Tennis on TV needs to be finally presented in a better, more varied way.

[UnderratedSlam]

I am referring primarily to camera angles, scene changes, just direction in general.

For example, at some events, for example USO, the TV director would allow several points to be shown at player level height, the camera filming just a few meters BEHIND the near-court player as opposed to 30 meters ABOVE him which is the standard BORING tradition. This "low" angle is nearly always awesome. It should be used every 5 minutes or even more frequently, not just once an hour.

Changing angles regularly, rather than EVERY 30 MINUTES ONLY, would add variety and colour.

Or they could show a point filming just one player from the side. This would help some viewers realize what an athletic sport it is and how much quick running is often involved in tennis. Sure, they sometimes do a slow-motion of this, but how about the whole point in real motion? Several times per set, not just once per match, obviously... At 1-1 in games in the first set and 30-0 we can certainly afford to show a point this way without "missing out" on something spectacular or a key point of the match. And if st spectacular does happen, it can be replayed anyway...

Also, INCREASE THE BLOODY VOLUME on the conversations between player and umpire. There are still many events where you can barely hear anything. Admittedly, I am not sure who is to blame here, tour organizers or TV stations.

And make it ILLEGAL for TV stations to jump to commercials when there is a major argument going on. Of course, "define what a major argument is" can be a tough one.

Placing the camera AT AN ANGLE from the court is never being done, but should be. An occasional point covering the court from the side would be refreshing after 100 points shown from the same standard "behind/above near-court player" angle that DOMINATES TOO MUCH.

Show us player's box reactions when that player is losing, not just when he is winning. More drama that way.

Any other suggestions? Annoyances about direction and/or presentation?

 

[mbm0912]

I love when they go court level.

 

[travlerajm]

When I watch tennis matches live, my preferred vantage point is to the side of the baseline, and preferably up above the court about 20 feet.

This gives a better idea of how fast the ball is moving and what type of trajectories are being hit.

Sitting centered behind netpost doesn’t work live at the match because your head has to swivel back and forth too much. But if the camera man does the work for you, that might actually work.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I love when they go court level.

Many people do, yet in many events this angle is almost never used.

So annoying. Because this is the best angle by far.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

When I watch tennis matches live, my preferred vantage point is to the side of the baseline, and preferably up above the court about 20 feet.

This gives a better idea of how fast the ball is moving and what type of trajectories are being hit.

Sitting centered behind netpost doesn’t work live at the match because your head has to swivel back and forth too much. But if the camera man does the work for you, that might actually work.

This is sorely lacking in TV tennis. In fact, completely lacking.

 

[Deleted member 763691]

I only have a problem with the Paris Masters camera angle.
No complaints apart from that
Tennis has the best camera work in the sports world.
No other sport does it better.

 

[travlerajm]

Many people do, yet in many events this angle is almost never used.

So annoying. Because this is the best angle by far.

Yes. This angle is better than the standard TV angle, because it is more like seeing the match from the eyes of the player.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I only have a problem with the Paris Masters camera angle.
No complaints apart from that

Paris Masters is the WORST M1000, for me. Precisely for that reason. Matches shown from a helicopter, or perhaps from the Moon.

 

[Third Serve]

Court level view should be pushed into the mainstream more. That's my big gripe atm.

 

[Azure]

I am referring primarily to camera angles, scene changes, just direction in general.

For example, at some events, for example USO, the TV director would allow several points to be shown at player level height, the camera filming just a few meters BEHIND the near-court player as opposed to 30 meters ABOVE him which is the standard BORING tradition. This "low" angle is nearly always awesome. It should be used every 5 minutes or even more frequently, not just once an hour.

Changing angles regularly, rather than EVERY 30 MINUTES ONLY, would add variety and colour.

Or they could show a point filming just one player from the side. This would help some viewers realize what an athletic sport it is and how much quick running is often involved in tennis. Sure, they sometimes do a slow-motion of this, but how about the whole point in real motion? Several times per set, not just once per match, obviously... At 1-1 in games in the first set and 30-0 we can certainly afford to show a point this way without "missing out" on something spectacular or a key point of the match. And if st spectacular does happen, it can be replayed anyway...

Also, INCREASE THE BLOODY VOLUME on the conversations between player and umpire. There are still many events where you can barely hear anything. Admittedly, I am not sure who is to blame here, tour organizers or TV stations.

