American interest in Tennis

[objectivity]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

Right now, the lack of a top American male player is a large part of it, but I agree that tennis was never on the level of team sports. America has a love affair with team sports such as the NFL, NBA etc and showy athleticism which involves running, jumping etc.

Tennis is a more subtle taste and most of America is meat and potatoes. The individualistic culture here does not mitigate the love of bone-crushing hits and contact sports, or the showy dunking and athleticism displayed in the NBA.

 

[Gary Duane]

Right now, the lack of a top American male player is a large part of it, but I agree that tennis was never on the level of team sports. America has a love affair with team sports such as the NFL, NBA etc and showy athleticism which involves running, jumping etc.

Tennis is a more subtle taste and most of America is meat and potatoes. The individualistic culture here does not mitigate the love of bone-crushing hits and contact sports, or the showy dunking and athleticism displayed in the NBA.

It could still change. But without a top American male player it won't.

I'm in the minority. I wouldn't care if the NFL disappeared tomorrow, and with all the scandals going on right now, it just shows how violent it is. I'd watch just about any sport on the planet before American football.

 

[magnut]

because its too hard for most people and kids cant handle failure partly due to progressive school curriculum mentality.

we also have an extremely liberal and progressive USTA that continues to **** the industry and turning into more of an elitist sport every day for the purpose of growing the USTA at the cost of the sport.

we also have a corrupted progressive drive political system at the federal level. that is burying the middle class to the point that they are just not willing to shell out big money to play tennis. People are broke. Record numbers on food stamps and the government is not subsidizing tennis lessons. Zero job growth. People loosing their jobs all the time. Economy in shambles. Monetary system is a fraud.

Tennis is falling apart in the US. club memberships are down. Tennis pros are loosing things like salaries and insurance benefits. Numbers are down across the board.

as for team sports....i wouldnt get to carried away. Most teenagers are not playing sports anymore. the team sports atmosphere is largely kids whose parents are trying to keep them interested in some sort of activity other than video games and ipads.

Honestly....most people are more interested in buying firearms, ammo, and prep supplies than they are shelling it out for sport. that should tell you something right there. Many blue collar folks will tell you its going to take a full blown revolution for this country to get on track again.

 

[objectivity]

yeah good points all round.

i think its the same reason why Nascar is more popular than say Formula 1.

but at the risk of digressing, i also find motorsports interest odd in america. if americans really embrace capitalism so much, why do they insist on "stock car" racing where teams are essentially using the same car? compared to say F1 where better funded teams can always create better cars. isn't the former the "socialist" version of sports? while the latter the "capitalistic" version?

same thing with soccer vs american sports such as basketball and NFL. soccer has no salary cap across teams, so richer teams will dominate by buying better players etc. and until very recently with the FIFA fairplay rule (which is a very very lax form of luxury tax), there was absolutely no restriction on total expenditure by clubs. but most american sports impose either salary caps or luxury taxes to ensure parity among teams. again, isn't this the "socialist" version of sports? yet american fans seem to support this.

it seems really contradictory.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Well for one, it's VERY hard to watch live tennis on TV. Impossible without cable. There's almost no tennis news coverage or advertising either. Unless you're already somehow a big fan, how are you supposed to become one? Randomly deciding to buy the tennis channel?

Another big problem is just how individualistic tennis is. You know when all the games will be for your favorite and/or home team, and the teams names never change. It's easier to follow/get behind things like that. With tennis there's never a guarantee you'll even see who you support get to play. Lots of reasons why I don't see tennis being big here again unless we get some SERIOUS american star power. Bigger than Roddick at least.

 

[objectivity]

Well for one, it's VERY hard to watch live tennis on TV. Impossible without cable. There's almost no tennis news coverage or advertising either. Unless you're already somehow a big fan, how are you supposed to become one? Randomly deciding to buy the tennis channel?

