What have the Big 3 done for the sport of tennis?

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
First off this is not just another Fed hate post. These statements apply to Nadal and Djokovic too.

So many talking heads on TV and in the media like to give lip service to what Roger and Rafa (and to a lesser extent Djokovic) have “done for the game”. My question is what exactly is that? Do they mean they’ve helped grow the game?

Because I can sure as hell say that tennis here I’m the US AIN’T a bigger deal than it was 15 years ago. I can’t speak for Europe (please enlighten me those of you across the pond if you can) and other places but Tennis has certainly gone DOWN in popularity here.

When Sampras (and later Agassi) retired tennis could still be considered a semi-mainstream sport. While it’s never quite been chic like it was for a time in the 70’s it had a solid following that was probably equal with hockey, NASCAR and pre Tiger era golf.

But since these guys dominated tennis has declined in interest. It is pretty much strictly a niche sport here now and it has lost all crossover appeal. It’s been at least 6 years since I’ve even heard anything about tennis in a non sports channel context.

Even worse there has been more of a return of unfortunate country club snobbish attitudes. While these things have ALWAYS been present and always will to some extent it has gotten better after Sampras and Agassi managed to transcend some of the stereotypes (following in the footsteps of guys like Connors Lendl etc.)

Many times the public courts around my area are a ghost town and not many working class people can afford exorbitant membership rates at tennis clubs. And the people who do play tennis are (not always but often) very snooty people who look down on those who work menial jobs and such. It’s a big reason why I’m only able to play tennis 20-25 times a year even though I’d LIKE to play a LOT more. For example my “coach” went to university and had a good paying job and was able to retire at an early age. Which is great! But he and his son very subtly look down their noses at me and my parents and seem to take pleasure in the fact that their son (who I’m about equal in ability with) beats me because he gets to play 5x more than I do. And it’s that way with many people. We’re just outsiders I’m not trying to just be whiny here I’m just giving personal evidence to support my case here. It’s hard to really do much when people will have nothing to do with your family.

For this I blame the tanking economy first. That is obviously a big reason why. When the playing field was more even money wise there was less room for classism to breathe. But then I blame the media and the players. I think Fed and Nadal are guilty of helping make tennis a more PC game with less colorful personalities. And regardless of whether you agree with that or not It’s clear outside of novelties like this years AO that Fed/Rafa/Novak don’t drive the public’s imagination enough to generate any kind of consistent real interest outside of die hards.

While no doubt I dislike Fed and his unapologetic white collar rich boy image I actually think Rafa is the worst offender here. I still like and respect him but I really don’t like how in the later part of his career he’s embraced more of the PC highly image concious staid attitude himself following Fed’s footsteps (hello wearing a multi thousand dollar wrist watch on court!) Its a marked change from his early pirate style. To be quite frank I think he’s a bit of a turncoat. I still respect him but I do shake my head at things like this as well as his well documented moments of fake humility.

I don’t have anything against Novak personally but it’s clear the public was never going to get behind him but regardless even he has lost some of the “edge” he had pre 2011.

Regardless of anything ratings have often been down the last decade and you’d be hard pressed to find many people in my city that know or care a thing about tennis anymore.

Don’t get me wrong tennis isn’t “dead” and isn’t going to be but take it from someone’s who’s first love is NASCAR. I know EXACTLY what it’s like to have a sport you love go down the tubes because of a shift in attitudes and other factors. 20 years ago NASCAR was an awesome sport with colorful personalities that was the fastest rising sport in the world. Now it is a PC boring horribly managed fustercluck that struggles to get 2 million viewers a race (after knocking on the door of the NFL and NBA 15 years ago).

Not gonna mention Murray since no one outside the UK cares about him :D.

