Roger Federer's Appreciation in the U.S

[Grigollif1]

I don't understand why, It has become popular in the media to say that The N.1 player in the World is underated in the U.S. I don't know what this is based on, I live in the U.S and every place that I go to play tennis and talk about it. The subejct matter is always the same : ROGER FEDERER's talent . I have never met in person somebody that doesn't actually appreciate his talent. Of coure, here in this threads once in a blue moon some Journeyman will Show up making a lot of noise that he doesn't enjoy Federe's game but, the vast majority of TW mebers are Americans and Most of the them seemed to enjoy Federer's game. So hence the question is Roger Federer under appreciated in the U.S?
my answer, Hell No...

 

[ACE of Hearts]

I dont know about that, right now they dont care about tennis, i bet if Roger walked through time square, some might not even recognize him and his gift of playing the game of tennis.I bet they would recognize Pete Sampras!

 

[8PAQ]

I dont know about that, right now they dont care about tennis, i bet if Roger walked through time square, some might not even recognize him and his gift of playing the game of tennis.I bet they would recognize Pete Sampras!

Just wait few more years. Federer's legend is pretty far from being fully written

 

[Grigollif1]

I dont know about that, right now they dont care about tennis, i bet if Roger walked through time square, some might not even recognize him and his gift of playing the game of tennis.I bet they would recognize Pete Sampras!

Do you think if Jim Courier, Pete Sampras would be that much different? I think the only players that would be easily recognized anywhere in the U.S are Andre Agassi , John Mcenroe and Borg. Mostly because of Non tennis activities...

 

[Free_Martha]

Federer doesn't have the star power to get Americans excited about.

 

[Applez]

Most Great tennis players ( especially during their dominating years) are normally under appreciated here in the US until the later stages of their career or until they retire

Just like Sampras, Navratilova, Seles, McEnroe et al

It's a common fact that most Americans always root for the underdog

 

[goober]

Do you think if Jim Courier, Pete Sampras would be that much different? I think the only players that would be easily recognized anywhere in the U.S are Andre Agassi , John Mcenroe and Borg. Mostly because of Non tennis activities...

Kournikova would be the most recognized

I doubt if Borg would be recognized today if he walked down the street in Manhattan.

 

[Keifers]

Among people who know tennis, no question that Federer is well-known and much admired.

It's the other part of ESPN's viewership that is always late to the game, even for a once-in-a-generation-perhaps-best-ever talent like Fed.

 

[rommil]

Federer doesn't have the star power to get Americans excited about.

....but he's got more than enough fire power to whoop Andy's behind.

 

[Grimjack]

A lot of the most popular and successful athletes in the world are pretty far from household names and faces in the US. The world's best soccer players, F1 drivers, and even boxers earn more money and respect than just about any other athletes (or "sportsmen" or "competitors" or whatever) in the world.

Yet these people could walk right into a sports bar in the US and remain practically anonymous. There's the odd Beckham or De la Hoya out there, but for the most part, nobody in the US gives a rat's ass about these international superstars. Same deal with tennis. It's not Federer, but tennis as an entire entity that suffers from an appreciation and recognition problem. Those who follow the game are perfectly cognizant of what Fed is achieving. But more and more, that's a small, cult following.

He gets as much respect as any player ever has, relative to the coverage he receives here. Tennis is simply losing the marketing war.

 

[rilokiley]

I doubt if Borg would be recognized today if he walked down the street in Manhattan.

I wouldn't recognize him unless I sat down with him and had a nice tennis talk.

 

[Shabazza]

He gets as much respect as any player ever has, relative to the coverage he receives here. Tennis is simply losing the marketing war.

Sad but true.

I wouldn't recognize him unless I sat down with him and had a nice tennis talk.

In swedish.

 

[@wright]

Tennis isn't exactly the superstar in the US sports race. That said, I bet people recognize Andy Roddick as a tennis player, even if he walked down the street. He's been all over the tube.

 

[Moose Malloy]

I'd take that bet, awright. Roddick could run around my office swinging a racquet & no one would know who he is. He isn't exactly Agassi-like in the endordsement/tv ratings department. Outside of a few commercials during the US Open every year, I never see Roddick on TV.

Federer & Roddick have the same recognizability factor in the US, IMO. Neither one has trascended the tennis crowd like Agassi, Williams sisters.

 

[Colpo]

As far as Roger being viewed as "underrated" here in the US, that just sounds like a way for Roger's fans and some well-regarded tennis observers to say that even though he's won "only" 6 Slams to date, it's acceptable to put him up as a candidate, right now, for greatest of all time. Many folks are doing that, and it's all so premature. For any baseball fans out there, it's like judging Koufax to be the greatest pitcher ever: he was great, but for a career, Sandy had only 6 dominant seasons, and that's probably not enough to say he was the greatest over a career. Same's true with judging Roger as the greatest while his work's only half-done.

