U.S. Open TV Ratings off to a slower start in the Nielsens.

eagletennis said:
No you dont.I playing it through my Roku just download espn app.You can't watch regular tv content on watchespn app but they are providing different feed with different announcers for streaming only channel
Click to expand...
woops my mistake I was thinking of WatchESPN..as an aside the ESPN3 commentators are much more enjoyable
 
Sander001 said:
I like how you hypothesize about a USTA attendance conspiracy on one hand, and then accept neilson ratings as factual and relevant without question or context on the other.
Click to expand...

Where did I say neilson ratings are accurate at all? Or that I accept them? They are just what get discussed. I think the neilson ratings are very flawed, but that wasn't the discussion point. And for that matter, how is stating no one ever discusses the quality of the presentation as accepting as "factual and relevant without question or context on the other?" Seems to me that was exactly what I was doing.

But here, if it will make you feel better, I said all organizations lie if they think it will make them more money. The PGA Tour hosts an event in Phoenix each year, and the organizing group likes to tout it as the largest attendance in golf, setting "new records every year." How do they measure this attendance? Tickets sold? nope. They take how many cars are parked, and multiply that by 3.2! Very scientific way of doing it. But the PGA Tour and the media put the number out there like gospel. It doesn't get questioned by the usual suspects.

But since we're playing "let's read something that isn't there into the post", how long have you worked PR for the USTA?
 
tennisaddict said:
Well, ask any neutral observer which match they watched - Kvitova vs Kerber OR Novak vs Edmund and you will get your answer.

USTA also tries to schedule the marquee match upfront , which again shows Novak vs Edmund was a filler match. The match thread here for Novak vs Edmund was 3 pages long , mainly with folks not living in USA

And you didn't have any response to why late evening viewership (Novak) was 12% less than than Rafa. Next.
Click to expand...

Have you ever heard of an undercard? That is what the 1st match is. A warmup. The second match is always the marquee match. Are you just making things up as you go along? No one can possibly be that clueless. No one watches women's tennis in the US unless 3 women are playing or they are American. The end.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
Have you ever heard of an undercard? That is what the 1st match is. A warmup. The second match is always the marquee match. Are you just making things up as you go along? No one watches women's tennis in the US unless 3 women are playing or they are American. The end.
Click to expand...

LOL. Let us tell USTA they messed up by putting Serena first yesterday instead of Stan/Delpo.

Still no response as to why Novak is unable to cross Rafa even though it is over 2 years since Rafa made even the final rounds.
 
NoleFam said:
Have you ever heard of an undercard? That is what the 1st match is. A warmup. The second match is always the marquee match. Are you just making things up as you go along? No one watches women's tennis in the US unless 3 women are playing or they are American. The end.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that you can have any rational discussion with the OP? He just look for those who would bait.
 
tennisaddict said:
LOL. Let us tell USTA they messed up by putting Serena first yesterday instead of Stan/Delpo.

Still no response as to why Novak is unable to cross Rafa even though it is over 2 years since Rafa made even the final rounds.
Click to expand...

Because Stan/Delpo was the marquee match. I can't believe you don't know or understand this. LOL. I already said both Fed and Rafa are more popular overall. I just said that doesn't mean Djokovic is not popular which he is. But keep crying your eyes out because you don't like the man who is running the show. It won't change anything though.
 
tacou said:
woops my mistake I was thinking of WatchESPN..as an aside the ESPN3 commentators are much more enjoyable
Click to expand...
Like 100 times better.It seems that espn3 feed is ment for die hards.They don't have too manny annaouncer crews but the people in the boot are really good
 
NoleFam said:
Because Stan/Delpo was the marquee match. I can't believe you don't know or understand this. LOL. I already said both Fed and Rafa are more popular overall. I just said that doesn't mean Djokovic is not popular which he is. But keep crying your eyes out because you don't like the man who is running the show. It won't change anything though.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that is 100% true. I remember there being some talk about men, or women always being screwed by playing 1st/second. I don't think it was that long ago that it was fixed as to who played the first match at night(ie men or women, but it never switched during the tournament.) While one might argue going second makes you marquee, I would think ESPN would want whichever match gets them their ratings(and whether nielsen is right or wrong, that's what ESPN currently uses to sell ads, so they are going to use them for decision making) to go at 7 pm. People know the match starts then. As much as I wanted to watch Delpo-Stan last night, I could only watch a bit of the first set, because they don't pay my bills, I do, and doing so requires me to get up early. Starting at 10 pm, especially in a non-weather induced situation, can cause a lot of problems.