I realize I kinda rambled here and not all of this might make sense but while I’m still sick and have nothing to do I figured I’d chime in on this.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
You make some valid points here. What have Rafa and Roger done for the game? Well they have played at an exceptional level for long periods of time and both have broken the GS record that was set by Pete. However, you are correct in that at least in the US they have done little in advancing the game as a whole. I can't speak for other countries. The reason mainly is that Americans are more prone to watch and follow tennis when they have their own countrymen at the top of the game to cheer on and praise. Since Pete and Andre retired, and to a lesser extent Roddick, they don't have that anymore. Since that time frame, the interest has waned here in the US. I see posters on here complain about the women's game on here quite often but Serena gets higher ratings in the US than any man on the tour and sometimes even gets better ratings on Eurosport. She is what has kept tennis somewhat afloat in the US and not Federer or Nadal, even though some people are blind to this fact.

I do agree that Roger and Rafa are very Nike, PC, do and say what the establishment wants type of players. Yes it is overdone and a bit inauthentic, and even Djokovic has fallen into this where he is so PC now when he used to say what was on his mind. To be honest, I dislike that Djokovic has changed to please the establishment and not ruffle feathers, and that he wants to be seen as more likeable. I agree with you that he doesn't have quite that edge he used to have. I found it interesting that you think Rafa is more guilty of this when I say it is easily Federer. I find his whole image manufactured and forged and that Rafa just fell into line with this, and remained with the status quo. I find the whole gentleman thing ridiculous especially when there have been plenty of times when he wasn't exactly behaving like a gentleman, and I just think tennis needs more colorful personalities and fire. It needs rivalries and for players to bring those locker room tensions on to the court and have some great, blockbuster rivalries. Also, the future of American men's tennis looks bleak and I hope that changes very soon.
 
Last edited:

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
You make some valid points here. What have Rafa and Roger done for the game? Well they have played at an exceptional level for long periods of time and both have broken the GS record that was set by Pete. However, you are correct in that at least in the US they have done little in advancing the game as a whole. I can't speak for other countries. The reason mainly is that Americans are more prone to watch and follow tennis when they have their own countrymen at the top of the game to cheer on and praise. Since Pete and Andre retired, and to a lesser extent Roddick, they don't have that anymore. Since that time frame, the interest has waned here in the US. I see posters on here complain about the women's game on here quite often but Serena gets higher ratings in the US than any man on the tour and sometimes even gets better ratings on Eurosport. She is what has kept tennis somewhat afloat in the US and not Federer or Nadal, even though some people are blind to this fact.

I do agree that Roger and Rafa are very Nike, PC, do and say what the establishment wants type of players. Yes it is overdone and a bit inauthentic, and even Djokovic has fallen into this where he is so PC now when he used to say what was on his mind. To be honest, I dislike that Djokovic has changed to please the establishment and not ruffle feathers, and that he wants to be seen as more likeable. I agree with you that he doesn't have quite that edge he used to have. I found it interesting that you think Rafa is more guilty of this when I say it is easily Federer. I find his whole image manufactured and forged and that Rafa just fell into line with this, and remained with the status quo. I find the whole gentleman thing ridiculous especially when there have been plenty of times when he wasn't exactly behaving like a gentleman, and I just think tennis needs more colorful personalities and fire. It needs rivalries and for players to bring those locker room tensions on to the court and have some great, blockbuster rivalries. Also, the future of American men's tennis loos bleak and I hope that changes very soon.
Yes I forgot to say that part about lack of male US tennis stars that has an affect too though I think it’s more of the chicken and the egg with talented players here unable to receive affordable training unless they have lots of money. This is a problem with ALL sports here I don’t mean to make it sound like it’s just a tennis issue but of all the “big 6” sports it’s probably suffered the most.

You could definitely be right about Fed but the reason I say Rafa is worse is because he kinda started as a bit more of a rebel figure but had since fallen in line and “turned” whereas Fed’s image has always been that way. But I certainly don’t care for the way any of them have gone with their personas.

