The Evolution of Tennis Magazine

[michael_1265]

I first started reading Tennis magazine in the late 80s, and just recently (2007) started reading it again after a 15 year gap. Here are my impressions:

1. There was more instructional content in the 80s. There were a lot of great little pieces from people like Vic Braden. I found them very useful.

2. More in-depth interviews with players. Most interviews now seem about a page long.

3. More overall content. The magazine was definitely larger then it is now.

I can't find as much to like about the new magazine. Since I didn't keep the old issues, I can't be sure if my impressions are correct.

Does anyone still have Tennis Mags from the 80s lying around? Do you notice a big difference?

 

[max]

Yes, I do. I stopped reading the new Tennis magazine a couple of years ago.

My guess, it's a guess, is that the magazine no longer commands attention from major advertisers, so without that revenue, it shrinks and loses content.

MOST magazines, however, in recent years have thrown away the notion of editorial content in favor of more "art" jazzing up the page, since editors feel they are competing with screens.

It's a shame. This is a key strength of print.

 

[maverick66]

The internet is killing magazines. Just like it is doing to newspapers. Why buy a magazine when I can get all the same info online for free.

I get the Hockey News. I like the articles and they write about prospects coming up that I wouldnt hear about otherwise but the content on how things are going as far as standings and stats is always 1-2 weeks behind. So the internet is just better for most of the up to date hockey info.

As for tennis magazine. Its all fluff. The biggest kick I get out of it is the rulings page. Where people ask the dumbest question you possibly can and they answer them. The reviews for products is not good as they have sponsors to keep happy.

 

[OneMoreShot]

The biggest kick I get out of it is the rulings page. Where people ask the dumbest question you possibly can and they answer them.

This is the first thing I turn to when the mag arrives. Amazing some of the questions.

 

[sureshs]

Print media is in trouble

 

[max]

Print media is in trouble

That's just common opinion. If you look into studies done on reading effectiveness/value you find print works far better than a screen.

More's yet at play. I think print's going to swing back as people find it is more convenient, contains more information and is cheaper. And as formerly free websites find themselves having to charge money.

 

[Larrysümmers]

This is the first thing I turn to when the mag arrives. Amazing some of the questions.

haha mee toooo. i read that. the little tips. and thats about it. im not really big into the interviews and stuff, just not my cup o tea.

 

[billsgwn]

The internet is killing magazines. Just like it is doing to newspapers. Why buy a magazine when I can get all the same info online for free.

I get the Hockey News. I like the articles and they write about prospects coming up that I wouldnt hear about otherwise but the content on how things are going as far as standings and stats is always 1-2 weeks behind. So the internet is just better for most of the up to date hockey info.

As for tennis magazine. Its all fluff. The biggest kick I get out of it is the rulings page. Where people ask the dumbest question you possibly can and they answer them. The reviews for products is not good as they have sponsors to keep happy.

What? You didnt like the one question that was sent in asking if it was legal to pull out a lighter and burn the fuzz off the ball right there at the service line? That one just made me laugh and shake my head.

 

[MAXXply]

It's for the reasons as the O.P stated that I've been on a bit of a buying spree recently, trying to get my hands on back issues of TENNIS and WORLD TENNIS from the 70s and 80s.

It's quite amusing looking back on all the earnest and at times convoluted instruction. All the high-tech scientific analysis of new rackets by MIT experts. And the stories and player profiles running over several pages of dense text. I too tend to avoid the current day TENNIS Magazine unless it's reasonably weighted with a few extra pages than normal.

Would be interested to hear from anyone looking to offer a new home to a large number of magazines. maxxply at jee mayall dot komm

 

[Bartelby]

There's a UK mag called tennis-head that seems rather good.

 

[michael_1265]

Yes, I do. I stopped reading the new Tennis magazine a couple of years ago.

My guess, it's a guess, is that the magazine no longer commands attention from major advertisers, so without that revenue, it shrinks and loses content.

MOST magazines, however, in recent years have thrown away the notion of editorial content in favor of more "art" jazzing up the page, since editors feel they are competing with screens.

It's a shame. This is a key strength of print.

The fact that it's locked in to USTA memberships is what keeps it afloat, I think. Of course, there is no incentive to improve also.

Your point is taken about glitzy content. Look at last month. Those studio pics of Wozniacki were certainly expensive to produce. The magazine is mostly show with very little go.

 

[michael_1265]

What? You didnt like the one question that was sent in asking if it was legal to pull out a lighter and burn the fuzz off the ball right there at the service line? That one just made me laugh and shake my head.

I loved that question. Who brings a lighter to a tennis match in the first place? What you need is a sweater shaver.

 

[Kevin T]

Title should be 'devolution'. I was a subscriber from 1986-2007 or so. It seemed to get worse/thinner every year. I sent a letter in 2007, lamenting how hollow the magazine had become and ending my subscription. I got an offer last month, offering a free issue to "come back". Just got the issue with Woz on the cover last Friday...it's hard to believe but Tennis may be even worse than 2007! I immediately sent the card in to say "no mas".

 

[billsgwn]

I loved that question. Who brings a lighter to a tennis match in the first place? What you need is a sweater shaver.

Can you imagine seeing that while on a changeover? Youre drinking some Gatorade then all the sudden you smell some burning balls and look over and its your opponent burning the fuzz off the tennis balls. I guess he thinks thats what that other pocket in the shorts is for is to hold the lighter while the other pocket is for the balls.

 

[max]

Title should be 'devolution'. I was a subscriber from 1986-2007 or so. It seemed to get worse/thinner every year. I sent a letter in 2007, lamenting how hollow the magazine had become and ending my subscription. I got an offer last month, offering a free issue to "come back". Just got the issue with Woz on the cover last Friday...it's hard to believe but Tennis may be even worse than 2007! I immediately sent the card in to say "no mas".

You acted well. The editors have to recognize how it compares with its past.

I would very much welcome a magazine with as much content as 1983, and would pay $40 a year for a full (12! not 11 issues) years subscription.

I wouldn't pay $5 for the current thing. It's irrelevant.