Note to Sinner etc: Tennis should be entertaining!

[NoleFam]

People talk a lot of women's tennis but since I started watching tennis , it has never been very interesting. They can't slice or volley.

In the late 90s through mid 2000s, the women were ruling. The Hingis clashes with the Williams sisters were must see events, and Davenport to a lesser extent. Then Capriati came back to the top, and then the Belgians Clijsters and Henin emerged. Not to mention Pierce, Seles, Mauresmo, etc. in the mix. Kournikova was playing and bringing a lot of male attention. That era was great and a complete different situation than now.

 

[10sbeast888]

In the late 90s through mid 2000s, the women were ruling. The Hingis clashes with the Williams sisters were must see events, and Davenport to a lesser extent. Then Capriati came back to the top, and then the Belgians Clijsters and Henin emerged. Not to mention Pierce, Seles, Mauresmo, etc. in the mix. Kournikova was playing and bringing a lot of male attention. That era was great and a complete different situation than now.

ok I give you that... bottom line is we need variety.

problem is the equipment and universal court speed and now every coach/player is using computer metrix and the optimal is determined by AI and the player has no creativity... the computer says serve plus 1 whatever.. the player just becomes a robot that executes it.

 

[NoleFam]

ok I give you that... bottom line is we need variety.

problem is the equipment and universal court speed and now every coach/player is using computer metrix and the optimal is determined by AI and the player has no creativity... the computer says serve plus 1 whatever.. the player just becomes a robot that executes it.

I think the 1st line covered it. There's not much variety. Most of the female players now aren't even that good at net. I think skill wise they aren't on the level of most of the players I listed above. There's not many interesting personalities compared to them either. It was truly the golden era of women's tennis.

 

[Quaichang]

I actually didn't think Lendl was boring. He was a warrior with fire in his eyes and lots of temperament (at least after 1984). And he had a very pretty forehand.

I agree. Huge fan of Lendl.

 

[Tallawah Tennis]

Man, Jannik won the ATP 'fan favourite' award second year running. The word 'boring' seems misplaced.

 

[captainbryce]

There is nothing boring about Nole that isn't about Nadal. Nadal played more boring brand of tennis, camping farther back and not having initiative.

Calm down fanboy - you’re entitled to your opinion, but that really wasn’t the point!

 

[CHillTennis]

Tennis is an entertainment as well as a sport. If there are too few personalities the entertainment value is far less and people will switch off.

When I first started going to Wimbledon you had a brilliant variety of personalities with a fascinating variety of playing styles: Nastase, Newcombe, Connors, Ashe, Rosewall, Gerulaitis, Borg, Tanner and then of course came McEnroe. Every one different. Every one their own distinct personality. And their personality was reflected in how they played the game. When they played, each match was its own little soap opera as well as a sporting contest. Entertainment!

Now, we not only have players who all play the same but most seem to have the same lack of personality. Sinner is the worst of the lot. A bland automaton blasting the ball from the baseline. Thank goodness for Alcaraz. He has personality. Life. That's why the public have reacted to him. But he can't do it alone. No wonder Netflix cancelled that tennis show. The players were even more boring off the court than they were on it!

The players need to realise they are in an entertainment. The tennis authorities need to realise that people won't want to watch five hours of baseline rallies between bland, robotic players.
Start entertaining the public or tennis will die!

I will take Jannik Sinner and his blandness any day over Kyrgios and his desperate attention seeking antics.

 

[eb_tennis_247]

Start entertaining the public or tennis will die!"

100%.

Does anyone think that Fast4 or UTS style might be a solution?

 

[socallefty]

100%.

Does anyone think that Fast4 or UTS style might be a solution?

Not for me. I switch off anything that has weird scoring as it doesn’t feel like a tennis match to me - don’t watch NextGen finals either for Fast4/no Ad reason. UTS is even weirder with all their new rules.

 

[Robert F]

100%.

Does anyone think that Fast4 or UTS style might be a solution?

I'm a big fan of the traditional 5 set format. Love big long showdowns, but I know the rest of the world is no longer leaning that way.

I wonder instead of Fast4, UTS, 3rd set as a tb formats, a good compromise would be B of 3 8 game sets. I think this would be also great for the woman's game. Too many hour matches at 6-2, 6-2 finals. An 8 set game gives the underdog a few more chances to catch up.

 

[Candide]

Another, "the thing I don't like is the bad thing" argument. Beauty (and ugliness) are in the eye of the beholder. Sinner rocks.