There is a real challenge with the game being accessible here in America and my main point is what have these guys really done in that area? I don’t think they’ve done anything really.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Yes I forgot to say that part about lack of male US tennis stars that has an affect too though I think it’s more of the chicken and the egg with talented players here unable to receive affordable training unless they have lots of money. This is a problem with ALL sports here I don’t mean to make it sound like it’s just a tennis issue but of all the “big 6” sports it’s probably suffered the most.

You could definitely be right about Fed but the reason I say Rafa is worse is because he kinda started as a bit more of a rebel figure but had since fallen in line and “turned” whereas Fed’s image has always been that way. But I certainly don’t care for the way any of them have gone with their personas.

There is a real challenge with the game being accessible here in America and my main point is what have these guys really done in that area? I don’t think they’ve done anything really.

Well tennis is a very expensive sport and I feel like that more people would play tennis if they could afford it. The training and equipment costs make it inaccessible for people who are not well off and even now it seems the kids who can afford it have chosen other sports to get involved in.

I just would rather players be themselves instead of some created persona. Nothing wrong with being a nice guy of course and I don't think we need a whole bunch of Kyrgios type of personalities but it would be nice to have some colorful personalities like tennis used to have.

Yea as far as accessibility, no they haven't.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Well tennis is a very expensive sport and I feel like that more people would play tennis if they could afford it. The training and equipment costs make it inaccessible for people who are not well off and even now it seems the kids who can afford it have chosen other sports to get involved in.

I just would rather players be themselves instead of some created persona. Nothing wrong with being a nice guy of course and I don't think we need a whole bunch of Kyrgios type of personalities but it would be nice to have some colorful personalities like tennis used to have.

Yea as far as accessibility, no they haven't.
Thank you for your well thought out and balanced responses. It’s nice to not be called a coward and an idiot for my views lol.
 

George Turner

Hall of Fame
Interesting comments. But there is a flaw in your whole point, you're blaming the decline on Fedalovic by saying they've done nothing to grow the game.

You blame them for being too PC. Yet guys like Kyrgios get slated for their behaviour. The public are scared of people who act themselves, so you're going to get these PC robots.

I do not believe their PC behavior is the reason for it anyway. Heavyweight Boxing in America sucks aswell and boxers don't behave PC. On the other hand Golf viewing figures double whenever Tiger is playing and Tiger has as much personality as my underpants, zero. At the end of the day we watch sport primarily to see who wins, personalities are a fairly insignificant factor in comparison. Ofc having an Athlete with a big personality like Bolt is great for sport but would anyone really care about his personality if he hadn't been the worlds best sprinter aswell?

Tennis in Australia had declined in a similar way to the states, people down under don't care for it much either. I don't know why this is, from what i can see the American system produces one serve/forehand bot after another. Maybe the American system is flawed, or maybe your best athletes are doing other sports? The British tennis system has always sucked, maybe you're copying us too much? :D Your next gen players are not good enough to raise American interest again.

I think it's a worldwide problem, judging by the lack of nextgen talent we have these days. But i don't believe getting Fedalovic to dress up as clowns and have nicknames is going to solve that. That works for Darts but not for tennis.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
I don't agree if commentators are touting how much Fed and Rafa "have done for the game." I don't really know who is saying this (Fowler? the Mac Bros? Mats?) but they're wrong. Doing "something for the game" would suggest to me philanthropy, raising awareness of tennis among non-wealthy people, or having a tennis academy which is free. It costs $55,000 a year to attend Rafa's Academy and Lendl charges almost as much. That's "education" for the privileged.

Someone like Borg did something for the game because he became a rock star and hundreds of thousands of people got into tennis because of him and his aura. Mac did something for the game by exhibiting sublime net skills and a brash, interesting personality. Becker did something for the game by winning Wimbledon at 17 and 18 and influencing so many people to get into tennis.