I've never understood though, why there is only one night match? All the courts have tremendous lights.
 
Bluefan75 said:
I'm not sure that is 100% true. I remember there being some talk about men, or women always being screwed by playing 1st/second. I don't think it was that long ago that it was fixed as to who played the first match at night(ie men or women, but it never switched during the tournament.) While one might argue going second makes you marquee, I would think ESPN would want whichever match gets them their ratings(and whether nielsen is right or wrong, that's what ESPN currently uses to sell ads, so they are going to use them for decision making) to go at 7 pm. People know the match starts then. As much as I wanted to watch Delpo-Stan last night, I could only watch a bit of the first set, because they don't pay my bills, I do, and doing so requires me to get up early. Starting at 10 pm, especially in a non-weather induced situation, can cause a lot of problems.

I've never understood though, why there is only one night match? All the courts have tremendous lights.
Click to expand...

I have analyzed over the years...They try their best to put one of Serena, Rafa and Fed as the first match.

Day 1 : Djokovic followed by Keys
Day 2 : Serena followed by Murray
Day 3: Muguruza followed by Rafa
Day 4: Serena followed by Delpo
Day 5: Rafa followed by Kerber
Day 6: Venus followed by Kyrgios
Day 7 : Kerber/Kvitova followed by Djokovic/edmund
Day 8: Murray followed by Radwanska
Day 9 : Wozniacki followed by Djokovic
Day 10 : Serena followed by Stan/Delpo


Except for day 3, the rule is that the more popular player / more marquee match gets played first.
 
Bluefan75 said:
I'm not sure that is 100% true. I remember there being some talk about men, or women always being screwed by playing 1st/second. I don't think it was that long ago that it was fixed as to who played the first match at night(ie men or women, but it never switched during the tournament.) While one might argue going second makes you marquee, I would think ESPN would want whichever match gets them their ratings(and whether nielsen is right or wrong, that's what ESPN currently uses to sell ads, so they are going to use them for decision making) to go at 7 pm. People know the match starts then. As much as I wanted to watch Delpo-Stan last night, I could only watch a bit of the first set, because they don't pay my bills, I do, and doing so requires me to get up early. Starting at 10 pm, especially in a non-weather induced situation, can cause a lot of problems.

I've never understood though, why there is only one night match? All the courts have tremendous lights.
Click to expand...

You are right in the fact that that used to be the case where women played first and men played second but they ended up changing that rule. I have seen where a women's marquee match has gone second. Also, if you look at any GS tournament, and the men's SF are scheduled on the same court, the marquee always plays second. Sometimes if a match with Serena/Sharapova is going to be on, they may sandwich it between the two men's matches. Usually there is an "undercard" which is the first match.
 
tennisaddict said:
I have analyzed over the years...They try their best to put one of Serena, Rafa and Fed as the first match.

Day 1 : Djokovic followed by Keys
Day 2 : Serena followed by Murray
Day 3: Muguruza followed by Rafa
Day 4: Serena followed by Delpo
Day 5: Rafa followed by Kerber
Day 6: Venus followed by Kyrgios
Day 7 : Kerber/Kvitova followed by Djokovic/edmund
Day 8: Murray followed by Radwanska
Day 9 : Wozniacki followed by Djokovic
Day 10 : Serena followed by Stan/Delpo


Except for day 3, the rule is that the more popular player / more marquee match gets played first.
Click to expand...