Another big problem is just how individualistic tennis is. You know when all the games will be for your favorite and/or home team, and the teams names never change. It's easier to follow/get behind things like that. With tennis there's never a guarantee you'll even see who you support get to play. Lots of reasons why I don't see tennis being big here again unless we get some SERIOUS american star power. Bigger than Roddick at least.

good point. but suppose you are a middle class kid (say family income around 80-90k US$ a year) growing up in a relatively cosmopolitan place in america. say Boston. would you be more likely to play gridiron football or tennis? it would appear gridiron football is still more popular. i am just thinking that regardless of american professionals being successful or not, the NATURE of the 2 sports should compel americans to veer towards tennis if they are truly individualistic, right?

 

[dirtballer]

I always felt that tennis was a better participation sport than a spectator sport. I think many Americans just find it too repetitive to watch.

 

[Chico]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

Because other nations are better at it and Americans don't like to watch that.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

Don't worry, team sports are very compatible with capitalist values: Make money. Pay the successful a lot. Reach new height. Destroy your health in exchange of fame and dollars. Buy a new franchise. Advertise. Team sport are as much socialist as banks, insurance, weapon industry, etc. (which are too team work).

 

[objectivity]

Don't worry, team sports are very compatible with capitalist values: Make money. Pay the successful a lot. Reach new height. Destroy your health in exchange of fame and dollars. Buy a new franchise. Advertise. Team sport are as much socialist as banks, insurance, weapon industry, etc. (which are too team work).

ok then what about salary caps and luxury taxes on american sports teams? soccer has almost none of these things. in fact, salary caps and luxury taxes are almost exclusively an american invention! seems incompatible with societal values.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

ok then what about salary caps and luxury taxes on american sports teams? soccer has almost none of these things. in fact, salary caps and luxury taxes are almost exclusively an american invention! seems incompatible with societal values.

Hum, being an european I'm not fully aware of how US sport work.

Salary caps is the rule that say that teams have a maximum total amount of wages that they can't pass yes? Therefor making sure that no team can hire all the best players thanks to huge wages, dominate easily the championship year after year, and then kill the interest in the sport? If I understand it correctly, companies organizing themselves to guarantee the growth of their market by making sure what they sell remain attractive isn't socialistic?

These companies have also a monopole on who can play in their league and who can't no? You can't simply create a new franchise and enter a league right? You have to buy a team who played in Seattle and then move it to Oklahoma no? That's capitalistic enough for me.
Monopole is uncapitalistic in theory (how a perfect capitalist system should benefit to everyone), but very capitalistic in practice.

Sport in Europe is organized in a very different way, but not less capitalistic.

 

[objectivity]

Hum, being an european I'm not fully aware of how US sport work.

Salary caps is the rule that say that teams have a maximum total amount of wages that they can't pass yes? Therefor making sure that no team can hire all the best players thanks to huge wages, dominate easily the championship year after year, and then kill the interest in the sport? If I understand it correctly, companies organizing themselves to guarantee the growth of their market by making sure what they sell remain attractive isn't socialistic?

These companies have also a monopole on who can play in their league and who can't no? You can't simply create a new franchise and enter a league right? You have to buy a team who played in Seattle and then move it to Oklahoma no? That's capitalistic enough for me.
Monopole is uncapitalistic in theory (how a perfect capitalist system should benefit to everyone), but very capitalistic in practice.

Sport in Europe is organized in a very different way, but not less capitalistic.

no no, thats exactly what i meant. that the AMERICAN organization of sport recognizes the limitations of capitalism and hence has very strong socialist characteristics. things like preventing monopoly, equitable distribution of profits, and resources.

but somehow european sports leagues don't recognize the limitations of capitalism and hence they have not imposed such brakes to limit the excesses.

 

[Alchemy-Z]

I think on the recreation level tennis is huge in america- but to go professional a good athlete has far better options in making money going into Basketball/Baseball/Hockey/Football.

I think the majority of American Tennis talent probably plays college gets a degree in something else and never goes pro.

 

[dominikk1985]

Team sports have the Advantage that the Teams exist for a Long time and thus there is more identification with it. sometimes a kid will grow up being a Yankees fan because his dad and grandfather also where Yankees fans. he would basically grow up as a yanks fan Hearing stories about ruth, mantle and dimaggio. an individual Sport, where a Tennis Player has maybe 10 years at the top can't offer that Kind of identification.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

no no, thats exactly what i meant. that the AMERICAN organization of sport recognizes the limitations of capitalism and hence has very strong socialist characteristics. things like preventing monopoly, equitable distribution of profits, and resources.

but somehow european sports leagues don't recognize the limitations of capitalism and hence they have not imposed such brakes to limit the excesses.

