Comments on Bouchard, the Wimby final, and Commentating in Favor of her, and ...

jamus30

New User
Hello all. I don't come on here often, but I just had a few thoughts about what I've seen this tournament. Did anyone notice some commentator's favoring of Eugenie this Wimbledon, mainly by Chris Evert; I even noticed some of the other commentating staff trying to temper and counter the favoritism. I would have overlooked the favoritism if Eugenie is American, but she's not. She's a great player, but in order for her to win big titles like this, she is going to either have to gain 5-10 pounds so that she can really focus only on her game or she is going to have to employ some better tactics for each match. How about slice or drop shots or good net play or, more important, computing exactly what her opponent is doing and adjusting? Eugenie is an aggressive player mentally and tactically, but she doesn't have the pure power of players stronger than her.

Back to the commentating, it seems like many commentators want Bouchard to be the new darling of women's tennis. That's why I love Martina Navratilova's commentating because it's mainly about what's happening in the match.

Anyway, Kvitova is no joke out there on the court. She hits harder than any woman's player I've seen. She played a great match. She has the type of game to beat anybody at anytime when she's not making errors. Great match by her.

Side note: I know I should probably start a new thread on this, but forgive me. I don't spend much time on here. Isn't Radwanska's game riskier than most? She takes on the ball truly flat (a lot of commentator's claim that a player hits really flat when in fact they are just hitting low over the net with good topspin), with good hands instead of repeatable mechanics, like Pete Sampras or Lindsay Davenport. And she uses a variety and plethora of technically difficult shots without making an expected amount of errors. If she would hit the gym hard, she could be a great champion, but that remains to be seen.

Anyway, great tennis by Bouchard and Kvitova this Wimbledon. Congrats to Kvitova, and I look forward to what Bouchard has to offer in her career.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Evert loves Bouchard and she's not afraid to show it openly. In fact, she's never been a real unbiased commentator. She's a huge Federer fan, (maybe as far as fangirl) as well and has shown it on TV even going as far as saying "Go Roger!" on TV. She's not the only one though. JMac has never said Go Rafa! on TV to the best of my knowledge, but it's quite clear he's become a huge Nadal fan (maybe even fanboy).
 
Last edited:

jamus30

New User
Evert loves Bouchard and she's not afraid to show it openly. In fact, she's never been a real unbiased commentator. She's a huge Federer fan, (maybe as far as fangirl) as well and has shown it on TV even going as far as saying "Go Roger!" on TV. She's not the only one though. JMac has never said Go Rafa! on TV to the best of my knowledge, but it's quite clear he's become a huge Nadal fan (maybe even fanboy).

Yeah, it's obvious that J. McEnroe is a Nadal fan. I think it's funny that recently he's been claiming that Nadal has better volleys than Federer.
 
Last edited:

gambitt

Banned
McEnroe is disgustingly biased. It's more sinister than simply "go rafa". Re-watch Rosol vs Nadal 2014 to find out how bad he can be.
 

Fed881981

Hall of Fame
Chris Evert is class and she likes class (Federer).
John McEnroe is classless and he likes classlessness (Nadal)

No surprise there.

It's one thing to cheer for a beauty who is a terrible tennis player, it's another thing to cheer for a beauty who is actually a good player. Bouchard is a good player and she will prove that as time goes by.
 

struggle

Legend
I like Bouchard and I "grew up" with and like Crissie.

But yes, it's just too much.

Agreed.

Lastly, Chris Fowler is an idiot, asking more questions than having any useful input to a match.
 

Midaso240

Legend
The pro-Bouchard commentary was just sickening. "If Bouchard can just get into the rallies,she has a clear advantage". And then BOOM,another winner from Kvitova. Rinse,repeat for the whole match. I swear,not until it was 6-3,4-0 did they even really talk about how Kvitova was the far superior player...
 

cknobman

Legend
Jmac and Brad Gilbert are worse.

They were commenting during Fed's semis on how he did not have to face a single top player to get to the semis in Wimby this year.

I was like WTF didnt he just play Stan? Wasnt Stan #4 in the world and the ONLY player not to have a loss to a top 10 player (before Fed)??