Fed and Rafa are the two most successful (and arguably greatest) players in tennis history. The two most popular as well. You could argue that they both transcended the sport: Fed with the sheer beauty of his game and Rafa perfecting clay tennis. But doing something for the game means something other than being great, popular and winning titles. They both are successful at doing what they're supposed to do as titans of tennis: put paying customers in the seats. But beyond that is questionable.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
I don't agree if commentators are touting how much Fed and Rafa "have done for the game." I don't really know who is saying this (Fowler? the Mac Bros? Mats?) but they're wrong. Doing "something for the game" would suggest to me philanthropy, raising awareness of tennis among non-wealthy people, or having a tennis academy which is free. It costs $55,000 a year to attend Rafa's Academy and Lendl charges almost as much. That's "education" for the privileged.

Someone like Borg did something for the game because he became a rock star and hundreds of thousands of people got into tennis because of him and his aura. Mac did something for the game by exhibiting sublime net skills and a brash, interesting personality. Becker did something for the game by winning Wimbledon at 17 and 18 and influencing so many people to get into tennis.

Fed and Rafa are the two most successful (and arguably greatest) players in tennis history. The two most popular as well. You could argue that they both transcended the sport: Fed with the sheer beauty of his game and Rafa perfecting clay tennis. But doing something for the game means something other than being great, popular and winning titles. They both are successful at doing what they're supposed to do as titans of tennis: put paying customers in the seats. But beyond that is questionable.
When they say stuff like what I just heard on TC live “ambassadors” for the game. But you already pretty much covered it all there anyway.
 

Cecilia

Rookie
Fed and Rafa are the two most successful (and arguably greatest) players in tennis history. The two most popular as well. You could argue that they both transcended the sport: Fed with the sheer beauty of his game and Rafa perfecting clay tennis. But doing something for the game means something other than being great, popular and winning titles. They both are successful at doing what they're supposed to do as titans of tennis: put paying customers in the seats. But beyond that is questionable.
Could not agree more. Some players may get a scholarship but in general Rafas Academy is for the wealthy .
Agassi really does great things with his school helping the underprivileged .I think djokovic opening a restaurant for those in need is also great. Come to think of it why does every star nowadays have a Fondation?
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Could not agree more. Some players may get a scholarship but in general Rafas Academy is for the wealthy .
Agassi really does great things with his school helping the underprivileged .I think djokovic opening a restaurant for those in need is also great. Come to think of it why does every star nowadays have a Fondation?
I think it is half real altruism and half good PR.

What is the Djokovic restaurant deal? And yes Agassi has always been great when it comes to not just generating interest in the game but true philanthropy. When I think of true altruism I think of things like Audrey Hepburn actively spr one time in desert with UNICEF to help the hungry.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
I don't agree if commentators are touting how much Fed and Rafa "have done for the game." I don't really know who is saying this (Fowler? the Mac Bros? Mats?) but they're wrong. Doing "something for the game" would suggest to me philanthropy, raising awareness of tennis among non-wealthy people, or having a tennis academy which is free. It costs $55,000 a year to attend Rafa's Academy and Lendl charges almost as much. That's "education" for the privileged.

Someone like Borg did something for the game because he became a rock star and hundreds of thousands of people got into tennis because of him and his aura. Mac did something for the game by exhibiting sublime net skills and a brash, interesting personality. Becker did something for the game by winning Wimbledon at 17 and 18 and influencing so many people to get into tennis.

Fed and Rafa are the two most successful (and arguably greatest) players in tennis history. The two most popular as well. You could argue that they both transcended the sport: Fed with the sheer beauty of his game and Rafa perfecting clay tennis. But doing something for the game means something other than being great, popular and winning titles. They both are successful at doing what they're supposed to do as titans of tennis: put paying customers in the seats. But beyond that is questionable.
Forgot to add on that last part, another thing is the absurd costs to watch tennis matches live. It costs more to see a SECOND round match at the event I’m close to than to see 4 hours worth of NASCAR sanctioned short track racing or see a college football game. It costs more than many people make in a month to see a QF or later of many events. Totally ridiculous.
 