It's more than if the player is more popular or less popular. It is who that player is playing. Del Potro was playing an American so he went second after Serena as a marquee match. Keys is American. Murray was playing Rosol so he went after Serena,. Kerber played Bellis (American) in the 3rd round and went second, etc. It really isn't rocket science.
 
NoleFam said:
You are right in the fact that that used to be the case where women played first and men played second but they ended up changing that rule. I have seen where a women's marquee match has gone second. Also, if you look at any GS tournament, and the men's SF are scheduled on the same court, the marquee always plays second. Sometimes if a match with Serena/Sharapova is going to be on, they may sandwich it between the two men's matches. Usually there is an "undercard" which is the first match.
Click to expand...

True, but there is also the fact that, come the semis, you're all playing on center court, so someone has to go second. Your scenario makes sense there, especially in cases where matches need to be played in daylight(although RG may be the only one left with that scenario). But let's also not forget the TV influence. ESPN asks for a match at a certain time, you can be sure they won't be denied very often.

What I would be curious about, although this will likely generate shrills, but what if the USTA put a night match on the other court at the same time(ie, Stan-Delpo would have been on Armstrong while Williams Halep were going on, or vice versa?) Seems a little too obvious.
 
NoleFam said:
It's more than if the player is more popular or less popular. It is who that player is playing. Del Potro was playing an American so he went second after Serena as a marquee match. Keys is American. Murray was playing Rosol so he went after Serena, etc. It really isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

I would argue you're saying otherwise. In the scheduling eyes, anyway, I would think S Williams is deemed marquee, unless Fed or maybe Rafa are playing. And I don't think she played second very often on the night match. I think there's a lot to be said for the 7 pm match being a solid start time people can plan around, and thus help the rating.
 
Bluefan75 said:
True, but there is also the fact that, come the semis, you're all playing on center court, so someone has to go second. Your scenario makes sense there, especially in cases where matches need to be played in daylight(although RG may be the only one left with that scenario). But let's also not forget the TV influence. ESPN asks for a match at a certain time, you can be sure they won't be denied very often.

What I would be curious about, although this will likely generate shrills, but what if the USTA put a night match on the other court at the same time(ie, Stan-Delpo would have been on Armstrong while Williams Halep were going on, or vice versa?) Seems a little too obvious.
Click to expand...

ESPN may have rights to show Serena at a certain time but she may still be the undercard for that night. Not because of her, I mean it's Serena but they want the most "exciting" match to be last. They never put matches on other courts unless it's bad weather and they are really behind schedule. It has happened before.
 
Bluefan75 said:
I would argue you're saying otherwise. In the scheduling eyes, anyway, I would think S Williams is deemed marquee, unless Fed or maybe Rafa are playing. And I don't think she played second very often on the night match. I think there's a lot to be said for the 7 pm match being a solid start time people can plan around, and thus help the rating.
Click to expand...

Serena is definitely marquee. I am not talking about the player here. I am talking about which match is the most exciting on the ticket. Serena is miles more famous than Del Potro or Wawrinka but that match went last because it was a more exciting matchup.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
Serena is definitely marquee. I am not talking about the player here. I am talking about which match is the most exciting on the ticket. Serena is miles more famous than Del Potro or Wawrinka but that match went last because it was more a more exciting matchup.
Click to expand...

While it is to you and I, based on all the previous decisions, I have a really hard time believing they think that way. ESPN will show Williams walking around the grounds, chatting up someone in the hallway, hell they'd probably show in her the bathroom if they could, over men's matches going on and at crucial points at the same time. ESPN's view has been that they are showing the Williams sisters for two weeks, but they have to show some other stuff while they sleep.
 
NoleFam said:
It's more than if the player is more popular or less popular. It is who that player is playing. Del Potro was playing an American so he went second after Serena as a marquee match. Keys is American. Murray was playing Rosol so he went after Serena,. Kerber played Bellis (American) in the 3rd round and went second, etc. It really isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

The average household tunes in for Serena vs XYZ , not Murray vs Rosol or Stan vs Delpo.
 