Total fanboy illogical idiots.
 

Down_the_line

G.O.A.T.
I'll admit the Evert fangirl'ing was over the top. You get the sense she sees herself in her or something and is loving it.

You guys have to remember too that, even if their commentary isn't entirely scripted, they're probably told by their producers who to talk about and what to emphasize. Bouchard is the talk of the town right now and, like it or not, they were all probably told to hype up Bouchard.

It makes for awful commentary, but what are you going to do? Money rules.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
I lost count how many time Chris Evert said 'A star has arrived', 'You dont see such players emerge often'..

Absurd when she has not won a major. How many titles has Genie won till date ? One ?
 

Tcbtennis

Hall of Fame
It's just not Chris Evert. It's the whole entire WTA who is doing this pushing of Bouchard. These past many months I've watched mostly WTA because the ATP (in my opinion) has gotten too predictable. There are new women arriving on the scene that make it more exciting to me. So I've been listening for a while now about the new "It" girl. She's a really good player as you can see from her results but she hasn't done anything to warrant the "future of the WTA" title that has been thrust upon her. As someone who thinks for herself and uses logic and facts to make informed decisions it doesn't sit well with me. It's as though if they keep saying it enough they think people will believe it. But I guess that has happened. And the fact that she is thought to be pretty (she's OK looking to me) so it justifies the hyping makes it more ridiculous to me.
 

Midaso240

Legend
It's just not Chris Evert. It's the whole entire WTA who is doing this pushing of Bouchard. These past many months I've watched mostly WTA because the ATP (in my opinion) has gotten too predictable. There are new women arriving on the scene that make it more exciting to me. So I've been listening for a while now about the new "It" girl. She's a really good player as you can see from her results but she hasn't done anything to warrant the "future of the WTA" title that has been thrust upon her. As someone who thinks for herself and uses logic and facts to make informed decisions it doesn't sit well with me. It's as though if they keep saying it enough they think people will believe it. But I guess that has happened. And the fact that she is thought to be pretty (she's OK looking to me) so it justifies the hyping makes it more ridiculous to me.
Yeah,I mean the problem I have is this: Sure Sharapova was hyped plenty in her early years,but it wasn't until AFTER she had proven herself and won Wimbledon. Bouchard is being hyped without winning anything of note. She has one small title,in which she didn't have to face anyone in the top 50. She has lost in the first round 6 times this year,she's a long,long way from the top. A lot further than what she and her fans realized...
 
I commend Bouchard on her run to the final, but if the reports are true about her stepping all over her close friend Robson to get the coach, it's very disappointing. She needs to take a closer look at her inner circle and the advice she's receiving. It's possible to be both a top player and a decent person (see ATP for some examples). I hope she doesn't go the Sharapova route and get the image of a cold "person" (euphemism here).
 

martini1

Hall of Fame
Hello all. I don't come on here often, but I just had a few thoughts about what I've seen this tournament. Did anyone notice some commentator's favoring of Eugenie this Wimbledon, mainly by Chris Evert; I even noticed some of the other commentating staff trying to temper and counter the favoritism. I would have overlooked the favoritism if Eugenie is American, but she's not. She's a great player, but in order for her to win big titles like this, she is going to either have to gain 5-10 pounds so that she can really focus only on her game or she is going to have to employ some better tactics for each match. How about slice or drop shots or good net play or, more important, computing exactly what her opponent is doing and adjusting? Eugenie is an aggressive player mentally and tactically, but she doesn't have the pure power of players stronger than her.

Back to the commentating, it seems like many commentators want Bouchard to be the new darling of women's tennis. That's why I love Martina Navratilova's commentating because it's mainly about what's happening in the match.

Anyway, Kvitova is no joke out there on the court. She hits harder than any woman's player I've seen. She played a great match. She has the type of game to beat anybody at anytime when she's not making errors. Great match by her.

Side note: I know I should probably start a new thread on this, but forgive me. I don't spend much time on here. Isn't Radwanska's game riskier than most? She takes on the ball truly flat (a lot of commentator's claim that a player hits really flat when in fact they are just hitting low over the net with good topspin), with good hands instead of repeatable mechanics, like Pete Sampras or Lindsay Davenport. And she uses a variety and plethora of technically difficult shots without making an expected amount of errors. If she would hit the gym hard, she could be a great champion, but that remains to be seen.