Thundergod

Hall of Fame
Imo you're looking at it from the wrong angle. From a level of play perspective, they've certainly heightened the bar. In terms of things like sport popularity which is what you're mainly talking about: they might not have made it much more popular(I think a lot of the sport's problems are out of their control), but they certainly kept the sport afloat on their own. I think impact is just as large IMO since the amount of negative impact they prevented is just as large as the positive impact the guys before them made.

This is especially true in the US. As much as people don't care about tennis in the US, even complete casuals know who Fedal are(Djokovic to a lesser extent). Take them out of the equation for the past 10+ years and you get a bunch of 2014 USO Finals. We all know how disastrous that was in terms of viewership, popularity, etc.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
He wants to open a restaurant in Serbia that offers free food for those in need .Novak said in a statement: "Money is not problem for me. I have earned enough to feed all of Serbia."I think that they deserve this after all the support they are giving to me."
If he’s sincere about that than that’s awesome! Never cared for his personality but I’ve always respected where he came from and how he worked so hard for his success.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Imo you're looking at it from the wrong angle. From a level of play perspective, they've certainly heightened the bar. In terms of things like sport popularity which is what you're mainly talking about: they might not have made it much more popular(which might be impossible anyway), but they certainly kept the sport afloat on their own. I think impact is just as large IMO since the amount of negative impact they prevented is just as large as the positive impact the guys before them made.

This is especially true in the US. As much as people don't care about tennis in the US, even complete casuals know who Fedal are(Djokovic to a lesser extent). Take them out of the equation for the past 10+ years and you get a bunch of 2014 USO Finals. We all know how disastrous that was in terms of viewership, popularity, etc.
Maybe. But ratings have been down quite a bit even with them. Though part of the blame goes to the media completely bailing on everything besides Football and Basketball the last decade.
 

Thundergod

Hall of Fame
Maybe. But ratings have been down quite a bit even with them. Though part of the blame goes to the media completely bailing on everything besides Football and Basketball the last decade.
Ratings have gone down in every sport as far as I know, even American Football and Basketball(just that those 2 have been affected the least). I'm just saying that if you take out those 3, then ratings would go down way, way more; an enormous amount probably.

Just because the overall result is still negative doesn't mean there hasn't been an impact. If someone studies and gets like a 70% on a test, it is still a large impact if that person would have gotten a 30% if he didn't study.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Very concise and accurate point.
I have thought of the same as you many times. They have.probably inspired for people to play. But at the same time they have made tons of money in endorsements and such, nike too. So i dont really see that as being great for the sport only. Pc and quite boring in many ways. Its like they have no really meaningful opinions on anything.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
I have thought of the same as you many times. They have.probably inspired for people to play. But at the same time they have made tons of money in endorsements and such, nike too. So i dont really see that as being great for the sport only. Pc and quite boring in many ways. Its like they have no really meaningful opinions on anything.
Exactly. Despite my fandom of him I rarely agreed with Andy Roddick but still admired that he said what was on his mind. In the 21st century of tennis he is practically John Lennon. And that tells you the story.

If it hadn’t been for my being a fan of Tiger and hating Fed for that reason (the original ridiculous roots of my hate for him) I probably never would have gotten into it myself.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Exactly. Despite my fandom of him I rarely agreed with Andy Roddick but still admired that he said what was on his mind. In the 21st century of tennis he is practically John Lennon. And that tells you the story.

If it hadn’t been for my being a fan of Tiger and hating Fed for that reason (the original ridiculous roots of my hate for him) I probably never would have gotten into it myself.
They are not a meaningful idol besides playing tennis. Had some injuries, thats it. Both not very personal or open. They are correct.
 