Bluefan75 said:
While it is to you and I, based on all the previous decisions, I have a really hard time believing they think that way. ESPN will show Williams walking around the grounds, chatting up someone in the hallway, hell they'd probably show in her the bathroom if they could, over men's matches going on and at crucial points at the same time. ESPN's view has been that they are showing the Williams sisters for two weeks, but they have to show some other stuff while they sleep.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And they know talking about Serena is what drives up the ratings. It is not that Chris McKendry and Hannah Storm have some major crush on Serena
 
Bluefan75 said:
While it is to you and I, based on all the previous decisions, I have a really hard time believing they think that way. ESPN will show Williams walking around the grounds, chatting up someone in the hallway, hell they'd probably show in her the bathroom if they could, over men's matches going on and at crucial points at the same time. ESPN's view has been that they are showing the Williams sisters for two weeks, but they have to show some other stuff while they sleep.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point. The US Open's goal here is to make money. What is on the ticket (what people pay money for) and what is shown on ESPN are two different entities. Of course people at home will tune in more to watch Serena (who is not a good example because she can pull higher ratings in the US than Nadal, Djokovic or Federer) but what about the people who are paying money to attend the tournament? Serena could very well have blown Halep away 2 and 3 and then the folks who paid money will not be satisfied because they want to see tennis. That's where Del Potro and Wawrinka come into play. Exciting match that gives the fans their money's worth. Also, US fans want to see Americans play their best on the biggest American stage and give it their best shot. People pay money to see that and will hang around after the first match to watch them play. Here is an old thread that talked about what a "marquee match" is.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/what-constitutes-a-marquee-match.96455/

Also, you can see in this article here that Del Potro was the marquee match because he was playing Shawn Johnson (American) and Serena was scheduled first.

http://tennisinsight.com/marquee-match-day-4-us-open/
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
You are missing the point. The US Open's goal here is to make money. What is on the ticket (what people pay money for) and what is shown on ESPN are two different entities. Of course people at home will tune in more to watch Serena (who is not a good example because she can pull higher ratings in the US than Nadal, Djokovic or Federer) but what about the people who are paying money to attend the tournament? Serena could very well have blown Halep away 2 and 3 and then the folks who paid money will not be satisfied because they want to see tennis. That's where Del Potro and Wawrinka come into play. Exciting match that gives the fans their money's worth. Also, US fans want to see Americans play their best on the biggest American stage and give it their best shot. People pay money to see that and will hang around after the first match to watch them play. Here is an old thread that talked about what a "marquee match" is.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/what-constitutes-a-marquee-match.96455/

Also, you can see in this article here that Del Potro was the marquee match because he was playing Shawn Johnson (American) and Serena was scheduled first.

http://tennisinsight.com/marquee-match-day-4-us-open/
Click to expand...

Again let me tell you a basic principle. The TV rights owners are the ones who dictate the schedule. They are not two different entities. If you have any doubt, ask PMac, BG or Darren Cahill on twitter or at one of the American events.

It is ESPN that decides the order of play.
 
NoleFam said:
That argument you made about Nadal having higher ratings was already debunked in my earlier post since Novak had 3 other main US sporting events on while his match was on the 1st Monday. Rafa had 1 main US sporting event on while his match was on. Djokovic had 979,000 viewers Sunday night. That was better than NFL preseason and MLB which were on in the same slot. You are on some failed mission to prove that he is not a big draw in tennis, unpopular, boring, etc. The stands and the numbers say otherwise. He is the dominant force in men's tennis so of course people want to watch him. The proof is below...Next.

(http://sportstvratings.com/sportsce...-tv-ratings-for-sunday-september-4-2016/5778/)
Click to expand...

Keep this in mind:

You are on some failed mission to prove that he is not a big draw in tennis, unpopular, boring, etc.
Click to expand...

