This guy seems to commentate on a lot of tennis matches. Is it just me , or does everything he says seems to be a cliche? He provides very little insight into the matches he calls , aside from the bleeding obvious. He also doesn't miss any chance to remind viewers that he is an ex player. I had never heard of him until I heard him as a commentator. I know I'm gonna get criticised for this thread , but , if they're gonna get a commentator, shouldn't they get ppl who are knowledgable above the average fan level?
Robbie Koenig. Who??
- Thread starter Fedchamp
- Start date
TTMR
Hall of Fame
He's terrible, but he's still a step above McEnroe, Carillo and Enberg. I at least do not feel the incessant urge to hurt something with the Drysdale/Koenig/Gilbert/Cahill crew.
GOAT BAAH!!!
Professional
He is the best.
Koenig is transitional GOAT of commentary bar none.
Koenig is transitional GOAT of commentary bar none.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
He's okay, but a huge *******. He does have his cliches, you can almost predict what he's going to say.
However, since I only get him and Jason Goodall, therefore can't compare him to any others.
Actually what get's on my nerves is his way of talking, the intonation or tone ... the way he stresses some parts of the sentence.
Maybe these guys are paid to talk in superlatives, and make every match sound the most exciting one ever.
However, since I only get him and Jason Goodall, therefore can't compare him to any others.
Actually what get's on my nerves is his way of talking, the intonation or tone ... the way he stresses some parts of the sentence.
Maybe these guys are paid to talk in superlatives, and make every match sound the most exciting one ever.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
LAWL !
Good one, but isn't transitional supposed to be between ... okay i get it, he's the perpetual ...
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
Koenig is by far the best commentator bar none. I guess it takes a certain level of refinement to appreciate him
mental midget
Hall of Fame
koenig is clever, has style, and knows the game very well. good grief, if he's a problem, who are the good commentators?
Homeboy Hotel
Hall of Fame
Koenig is hilarious, and so is the other guy he normally works with on ATP matches. (John Lester?)
The best team that provide good insight are the people who always do Murray's Australian Open matches on the BBC red button, I believe they are Andrew Cotter and John Lloyd. Fair and analytical. Not just sensationalising and ego-break like Mcenroe, Henman, Castle etc
I think the ESPN crowd aren't too bad either.
The best team that provide good insight are the people who always do Murray's Australian Open matches on the BBC red button, I believe they are Andrew Cotter and John Lloyd. Fair and analytical. Not just sensationalising and ego-break like Mcenroe, Henman, Castle etc
I think the ESPN crowd aren't too bad either.
bluescreen
Hall of Fame
The way I see it, commentators have an inherently bad rap. To me they tend to be a little better than the general consensus on this board. Mary Carillo, for example, seems comparable to the black plague on this board. So in reality she's at the "turn your tv volume down" level.
Koenig, on the other hand, is often loved--which is amazing for a commentator. He and Goodall seem to lead the pack by a huge margin.
Koenig, on the other hand, is often loved--which is amazing for a commentator. He and Goodall seem to lead the pack by a huge margin.
Devilito
Hall of Fame
He’s awesome. That’s why they call them COLOR commentators. They add a bit of spice to often repetitive matches. After you’ve seen 100,000 pro tennis matches there’s very little in the span of a match that might actually be “special”. You want a commentator that can keep things fun while you’re watching the doldrums of an early set until the score starts making the match more exciting.
Gaudio2004
Semi-Pro
I think you do not understand the original poster's point.
Who said that a tennis is "more exciting" towards the later parts?
Who said that the early parts of a set are "doldrums"?
And who said that matches are repetitive, watching 100 000 pro matches does not mean the next will be repetitive?
You see, you have accepted this way of watching tennis - and see no other way to do so, so it seems natural for "color" commentary by the likes of Koening to help, when in reality...
1. Often the early parts of a set can be the most interesting
2. Commentators ruin natural match tension
3. They can make stupid comments that annoy you
4. Their bias towards a player can get in the way (Koening = Nadal)
5. Their bias towards certain techniques are very annoying (Koening & Goodall's view towards the two handed backhand in comparison to the one hander is childish and shows no analytical thinking )
Perhaps these 5 points explain why some don't like Koening.