Cecilia

Rookie
I have thought of the same as you many times. They have.probably inspired for people to play. But at the same time they have made tons of money in endorsements and such, nike too. So i dont really see that as being great for the sport only. Pc and quite boring in many ways. Its like they have no really meaningful opinions on anything.
Yes i agree they try to be not controversial. Murray is commited to fight against sexism and he gets some **** for this put he stands for it and does some really great things . The big 3 are only Tennis player if you know what i mean . Many sport legend stay in our memory because they were more than that like Muhammed Ali or Arthur Ashe . They fighted for something for what they believe was right . If you do that you get some backlash and Fedal seems to avoid that
 
Last edited:

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Pretty much all sports have gone heavily PC in the past few years so I don't think that's an issue. Basketball is butter soft compared to the 90's but it's as popular as ever, and maybe even moreso.

Federer, Nadal, Djokovic are all mild mannered European dudes who mostly stay out of the news (in the bad way) so they have trouble appealing to a more brash fan base (Americans). Tennis probably won't be popular in America unless America produces a legit guy, that's just how it is. But I think tennis has grown in places like Asia and maybe South America and guys like Shapovalov and FAA could help in North America. I think tennis will see a big popularity boost when an ATG talent comes from either Asia or America. So we'll see.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes i agree they try to be not controversial. Murray is commited to fight against sexism and he gets some **** for this put he stands for it and does some really great things . The big 3 are only Tennis player if you know what i mean . Many sport legend stay in our memory because they were more than that like Muhammed Ali or Arthur Ashe . They fighted for something for what they believe was right . If you do that you get some backlash and the big 3 seems to avoid that
Im talking about fedal.
Murray is on a more warm and meaningful path. Novak too.
 

Sudacafan

Bionic Poster
OP makes valid individual points but they generally do not correlate with each other.
Fedalovic success has nothing to do with American alleged tennis decline.
It’s true that it’s an expensive sport to play competitively. It’s always been, but this is aggravating with the weak economy.
Maybe it’s because America has not produced top ten players for awhile. Last one I remember is Roddick, who was not in the same class of Sampras and Agassi.
Come down to play to South America, it’s not that expensive here!
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Pretty much all sports have gone heavily PC in the past few years so I don't think that's an issue. Basketball is butter soft compared to the 90's but it's as popular as ever, and maybe even moreso.

Federer, Nadal, Djokovic are all mild mannered European dudes who mostly stay out of the news (in the bad way) so they have trouble appealing to a more brash fan base (Americans). Tennis probably won't be popular in America unless America produces a legit guy, that's just how it is. But I think tennis has grown in places like Asia and maybe South America and guys like Shapovalov and FAA could help in North America. I think tennis will see a big popularity boost when an ATG talent comes from either Asia or America. So we'll see.
I agree it certainly isn’t a tennis only issue. But classism is still very prevalent here in the US with tennis and nothing is really being done about it. The top players have a golden opportunity to help this but instead we see Rafa opening an academy that costs 55,000 to get in and such.
 

Standaa

G.O.A.T.
Federer brought so much grace, elegance and variety into his beautiful game to the point it's unprecedented. The amount of spin Rafa brought to his strokes is equally something we have not seen before. Djokovic brought his incredible athleticism. In all of these cases, you could argue they've done something for the sport of tennis by bringing something new to the game. As well as millions of new tennis fans, who wouldn't have been fans if not for these players, arguably. There's a reason I hear everywhere "When Fedal retires I'm done with tennis". Federer alone became a huge inspiration not just for juniors, but for recreational players as well. The drop in ratings after these players are done shall be huge.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
OP makes valid individual points but they generally do not correlate with each other.
Fedalovic success has nothing to do with American alleged tennis decline.
It’s true that it’s an expensive sport to play competitively. It’s always been, but this is aggravating with the weak economy.
Maybe it’s because America has not produced top ten players for awhile. Last one I remember is Roddick, who was not in the same class of Sampras and Agassi.
Come down to play to South America, it’s not that expensive here!
Well I would except I don’t have the money or means and I’d be afraid of the culture change. But yes it’s no wonder there are more good tennis players in your part of the world than us!
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
I agree it certainly isn’t a tennis only issue. But classism is still very prevalent here in the US with tennis and nothing is really being done about it. The top players have a golden opportunity to help this but instead we see Rafa opening an academy that costs 55,000 to get in and such.
Its not only about charity. But to be open about something that could help people beyond the sport. They have enourmous power to do so, but they dont.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Federer brought so much grace, elegance and variety into his beautiful game to the point it's unprecedented. The amount of spin Rafa brought to his strokes is equally something we have not seen before. Djokovic brought his incredible athleticism. In all of these cases, you could argue they've done something for the sport of tennis by bringing something new to the game. As well as millions of new tennis fans, who wouldn't have been fans if not for these players, arguably. There's a reason I hear everywhere "When Fedal retires I'm done with tennis". Federer alone became a huge inspiration not just for juniors, but for recreational players as well.
I’m genuinely not saying this to stir the pot, it is totally fine and good to feel that way (that’s how I feel about Dale Earnhardt Jr. and NASCAR) but I can safely say I’ll be glad when the big 3 are done and we can MAYBE get some fresh faces in and have more parity in this sport. I’ve been pretty tired of them for a while now.
 
