual.

[BrooklynNY]

Honestly they are.

The constant comparisons to other sports, and the constant label of everything as the 'best ever' is just disgusting.

I agree tennis has been reduced to a talk show. ESPN would rather show a player being interviewed than a tennis match.

P-mac, BG, Darren Cahill, Pam Shriver are all terrible, although I kind of have a softspot for BG, when he isn't comparing tennis to other sports.

I actually think Mary Carillo is one of the better commentators, funny everyone hates her, she actually talks about the tennis.


I really hate how tennis is almost like trying to hit a home run in baseball, combined with hitting a 3 pointer in basketball, and kicking a field goal in football, while crossing the finish line as the triple crown winner.

I think tennis media is general is ruining tennis. Especially BS articles like this http://t.co/DDG2NP2W that try to convince people that Federer invented the squash shot, or that retrieving balls is "creative defense".

I'm convinced tennis industry is a incestuous business, hence the ESPN / May Jo Fernandez / IMG / Federer conflict of interest that happened before Federer announced his departure from that situation last week

[rainingaces]

Egomaniacs dont make for good commentators, unfortunatly America seems pretty full of them. There are good American commentators for sure just not enough. I think the more humble American pros of the past would make good comms people, im thinking of guys like chang and martin.

[BevelDevil]

Keep in mind that to expand their business, the TV producers have to appeal to the casual viewer, not the die-hard tennis fans (who will watch even if they hate the commentators).

If we want tennis to grow, some amount of low-brow commentary may be necessary.

[cluckcluck]

We all know that Gimelstob is by far the WORST commentator on air these days. He doesn't know jack.

[Gizo]

Originally Posted by BevelDevil

Overall, a better situation for U.S. tennis would have been if Agassi and Sampras switched records,

Agreed. Sure Agassi would have had no career grand slam or dramatic 'hero to zero to hero again' decline and resurgence story, but he would have been winning a lot more Wimbledon and US Open titles, which of the course to many casual fans in the US are the only two tournaments that matter.

I also agree that Sampras was a relative nobody in the US in heyday for guy who achieved as much as he did. That's why I've found it hilarious when I've read conspiracy theories over the years about how the US open organisers favoured him.