Is Cult Tennis A Credible YouTube Channel?

Do you find the Cult Tennis videos to be interesting, informative and / or entertaining?

  • Yes

    Votes: 18 48.6%

  • No

    Votes: 19 51.4%
  • Total voters
    37
CHillTennis

CHillTennis

Hall of Fame
I had an interesting experience on the tennis courts last year.

I met a friend on the tennis courts for practice.

After we were done hitting, I spent some time talking with him on the sidelines.

In the course of our conversation he mentioned the YouTube channel Cult Tennis and asked me if I was familiar with it.

I told him that I was.

My friend asked me what I thought of the channel.

I told him that I thought it was pretty good.

In the time since, I have been asked this question by several other people.

Now that I've had a bit of time to reflect on my answer, I feel that my opinion has really changed.

While I respect the work that it takes to create high quality content on YouTube (I have some experience in this matter) and like many of you, I have a deep interest in the history of the game.

I started to realize that videos on his channel really don't provide much more than a base level understanding on the topics that he covers.

I also have to admit that I haven't really learned much of anything from having watched his videos.

In some cases, I would even go so far as to call the videos misleading and dishonest (E.G. The Controversial Rise of Nick Kyrgios and The Battle of the Sexes.)

I find the editing style to be a bit of a mixed bag.

Which makes it hard to sit through the entire video.

Now that we seem to be getting more and more channels that are copying Cult Tennis' style (some of which are completely unwatchable) I'm a bit concerned for the future of tennis-related documentaries on YouTube.

If you guys enjoy these videos then let me know what you like about them.
 
Last edited:
Flashy editing but short on substance and over reliance on click baity titles. I briefly subscribed and after about 6 months, my opinion on him soured and I unsubed from him.

that’s about 3 times as long as I lasted when compared with Tennis Spin, far and away the worst ‘popular’ tennis channel. I made the mistake of watching a few videos of his, and then the Youtube algorithm assumed I LOVED it and constantly filled my sidebar with his crap videos. It got to the point where I actually clicked "do not recommend videos from this channel" just to end the madness. Now the only time I see them is when people post them here...
 
Last edited:
kevin qmto said:
Flashy editing but short on substance and over reliance on click baity titles. I briefly subscribed and after about 6 months, my opinion on him soured and I unsubed from him.

that’s about 3 times as long as I lasted when compared with Tennis Spin, far and away the worst ‘popular’ tennis channel.
Click to expand...

Same here. I was briefly subscribed to the channel but then decided to unsubscribe after I realized that I wasn't getting any value out of the content.

I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say the videos are bad.

Sadly, I have seen plenty that are far worse.

But I also feel that for a channel with over 120,000 subscribers, the quality of the content is not very good.

I have seen boxing channels with similar subscriber counts that have mind-blowing good content.

Cult Tennis sets a very low bar.
 
undermining the competition eh

(jk)


he’s alright, could be better, I think he dumbs things down a notch to appeal to a wider audience. Tennis needs the equivalent of a Foolish Baseball-type content creator that combines great material with novel presentation.
 
CHillTennis said:
I had an interesting experience on the tennis courts last year.

I met a friend on the tennis courts for practice.

After we were done hitting, I spent some time talking with him on the sidelines.

In the course of our conversation he mentioned the YouTube channel Cult Tennis and asked me if I was familiar with it.

I told him that I was.

My friend asked me what I thought of the channel.

I told him that I thought it was pretty good.

In the time since, I have been asked this question by several other people.

Now that I've had a bit of time to reflect on my answer, I feel that my opinion has really changed.

While I respect the work that it takes to create high quality content on YouTube (I have some experience in this matter) and like many of you, I have a deep interest in the history of the game.

I started to realize that videos on his channel really don't provide much more than a base level understanding on the topics that he covers.

I also have to admit that I haven't really learned much of anything from having watched his videos.

In some cases, I would even go so far as to call the videos misleading and dishonest (E.G. The Controversial Rise of Nick Kyrgios and The Battle of the Sexes.)

I find the editing style to be a bit of a mixed bag.

Which makes it hard to sit through the entire video.

Now that we seem to be getting more and more channels that are copying Cult Tennis' style (some of which are completely unwatchable) I'm a bit concerned for the future of tennis-related documentaries on YouTube.

If you guys enjoy these videos then let me know what you like about them.
Click to expand...
Cult tennis is weak era channel aka Hewitt in 01-02.
There's no one better that's it.
 
TheFifthSet said:
undermining the competition eh

(jk)


he’s alright, could be better, I think he dumbs things down a notch to appeal to a wider audience. Tennis needs the equivalent of a Foolish Baseball-type content creator that combines great material with novel presentation.
Click to expand...

Not really.

His viewers would not be at all interested in my channel.
 
I think the whole “base level” is what he’s going for so he can appeal to a wider audience.

I think it’s beneficial. Would be nice to actually have tennis appeal to the casual audience more and spread more awareness about our sport.