I think the best commentator I have heard has been Agassi, Henman or Arias. Agassi, if I recall correctly, has only commentated once, USO 2007 QF Federer vs Roddick, and when he did, he put the other commentators to a shame.
McEnroe for example, despite being a very good ex-player; cannot really comment on the style that players have today due to him having an ancient, and even back then, rare style.
I think sport in general is better with no commentary, a no-commentary button would be beautiful.
John Lloyd makes some good points now and then, during the Aussie open he made a great point about how Tomic was dominating Nadal technically, but often his analysis and commentary is just boring, full of cliches.
Henman I think is better than Lloyd as a commentator. He doesn't sensationalise! He's very classy. During the WTF this year he commentated alongside Andrew Castle, and Castle kept on talking during the rallies, Henman kept quiet.
Last edited:
Devilito
Hall of Fame
I don’t agree with any of those points being negatives though. I don’t care if a commentator has bias. Good. Makes it more fun to watch. I don’t agree that commentators ruin match tension. Some of the Arabic commentating would make a women’s 3.0 league match sound like the US Open final. Yes McEnroe says completely idiotic stuff sometimes but who cares. Makes it interesting to watch. Why would I want to listen to a robot commentating? Ok you say you’d rather have no commentary at all. That’s fine it’s a personal preference but without commentary I find watching a match completely boring and dry unless I have a personal interest in it (eg. Favorite player, important match in a tournament etc.). Some people take sports far to seriously. It’s entertainment and I want to be entertained. It’s not a lessons in quantum mechanics. I don’t need to learn anything from a commentator I just want them to keep me interested. So IMO the best commentators are the ones that are the most outrageous, not the ones with the best “analysis”.
passive_aggressive
Banned
Is that why he's a good commentator, then? Not saying enough is just as much the bane of modern commentating as choosing to talk about vacuous stuff like the schedule (Andrew Castle, I'm looking at you).
I think some commentary during a rally that isn't match-point would be useful for the average tennis fan.
We could get stuff like: "oooh, see there how Rodge is mixing his short slice and topspin backhands to ensure Djokovic doesn't know how deep to stand in the court" - and "see, there Murray goes squandering an offensive position just because he can't hit a hard forehand to save his life."
Stuff like that, I would find interesting. As long as it's not ultra obvious.
Some gems I've heard are: "it's match point Roddick now. That means if Roddick wins this point, he will win the match" and "oh dear, the 1st serve went out. He better get the 2nd one in, or it will be a double fault!!"
Brag Gilbert is the most annoying. The guy loves hearing himself talk and will never just shut up. He is also such a fan boy to Nadal and has no integrity when calling his matches. Brad's one liners and nicknames for everyone on the tour make me want to puke.
Pam Shriver is also horrible. That lady is witch and never has anything positive to say. She needs to go back to her cave.
Cahill is the best. He seems to be a humble guy who has the respect of all the players and an amazing understanding of the game.
Pam Shriver is also horrible. That lady is witch and never has anything positive to say. She needs to go back to her cave.
Cahill is the best. He seems to be a humble guy who has the respect of all the players and an amazing understanding of the game.
Last edited:
OddJack
G.O.A.T.
I never understood this Koeing love around here. Not that he is bad. I guess it's just a matter of style preference. Maybe some guys enjoy comments like " .. like a south African diamond cutter.." or " cut under there like a surgeon.." which are cool phrases but not good enough.
There are tournaments almost every other week so someone need to commentate them for tennis channel and so there is Koeing and his pal Goodall. To me these guys are equal to fast food joints. There is McDonalds and then there is PF chang. I never hear any insights deep into the match. I have heard worse commentating though. And much better as well.
There are tournaments almost every other week so someone need to commentate them for tennis channel and so there is Koeing and his pal Goodall. To me these guys are equal to fast food joints. There is McDonalds and then there is PF chang. I never hear any insights deep into the match. I have heard worse commentating though. And much better as well.
OddJack
G.O.A.T.
A poll cannot make him better or worse of what he is.
You may as well start a poll on McDonalds.
There are some who are better, and those who are worse.
For me JMc, Cahill, are the best. Then there is BG, who is not as deep but can make it fun. PMc is ok but a little bit too self conscious.