Anyway, great tennis by Bouchard and Kvitova this Wimbledon. Congrats to Kvitova, and I look forward to what Bouchard has to offer in her career.

Genie is a good player. Although she does not have the sex appeal as much as other "hot" tennis players on the tour, she is very likable. What I found annoying is some of her "genie army" fans. Too loud, too quick on the band wagon, and too extreme (I said SOME, not all, ok?). They are very annoying, just because she is from Canada and Canada hasn't got tennis star for the longest time.

This is an amazing year for Genie. I wish her best of luck and do not get side tracked by the craziness. She can be the future world no 1 with her style of aggressive play, but she ain't there yet. She's got a few things to upgrade in her game.
 

fuzz nation

G.O.A.T.
Aggie Radwanska is a truly incredible talent. I first saw her up close in a doubles match at the US Open, maybe in her first year as a pro, and both her hands and shot creativity were jaw-dropping to me. She seems to create dimensions that simply don't exist on the court for so many other players.

I think that a lot of her style of play is straight out of her own DNA more than any tennis guru's blueprint. She's not ultra-powerful, so I think that lets her hit flatter balls more successfully - the somewhat slower balls can more readily drop into the court. With variety and placement, she can keep an opponent off balance and out of position without "redlining" and trying to pound the ball through small openings.

Her movement is vital and I'd expect her to be better off without any extra pounds on her frame to lug around. Yes, she needs "enough" strength and endurance to play her game, but I don't think she's going to rebuild her body type and start crushing from the baseline. She plays an instinctive all court game, which (ironically) Bouchard needs to get better at if she wants to compete against players like Kvitova who can outslug her from the backcourt.

Justine Henin was a tiny little pea when she made her splash as a pro and after her initial success, she over-trained to the point that she got too muscular and heavy. It cost her for a while (injuries and illness) until she could slim back down and get back to using her best weapons, including her movement. Aggie needs to preserve her movement so that she can effectively put her variety to work from all areas of the court.

I don't even think that anyone mentioned it today, but Petra looked physically fantastic at this tournament. That little belly and a little overall "thickness" that she had a couple years ago seem to have been consumed by her more recent training and discipline. When she had to scramble once or twice during today's final, she wasn't the lumbering big, strong girl we saw in 2011. To my eye she looked quick, balanced, and graceful. Good for her!

Agree that the cast of commentators remains astonishingly underwhelming. Count on them to know nothing until after it happens.
 

Fedinkum

Legend
Aggie Radwanska is a truly incredible talent....

One Aga fan salutes to another:cool::cool::cool:

Back to OP's post, I have no doubt the WTA has been looking for a female Federer to promote its brand and the chubby jaw princess ticks all the boxes. Together with a powerhouse sponsor like Nike, media bias to Genie is practically paid for.
 

jamus30

New User
Aggie Radwanska is a truly incredible talent. I first saw her up close in a doubles match at the US Open, maybe in her first year as a pro, and both her hands and shot creativity were jaw-dropping to me. She seems to create dimensions that simply don't exist on the court for so many other players.

I think that a lot of her style of play is straight out of her own DNA more than any tennis guru's blueprint. She's not ultra-powerful, so I think that lets her hit flatter balls more successfully - the somewhat slower balls can more readily drop into the court. With variety and placement, she can keep an opponent off balance and out of position without "redlining" and trying to pound the ball through small openings.

Her movement is vital and I'd expect her to be better off without any extra pounds on her frame to lug around. Yes, she needs "enough" strength and endurance to play her game, but I don't think she's going to rebuild her body type and start crushing from the baseline. She plays an instinctive all court game, which (ironically) Bouchard needs to get better at if she wants to compete against players like Kvitova who can outslug her from the backcourt.

Justine Henin was a tiny little pea when she made her splash as a pro and after her initial success, she over-trained to the point that she got too muscular and heavy. It cost her for a while (injuries and illness) until she could slim back down and get back to using her best weapons, including her movement. Aggie needs to preserve her movement so that she can effectively put her variety to work from all areas of the court.