--it is the driving motive behind this kind of thread. Certain Federer fans are feeling helpless and angry because:

  • Federer did not participate in the 2016 U.S. Open, thanks to his number of injuries.
  • It is near beyond questioning the belief that Djokovic is motivated to play for years to come, is the far-and-away best male player in the world. That's a combination that threatens to not only match, but surpass Federer's majors count.
  • The chances of Federer returning to win a major are slim (though one is possible) as age & injury trouble him, and Djokovic is on the scene.
  • Add it all up, and Djokovic--the acknowledged greatest male player in the world is getting attention, raising expectations and barely a lone soul is even missing Federer. For those who worship Roger Federer, this is building on the "nightmare" that began (years ago) with the rise of Nadal as the Federer-crusher who "stole" majors and his "rightful place" from him. With Djokovic being a force who cannot be stopped often, the only thing Fed-fans have left to attack is the essence of Djokovis himself, hence poorly constructed notions of his not being "popular" to audiences (live, cable, etc.), and by some warped extent, "bad" for tennis. All because Federer will likely retire next year, and his days of being a top ATP player are a memory from the past.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
Keep this in mind:



--it is the driving motive behind this kind of thread. Certain Federer fans are feeling helpless and angry because:

  • Federer did not participate in the 2016 U.S. Open, thanks to his number of injuries.
  • It is near beyond questioning the belief that Djokovic is motivated to play for years to come, is the far-and-away best male player in the world. That's a combination that threatens to not only match, but surpass Federer's majors count.
  • The chances of Federer returning to win a major are slim (though one is possible) as age & injury trouble him, and Djokovic is on the scene.
  • Add it all up, and Djokovic--the acknowledged greatest male player in the world is getting attention, raising expectations and barely a lone soul is even missing Federer. For those who worship Roger Federer, this is building on the "nightmare" that began (years ago) with the rise of Nadal as the Federer-crusher who "stole" majors and his "rightful place" from him. With Djokovic being a force who cannot be stopped often, the only thing Fed-fans have left to attack is the essence of Djokovis himself, hence poorly constructed notions of his not being "popular" to audiences (live, cable, etc.), and by some warped extent, "bad" for tennis. All because Federer will likely retire next year, and his days of being a top ATP player are a memory from the past.
Click to expand...
The worst is the hypocrisy of a number of Fed fans who pretended to like Djokovic when he was beating Nadal and protecting his record, who have now completely turned on Novak... Now they have this fake Nadal appreciation shtick that would surely go away should he start threatening Fed again.

Some of them are on this very thread. You know who you are :oops:

For this (and other reasons, like believing Fed plays "real" tennis as opposed to players like Djokovic, Murray, or Nadal), Fed's fanbase is easily the worst in tennis and probably one of the worst in sports.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
Keep this in mind:



--it is the driving motive behind this kind of thread. Certain Federer fans are feeling helpless and angry because:

  • Federer did not participate in the 2016 U.S. Open, thanks to his number of injuries.
  • It is near beyond questioning the belief that Djokovic is motivated to play for years to come, is the far-and-away best male player in the world. That's a combination that threatens to not only match, but surpass Federer's majors count.
  • The chances of Federer returning to win a major are slim (though one is possible) as age & injury trouble him, and Djokovic is on the scene.
  • Add it all up, and Djokovic--the acknowledged greatest male player in the world is getting attention, raising expectations and barely a lone soul is even missing Federer. For those who worship Roger Federer, this is building on the "nightmare" that began (years ago) with the rise of Nadal as the Federer-crusher who "stole" majors and his "rightful place" from him. With Djokovic being a force who cannot be stopped often, the only thing Fed-fans have left to attack is the essence of Djokovis himself, hence poorly constructed notions of his not being "popular" to audiences (live, cable, etc.), and by some warped extent, "bad" for tennis. All because Federer will likely retire next year, and his days of being a top ATP player are a memory from the past.
Click to expand...