Koeing gives you another version of what you see on the court. Better ones give you something you dont see, or what's likely on players minds.. because they been there done that.
You may as well start a poll on McDonalds.
There are some who are better, and those who are worse.
For me JMc, Cahill, are the best. Then there is BG, who is not as deep but can make it fun. PMc is ok but a little bit too self conscious.
Koeing gives you another version of what you see on the court. Better ones give you something you dont see, or what's likely on players minds.. because they been there done that.
passive_aggressive
Banned
There are some who an irrelevant forum poster considers better, and others he considers worse.
Keonig is funny, adds to the fun of watching tennis.
DoubleDeuce
Hall of Fame
Yeah. at least he is funny.
But you are not even funny passive boy, and BTW what makes you a relevant poster? Why dont you name for us a few of your qualities and qualifications that makes you such a relevant poster?
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
I agree. His commentary alongside Jason Goodall is about as good as it gets these days. They don't over-explain stuff but pick plenty of good, insightful things to add about the match, tournament and players.
Rock Strongo
Legend
Koenig is hilarious!
However on the other end of the scale, Rusedski commentating a Federer match makes me want to dig out my own eardrums.
However on the other end of the scale, Rusedski commentating a Federer match makes me want to dig out my own eardrums.
Walenty
Professional
I'm gonna go with OddJack on this one.
Koenig's alright. He does a decent job of keeping the match interesting, but like any commentator, after you've seen enough matches they comment on, their quirks can make you want to hit the mute button.
Cahill might be the only commentator that I would listen to any match at any tourney.
Koenig's alright. He does a decent job of keeping the match interesting, but like any commentator, after you've seen enough matches they comment on, their quirks can make you want to hit the mute button.
Cahill might be the only commentator that I would listen to any match at any tourney.
AhmedD
Semi-Pro
I like Courier and Wilander when they comment.
I like Koeing too, he's fun to listen to, especially when an amazing shot comes up, I love his reactions.
"South African Diamond Cutter" - Shanghai 2010
"Somebody call 911, Federer got out of jail" - Indian Wells 2011
He gets some good insights here and there as well, not the best, but good enough and he keeps the commentary light and enjoyable. I absolutely hate it when other commentators talk during a point :/
However, the commentator I always stick to if he's on is Adel Al Shatti, the guy who commentates on Al Jazeera Sport, he's just awesome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLWc-aWAr34
Very emotional, you'll usually see a some of his commentating on youtube, when he gets excited. But if you listen to his commentary for a whole match there are also some really good insights from Adel, him being a former players as well. Good to see he still has a big passion for the game.
I like Koeing too, he's fun to listen to, especially when an amazing shot comes up, I love his reactions.
"South African Diamond Cutter" - Shanghai 2010
"Somebody call 911, Federer got out of jail" - Indian Wells 2011
He gets some good insights here and there as well, not the best, but good enough and he keeps the commentary light and enjoyable. I absolutely hate it when other commentators talk during a point :/
However, the commentator I always stick to if he's on is Adel Al Shatti, the guy who commentates on Al Jazeera Sport, he's just awesome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLWc-aWAr34
Very emotional, you'll usually see a some of his commentating on youtube, when he gets excited. But if you listen to his commentary for a whole match there are also some really good insights from Adel, him being a former players as well. Good to see he still has a big passion for the game.
NothingButNet
Semi-Pro
I love the mood that Robbie and Jason bring to tournaments - they do make other commentators sound like garbage if you can appreciate their style and finer points as a poster above mentioned.
I was really, really impressed with the 3 or so matches where Hewitt stepped in with commentary/analysis and think he's got a serious knack for this gig!
I was really, really impressed with the 3 or so matches where Hewitt stepped in with commentary/analysis and think he's got a serious knack for this gig!
passive_aggressive
Banned
I'm not meant to be funny.
I'm not meant to be relevant.
I'm meant to be passive aggressive.
