What do you guys think of Ben Rothenberg?

MeatTornado

G.O.A.T.
I absolutely cannot stand him but I think a lot of those tweets are actually poor examples. He was right to call out Nick who does constantly pull that crap of acting like a tough guy and then deleting his tweets. And I of course want Bo5 slams to continue, but being a jerk like Gilbert and telling him he doesn't get to have an opinion on the issue is even worse. Especially when he actually makes a decent point about how the game has changed physically since Bo5 was started. The last one is purely Stakhovsky's quote, I don't know why that would reflect poorly on Rothenberg unless it's actually a misquote I'm not aware of.
 

citybert

Hall of Fame
he wrote an article about how he tried to play tennis and implied that he could probably be pretty good at tennis if he tried.

He feels like a hack who only began reporting on tennis bc it was the only sport that would take him. But not sure that if this is true.

His opinions and views dont bother me and he should be allowed to have them without getting destroyed. Its just my opinion that it feels like he is very condescending towards the sport.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
I absolutely cannot stand him but I think a lot of those tweets are actually poor examples. He was right to call out Nick who does constantly pull that crap of acting like a tough guy and then deleting his tweets. And I of course want Bo5 slams to continue, but being a jerk like Gilbert and telling him he doesn't get to have an opinion on the issue is even worse. Especially when he actually makes a decent point about how the game has changed physically since Bo5 was started. The last one is purely Stakhovsky's quote, I don't know why that would reflect poorly on Rothenberg unless it's actually a misquote I'm not aware of.
The game is so physical an almost 39 year old is #4 in the world.
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
Belongs to tennis tabloid. Loves gossip and controversies. Revels in drama. Has horrendous perspectives for the sport (Like BO3 for slams?!). All that being said, he can still be right about certain things like how the Adria Open was a horror show and Novak needs to take responsibility for how that s#!t went down and how it's stupid to go ahead with a GS in the middle of a raging pandemic especially in a country like the US where things are as bad as it could possibly be.
 
D

Deleted member 768841

Guest
My question is what the hell happened to Brad’s grammar???
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
The game is so physical an almost 39 year old is #4 in the world.
yes, tennis has by far become more physical across the decades and an almost-39-year-old is also #4 in the world. There's no contradiction there.

The marathon is a pretty physical activity too (understatement of the century), and a 38-year-old is currently aiming for the world record there, having come just two seconds short in his last marathon.
 
D

Deleted member 768841

Guest
He’s pretty much a reply guy, adds nothing except diet arguments(trademark) and enjoys being annoying. Like many journalists and twatters!
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
"If you're gonna make an omelet, you gotta break a few eggs"

He's a little over the top at times, but I take it as a good sign when a journalist isn't liked by everyone he reports on; most tennis "journalists" are a little too cozy with the players though I'm sure it enables them to have continued access.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
Athletes do often seem to labor under the illusion that journalists are supposed to be their cheering squad.

This is of course a very mistaken view, and explains why so many of them turn into indignant babies as soon as they face the smallest amount of scrutiny or criticism from the media.

This latest tantrum from Isner is illustrative. I believe in one of his tweets he said something akin to, "as a tennis journalist, you should be cheering this tournament on." That's pretty confused.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
yes, tennis has by far become more physical across the decades and an almost-39-year-old is also #4 in the world. There's no contradiction there.

The marathon is a pretty physical activity too (understatement of the century), and a 38-year-old is currently aiming for the world record there, having come just two seconds short in his last marathon.
Aerobic endurance atletes peak later than high impact/interval/anaerobic athletes. Bo5 isn't prohibitive to win for a 38 year old, because even Bo5 isn't so physical that the technical skill gap is being undone. If anything the technical gap widens because average level becomes more important.

Why is increased physicality a problem for Bo5 anyway? Medical/sports science has progressed, and they get days off inbetween. I fail to see why the biggest events being physically tougher would be a bad thing.

The main argument for Bo3 is literally to cater to people who won't wanna watch tennis anyway. There's 0 problems that Bo5 gives that can't be solved with better scheduling. And as for players maybe wanting Bo3, sure, wouldn't anyone wanna do less work for the same amount of $$$.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
Aerobic endurance atletes peak later than high impact/interval/anaerobic athletes.
You are moving the goalposts now.

The post to which I replied was an unqualified statement that the success of a 38-year-old in itself should prove that tennis isn't physical, which is silly on numerous levels.

If you want to go to the opposite end of the athletic spectrum, Justin Gatlin silvered in the 100m in the last WCs aged 37 as well.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to suggest that people in their late 30s cannot be very competitive in sports that are extremely 'physical'. Furthermore, using Fed as an example is pretty disingenuous seeing that his decline in physicality is the biggest reason why his performance baseline and ceiling are now lower than they were before.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
are barber shops closed in his city?
he looks like something I found growing under my bed.
:(
 

citybert

Hall of Fame
Belongs to tennis tabloid. Loves gossip and controversies. Revels in drama. Has horrendous perspectives for the sport (Like BO3 for slams?!). All that being said, he can still be right about certain things like how the Adria Open was a horror show and Novak needs to take responsibility for how that s#!t went down and how it's stupid to go ahead with a GS in the middle of a raging pandemic especially in a country like the US where things are as bad as it could possibly be.
He loves gossip yet is too scared to report on any of the real gossip for fear that no one will talk to him ever again.

I hear more from tennis friends who have been on tour as hitters and coaches than him.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
You are moving the goalposts now.

