Identity of the US Open?

[ollinger]

Everything you need to know about the USO is apparent in the fact that it's been played on all three major types of surfaces in the past half century, and that there has been a tiebreaker in the fifth set since 1970. The US Open's distinct image is that it has none -- it is open to change and modernization and evolving in ways the other slams aren't. Switching to blue courts in 2005 to enable fans to better see the ball on TV. No idiotic matches spanning a three day period, no royalty traipsing in (except Alec Baldwin), no curfew, just egalitarian spectacle.

 

[Backspin1183]

It's still a great tournament that gives more prize money than any other tennis tournament. And Nadal is the reigning champion!

 

[Powderwombat]

Why is everyone saying night matches as if it's the only slam with night matches?

 

[Rosstour]

The crowd at the US is distinct.

For one, tons of celebs. Think of how American media dominates the globe and how star-studded the stands are.

But the real distinguishing characteristic is how loud the fans are. They will cheer for anything. The crowds at the other Slams are so much more demure and self-conscious, we Americans are not like that.

The players obviously love the AO because of how well organized and player-friendly it is. The French is the opposite, what a crapshow. Hardly any lights, no roofs...what year is it? The US is probably the 2nd-most player-friendly Slam, 2nd-best venue, and has the best crowds.

Having said this, I really object to Armstrong Stadium. Why is it named after him? Do we not have enough great American players to name things after? Louis Armstrong died in 1971 and as far as I can tell, never set foot on a tennis court in his life.

 

[Ray Mercer]

The courts are garbage now and they have turned the event into clay court tennis. It used to be awesome when guys could drop bombs and hit winners at will. Why those idiots have never adopted the Cinci surface I’ll never know. The hell with grinding defensive tennis.

 

[MichaelNadal]

The US Open is epic.
It's the Nadrihanna slam.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

I don't like the US Open broadcasts, I think they're done by ESPN, they seem to cater to people with short attention spans, always giving more and more external information and pointless stats, impossible to get immersed in the moment. They have a blimming news feed running at the bottom of the screen during matches??? WTF is that about?

 

[Bartelby]

The absence of a tiebreaker in the fifth set is a bit like distinguishing your mid-grey tie from your ash-grey one.

Egalitarian spectacle - huge corporate boxes up the front and cheap seats so far away you are in a different time-zone!

Everything you need to know about the USO is apparent in the fact that it's been played on all three major types of surfaces in the past half century, and that there has been a tiebreaker in the fifth set since 1970. The US Open's distinct image is that it has none -- it is open to change and modernization and evolving in ways the other slams aren't. Switching to blue courts in 2005 to enable fans to better see the ball on TV. No idiotic matches spanning a three day period, no royalty traipsing in (except Alec Baldwin), no curfew, just egalitarian spectacle.

 

[Bartelby]

They are loud because they are too far away to see anything or participate in an actual tennis match.

They wait around drinking, presumably, until the big screens shows them what they missed.

Apparently Armstrong made his home in New York a stone's throw from the stadium so that makes sense.

It was built over the Singer Bowl, named for and by the sewing machine company, but maybe they thought a real singer should be honoured.

The crowd at the US is distinct.

But the real distinguishing characteristic is how loud the fans are. They will cheer for anything. The crowds at the other Slams are so much more demure and self-conscious, we Americans are not like that.

Having said this, I really object to Armstrong Stadium. Why is it named after him? Do we not have enough great American players to name things after? Louis Armstrong died in 1971 and as far as I can tell, never set foot on a tennis court in his life.

 

[Tshooter]

...
Having said this, I really object to Armstrong Stadium. ...

This again, really ?

If you had real interest you could investigate the reasons yourself with minimal effort and I think you would find them adequate. And if you don’t like the history of the court and the reasons rest assured the name is not changing because the USTA would be in violation of its lease were it to change the name (or the name of AA stadium).

If they want to rename a stadium court to honor a player they have two stadium courts to work with: GS and court 17.

 

[Chadillac]

USO = Cash Cow Slam

$291+ million in revenue

More “fun facts”:

https://wallethub.com/blog/us-open-tennis-stats/5935/

Not bad for a Non-Profit

 

[BGod]

As a Canadian I don't even get to watch the Final or all Quarters/R16 because to do so I'd need to get a whole package containing the 1 channel that shows it..........

So yeah it's crap and everyone is injured.

I love going down to the actual venue for the 1st week though.