Ouch. That was harsh but true. Rafa fans have started to chime in as well though. I don't know what is this obsession to prove that Novak isn't popular. People know who he is. Case in point. Yesterday at work (I live in the US). I was on this forum typing away and two of my coworkers were being nosey when they passed my cubicle and asked "you follow tennis". I said "yea". I asked do they follow and they said no. They asked me who my favorite player is. I said "Djokovic". They said "Novak Djokovic"? I said "yea". They said "Oh he is goooood". LOL. Novak is pretty well-known so I don't get this trying to prove otherwise.
 
THUNDERVOLLEY said:
Keep this in mind:



--it is the driving motive behind this kind of thread. Certain Federer fans are feeling helpless and angry because:

  • Federer did not participate in the 2016 U.S. Open, thanks to his number of injuries.
  • It is near beyond questioning the belief that Djokovic is motivated to play for years to come, is the far-and-away best male player in the world. That's a combination that threatens to not only match, but surpass Federer's majors count.
  • The chances of Federer returning to win a major are slim (though one is possible) as age & injury trouble him, and Djokovic is on the scene.
  • Add it all up, and Djokovic--the acknowledged greatest male player in the world is getting attention, raising expectations and barely a lone soul is even missing Federer. For those who worship Roger Federer, this is building on the "nightmare" that began (years ago) with the rise of Nadal as the Federer-crusher who "stole" majors and his "rightful place" from him. With Djokovic being a force who cannot be stopped often, the only thing Fed-fans have left to attack is the essence of Djokovis himself, hence poorly constructed notions of his not being "popular" to audiences (live, cable, etc.), and by some warped extent, "bad" for tennis. All because Federer will likely retire next year, and his days of being a top ATP player are a memory from the past.
Click to expand...
You're right. But this OP is a psycho, obsessed with Djokovic.
 
tennisaddict said:
Stan - Delpo match - upper section totally empty.

CrzmZonWgAAS9Tu
Click to expand...
Lets speed up the courts! That should help!
 
Bluefan75 said:
Where did I say neilson ratings are accurate at all? Or that I accept them? They are just what get discussed. I think the neilson ratings are very flawed, but that wasn't the discussion point. And for that matter, how is stating no one ever discusses the quality of the presentation as accepting as "factual and relevant without question or context on the other?" Seems to me that was exactly what I was doing.

But here, if it will make you feel better, I said all organizations lie if they think it will make them more money. The PGA Tour hosts an event in Phoenix each year, and the organizing group likes to tout it as the largest attendance in golf, setting "new records every year." How do they measure this attendance? Tickets sold? nope. They take how many cars are parked, and multiply that by 3.2! Very scientific way of doing it. But the PGA Tour and the media put the number out there like gospel. It doesn't get questioned by the usual suspects.

But since we're playing "let's read something that isn't there into the post", how long have you worked PR for the USTA?
Click to expand...
"All organizations lie if they think it will make them money" nice blanket generalization there. And I didn't know the conspiracy theory goes across two sports now, unless that was just a fun strawman.
 
Sander001 said:
"All organizations lie if they think it will make them money" nice blanket generalization there. And I didn't know the conspiracy theory goes across two sports now, unless that was just a fun strawman.
Click to expand...

So you're just an intern then in the USTA PR department? Now I get it. Have to go that extra mile to get the job after you graduate.
 
In Canada only TSN2 was carrying the final today. After having all quarters, semis and women's final on other TSN feeds.

I went out to 5 bars and they didn't have it so finally I just gave up on it.

Maybe that's why the ratings suck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

marc45
Australian Open TV Ratings..ESPN
Replies
2
Views
1K
Im(moral) Winner
Im(moral) Winner
I
USA Australian open ratings.
Replies
3
Views
212
JMR
J
THUNDERVOLLEY
2009 U.S. Open women's final: television ratings reveal much...
Replies
11
Views
4K
ubermeyer
ubermeyer
Fee
ESPN and TTC to broadcast US Open beginning in 2009.
Replies
29
Views
3K
BreakPoint
BreakPoint
MichaelNadal
GREAT article on the sad state of tennis in America. (viewership)
Replies
22
Views
2K
T-Noone
T-Noone
Back
Top