And make it ILLEGAL for TV stations to jump to commercials when there is a major argument going on. Of course, "define what a major argument is" can be a tough one.

Placing the camera AT AN ANGLE from the court is never being done, but should be. An occasional point covering the court from the side would be refreshing after 100 points shown from the same standard "behind/above near-court player" angle that DOMINATES TOO MUCH.

Show us player's box reactions when that player is losing, not just when he is winning. More drama that way.

Any other suggestions? Annoyances about direction and/or presentation?

Great thread idea

In my opinion the sport has to be made engaging - visually. I rarely see stat maps, analysis graphs etc while with other sports you get so much info. That can really make a difference. The scores should be displayed bigger too. In the 90s it used to be bigger on TV. Wonder what made them change it.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Great thread idea

In my opinion the sport has to be made engaging - visually. I rarely see stat maps, analysis graphs etc while with other sports you get so much info. That can really make a difference. The scores should be displayed bigger too. In the 90s it used to be bigger on TV. Wonder what made them change it.

Because tiny is supposedly more "elegant".

Jesus wept.

Admittedly, perhaps it's coz the TVs are much bigger now...

 

[ForehandRF]

I love when they go court level.

A bit higher would be better so one can see above the net too

 

[SaintPetros]

This will make it even harder for Fraudsters to accept demolitions of their god. No more high angle to soften the blows.

 

[guitarra]

I also love the near court level camera angle cause it shows the picture that is the closest to reality. But I doubt it's the most popular one in general and that's why they don't use it more often.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I also love the near court level camera angle cause it shows the picture that is the closest to reality. But I doubt it's the most popular one in general and that's why they don't use it more often.

Do you believe they conduct polls?

They have no clue what the public wants regarding sports events. They just do as they deem fit.

It is highly unlikely that the public wants the SAME ANGLE over and over.

MTV-style movie direction proves that people are easily bored with sameness, hence why the editing is often so wild in so many areas of TV, movies, music...

 

[guitarra]

Do you believe they conduct polls?

They have no clue what the public wants regarding sports events. They just do as they deem fit.

It is highly unlikely that the public wants the SAME ANGLE over and over.

MTV-style movie direction proves that people are easily bored with sameness, hence why the editing is often so wild in so many areas of TV, movies, music...

Well, I don't really know, that was my educated guess not based on any research. You might be right but on the other hand many people like what they already know and are reluctant to changes. I think they should conduct some surveys and try different things. For me the higher the camera the worse. In some tourneys the camera is so freaking high that it looks unreal almost like watching from a satellite.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Well, I don't really know, that was my educated guess not based on any research. You might be right but on the other hand many people like what they already know and are reluctant to changes. I think they should conduct some surveys and try different things. For me the higher the camera the worse. In some tourneys the camera is so freaking high that it looks unreal almost like watching from a satellite.

Like watching ants play tennis.

Insect tennis.

 

[HipRotation]

More Kisscam highlights

 

[UnderratedSlam]

More Kisscam highlights

Less kisscam lowlights.

Unless a couple decides to go all the way...

 

[Lleytonstation]

Many people do, yet in many events this angle is almost never used.

So annoying. Because this is the best angle by far.

As long as it is not too low. Sometimes it is too low and makes it hard to see trajectory and the net blocks a lot. But the "eye level" is fine. Wonder what an angle would like if it was in the corner about 10 feet up?

 

[UnderratedSlam]

As long as it is not too low. Sometimes it is too low and makes it hard to see trajectory and the net blocks a lot. But the "eye level" is fine. Wonder what an angle would like if it was in the corner about 10 feet up?

If friggin Big Brother can have 50 cameras, surely the ATP should too.

As many different angles as possible. Or at least more than just one over and over and over.

Obviously, we don't want frog-perspective angles. That'd be pointless, unless we wanted to analyze the sneakers very closely.

 

[Roddick85]

I would love the option to switch angles during a match as I also enjoy a lower camera angle which showcases how quick the game really is unlike the higher angle that makes rallies look slow.

But if there's one improvement that TennisTV could do to that would make me extremely happy is if....they would also broadcast slams. Who could say no to the ability to pick the match that YOU actually want to see instead of the political/propaganda filled agenda that's presented in the 1st week. Also I'm sure I'm not the only one who enjoys watching a match with no commentators as it's a lot more immersive to hear the crowd/ambiant noise and what players say between points. If TennisTV could do that, perhaps I would enjoy watching slams again and I'd finally cut the cord with cable.