Increase in prize money is a big deal, they brought that to the table. There are no great American players which is why tennis doesn't get a lot of coverage in the USA, but then again Messi and Ronaldo aren't exactly the most popular athletes in America are they (and we all know what they have done for footy). The big three are legends and I really do believe they raised the game to a new level, starting with Federer. Big reason why no one else could keep up with them.
 

Cecilia

Rookie
I agree it certainly isn’t a tennis only issue. But classism is still very prevalent here in the US with tennis and nothing is really being done about it. The top players have a golden opportunity to help this but instead we see Rafa opening an academy that costs 55,000 to get in and such.
Yeah and it is sad. They have so much power and they could change things for good but they only do what is expected of them not more . Tennis is a sport where the rich have a so much bigger chance at succeeding it is sickening.
One friend of mine use to say we might never have seen the best tennis player because he did not have the possibilies to be one . The whole system supports this . In sports like Basketball or football it is easier.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Increase in prize money is a big deal, they brought that to the table. There are no great American players which is why tennis doesn't get a lot of coverage in the USA, but then again Messi and Ronaldo aren't exactly the most popular athletes in America are they (and we all know what they have done for footy). The big three are legends and I really do believe they raised the game to a new level, starting with Federer. Big reason why no one else could keep up with them.
At the top yes. But lower players still barely scrape by and make a living. But yes the lack of male Americans makes a difference too.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Yeah and it is sad. They have so much power and they could change things for good but they only do what is expected of them not more . Tennis is a sport where the rich have a so much bigger chance at succeeding it is sickening.
One friend of mine use to say we might never have seen the best tennis player because he did not have the possibilies to be one . The whole system supports this . In sports like Basketball or football it is easier.
We have a candidate for TT 2018 rookie of the year! If I could like this 100 times I would. Even in other sports things have gotten bad but tennis is the worst.

I think after all my searching I’ve finally found my Nirvana as a Fed hater. Though as I said Nadal’s hands aren’t clean either.
 

Thundergod

Hall of Fame
I’m genuinely not saying this to stir the pot, it is totally fine and good to feel that way (that’s how I feel about Dale Earnhardt Jr. and NASCAR) but I can safely say I’ll be glad when the big 3 are done and we can MAYBE get some fresh faces in and have more parity in this sport. I’ve been pretty tired of them for a while now.
Then tell the fresh faces to get good enough that they are more preferred to watch over the old guys. I could care less about fresh faces if they aren't good.

If you would enjoy something like Coric v Donaldson in a big tourney final more than yet another Big 4 matchup, then all the power to you.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Then tell the fresh faces to get good enough that they are more preferred to watch over the old guys. I could care less about fresh faces if they aren't good.

