Is it me or does the French Open feel less like a grandslam then the other slams

Elektra

Professional
I have watched the Grandslams for a long time and each slam comes with a different feeling, atomsphere etc. The French Open seems to be the less exciting grandslam in terms of atomsphere. To me it reminds me more a large tennis tournament, however the vibe seems off.

Does anybody feel this way?
 

cluckcluck

Hall of Fame
I think a few things factor in on this feeling. First of all, the French crowd has always been pretty nonchalant at RG. Very infrequently, they get behind the players and root for them (even their countrymen).
Secondly, this year the temps have been cool and rainy; the roof would improve the tournament and the crowd experience. Use it.
Thirdly, it's every guy against Nadal. He's the greatest clay courter ever, so every other ATP player is out there for table scraps.
Fourthly, the WTA is totally inconsistent. We see a lot of 6-0, 1-6, 6-2 scorelines, it's not close and lacks drama.
Fifthly, it's really hard to see the ball on TV during play. It kind of gets lost in the shadows so it's hard to follow (similar at Wimbledon during second week).
 

Elektra

Professional
I think a few things factor in on this feeling. First of all, the French crowd has always been pretty nonchalant at RG. Very infrequently, they get behind the players and root for them (even their countrymen).
Secondly, this year the temps have been cool and rainy; the roof would improve the tournament and the crowd experience. Use it.
Thirdly, it's every guy against Nadal. He's the greatest clay courter ever, so every other ATP player is out there for table scraps.
Fourthly, the WTA is totally inconsistent. We see a lot of 6-0, 1-6, 6-2 scorelines, it's not close and lacks drama.
Fifthly, it's really hard to see the ball on TV during play. It kind of gets lost in the shadows so it's hard to follow (similar at Wimbledon during second week).

Great points, I don't have a problem with Nadal being the King of the Tournament, he has made RG relevant the last decade but I don't think it is as competitive cause we know a lot of the players don't play a lot on clay, therefore you feel their insecurities on the surface. I also think that the ball is hard to see, which is why a lot of tournament organizers want to do hard court more cause it is easier to see on television and cost effective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

Lleytonstation

G.O.A.T.
For me it has the least parity obviously, but I also don't get to watch any match during weekdays in my location. Australian is at night or early morning, US is afternoon or night, and Wimbledon is when I am on vacation.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
I have watched the Grandslams for a long time and each slam comes with a different feeling, atomsphere etc. The French Open seems to be the less exciting grandslam in terms of atomsphere. To me it reminds me more a large tennis tournament, however the vibe seems off.

Does anybody feel this way?
Some Fed fans... for a reason.

Ask a Nadal fan or even a Djokovic fan about RG and generally you will find no complaints.

The reason why some (not all) Fed fans complain about RG is to justify Federer's relative lack of success at RG (compared with Nadal). 11 vs 1 is a giant difference, so some Fed fans need to justify it denigrating RG to excuse Roger. The same strategy is employed with the Olympic Gold in singles, which is denigrated by some (not all) Fed fans to justify Federer's lack of success at the Olympics in singles.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Some Fed fans... for a reason.

Ask a Nadal fan or even a Djokovic fan about RG and generally you will find no complaints.

The reason why some (not all) Fed fans complain about RG is to justify Federer's relative lack of succes at RG (compared with Nadal). The same strategy is emplyed with the Olympic Gold in singles, which is denigrated by some (not all) Fed fans to justify Federer's lack of succes at the Olympics.
Would you agree the same is true to explain the behavior of some Nadal fans in regards to Nadal's failure to win the biggest indoor title of the season, the WTF?
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
I think a few things factor in on this feeling. First of all, the French crowd has always been pretty nonchalant at RG. Very infrequently, they get behind the players and root for them (even their countrymen).
Secondly, this year the temps have been cool and rainy; the roof would improve the tournament and the crowd experience. Use it.
Thirdly, it's every guy against Nadal. He's the greatest clay courter ever, so every other ATP player is out there for table scraps.
Fourthly, the WTA is totally inconsistent. We see a lot of 6-0, 1-6, 6-2 scorelines, it's not close and lacks drama.
Fifthly, it's really hard to see the ball on TV during play. It kind of gets lost in the shadows so it's hard to follow (similar at Wimbledon during second week).
You must have not watched Monfils today.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Would you agree the same is true to explain the behavior of some Nadal fans in regards to Nadal's failure to win the biggest indoor title of the season, the WTF?
Absolutely, and until 2017 the AO was inferior because it was Novak's main major. That's the way partisans spin it.

It's really easy to look down on RG as inferior because you-know-who won it 11 times and may win it again. But saying it is "inferior" is not something Fed or Novak will ever say, since they both struggled so hard to win it just once. ;)
 

thrust

Hall of Fame
I have watched the Grandslams for a long time and each slam comes with a different feeling, atomsphere etc. The French Open seems to be the less exciting grandslam in terms of atomsphere. To me it reminds me more a large tennis tournament, however the vibe seems off.

Does anybody feel this way?
It is YOU!
 

Federer and Del Potro

Talk Tennis Guru
I could see how Fed fans find the French a bit boring or Nadal fans find Wimbledon a bit boring. I thought both events 2017 versions were pretty drab.