Actually, the american organization in leagues CREATE a monopoly of several companies, with equitable distribution of profits and resources among themselves. Saying that this is socialist is like saying the OPEC is a socialist organization as it aims to guarantee a very high level of oil revenue to its members...

In Europe, soccer (it's the only really big sport in the whole continent) isn't organized in leagues with franchise and doesn't have to organize any kind of redistribution of strength because the fan are emotionally attached to city clubs at the national level, whatever the success of the club. These clubs don't leave a city to go play in another city either.

At the continental level, no club has been able to dominate so much the champion's league that fan interest could drop if nothing was done about it.

This way of organizing sport isn't more or less capitalist or socialist than the american way, I think.

 

[objectivity]

Actually, the american organization in leagues CREATE a monopoly of several companies, with equitable distribution of profits and resources among themselves. Saying that this is socialist is like saying the OPEC is a socialist organization as it aims to guarantee a very high level of oil revenue to its members...

In Europe, soccer (it's the only really big sport in the whole continent) isn't organized in leagues with franchise and doesn't have to organize any kind of redistribution of strength because the fan are emotionally attached to city clubs at the national level, whatever the success of the club. These clubs don't leave a city to go play in another city either.

At the continental level, no club has been able to dominate so much the champion's league that fan interest could drop if nothing was done about it.

This way of organizing sport isn't more or less capitalist or socialist than the american way, I think.

i agree on the city/town affiliation point, but surely these clubs are now playing on the global stage, where fan affiliation has pretty much nothing to do with the town/city? for eg, the average singaporean fan -- huge market for the BPL -- has no affiliation with manchester but he still loves his manchester united, until man utd started losing and he switched his support to chelsea.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

i agree on the city/town affiliation point, but surely these clubs are now playing on the global stage, where fan affiliation has pretty much nothing to do with the town/city? for eg, the average singaporean fan -- huge market for the BPL -- has no affiliation with manchester but he still loves his manchester united, until man utd started losing and he switched his support to chelsea.

That's only the case for the biggest club, but in England and other countries their is still large local support for smaller clubs (West Ham, Celta Vigo, Genoa, etc.) which have no international success at all. Sometimes these club will have a very good season, but at the end their best players will be bought by Manchester or Madrid and order will be restored. This system work and generate a lot of money. No need to change it (on a business point of view).

The extra european market aren't negligible but it concern mainly the english first league, while other championship like the Calcio (Italy) or la Liga (Spain) don't attract as many fan outside Europe (I don't know actually, I believe they don't) but have the same success that the English clubs.

 

[coloskier]

yeah good points all round.

i think its the same reason why Nascar is more popular than say Formula 1.

but at the risk of digressing, i also find motorsports interest odd in america. if americans really embrace capitalism so much, why do they insist on "stock car" racing where teams are essentially using the same car? compared to say F1 where better funded teams can always create better cars. isn't the former the "socialist" version of sports? while the latter the "capitalistic" version?

same thing with soccer vs american sports such as basketball and NFL. soccer has no salary cap across teams, so richer teams will dominate by buying better players etc. and until very recently with the FIFA fairplay rule (which is a very very lax form of luxury tax), there was absolutely no restriction on total expenditure by clubs. but most american sports impose either salary caps or luxury taxes to ensure parity among teams. again, isn't this the "socialist" version of sports? yet american fans seem to support this.

it seems really contradictory.

Mainly because it is cheaper to build a NASCAR lookalike than a F1 lookalike, plus NASCAR lookalikes are street legal, but F1's are not.

 

[objectivity]

Mainly because it is cheaper to build a NASCAR lookalike than a F1 lookalike, plus NASCAR lookalikes are street legal, but F1's are not.

But Indycar is also stock-car racing, right?

 

[hrstrat57]

Overly simple answer?

Americans see tennis as a country club sport played by brats.....

A shame, it is still one of the best games ever invented and teaches real values IMHO.