If you would enjoy something like Coric v Donaldson in a big tourney final more than yet another Big 4 matchup, then all the power to you.
Yes those two guys aren’t interesting but I’d rather see guys like Tiafoe and Thiem and he’ll even Zverev much as I can’t stand him then the same old things I’ve been watching for a decade.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
As number 1 players , they have contributed to the game by playing at the highest level for so long , Fed was a model of sportsmanship and fair play and promoted the sport to the best they can , contributed to society outside of sports with their foundation . They have done all this better than any other No 1 of the past .

It is for the ATP and ITF to grow the sport and take responsibility for it .
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
Ha! Ha! Federer has done plenty for the game and has plenty of American fans. The Roger Foundation has been going strong now since 2003. He even held a Match for Africa in Seattle this year. He is resented for still playing successfully at 36 and personally sending American tennis back to the dark ages by continuously beating their “top” players and esclipsing the records of their most decorated player in Pete Sampras.
 

Thundergod

Hall of Fame
Yes those two guys aren’t interesting but I’d rather see guys like Tiafoe and Thiem and he’ll even Zverev much as I can’t stand him then the same old things I’ve been watching for a decade.
Fair enough. I will never get tired of watching Fedal though since I know I won't see players play similar to them for probably a long time.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Fair enough. I will never get tired of watching Fedal though since I know I won't see players play similar to them for probably a long time.
Fair enough as well. I wish more than anything there was variety and varied personalities like there were before the 21st century but oh well..
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
As number 1 players , they have contributed to the game by playing at the highest level for so long , Fed was a model of sportsmanship and fair play and promoted the sport to the best they can , contributed to society outside of sports with their foundation . They have done all this better than any other No 1 of the past .

It is for the ATP and ITF to grow the sport and take responsibility for it .
Definitely they need to do a better job and so does the BSTA. Not arguing that. But they hav me great opportunities to grow the game and make it more accessible yet we have guys opening tennis academies for the rich and privileged and nothing more than lip service being done. There needs to be more done across the board.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Definitely they need to do a better job and so does the BSTA. Not arguing that. But they hav me great opportunities to grow the game and make it more accessible yet we have guys opening tennis academies for the rich and privileged and nothing more than lip service being done. There needs to be more done across the board.

Give us some examples of what you have in mind as to what they should have done.

Fed and Rafa participate in Kids day, conducted Laver Cup to honor tennis legends. They are both very respectful to ball kids. Fed respects the tour by playing around 80 matches per year and not taking any opportunistic sabbatical.

Tell us what players of the past and players from other sports did for comparison .
 

every7

Hall of Fame
When you get a group of sportspeople as transcendent as the Big 4 you look at their contributions to tennis (HUGE!) but also their greater contributions to the world.

Nadal:
- As part of the ATP player council brokered a new deal to change profit sharing and prize money and create more financial networks for lower-tiered players
- Shifted tennis debate completely and reignited clay as one of the big talking points in tennis and an important proving ground for anyone wanting to truly be considered an all-round great (Sampras era had temporarily marked clay as irrelevant in this discussion).
- Developed a new education initiative in India and created a school and also paid millions to developing schooling and education infrastructure in that country.
- Grown tennis in his home country exponentially. Also now has an academy presence in his home country with a full academy site established to teach full fee paying student and also give scholarships to underpriveleged gifted players.
- Brought rock star sex appeal back to tennis for the first time since Borg.
- Has increased the visibility of the game worldwide and has contributed to making tennis arguably third most popular sport in his country

Federer:
- Created a legion of new tennis fans and brought more new people to the game than any other player ever
- Significant financial contribution to Africa

Djokovic:
- Raised awareness for plant-based vegetarian and gluten-free foods and health approaches
- Millions raised and contributed in Serbia via charitable donations and business investment.
- Created new approaches to flexibility / training / body management / hyperbaric recovery that changes tennis training

Murray:
- Millions raised for animal protection and welfares
- Charitable donations and aid work for Africa and also in England
- Has fostered the development of tennis as a "power sport" in the U.K. again, and made the sport arguably 4th most popular sport in his country.
 
Top