Of course for most of us here, his content does little to nothing. But still interesting nonetheless in my opinion.
 
CHillTennis said:
Not really.

His viewers would not be at all interested in my channel.
Click to expand...

I liked videos from both channels. What’s tribal knowledge to us passes as zoinksomgawdmindblowing to most new tennis fans - I think there’s value to his MO.
 
Last edited:
I was wondering what happened to that one with the cute blonde girl, but it seems she ditched her teaching pro boyfriend and got cozy with ol' Patrick Monkeyglue.


Can you imagine the stories this guy can tell??

lorqiuO.png
 
Some videos I learned things, most I didn't (not a criticism, since he captures a general audience, just a reason not for me). I know it's not fair, but I immediately get turned off from overly intense/stylized thumbnails and titles. It was interesting for a few topics, but I got bored of how he is mostly a neutral presenter, like watching a movie that builds something up just leave things unanswered so the audience can come up with their own ideas and answers. I know neutrality helps him not turn away viewers, but still, I come away with an unsatisfied feeling, like what was the point since I'm already aware of both sides of the "debate" as his videos often go.

But I'm always happy to see a tennis channel doing well. I'm honestly shocked that even with all the click baity stuff and high quality graphics he gets as many views as he does. Tennis on YouTube is usually a huge flop. Foot Doctor Zac figured that out pretty quickly, realizing the basketball and doctor space is far more rewarding.
 
Last edited:
I watch some tennis and baseball channels and to me it's more like Baseball Doesn't Exist where they have these click-baity titles but in fact are just wiki pages disguised as video montages that present easily Googleable facts and present few meaningful conclusions.

Stuff like Foolish Baseball and Veritasium (yes it's not sports-related) are much more intriguing in terms of how they set out to reach conclusions or, if the conclusions are established, at least present you with the methodology with which the conclusions are reached.
 
Clay lover said:
I watch some tennis and baseball channels and to me it's more like Baseball Doesn't Exist where they have these click-baity titles but in fact are just wiki pages disguised as video montages that present easily Googleable facts and present few meaningful conclusions.

Stuff like Foolish Baseball and Veritasium (yes it's not sports-related) are much more intriguing in terms of how they set out to reach conclusions or, if the conclusions are established, at least present you with the methodology with which the conclusions are reached.
Click to expand...

You have good taste :) agree about BDE too.
 
Last edited:
puppybutts said:
Some videos I learned things, most I didn't (not a criticism, since he captures a general audience, just a reason not for me). I know it's not fair, but I immediately get turned off from overly intense/stylized thumbnails and titles. It was interesting for a few topics, but I got bored of how he is mostly a neutral presenter, like watching a movie that builds something up just leave things unanswered so the audience can come up with their own ideas and answers. I know neutrality helps him not turn away viewers, but still, I come away with an unsatisfied feeling, like what was the point since I'm already aware of both sides of the "debate" as his videos often go.

But I'm always happy to see a tennis channel doing well. I'm honestly shocked that even with all the click baity stuff and high quality graphics he gets as many views as he does. Tennis on YouTube is usually a huge flop. Foot Doctor Zac figured that out pretty quickly, realizing the basketball and doctor space is far more rewarding.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that he's using paid traffic to get those views.

He wouldn't be the only one using it either.
 
JoshDragon said:
I think that Wiki Tennis just found a new competitor.

Click to expand...

There are so many of these copycats out there. And they all make the same exact video.

It literally sounds exactly like they're reading straight off of a Wikipedia page.

I swear that it's some sort of AI software, that has been set loose on YouTube, and it's making all of these laughably bad tennis videos.
 
Last edited:
JoshDragon said:
I think that Wiki Tennis just found a new competitor.

Click to expand...
Lol at the “he won the 2022 US Open” and shows a picture of the Australian Open logo and cup.

I wonder what sort of flashy drag and drop editing suite he uses. If he were manually editing all those key frames his script and overall tone probably wouldn’t be so base level and amateurish.

But yeah, that’s like 3/10 level content right there.
 
kevin qmto said:
Lol at the “he won the 2022 US Open” and shows a picture of the Australian Open logo and cup.

I wonder what sort of flashy drag and drop editing suite he uses. If he were manually editing all those key frames his script and overall tone probably wouldn’t be so base level and amateurish.

But yeah, that’s like 3/10 level content right there.
Click to expand...

Yep. A lot of these guys can't even pronounce the names of the players that they're talking about in the video.

I have heard Agassi pronounced "A-gasy" and Djokovic pronounced "Jockovic."

If you can't even pronounce the names correctly, then you probably should be making a video about these players.
 
CHillTennis said:
I had an interesting experience on the tennis courts last year.

I met a friend on the tennis courts for practice.

After we were done hitting, I spent some time talking with him on the sidelines.

In the course of our conversation he mentioned the YouTube channel Cult Tennis and asked me if I was familiar with it.

I told him that I was.

My friend asked me what I thought of the channel.