I don't even think that anyone mentioned it today, but Petra looked physically fantastic at this tournament. That little belly and a little overall "thickness" that she had a couple years ago seem to have been consumed by her more recent training and discipline. When she had to scramble once or twice during today's final, she wasn't the lumbering big, strong girl we saw in 2011. To my eye she looked quick, balanced, and graceful. Good for her!

Agree that the cast of commentators remains astonishingly underwhelming. Count on them to know nothing until after it happens.

Thanks for your response. Regarding Radwanska, I just feel like the only frontier left for her to conquer is becoming stronger and more physical. And that cannot be said for most of the other top players. She's in her mid-20s and if she wants to be a major champion, I think all she has to do is hit the gym harder. That is, if she hits the gym hard now at all. Many major champions have come along with great hands, but in recent years they've all been physically strong. For example, Pete Sampras had exquisitely great hands, but with supreme power and strength to help him overcome the best of his generation. Furthermore, many recent champions have been labeled as ball-bashers when in fact they have good hands when it counts. For instance, I'll take Serena's down-the-line shots over Radwanska's. Many tennis fans seem to confuse slower with better and more aesthetically pleasing.
 

DM07

Rookie
Jmac and Brad Gilbert are worse.

They were commenting during Fed's semis on how he did not have to face a single top player to get to the semis in Wimby this year.

I was like WTF didnt he just play Stan? Wasnt Stan #4 in the world and the ONLY player not to have a loss to a top 10 player (before Fed)??

Total fanboy illogical idiots.

Did they really day that? That the Australian Open and Monte Carlo champion, the only man in recent years to break up the big 4, and world number 3 (above Federer) isn't a top player? Wow.

As for Bouchard, she's good and has come a long way due to her self-belief, but I can see Madison Keys being the truly dominant player of the next generation. She has more to her game. It'll be interesting to see the media's reaction if that happens.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I lost count how many time Chris Evert said 'A star has arrived', 'You dont see such players emerge often'..

Absurd when she has not won a major. How many titles has Genie won till date ? One ?

She has appeared in only six slams and has made the SFs in two and the final in one. That is a better record in slams than the very top players this year! Genie has 'arrived.'
 

easywin

Rookie
Commentating in sports usually sucks.

There are some commentators that actually try to bring in some stats or interesting trivia etc. and I enjoy that.
But 90% is basically :"That was a good forehand" "Isner is known for having a good serve" "He could have won that point if he wouldn't have smashed that overhead into the net" - you don't say ?

Maybe it's just me but I`d prefer commentators to shut up more :)
 
Last edited:

tacou

G.O.A.T.
OP, I don't think it's so bad when announcers have favorites. I think it makes it interesting, but only when the other announcers step up and, in the case of the W final, point out that the "darling" is getting her brains bashed.

I think in the case of Bouchard, she represents the next wave of future stars. Unlike the men's side, players like her and Halep are actually making major finals now, so it's not so bad to hype her compared to a player like Kivitova who is a bit older and, while a 2-time Wimbledon champion, has proven she's going to be streaky.

So yeah, I get annoyed when commentators start favoring one player in particular, but only when it is unwarranted and one-sided.
 

TheMusicLover

G.O.A.T.
Yeah, it's obvious that J. McEnroe is a Nadal fan. I think it's funny that recently he's been claiming that Nadal has better volleys than Federer.

Funny, sure, but even more, embarrassing.
Johnny Mac claims that regularly and every time I can't help but thinking he's on crack.
 

sliceroni

Hall of Fame
Yeah look at Anna Kornikova. One of the highest paid players, both men and women, and she didn' win sh**.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
She has appeared in only six slams and has made the SFs in two and the final in one. That is a better record in slams than the very top players this year! Genie has 'arrived.'

Just see Simona Halep's record over the last year. A star ??
 

HRB

Hall of Fame
The pro-Bouchard commentary was just sickening. "If Bouchard can just get into the rallies,she has a clear advantage". And then BOOM,another winner from Kvitova. Rinse,repeat for the whole match. I swear,not until it was 6-3,4-0 did they even really talk about how Kvitova was the far superior player...