 

[heftylefty]

Tennis professionals outside of the US are more athletic and PMac was clueless on attracting athletes to play tennis. But he made a lot of money, and that's what's really important in America.

 

[magnut]

A shame, it is still one of the best games ever invented and teaches real values IMHO.

i agree with you there. i have played just about every sport at one time or another. There is nothing even close to tennis though.

I think another thing to mention is that you have to be reasonably good at it for it to be fun. I didnt enjoy it nearly as much when I was terrible at it.

In the end its just very physically and mentally difficult. Lots of things are one or the other but tennis is both. Big time. The skill set alone takes years to develop. The mental aspect takes pretty much your whole life.

 

[magnut]

Tennis professionals outside of the US are more athletic and PMac was clueless on attracting athletes to play tennis. But he made a lot of money, and that's what's really important in America.

blah, blah, blah

yeah tennis is all free in other countries. nobody cares about money outside america.

you should move

 

[sureshs]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

Quite the opposite. American sports have a high degree of unionization and guarantee pay and medical benefits for all their players. America has also some of the largest unions in general and a humongous safety net of social security and Medicare. The automobile and airline industries would have shut down a long time ago if it was not for government bailouts. Agricultural subsidies have been around for years otherwise farmers cannot make a living off the land or compete with imports. There are plenty of tariffs and quotas so "free trade" is just an illusion, like in every country. It is free only to the extent the people of the country are not unhappy.

Don't believe what you read. That is just what people like to think. Take away one small benefit from any group of people, especially the retired old who control the votes, and see how they react. It is a different matter that everyone preaches the opposite of what they do - that is human nature. People like to think they don't depend on anyone but have succeeded because of "merit." But most people everywhere are just leeches surviving on the work of a few.

 

[objectivity]

i agree with you there. i have played just about every sport at one time or another. There is nothing even close to tennis though.

I think another thing to mention is that you have to be reasonably good at it for it to be fun. I didnt enjoy it nearly as much when I was terrible at it.

In the end its just very physically and mentally difficult. Lots of things are one or the other but tennis is both. Big time. The skill set alone takes years to develop. The mental aspect takes pretty much your whole life.

agreed. tennis is so bloody fun. it really is. it is my sincere belief that the tennis athlete is possibly the most balanced athlete in all of sports. strong, agile, coordinated and great endurance.

 

[tennisaddict]

Quite the opposite. American sports have a high degree of unionization and guarantee pay and medical benefits for all their players. America has also some of the largest unions in general and a humongous safety net of social security and Medicare. The automobile and airline industries would have shut down a long time ago if it was not for government bailouts. Agricultural subsidies have been around for years otherwise farmers cannot make a living off the land or compete with imports. There are plenty of tariffs and quotas so "free trade" is just an illusion, like in every country. It is free only to the extent the people of the country are not unhappy.

Don't believe what you read. That is just what people like to think. Take away one small benefit from any group of people, especially the retired old who control the votes, and see how they react. It is a different matter that everyone preaches the opposite of what they do - that is human nature. People like to think they don't depend on anyone but have succeeded because of "merit." But most people everywhere are just leeches surviving on the work of a few.

Agree with lot of what you said.

Given the last few decades and the prognosis for future based on the ground realities that we see today, it is apparent that only team sports are here to survive.

You go to any school campus- It is football, baseball , basketball or cheer leading.

Golf and tennis are for the retired.

 

[tennis24x7]

It could still change. But without a top American male player it won't.

I'm in the minority. I wouldn't care if the NFL disappeared tomorrow, and with all the scandals going on right now, it just shows how violent it is. I'd watch just about any sport on the planet before American football.

You mean "American HANDBALL" wherein only one guy kicks it sparingly??:twisted:

That is the only sport wherein the coaches do all the strategy and thinking on every single play. They have dummed it down further by having speakers in QB's helmets.:twisted::twisted:

 

[Devilito]

matches length are too unpredictable.. can be far too long and too much wasted time between points. Match start times are unpredictable so you never know when the match you want to watch is on. Modify the scoring system and a few rules like lets on serves would go a long way to making it better for TV viewership. Tennis is far to conservative to implement such changes so it will always been a niche sport relatively speaking.