I enjoy clay court tennis but I do wish there was more competition. At least on grass there is a little more parity, primarily because serve is such a big weapon that upsets are not uncommon.

At least the FO is the second major of the season. Imagine if it was the last like USO is when everyone is on fumes. The most grueling surface with players on fumes..yikes. Ironically that would add to its intrigue though because then maybe Nadal wouldn't be 3859383939-2 on the surface.
 

MeatTornado

G.O.A.T.
I could see how Fed fans find the French a bit boring or Nadal fans find Wimbledon a bit boring. I thought both events 2017 versions were pretty drab.

I enjoy clay court tennis but I do wish there was more competition. At least on grass there is a little more parity, primarily because serve is such a big weapon that upsets are not uncommon.

At least the FO is the second major of the season. Imagine if it was the last like USO is when everyone is on fumes. The most grueling surface with players on fumes..yikes. Ironically that would add to its intrigue though because then maybe Nadal wouldn't be 3859383939-2 on the surface.
I've always wished the tour started the season with clay and and got progressively faster as the players get more tired throughout the year.

Obviously weather & scheduling make that impossible, but it's a nice thought. At the very least I wish the AO & USO would swap back to Australia being the slow one and NY being the fast hard court.
 

Federer and Del Potro

Talk Tennis Guru
I honestly find the USO to be the hardest to get into nowadays when it used to be my 2nd favorite behind Wimbledon. By this point in the calendar it's usually about who is the best survivor and a lot of the finals have been incredibly one sided as of late.

That's probably because all the best players on tour are well over 30 years of age so the wear and tear is so incredibly evident by that point in the last few years.

And even STILL the young guys can't dethrone these players (looking at you Thiem/Khachanov).

TTW is the least enjoyable during CC season though I personally think. All the bickering and "new" accounts that litter the forum.
 

Otacon

Hall of Fame
Bigger is not synonymous of better.
I've been to the tournament a few times during my stay in France and I always felt the energy and the passion not only in the RG stadium but in the whole city of Paris because tennis is genuinely popular out there. In fact, Roland Garros is not considered as a mere sporting event, but it's part of France's cultural heritage just like the Tour de France.

Of course, the tournament facilities needed to be brought up to date and it took a lot of time. But from what I'm reading and hearing from people on site, the ongoing transformation is very successful as evidenced by the new Simonne-Mathieu court.

So IMO, RG is as good as other GS tournaments and Paris is anyway a lot more interesting than London, New York and Melbourne.
 
Last edited:

Federer and Del Potro

Talk Tennis Guru
Bigger is not synonymous of better.
I've been to the tournament a few times during my stay in France and I always felt the energy and the passion not only in the RG stadium but in the whole city of Paris because tennis is genuinely popular out there. In fact, Roland Garros is not considered as a mere sporting event, but it's part of France's cultural heritage just like the Tour de France.

Of course, the tournament facilities needed to be brought up to date and it took a lot of time. But from what I'm reading and hearing from people on site, the ongoing transformation is very successful as evidence by the new Simonne-Mathieu court.

So IMO, RG is as good as other GS tournaments and Paris is anyway a lot more interesting than London, New York and Melbourne.
Agreed until the blasphemous last sentence. Paris does not have @Mainad
 

Elektra

Professional
I honestly find the USO to be the hardest to get into nowadays when it used to be my 2nd favorite behind Wimbledon. By this point in the calendar it's usually about who is the best survivor and a lot of the finals have been incredibly one sided as of late.

That's probably because all the best players on tour are well over 30 years of age so the wear and tear is so incredibly evident by that point in the last few years.

And even STILL the young guys can't dethrone these players (looking at you Thiem/Khachanov).

TTW is the least enjoyable during CC season though I personally think. All the bickering and "new" accounts that litter the forum.
USO is enjoyable cause you see dark horses rise the most in that tournament. USO has had more different champions then the other slams, the atompshere rewards underdogs. RG and Wimbledeon is very predictable cause all that you will see is focus on Big Three and Serena around Wimbledeon time.
 

Federer and Del Potro

Talk Tennis Guru
USO is enjoyable cause you see dark horses rise the most in that tournament. USO has had more different champions then the other slams, the atompshere rewards underdogs. RG and Wimbledeon is very predictable cause all that you will see is focus on Big Three and Serena around Wimbledeon time.
I agree with this but at the same time it’s usually most conducive to dark horses because the favorites are ancient in sporting terms and tired. To me I’d rather see a dark horse be a dark horse through sublime play not opportunism. I do love USO’s atmosphere though. Totally agree. It’s the only slam besides Wimbledon I’ve been to live.
 

Elektra

Professional
Bigger is not synonymous of better.
I've been to the tournament a few times during my stay in France and I always felt the energy and the passion not only in the RG stadium but in the whole city of Paris because tennis is genuinely popular out there. In fact, Roland Garros is not considered as a mere sporting event, but it's part of France's cultural heritage just like the Tour de France.

Of course, the tournament facilities needed to be brought up to date and it took a lot of time. But from what I'm reading and hearing from people on site, the ongoing transformation is very successful as evidence by the new Simonne-Mathieu court.