 

[Tshooter]

Not bad for a Non-Profit

Non-profit is simply a tax status. It doesn't imply low revenues or low compenstion. Top USTA guy made about $1.2 million in 2016.

https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/business-leagues

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I live in NYC. The USO sucks. Corporate identity, fat rude fans, bad image for Americans (Im proud to be one but the crowd here embarrasses me.) It is not just because of their favoring Federer or not loving Novak (I think Fed has earned his crowd support) I have felt this way since I first went there in my teens in 2005. There is probably a higher percentage of not serious tennis fans at USO than any of the other slams. There is also nothing "cool" about it as OP said it doesn't really have an easily classifiable positive image surrounding it.

Still, it is a slam, and I get roughly equally excited for all of them and I am grateful I can visit it if I wish to see slam tennis.

 

[Bartelby]

All that means is that they plow profits back into the sport, which is a public good, and not back to the shareholders.

And as they serve a public good, they benefit in tax terms. People, of course, make fortunes along the way.

Not bad for a Non-Profit

 

[Mainad]

Seriously, Andy Murray with a feint hint of a smile is a wayyyy bigger eye catcher than a pink chick squad.

Madrid does do ballgirls better than anyone else though.

 

[spirit95]

Madrid is a much more interesting and fun place than Monaco and arguably Rome too.

The facilities at the Caja Mágica are better as well. Yes, the Madrid tournament is newer and may lack the history, but your comments are suggestive of someone towing the party line, without really knowing what they are talking about.

Of course, you may like surrounding yourself with dull old rich people or pickpockets, in which case I apologise and take it all back.

I'm talking about the tv aesthetics of the arenas, not the cities themselves

 

[Deleted member 756514]

Louis Armstrong died in 1971 and as far as I can tell, never set foot on a tennis court in his life.

I second you. Imo the first tennis court on moon should be named Louis Armstrong. Should pitch this idea to Elon Musk.

 

[Luckydog]

The second French Open(fuc*king damn slow),I suppose?

 

[ForLoveOfTheGame]

The US Open was a lot more exciting when the winners were Americans who drew out all the non tennis fans and celebrities in addition to those who followed the sport. Federer, and to some extent, even Nadal are the only two non-Amerian players who can draw this kind of excitement there.

THEN there's the other aspect of the inaccessibility that started after 9/11. I went a few times in the late 90s and walking around the grounds Serena, Venus and their entourage passed right by me on their way to the practice courts! It was insane, could have reached out and touched them. Watching practice courts was also very easy. I returned again in 2012 and everything is roped off or closed off with bushes you can't see past. Only a lucky few who can manage to sit on the three seat bleachers can watch their favorite players practice on their day off. It's things like that that used to make it so amazing that now just feel cheap. Also that Stadium needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk

 

[EloQuent]

I second you. Imo the first tennis court on moon should be named Louis Armstrong. Should pitch this idea to Elon Musk.

That's Neil Armstrong. Louis was the jazz musician

 

[Deleted member 756514]

That's Neil Armstrong. Louis was the jazz musician

Oh sh*t. I completely messed it up. My bad.

 

[justasport]

The US Open is a great tournament. It's extremely exciting! The French Open is the tournament that needs to step up and get with the times! My friends in the United States can't even watch the match on the premier sports channel in that country because it's lost so much of it's prestige! Get it together Paris! Or more directly Guy Forget needs to get it together!

 

[fedfan39]

- Borg's graveyard
- Federer's *other dominant slam during his heyday*
- The last slam
- The slam where Sampras got his first (big) and last win
- Connor's dominant slam
- Lendl made 8 straight finals here (but converted only 3)
- B2B Rafter's only slam
- B2B Edberg's conclusion slam (he clobbered then dominant Courier and served him a bagel in the process in 1991 and followed it up with a win over Sampras in 1992)
- *I will shove this down your throat* Serena
- The only slam I have been to and seen some amazing athletes in person

 

[Tshooter]

PR firm handling the USTA account in case you want to step your comments/complaints up the ladder from TT:

http://www.wunderman.com

 

[Tshooter]

...I returned again in 2012 and everything is roped off or closed off with bushes you can't see past. Only a lucky few who can manage to sit on the three seat bleachers can watch their favorite players practice on their day off. It's things like that that used to make it so amazing that now just feel cheap. Also that Stadium needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

The West practice courts were never the best place to watch a practice. Really any other court for practice is pretty good and the New Grandstand has its entire West side in shade with a large scrim type thing so you can hide from the midday sun. That was good design and they should fit one on the top of Ct 17 too because you can melt on that court.

I agree Ashe is not an ideal stadium to watch a tennis match. From any seat. And I'm being generous with my description.