The post to which I replied was an unqualified statement that the success of a 38-year-old in itself should prove that tennis isn't physical, which is silly on numerous levels.

If you want to go to the opposite end of the athletic spectrum, Justin Gatlin silvered in the 100m in the last WCs aged 37 as well.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to suggest that people in their late 30s cannot be very competitive in sports that are extremely 'physical'. Furthermore, using Fed as an example is pretty disingenuous seeing that his decline in physicality is the biggest reason why his performance baseline and ceiling are now lower than they were before.
No it proves that it isn't so physical that it prevents athletes past their peak from competing provided they have a technical skill gap. I'm perfectly fine with tennis being a factor of both physical and technical talent, which is what it always been and which hasn't changed at all. It's also not like Bo3 isn't physical. You only get more seperation based on endurance, but that difference is much more made in technical skill, average level, and mental strength than it is made in aerobic fitness.

The only potential problem I see with Bo5 is that it might decrease variability of results too much, but that's never been a problem before and by now we might as well wait out the Big 3 era before we get new Slam winners again.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
No it proves that it isn't so physical that it prevents athletes past their peak from competing provided they have a technical skill gap. I'm perfectly fine with tennis being a factor of both physical and technical talent, which is what it always been and which hasn't changed at all. It's also not like Bo3 isn't physical. You only get more seperation based on endurance, but that difference is much more made in technical skill, average level, and mental strength than it is made in aerobic fitness.

The only potential problem I see with Bo5 is that it might decrease variability of results too much, but that's never been a problem before and by now we might as well wait out the Big 3 era before we get new Slam winners again.
yes, fair, Federer does illustrate that if you have the skill, then you can still be competitive despite declining athleticism. On the flip side, I think Meat is also right that it shows that once you cannot hold that elite level of athleticism, then that becomes a limit on how dominant you can be.

Setting Federer aside, though, I'd be very baffled if you honestly disagree that tennis has become much more athletically demanding and physical across the decades. I reckon that's a pretty universally agreed-upon matter.

This isn't me arguing for BO3 at the slams by the way. I'd ultimately prefer it to stay BO5. But I think the pro BO5 side has a much stronger case if they can grant that some of the BO3 arguments hold some merit. It isn't that the BO3 crowd has *no* reasonable points; we should instead maintain that the upside of BO5 ultimately outweighs these points.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
yes, fair, Federer does illustrate that if you have the skill, then you can still be competitive despite declining athleticism. On the flip side, I think Meat is also right that it shows that once you cannot hold that elite level of athleticism, then that becomes a limit on how dominant you can be.

Setting Federer aside, though, I'd be very baffled if you honestly disagree that tennis has become much more athletically demanding and physical across the decades. I reckon that's a pretty universally agreed-upon matter.

This isn't me arguing for BO3 at the slams by the way. I'd ultimately prefer it to stay BO5. But I think the pro BO5 side has a much stronger case if they can grant that some of the BO3 arguments hold some merit. It isn't that the BO3 crowd has *no* reasonable points; we should instead maintain that the upside of BO5 ultimately outweighs these points.
I don't actually disagree it has gotten more physical, I disagree that the degree to which physicality determines success hasn't changed that much. Borg's dominance was largely rooted in his physical advantage over his opponents for example. I use Federer as an example not that the game hasn't gotten more physical, but as a counterargument that it's too physical. Maybe it's too physical as in younger players are technically not good enough but that's another discussion we've been before. Perhaps it's more prohibitive to guys that are physically literally average, but tennis wouldn't really be unique in that.

I don't like pretending that the Big 4 has just been physically ahead of the rest of the pack. Much of it has been technical, mental and tactical as well.
 

randomtoss

Semi-Pro
I like him, he covers tennis in a very professional way and his other interests are fun (Eurovision :giggle:). What I disagree with him about is Bo3.

Poor Ben has made a lot of enemies with this crusade, but most of all with the recent Djokovic controversies. And I guess writing for the NYT doesn't help him make friends with a certain president's minions.

And frankly, if the players who don't like you are Isner and Stakhovsky, this is a sign you're a good person.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
Loves his drama, pot stirrer, weird looking face. Think him and Kyrgios actually get along well enough though, I remember a podcast he had with Nick on it, was pretty entertaining listening to them chatter...
 

haqq777

Legend
Loves his drama, pot stirrer, weird looking face. Think him and Kyrgios actually get along well enough though, I remember a podcast he had with Nick on it, was pretty entertaining listening to them chatter...
I think that interview was the turning point where Ben and his podcast team (Courtney & ilk) started sucking up to NK pretty openly. This was the same interview NK said Nadal was salty after his Acapulco loss and Djokovic made him sick by making those love signs etc post match.
 

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
I find his twitter feed to be an excellent way of finding out about stuff that most sites won't show. Very rarely do i have the effort to watch a full press conference of players and sometimes i won't even find the video nor transcripts of them but Ben will usually pick up anything relevant and that's why i follow him and have been following him for a long time.

If you want to find out controversial things about tennis players then his twitter is one of the best ways keep up to date on it. He has got a bit personal lately but imo he's right to point out how stupid certain players are being but i still thik he's an excellent source of tennis news. He's only getting attention here because of his recent statements, not all his tweets and info is bad or s***-stirring. He's worth following imo.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Rotenberg's 'decline and fall' territory? He doesn't even have a permanent positions with the free press, let alone control anything with 'his ideas'.

Rothenberg is everything wrong with tennis today. He and his ideas and the people who share them are a danger to the sport.
 
Last edited:
Top