So IMO, RG is as good as other GS tournaments and Paris is anyway a lot more interesting than London, New York and Melbourne.
Paris is beautiful in my opinion, better than sterile London. NYC is it's own monster the energy of the city is unique.
 

Elektra

Professional
I agree with this but at the same time it’s usually most conducive to dark horses because the favorites are ancient in sporting terms and tired. To me I’d rather see a dark horse be a dark horse through sublime play not opportunism. I do love USO’s atmosphere though. Totally agree. It’s the only slam besides Wimbledon I’ve been to live.
I think also that since USO is the last grandslam, the players want to give it their all in this grandslam and it rewards the most prize money and USO loves fight and grit. Also more players become more popular stars winning the USO tournament more then the others. Even Rafa said that winning the USO feels more special. Andy Murray broke through USO and made him part of the Big Four.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
The reason why some (not all) Fed fans complain about RG is to justify Federer's relative lack of success at RG (compared with Nadal). 11 vs 1 is a giant difference, so some Fed fans need to justify it denigrating RG to excuse Roger. The same strategy is employed with the Olympic Gold in singles, which is denigrated by some (not all) Fed fans to justify Federer's lack of success at the Olympics in singles.
Is it not baffling hubris to speak on behalf of a fan base to which you do not belong? I was a bigger Lendl fan than I've ever been a fan of Roger and I hated the FO in the 80's, even though Ivan won it three times. Many tennis fans dislike clay because of the slow conditions. Millions aren't even Fed fans, just overall fans of the game.
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
@Gary Duane @Hitman

The OP never mentioned Fed or Djokovic yet you guys had to make it about fandom coloring preferences huh? ;)

I've been watching tennis for a long time, long before Fed and the French was always a second tier slam for me. Until Agassi won it, I never used to pay much attention other than say the finals (even that was spotty).

The prime factor for a number of years was that it was never the playground for the best players in the world and more of a clay-specialist's stomping ground. One could say the same about the Australian but it hasn't been the same since the mid-90s at least - ever since the Agassi-Sampras rivalry heated up down under.
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Nadal has won 11 out of the last 14 French Opens. A lot of people don't like this.
True. I'm one of the people who is, let's just say, not so enamored by his exploits at the FO even though objectively they are huge.

Yet, perhaps if the concept can fit in your mind, there are other reasons to dislike the slam. (a dislike predating Nadal and which also colors my judgment of his achievements there)
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
I think also that since USO is the last grandslam, the players want to give it their all in this grandslam and it rewards the most prize money and USO loves fight and grit. Also more players become more popular stars winning the USO tournament more then the others. Even Rafa said that winning the USO feels more special. Andy Murray broke through USO and made him part of the Big Four.
Wimbledon still carries the most prestige. Rafa said in his memoir, "Rafa: My Story" that he was told by Toni from an early age that Wimbledon was the one to win, not RG as you might have expected.
 

CiscoPC600

Professional
@Gary Duane @Hitman

The OP never mentioned Fed or Djokovic yet you guys had to make it about fandom coloring preferences huh? ;)

I've been watching tennis for a long time, long before Fed and the French was always a second tier slam for me. Until Agassi won it, I never used to pay much attention other than say the finals (even that was spotty).

The prime factor for a number of years was that it was never the playground for the best players in the world and more of a clay-specialist's stomping ground. One could say the same about the Australian but it hasn't been the same since the mid-90s at least - ever since the Agassi-Sampras rivalry heated up down under.

The same could be said for Wimbledon--more of a grass-specialist's stomping ground.

On another note, if aesthetics and BS aura is OP's reason (like many others) then that is subjective. Eliteness always attracts a good crowd but really doesn't mean anything. Personally, as you can tell by my response, it's my favorite slam. Longer points, more creativity, etc. Yes, it gets a bit old that Rafa is always winning but that doesn't take away from the other matches leading to the final. Could the French Open improve the grounds and atmosphere? Of course.
 

Otacon

Hall of Fame
Some Fed fans... for a reason.

Ask a Nadal fan or even a Djokovic fan about RG and generally you will find no complaints.

The reason why some (not all) Fed fans complain about RG is to justify Federer's relative lack of success at RG (compared with Nadal). 11 vs 1 is a giant difference, so some Fed fans need to justify it denigrating RG to excuse Roger. The same strategy is employed with the Olympic Gold in singles, which is denigrated by some (not all) Fed fans to justify Federer's lack of success at the Olympics in singles.
I agree with you on the first part but on the Olympics, it's Nadal’s fans that started hyping it way too much. Not the other way around.
 

Elektra

Professional
Wimbledon still carries the most prestige. Rafa said in his memoir, "Rafa: My Story" that he was told by Toni from an early age that Wimbledon was the one to win, not RG as you might have expected.
Yup cause Wimbldeon is the oldest followed by US Open. Another is due to the fact that Wimbldeon always got the glory compared to RG, when watching tennis history you always heard Wimbledeon and US Open as the most prominent grandslams during Open era cause the legends took part in those grandslams the most but never AO and RG.
 
Top