I'm a Genie fan and a HUGE PETRA FAN, and I gotta admit, a lot of the favoritism prior to the match probably had to do with the expected let down in level that is the usual in at least one set of almost every match by Petra, and the expectation that Genie's aggression could exploit that.

Then the pleasant surprise...that letdown in focus and intensity NEVER SHOWED UP, and whether it was Genie, Serena, Maria, or hell even an in her prime Martina it simply wouldn't have mattered!

Oh, and yeah..newsflash..GENIE IS PRETTY..and pretty girls get all the attention...NO SH#T!!!!:twisted:
 

Midaso240

Legend
Yeah look at Anna Kornikova. One of the highest paid players, both men and women, and she didn' win sh**.
She was actually extremely hot though,Genie can't do as well as that off court without the results because she just doesn't have the sex appeal of Anna...
 

snowwhite

Professional
Chris Evert is class and she likes class (Federer).
John McEnroe is classless and he likes classlessness (Nadal)

No surprise there.

It's one thing to cheer for a beauty who is a terrible tennis player, it's another thing to cheer for a beauty who is actually a good player. Bouchard is a good player and she will prove that as time goes by.

Just pointing to people being fans to Nadal as "classless" is far from being class
Plus it contradicts with your theory
see
You are classless and you are Federer fan
 

Netspirit

Hall of Fame
She was actually extremely hot though,Genie can't do as well as that off court without the results because she just doesn't have the sex appeal of Anna...

Nearly all Russians would look at Kournikova time and time again and were like "WTF are these westerners finding in her?". The same applies to Sharapova - nobody has any idea how that ordinary village girl look could become so popular internationally.
 
Last edited:

Down_the_line

G.O.A.T.
Nearly all Russians would look at Kournikova time and time again and were like "WTF are these westerners finding in her?". The same applies to Sharapova - nobody has any idea how that ordinary village girl look could become so popular internationally.

I've never been really attracted to Sharapova. I'm not going to be immature and say she's ugly - she's certainly good looking - she's just never been my type.

This, like so many other things, is subjective and a matter of personal taste. A lot of people say Bouchard is boring and plain looking. I happen to think she's gorgeous, and I'm not one who really gawks.
 

Midaso240

Legend
Nearly all Russians would look at Kournikova time and time again and were like "WTF are these westerners finding in her?". The same applies to Sharapova - nobody has any idea how that ordinary village girl look could become so popular internationally.
I don't think so. I've seen polls of the sexiest Russians and Kournikova and Sharapova were both near the top,or even at the top,I can't remember. If they were so 'average' they wouldn't be on there. But even if that is the case,they both can play tennis. What can those swarms of stunners you're talking about do? Sharapova works hard and doesn't take anything for granted. Tennis is what is most important for her. If people think she's pretty enough,and likeable enough to offer her endorsements,that's a bonus.
 

WARPWOODIE

Rookie
The pro-Bouchard commentary was just sickening. "If Bouchard can just get into the rallies,she has a clear advantage". And then BOOM,another winner from Kvitova. Rinse,repeat for the whole match. I swear,not until it was 6-3,4-0 did they even really talk about how Kvitova was the far superior player...

Ditto...my sentiments too! Bouchard got lucky to get past an injured Halep to the finals. Her serve isn't really a big weapon and she couldn't figure out how to make the adjustments...as in stepping back to give her more time to hit at Kvitova's balls/serves that were coming at her from a cannon.
 

Kalin

Legend
Apologies if this has been posted earlier but here's a bit of a different angle on Bouchard:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/te...er-ruthlessness-ahead-of-Wimbledon-final.html

Quote: "... Bouchard is a ruthless and single-minded character who has cut herself off from her peers in a similar manner to Maria Sharapova, the woman who originally inspired her.

Bouchard gets compared to Sharapova all the time, if only because they both have blonde hair and photogenic looks. On a less superficial level, you could also say that they both have minds like steel traps. "

So not everyone's a convert, it seems...
 
Top