 

[objectivity]

matches length are too unpredictable.. can be far too long and too much wasted time between points. Match start times are unpredictable so you never know when the match you want to watch is on. Modify the scoring system and a few rules like lets on serves would go a long way to making it better for TV viewership. Tennis is far to conservative to implement such changes so it will always been a niche sport relatively speaking.

yes i understand the history of baseball and hence its significance, but i honestly cannot understand how anybody can find tennis or for that matter soccer boring, and still watch baseball on tv. or live! jesus. its the most boring thing ever in history.

 

[sureshs]

Golf and tennis are for the retired.

And/or the intellectually sophisticated and elegant

 

[sureshs]

If tennis in Europe and South America is so great, how come US colleges are flooded with high school grads from there asking for athletic scholarships? Look at the Youtube recruiting videos and see who is trying to get into US colleges. The grass always looks greener from the other side. There is no country with as much affordable tennis like the US and as many college tennis opportunities. It is just that everyone likes to complain about something.

 

[jaggy]

American sports are promoted to stop interest in current affairs or socialism would probably breed.

 

[President]

I don't think it's because the game itself is boring to watch, NASCAR and baseball are two of America's most loved sports, and they are both boring as hell compared to tennis. I can see someone who is used to the quick pace and non stop action in basketball being frustrated by tennis, but a baseball fan has no business calling tennis boring or unathetic IMO.

 

[objectivity]

I don't think it's because the game itself is boring to watch, NASCAR and baseball are two of America's most loved sports, and they are both boring as hell compared to tennis. I can see someone who is used to the quick pace and non stop action in basketball being frustrated by tennis, but a baseball fan has no business calling tennis boring or unathetic IMO.

yeah, absolutely. golf on tv is huge too. i dont get it.

 

[Devilito]

yes i understand the history of baseball and hence its significance, but i honestly cannot understand how anybody can find tennis or for that matter soccer boring, and still watches baseball on tv. or live! jesus. its the most boring thing ever in history.

I love tennis but you can make changes to make it more appealing to new viewers. People don't go to a baseball game to watch baseball. They go to drink beer and hang out with friends. People watch baseball and other sports because they've been doing it for 100 years and its part of the culture. The atmosphere watching team sports is different. A lot of people will go to a baseball game just to be with family, be out, eat some hot dogs, be around other fans etc. Tennis has a way different crowd. Tennis crowds are cold, not much interaction between fans, you can't move around, you have to be quiet. rules, etc. It's not as conducive to a fun family outing like football, baseball, nascar etc.

 

[magnut]

as far as viewership. your common non-tennis player just cant relate. its a complicated game.

its also not the kind of sport you go watch to get drunk at. most people cant even grasp the score. other,sports have a long history in the USA. tennis is reletively new. its largely a european sport that had a boom in the US. look at soccer. Its just finally starting to get popular. sports like basketball, baseball, and football are largely american invented.

ask yourself why american football and baseball are not more popular in other countries. its a culture thing.

why is cricket and rugby not more popular here?.....its just not traditional american culture.

 

[Devilito]

as far as viewership. your common non-tennis player just cant relate. its a complicated game.

its also not the kind of sport you go watch to get drunk at. most people cant even grasp the score.

the scoring is stupid. A game should be first to win 4 points. 1 2 3 4 done. The scoring system for tennis is about as stupid as imperial units

 

[HRB]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

As for you participation theory I beg the differ considering I just waited 40 minutes for an open court at a lit park w/6 courts on a random Thursday night in the Capital of NY State (certainly not known as a tennis mecca).

Now for viewing interest..very simply..most Americans (not me) need an American to be winning to actually care about anything, and predominately follow male sports. So, since our male players do not top tennis there is no interest.

Call me "Anti-American" I guess because tennjis is my favorite to play and watch (NBA second), I follow WTA much more than ATP, and besides the "Sister's" all my other favorite players are Russian, Czech, Serbian, and Latvian (Go Ernie!).

 

[linofjason]

America is famously the land of the individual. Death to socialism etc.

Tennis is in many ways, the ultimate individualistic sport. Yet somehow, Americans are getting less and less interested in tennis, and veering towards team sports like football especially. Both in terms of actual participation, and viewer interest.