Yours Faithfully,
Passive Boy
sportsfan1
Legend
Any commentator but JMc. The guy's just jarring. Koenig maybe a little over the top, but he's listenable with some fun quotes. Here's one: 'There's the eaaasy(sic) power from Berdych'
Crazy man
Banned
Boris Becker at Wimbledon is arguably the best commentator. Doesn't suck up to the top three or four guys like everyone else, and doesn't have a one-dimensional way of thinking. His predictions before matches are also smart, not just picking a predicted winner of a specific match based on ranking. Everyone else just seem stupid. Koenig is no exception to this rule (although Gilbert & Cahill are quite chill).
Homeboy Hotel
Hall of Fame
DoubleDeuce
Hall of Fame
None of the above is any quality that would make you relevant and others irrelevant. Not that I expected anything else. You just sound like a waste of space.
N
Nathaniel_Near
Guest
It is grotesquely true that Koenig is one of the best if not the best commentators, with his sense of excitement and memorable catch phrases. It disturbs me mentally to think that some people wouldn't like this glorious man. The banter him and Jason Goodall (another commentating legend) have are absolutely golden.
For those who don't like him, it's time to get a clue and sharpen up!!
For those who don't like him, it's time to get a clue and sharpen up!!
I think you'd be in the minority about Robbie. J-Mac is an ass.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
I think recently his use of "outrageous" has overtaken "ridiculous.""Roger Federer: from sublime to ridiculous"
"Liquid whip forehand" has also been getting heavy rotation recently when a Federer match is being called.
Big_Dangerous
Talk Tennis Guru
I agree.
For me it doesn't get better than Goodall and Koenig calling the match.
I wish they'd get promoted to doing every grand slam final.
Gaudio2004
Semi-Pro
Well, you make a very good argument, and I respect your opinion, from your perspective I can see how tennis with commentary can be enjoyed.
(I don't mind Koening, he and Goodall make a great team)
Yes I agree with everything you have said.
"If he misses this shot it means his opponent wins the game" in response to a player facing a break-point is another gem, Castle likes to point this out one during the start of every World Tour finals, but his commentary has improved significantly since the Wimbledon late 2000 days.
Maybe so, how did you find his commentary and analysis of the match and in general tennis (during the match)?
To me it was refreshing!
Last edited:
This may be so, but I prefer people who have real insight into the game and the players eg Darren Cahill, Jim Courior and John Mcenroe (yes you read correctly) seem to have this. I also think the Australian commentators such as John Alexander and Roger Rasheed (Hewitt's ex-coach) are in this category -although they do tend to display bias toward the Aussie players.
Last edited:
It is grotesquely true that Koenig is one of the best if not the best commentators, with his sense of excitement and memorable catch phrases. It disturbs me mentally to think that some people wouldn't like this glorious man. The banter him and Jason Goodall (another commentating legend) have are absolutely golden.
For those who don't like him, it's time to get a clue and sharpen up!!
Well I guess that's the reason I'm not a Koenig fan- he just seems to spout endless catchphrases without revealing anything underneath the surface of what's happening on screen. Guys like Courior , Cahill and even Pat Cash comment on aspects of the game such as technique and court tactics that makes it interesting for people who play the game and are interested in the inner workings of the pro game. I guess Koenig may be entertaining for people who are casual tennis watchers who probably make up the majority of viewers. Maybe thats why he's asked to call so many matches.
Last edited:
MAXXply
Hall of Fame
I am a fan of Robbie Koenig, but how did he - as a nothing-ranked ATP journeyman - ever get his start as a commentator? His pro credentials were nothing special. My theory is that somehow he impressed his fellow South African Etienne de Villiers, who was running the ATP at the time. A bit of a SAFfie old boys network that sort of thing. Am I right?
MariaRafael
Banned
Even better example of commentary would be:
-Is he moving to the net?
- Yes, he is.
-Good.
I wondered whether they confused TV and radio, or thought that their entire audience was blind.
-Is he moving to the net?
- Yes, he is.
-Good.
I wondered whether they confused TV and radio, or thought that their entire audience was blind.
Zildite
Hall of Fame
It might be better to ask that about Goodall, he was less successful than Koenig
He might be the jawdropping Roddickulous guy but as has been said he is the colour commentator, Goodall is there to balance it out.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
one of the best in the bussiness BY FAR, agreed he's a bit nadalish but he approves a great shot when he sees one not only from Nadal
Similar threads