I told him that I thought it was pretty good.

In the time since, I have been asked this question by several other people.

Now that I've had a bit of time to reflect on my answer, I feel that my opinion has really changed.

While I respect the work that it takes to create high quality content on YouTube (I have some experience in this matter) and like many of you, I have a deep interest in the history of the game.

I started to realize that videos on his channel really don't provide much more than a base level understanding on the topics that he covers.

I also have to admit that I haven't really learned much of anything from having watched his videos.

In some cases, I would even go so far as to call the videos misleading and dishonest (E.G. The Controversial Rise of Nick Kyrgios and The Battle of the Sexes.)

I find the editing style to be a bit of a mixed bag.

Which makes it hard to sit through the entire video.

Now that we seem to be getting more and more channels that are copying Cult Tennis' style (some of which are completely unwatchable) I'm a bit concerned for the future of tennis-related documentaries on YouTube.

If you guys enjoy these videos then let me know what you like about them.
Click to expand...

Good production and editing but pretty shallow, IMO. But all tennis content is good content.
 
They did a vid on the history of carpet tennis court usage on the ATP Tour that was pretty darn good IMO--production, editing and narration wise. They also have one on the blue clay fiasco from Madrid 2012 that I enjoyed
 
beltsman said:
Good production and editing but pretty shallow, IMO. But all tennis content is good content.
Click to expand...

If you want to see a truly high quality YouTube sports documentary. This would be a perfect example.


The pacing of his video is consistent. He doesn't rely on cuts and fades every two second. And he doesn't use cheesy sound effects that make the videos sound amateurish and crappy.

He also provides some really interesting information about why Tyson started losing a bit of his explosive power after winning his first heavyweight championship.

The guy gives a really good break-down of the evolution of Tyson's career as a boxer.

You could never learn all of this from simply reading a Wikipedia page.
 
CHillTennis said:
I see that he's now claiming that it was the SABR that saved Roger Federer's career. :rolleyes:

Just more nonsense.

And please hire someone decent to edit your videos. This was pathetic. (n)
Click to expand...
Fed used the SABR for an extremely brief time: summer of 2015 until AO 2016, that's only a few months. He did a few SABR's at the 2017 AO and then essentially never did it again. It had nothing to do with "saving" his career, it's just stupidity to suggest it.
 
@BeatlesFan Correct. Long time fans like you or I remember watching these matches when they were live.

The SABR was a tactic that Federer used primarily during the time when he was coached by Edberg.

He did not start winning slams again until he teamed up with Ljubicic.

Ljubicic's greatest contribution to the team was certainly not to encourage Roger to use the SABR.

He practically never used it after early 2017.

Personally, I am getting a bit tired of "Wiki Reads" need to spin the narrative simply for the sake of getting views.

I will have more to say on this soon.
 
Gill Gross is my favorite youtube tennis guy because he's such a level-headed, respectful, agreeable chap.

so basically the opposite of TTW lololol

His content is 99% his talking head though, so if you're in for the fireworks, look elsewhere.
 
aldeayeah said:
Gill Gross is my favorite youtube tennis guy because he's such a level-headed, respectful, agreeable chap.

so basically the opposite of TTW lololol

His content is 99% his talking head though, so if you're in for the fireworks, look elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Gill seems like a very nice guy.

His content is too politically correct for me (especially in this day and age) but I will give him credit for always being cheerful and consistent at what he does.
 
CHillTennis said:
I see that he's now claiming that it was the SABR that saved Roger Federer's career. :rolleyes:

Just more nonsense.

And please hire someone decent to edit your videos. This was pathetic. (n)
Click to expand...
I saw the title of the video a few days ago in my recommendations and rolled my eyes. Haven't bothered watching it.
 
It’s fluff, a simple relaying of information that is readily available for free elsewhere, set to a pretty uninspired montage. The guy’s narration is hardly compelling either. If you don’t like using search to discover things for yourself I guess it serves a purpose but I get no enjoyment whatsoever from these wiki videos.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Actually 2015 isn't remotely close to "a long time ago."

2015 is very recent.

Laver or Poncho is a long time ago, not 8 years ago. ;)
Click to expand...
To Cult Tennis followers. 2015 is like ancient history.

Probably half of them don't even know what the SABR is.

And they think of Roger Federer as being a retired player.

Nobody that's followed the game for ten years or more could sit through his videos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Youtube Tennis Channel
Replies
0
Views
938
kiennham
K
N
Tennis Channel and Youtube TV...Ugh!
Replies
35
Views
9K
Chace
C
L
DirectTV Now
Replies
12
Views
2K
Harry_Wild
Harry_Wild
W
What happened to the YouTube channel Tennis talk with Cam Williams?
Replies
1
Views
366
SystemicAnomaly
SystemicAnomaly
B
ATPMedia blocking a LOT of tennis videos on YouTube
Replies
15
Views
2K
Say Chi Sin Lo
S
Back
Top