However, the entire facility has been completely redone since you've been there. Some pros and some cons. New 4/5/6 are three great courts. The West practice courts now have bleachers behind the courts so you don't have to sit on the three seat bleachers on the side looking through a chain-link fence. It's still not a great setup just better than before. The offset between the back of each court and the seats on the bleachers is a poor design; you can't sit directly behind any one court. And the vantage point is steep.

There are no roped off areas or tree obstructions that I can think of (unless you count certain areas not really intended for viewing behind and to the side of the West practice courts which people still insist on watching from. ).

You should give it another chance. If you don't like it send me your ticket for reimbursement. Offer only good for qualies week.

 

[eldanger25]

There was a great article about the unique appeal of the Open a few years ago - can't find a link to it now. Something about the passing of the seasons (how it is summer in NYC the first week, autumn the second week) lining up to the last major of the calendar season, and the progress of time (since often the retiring greats say farewell at the Open because it is the last of the great four tournaments each year).

It is a wonderful tournament, with glitz and charm (some unintentional) and a tremendous, forward-thinking history (equal-prize money since 1973, when it took the other three majors another 30-35 years to get their heads right). The Open has suffered, if it has suffered at all, and only on the ATP side, because (1) the greatest and most popular player has not won there in a decade, and (2) the greatest and most popular ATP rivalry potentially ever has never included a match at the Open.

Borg-Connors: 4 matches (two title fights) at the Open during their primes;
Borg-McEnroe: 2 matches (both title fights) during their primes;
Connors-Mac: 4 matches (including de facto title fight in '84 on the famous Super Saturday) during their primes;
Connors-Lendl: 4 matches (two title fights) across the 80s;
Lendl-Mac: 5 matches (two title fights) across the 80s;
Lendl-Wilander: back to back title fights there, 1987-88;
Agassi-Sampras: 4 matches (three title fights) between 1990 and 2002;
Roddick-Fed, Hewitt-Fed each had a title fight there when their rivalries were still meaningful.

And of course:
Federer-Nadal: 0 matches there

As a consolation prize, the Djokovic-Nadal trilogy at the top of this decade was fantastic; Murray's 2012 triumph was really compelling and has been somewhat unfairly overshadowed by the Wimbledon title the following season; Del Potro's 2009 win was magical and tragic; and, further to that article's point I mentioned above, the Open continues to consistently introduce and say farewell to compelling figures of the sport in terms of early- and late-career great runs at a major:

Ashe 1968
Tracy Austin and Mac, kid titlists, 1979
Lendl makes a teenaged run to the quarters in 1980
Evert's farewell trip to the quarters, 1989
Sampras bookend titles as a teenager and thirtysomething, 1990 and 2002
Sabatini breaking through in 1990
Connors, 1991 semis, the lion in winter
Venus 1997, Serena 1999, the dawn of a new era at the close of a century
Agassi farewell runs in 2005/06
Clijsters breaking through in 2005
Safin drawing and quartering Sampras in 2000, Hewitt 2001, Roddick 2003 (and his emotional 2012 farewell and visor-clad teenaged run to the quarters in '01)
Kid finalists/titlists Djokovic 2007, Murray 2008, Del Potro and Woz 2009
Murray breaking through in 2012
Kei/Cilic offering a glimpse of what the Lost Generation may have been, 2014
Flavia 2015 (and Vinci felling the queen a round earlier)
Sloane breaking through, Shapo making the second week, 2017

Man, what a great tournament.

 

[NaBUru38]

Not bad for a Non-Profit

Tell that to FIFA...

 

[NaBUru38]

Flushing Meadows isn't scenic?

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

The identity of the USO is night matches with raucous crowds to keep it simple. Unfortunately I think it's lost a bit of that luster. When was the last time we got a truly epic night match on the ATP? I say ATP because Sharapova and Halep was great last year.

Federer-Tiafoe went 5 sets but it wasn't what I'd call epic. Where's Agassi vs Blake when we need it? Or Agassi vs Sampras? The USO is suffering because there are no decent Americans for sure, but I think a Federer-Nadal showdown would really help the tournament too, although it wouldn't be a night match with things as they stand. At least for this year because last year was brutal. I've never seen a draw more lopsided than that with all the contenders on one side and all the pretenders on the other.

Federer and Kyrgios decided to boycott and do it at Miami instead.

 

[Tshooter]

Flushing Meadows isn't scenic?

Flushing Meadows Park is quite scenic, in parts, not that most attending the USO will spend any time in it other than to/from parking and maybe a photo at the Unisphere.

The tennis grounds are less scenic than before the most recent expansion: less trees/grass; more cement and shops.

 

[Tshooter]

...
Man, what a great tournament.

Dont sell it. It’s already way too crowded. It will only get worse with the new stadium.