 

[eb_tennis_247]

Not discussing ugly or beauty, but boredom, monotony and lifelessness vs. something that is exciting to watch.

Watching Sinner play is like watching PONG.

 

[Candide]

Not discussing ugly or beauty, but boredom, monotony and lifelessness vs. something that is exciting to watch.

Watching Sinner play is like watching PONG.

I got to sit pretty close to the front row to watch him dispatch Marcos Giron at Rod Laver this year. To see someone consistently step in and take the ball so early and hit with such overwhelming pace was incredibly exciting and fun for me. The point is that it's still a matter of personal taste.

 

[eb_tennis_247]

I got to sit pretty close to the front row to watch him dispatch Marcos Giron at Rod Laver this year. To see someone consistently step in and take the ball so early and hit with such overwhelming pace was incredibly exciting and fun for me. The point is that it's still a matter of personal taste.

Fair enough. Believe it or not, I was just replying to say … “De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum.” to your point.

Plus, I am just a disgruntled Charlie fan .

 

[jm1972]

Tennis is an entertainment as well as a sport. If there are too few personalities the entertainment value is far less and people will switch off.

When I first started going to Wimbledon you had a brilliant variety of personalities with a fascinating variety of playing styles: Nastase, Newcombe, Connors, Ashe, Rosewall, Gerulaitis, Borg, Tanner and then of course came McEnroe. Every one different. Every one their own distinct personality. And their personality was reflected in how they played the game. When they played, each match was its own little soap opera as well as a sporting contest. Entertainment!

Now, we not only have players who all play the same but most seem to have the same lack of personality. Sinner is the worst of the lot. A bland automaton blasting the ball from the baseline. Thank goodness for Alcaraz. He has personality. Life. That's why the public have reacted to him. But he can't do it alone. No wonder Netflix cancelled that tennis show. The players were even more boring off the court than they were on it!

The players need to realise they are in an entertainment. The tennis authorities need to realise that people won't want to watch five hours of baseline rallies between bland, robotic players.
Start entertaining the public or tennis will die!

Probably on beta-blockers.

 

[GreenClay]

Tennis is an entertainment as well as a sport. If there are too few personalities the entertainment value is far less and people will switch off.

When I first started going to Wimbledon you had a brilliant variety of personalities with a fascinating variety of playing styles: Nastase, Newcombe, Connors, Ashe, Rosewall, Gerulaitis, Borg, Tanner and then of course came McEnroe. Every one different. Every one their own distinct personality. And their personality was reflected in how they played the game. When they played, each match was its own little soap opera as well as a sporting contest. Entertainment!

Now, we not only have players who all play the same but most seem to have the same lack of personality. Sinner is the worst of the lot. A bland automaton blasting the ball from the baseline. Thank goodness for Alcaraz. He has personality. Life. That's why the public have reacted to him. But he can't do it alone. No wonder Netflix cancelled that tennis show. The players were even more boring off the court than they were on it!

The players need to realise they are in an entertainment. The tennis authorities need to realise that people won't want to watch five hours of baseline rallies between bland, robotic players.
Start entertaining the public or tennis will die!

Polyester string is the real problem here. They need to figure out how to outlaw any string that can produce ungodly RPMs while also making sure that serves don’t dominate the game.

Not an easy task, but unless things change, they’re going to lose loads of players to pickleball and loads of viewers to other sports.

(In addition to baseline banging, polyester, encourages the pros to use super high speed racket acceleration on their strokes, making it hard for normal players to relate to the pros. (A far cry from the strokes of the 80s and earlier eras.))

 

[Robert F]

Polyester string is the real problem here. They need to figure out how to outlaw any string that can produce ungodly RPMs while also making sure that serves don’t dominate the game.

Not an easy task, but unless things change, they’re going to lose loads of players to pickleball and loads of viewers to other sports.

(In addition to baseline banging, polyester, encourages the pros to use super high speed racket acceleration on their strokes, making it hard for normal players to relate to the pros. (A far cry from the strokes of the 80s and earlier eras.))

In some ways it is fun that we can all use different racquets, sizes, composites and strings. But in other ways I'm amazed that tennis doesn't put stricter limits on the equipment pros use.
Banning poly, limiting racquet size to 95 or smaller could solve some of the problems that the advance strings and increased athelticism of the pros bring--super baseline tennis.

By banning poly and limiting racquet size, the net game might be a viable option without giving the serve too much power to create a world of serve bots.

My understanding is slowing down the courts and balls was a response to the game becoming too fast and short in the late 90s.