Some of the ESPN commentating contingent fall into this group: in order to rationalize their excitement over Roger's brilliance and era-dominance, and to spoon-feed their opinions to us, they rush out and gloss over the fact that he's really only been at this peak since mid-2003, and that a measure of greatness is also to sustain it, not to just achieve it. For them, it's not enough to say he's great or is playing great; it's got to be jammed out to us that he's the greatest. Bull!

Not to take anything away, Roger is and has been Michael Jordan and all, but Sampras won 14 majors and was ranked number 1 for about 5-6 straight years in the 90s, so Roger's got a way to go. Frankly, I doubt he'll get it (averaging a realistic 2 Slam titles a year, he'd have to keep up this pace for 5 more seasons, and he's burning his candle right now 'cause he's over the top brilliant as we speak). Sampras also had many "money" wins; Roger's been stressed only a few times in the past 2.5 years, and his Davis Cup record (I look at that, anyway) doesn't have any Ljubicic-type moments.

I disagree that Roger's best is better than Pete's best, but who knows? Roger undoubtedly looks prettier doing it, but Pete was often devastating with his game and dominated for most of a decade. What separates Roger from Pete is Roger's inhuman ability to avoid bad or routine losses in smaller, workaday tournaments, and he wins just about every event he chooses to enter. How much longer can he keep that up? (Come to think of it, maybe I am underrating him ...)

 

[AngeloDS]

It's a matter of marketing. We don't see Federer or much of Tennis marketed in the US. When was the last time you saw a tennis commercial with Federer in it? Hardly, .

 

[Moose Malloy]

When's the last time you saw a tennis commercial, period? Agassi's canon/nike commercials were aired 24/7 all year long in the 80s & 90s, not just during tennis events. Nike even did extensive spots with Courier & Sampras.
Does Federer do any commercials in Europe? I have a feeling his fame is well behind Becker & Borg in terms of being well known among non tennis fans worldwide.

 

[FiveO]

I don't understand why, It has become popular in the media to say that The N.1 player in the World is underated in the U.S. I don't know what this is based on,...

U.S. tennis players and tennis fans already recognize Fed and appreciate him as one of the very best ever, but there are very few of us. To the average American you know at school, work or on line at the grocery store? Probably never heard of him or Sampras or anyone else other than maybe Agassi, the Williams sisters and "that Russian chick" from a few years ago. And they probably confuse Anna with the newer Russian chick thinking: "is that the same Russian chick in the new Canon commercial? She looks taller." The mainstream sports media, non-sports media and "corporate America" hype surrounding a few have made those few more recognizable. Any other tennis star? Forget it. Few tennis stars have managed to "cross over" into the mainstream. Sadly, most Americans, even if avid sports fans would rather watch a Texas Hold 'em marathon than tennis.

 

[devila]

He can win every tournament, but he is as underrated as George Bush.
Federer would be lucky to win more than 2 slams with Lendl, Edberg, Borg and Rafter playing in their prime.
I'm certain that Agassi, Hewitt, Berdych, Kuerten, Hrbaty, Costa and Nadal are the greatest players of all time, since Sampras lost a match at 2001 Wimbledon!

 

[Grigollif1]

A lot of the most popular and successful athletes in the world are pretty far from household names and faces in the US. The world's best soccer players, F1 drivers, and even boxers earn more money and respect than just about any other athletes (or "sportsmen" or "competitors" or whatever) in the world.

Yet these people could walk right into a sports bar in the US and remain practically anonymous. There's the odd Beckham or De la Hoya out there, but for the most part, nobody in the US gives a rat's ass about these international superstars. Same deal with tennis. It's not Federer, but tennis as an entire entity that suffers from an appreciation and recognition problem. Those who follow the game are perfectly cognizant of what Fed is achieving. But more and more, that's a small, cult following.

He gets as much respect as any player ever has, relative to the coverage he receives here. Tennis is simply losing the marketing war.

I would agree with that. I'm pretty sure that Ronaldo Gaucho or Michael Shumacher would have a very hard time being recognized anywhere in the U.S, specially in the Southern part. I disagree about Federer, I think he is always intersting to listen to in interviews and comes across with very charming personality. I think he has hit the right note where it counts which is within the Tennis community and I very much prefer that. When you look at a player like Agassi, many times got a lot of attention for non tennis things such as Brooke Shield or "Image is everything". Same Thing with Maria Sharapova, I don't see the coverage that they receive as being necessarily benefitial for Tennis. when speaking with non tennis followers most of that have the right impression of him. They do associate the name Federer with Massive Talent, and that is the way that I Like it.