Any theories why? Seems incompatible with societal values.

In America, men are usually more interested in team sports except for Golf and Golf is only for those that can afford it.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Maybe the Bollitieri boot camp approach to tennis, killed the Je ne sais quoi?

 

[tylertadams]

I think on the recreation level tennis is huge in america- but to go professional a good athlete has far better options in making money going into Basketball/Baseball/Hockey/Football.

I think the majority of American Tennis talent probably plays college gets a degree in something else and never goes pro.

You make a good point. Another thought is how fun can tennis be all by yourself on one side of the court (for singles). A lot of players talk to themselves on the court to keep themselves going.

 

[TheMusicLover]

matches length are too unpredictable.. can be far too long and too much wasted time between points. Match start times are unpredictable so you never know when the match you want to watch is on. Modify the scoring system and a few rules like lets on serves would go a long way to making it better for TV viewership. Tennis is far to conservative to implement such changes so it will always been a niche sport relatively speaking.

So because the USA folks' attention span (as well as their IQ apparently, if they are uncapable of comprehending the scoring system) has gone down, the sport should make adjustments?

Tennis has gone through far too many adjustments already and it's not like it's become any better. As for those too much time wasting, I agree, but that's merely a matter of ENFORCING the rules that are already excisting.

 

[pmerk34]

Tennis professionals outside of the US are more athletic and PMac was clueless on attracting athletes to play tennis. But he made a lot of money, and that's what's really important in America.

And everywhere else.

 

[pmerk34]

It could still change. But without a top American male player it won't.

I'm in the minority. I wouldn't care if the NFL disappeared tomorrow, and with all the scandals going on right now, it just shows how violent it is. I'd watch just about any sport on the planet before American football.

Correct. Until we have another top player interest will continue to decline.

 

[TheMusicLover]

Correct. Until we have another top player interest will continue to decline.

A bit sad - how come most Europeans are perfectly able to enjoy players coming from different countries then their own, whereas the US folks apparently aren't? :?

 

[pmerk34]

A bit sad - how come most Europeans are perfectly able to enjoy players coming from different countries then their own, whereas the US folks apparently aren't? :?

Are they? I see people painted up with the flags of their countries all the time at all events. Were Serbians really that into tennis before they had top players? Hard to say. I will say that if you are raised in Europe it's compulsory to learn a number of European languages as the countries are so close together and travel is therefore easy. Being so close together you get a feel for the language and culture and can more easily identify with other European players.

Here in the states unless you are study abroad or take long expensive European vacations we have no such connection nor identification with French players or German players etc.

 

[objectivity]

Are they? I see people painted up with the flags of their countries all the time at all events. Were Serbians really that into tennis before they had top players? Hard to say. I will say that if you are raised in Europe it's compulsory to learn a number of European languages as the countries are so close together and travel is therefore easy. Being so close together you get a feel for the language and culture and can more easily identify with other European players.

Here in the states unless you are study abroad or take long expensive European vacations we have no such connection nor identification with French players or German players etc.

well the brits were always into Wimbledon, and they had no top british player for a long, long time until tim henman!

 

[pmerk34]

well the brits were always into Wimbledon, and they had no top british player for a long, long time until tim henman!

The US Open is the most well attended sporting even in the United States every year. Americans are into the event but otherwise there is no interest. I remain a tennis fan of course but I do long for some new American men to rise to the top again.

 

[Overheadsmash]

Interesting thread.

Tennis is still popular here, but just more "underground" if you will. There's a decent tennis culture, but not like in the late 1970s when I was kid. Back in the Chris Evert / Bjorn Borg / McEnroe days, tennis was at it's peak here, and there were clubs being built and public courts being installed everywhere.

Today, a decent tennis club here recently shut down tennis for indoor year-round volleyball on one side, and year-round indoor soccer and lacrosse on the other. Can't make enough money to stay open with just tennis, even though the owners are big tennis people.

There are a lot more sporting choices these days for kids, including lacrosse. Ice hockey is also strong and a lot of kids play that too. In fact, on some parts of the easy coast, I'd say lacrosse is probably more popular than football, especially in places like Maryland and Virginia. Add in things like Xbox and iPhones, and it makes it even worse.