 

[merwy]

I would prefer an angle that's a bit higher than eye level. About 3-4m above eye level seems worth a try. The usual angle we're used to is so high that you can't gauge the height of the ball and you can't really feel the speed (and effect from topspin/slice) in which the ball comes towards the player. On the other hand, the upside is that you see clearly when a ball is either in or out and you always have a good view of the ball and both players without the camera having to move during the point.

On eye level you get the problem that you keep wondering how close a ball was to being out on the far baseline, because I honestly can't see sh1t over there. Also a part of the view is being blocked by the net. You get a very clear view of what the closest player is doing but you can't see the other player that well (partly because he's something being blocked by the other guy).

 

[Third Serve]

This is what good court view looks like. Yeah, I know that picture in the beginning is horrifying.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I would love the option to switch angles during a match as I also enjoy a lower camera angle which showcases how quick the game really is unlike the higher angle that makes rallies look slow.

But if there's one improvement that TennisTV could do to that would make me extremely happy is if....they would also broadcast slams. Who could say no to the ability to pick the match that YOU actually want to see instead of the political/propaganda filled agenda that's presented in the 1st week. Also I'm sure I'm not the only one who enjoys watching a match with no commentators as it's a lot more immersive to hear the crowd/ambiant noise and what players say between points. If TennisTV could do that, perhaps I would enjoy watching slams again and I'd finally cut the cord with cable.

I'm in Europe, don't get that channel. What do you mean? The selection of matches to be more WTA?

 

[Tommy Haas]

French Open 2019 coverage was the absolute worst. Their new camera angle made it look like I was watching tennis from a camera in orbit. The players looked so small. They need to show from the back more often so we can get an eye level almost player perspective view of the action. It also gives a much better sense of ball speed.

 

[Roddick85]

I'm in Europe, don't get that channel. What do you mean? The selection of matches to be more WTA?

Not at all. Here in Canada during the 1st week of slams, it doesn't matter who's playing, they will force us to watch Canadian players or since we get the ESPN broadcast, the Williams sisters. They also have what they call "court-to-court" coverage where they show you a few minutes of every matches which is quite useless. If Fed/Wawrinka/Dimitrov are playing a 1st round match, I want to be able to watch who I want, not who the broadcaster decided based on nationality/patriotism.

 

[Tshooter]

French Open 2019 coverage was the absolute worst. Their new camera angle made it look like I was watching tennis from a camera in orbit. The players looked so small...

They are trying to recreate the view you have watching a match in Ashe stadium.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Not at all. Here in Canada during the 1st week of slams, it doesn't matter who's playing, they will force us to watch Canadian players or since we get the ESPN broadcast, the Williams sisters. They also have what they call "court-to-court" coverage where they show you a few minutes of every matches which is quite useless. If Fed/Wawrinka/Dimitrov are playing a 1st round match, I want to be able to watch who I want, not who the broadcaster decided based on nationality/patriotism.

It was really extreme on German TV back in the 90s, probably still is. Anke Huber (exactly... who?) would play an even bigger nobody in a 1st round, yet the Germans would rather show that than st like Kafelnikov-Kuerten. German match selection: worst ever in the history of TV. They'd literally rather show a 105 ranked German play a top 50 journeyman than Federer-Sampras at Wimby, that sort of thing. Total bonehead decisions.

 

[travlerajm]

Don’t you love it when espn puts up two panels so you can (theoretically, if it were possible to see the tiny ball) watch two matches at once? Wouldn’t it even better if they gave us 4 panels with 4 matches at once?

 

[BH40love]

Behind the court on a players level doesn’t get any better. Also, like the idea of showing one player only during certain portions. The other vantage point I like is in one of the baseline corners and elevated. That’s a great view live anyways.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Behind the court on a players level doesn’t get any better. Also, like the idea of showing one player only during certain portions. The other vantage point I like is in one of the baseline corners and elevated. That’s a great view live anyways.

Almost any TTW poster would direct better tennis matches. It's pathetic actually how bad TV people are.

 

[Tshooter]

Behind the court on a players level doesn’t get any better. Also, like the idea of showing one player only during certain portions. The other vantage point I like is in one of the baseline corners and elevated. That’s a great view live anyways.

Also once in a while just focus on a fan so you get a feel for the event.