Is Men's Tennis Boring?

johnnylad · Tennis legend

RE: Is Men's Tennis Boring?

korriban · Challenger level

WD40 wrote:
Ah, johnnylad you disappoint me, what no reasoned argument, no discussion, just "your still wrong" LOL!

I don't think it needs much argument. For pure tennis brilliance and physical prowess, these 4 men have IMHO lifted the sport to the greatest ever era in the men's game. When the 4 play each other the standards on display are simply staggering at times, and there are probably 4 or 5 matches in the top 10 of GOAT matches between just these 4.

When you look at "transition eras" in tennis, 1 or 2 years between those with some of the greats, you realise how lucky certain GS champions have been. Hewitt, Safin, Bruguera spring to mind. All 2 time GS winners. The fact that we have FOUR stellar players at the same time is a delight, although unlucky for our Andy.

What is noticeable this week at RG is the distinct lack of future #1 talent on display. Dimitrov looks like Andy used to look before he began to bulk himself up, but when it really mattered showed very little fight against Nole, and his skill levels were still miles behind. Raonic has gone off the boil. Janovicz is a very good player, but is he a GS champion. And whilst there Re many Very good young US and Aussie players coming through, do any of them look like multiple slam winners?

Let's enjoy these 4 superstars while it lasts. The future doesnt look too bright.

SMC1809 · All-time great

Surely if you find it boring, then it is boring - there's not a right or wrong answer. In a similar way, I found watching FC Barcelona boring. I could admire their brilliance but it still bored me.

WD40 · Club Coach

korriban, I have not disputed 1 single point that you make, in fact I agree with you in the 1st paragraph of my post. Nor have I said that I find any individual match boring (which I don't). what I have tried to say (maybe clumsily) is that I find the overall situation slightly boring. Oh, and SMC1809 I dislike football (a lot). smile smile

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

WD40 wrote:

Madeline, watching the same event over and over for years and years with the same result and then anticipating it to be different the next or next time you watch it----is the definition of madness. (sorry, couldn't resist it, Please don't ostracise me).

Ah, but the excitement is that ONE day it WILL happen - and this may be it!

No problem with being called mad - Mad has been my nickname since I was 2 years old. Mad by name and mad by nature.

indiana · Tennis legend

Still no, just no !

The description of the "log jam effect" suggests players at all levels working harder and harder to improve their games, i.e. you need to be more and more exceptional to enter the top 200 / 100 / 50 / 10. So consequently players at all levels are undoubtably better than ever. General matches are better than ever. This is a good thing surely !

What can be boring can be supposed excellence which is actually poor in quality. Yes, the women's game is much more unpredictable, and has been for some time. Clearly at the moment Serena is no 1, but still beyond her is unpredictabilty, much of it caused by a lack of consistent excellence. Many matches at the sharp end of women's Slams are just relatively poor and do not grip me in the way the men's matches do, even if again featuring two of the top 4.

This is a great era in men's tennis with many exciting, memorable matches resulting.

For me personally, boring ? No way !

But then I like football too ( a lot ) LOL

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

I guess the answer would depend very much on whether your interest in tennis is results based or whether you enjoy the tennis in itself. I put myself in the latter category and hence my answer would be "no". When I am watching most matches, I don't really care who wins (unless a Brit is playing of course) but I enjoy the match as a spectacle. The best example of this may have been Tipsy v Ferrer in the US Open last year. What a match !! And yet sitting here now, I can't tell you who won, although I know it went to a 5th set tie break.

With regard to the top 4, I think that football is very much in the same situation right now. Even before the season starts, most people know which 4 teams are going to make Champions league qualification, but that doesn't stop people enjoying the matches. Golf on the other hand has recently offered us the opposite extreme. Once Tiger Woods had nosedived "quite spectacularly" off his pedestal, we had a period where 14 consecutive majors were won by 14 different people. And whilst this unpredictability provided some intrigue, for me it left golf without a "marketing figurehead" to promote the sport to the more casual and occasional fan.

Sport needs its superstars and tennis is lucky right now to have 4 of them.

But if it is surprises you want, stop reading this and go and watch Simon v Federer. ALLEZ GILLES, says the guy who doesn't care which player wins wink

-- Edited by Bob in Spain on Sunday 2nd of June 2013 05:38:14 PM

DF · Tennis legend

My answer is also an emphatic ''

WD40 · Club Coach

As Ratty noted (thanks Ratty smile ), I have absolutely no complaint with the matches. In fact during this French Open I have not posted on this forum during the day because I have been glued to the TV watching from morning till night and enjoying the tennis on show from the first round onwards, although I will admit to occasionally peeking at livescores to see how some of my fav. GB players were doing if playing. wink

I even enjoy watching the regular thrashings that Serena hands out, because I admire her skill (although I am not too fond of the lady herself for some strange reason!).

Part of my complaint (if anyone wants to call it that, though it's really just a comment) is that tennis fans the world over have their individual favs. and if one of your male favs. just happens not to be in the top 4, then while still watching and appreciating the quality of tennis it is no fun at all watching your fav. repeatedly get beaten by one or other of the top 4. In fact I imagine it could be downright depressing.

I was a fan of Tim Henman, a skillful and crafty player IMO, but every time he came up against Pete Sampras I found myself thinking game over, but I still watched and enjoyed the matches and there was always the chance? In todays game a player outside the top 4 can occasionally of course beat one of them but he will inevitably run into one of the other three. This, as I have said, can not be fun for his fans or the player.

-- Edited by WD40 on Monday 3rd of June 2013 01:53:30 AM

RJA · Hall of fame

As I indicated in my previous post I do think things are a bit stale at the top of men's tennis. The French Open has been a brilliant event thus far with some truly great matches but once we get past tomorrow I doubt that things will remain as exciting. The prospect of another Nadal v Djokovic or Federer v Nadal match doesn't really do much for me.

As I said a few times last year. My highlight of the year was not Andy Murray winning Olympic Gold or the US Open but Jonny Marray winning the Wimbledon doubles. Why? well because the latter was just so unexpected.

DF · Tennis legend

No

and to give as an example the match between Simon and Federer this afternoon,

Not boring. Stunning shots. The unexpected shots-sometimes great. sometimes not so much. Fed won but as Mad said it could have been the time that he lost.

Simon upped his game but was not able to keep it up.

Very entertaining. Brilliant tennis.

Ratty · County player

I don't think WD40 was complaining about the matches, just that only 4 players win most of the tournaments.

And it wouldn't be one of my posts without a bit of cosmic pretentiousness, and so I'd just point out that humans, like most pack animals, LIKE established pecking orders.

After all, the last time a team apart from Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal or Chelsea won the Premiership was in 1995. Other countries have even fewer dominant teams. And although I loathe and detest soccer, sadly an awful lot of people love it.

Armchair · County player

If you stop worrying about who wins the tournaments and the rankings and just watch match by match it makes tennis much more enjoyable.

I got into a 'discussion' with Queens Club ticketing a few years back when the ticketing system made the assumption that you would obviously
want to see the finals over the semis or preceeding rounds. And it was nigh impossible to choose 'less desirable' options as your preference.
Given a choice I never go for finals tickets IMHO semis and quarters are often much more interesting and competitive, particularly in slams.

I have particular players who's game I enjoy, and given the right match up I don't care if it's an early round it's still a match I want to sit and watch.
Sadly, I don't particularly like to watch Andy's matches as I often find the agony but not the ecstasy.

I would have so loved to see Simon beat Fed but it was not to be.....

PaulM · Tennis legend

The fact that before a major tournament starts you can (assuming the top 4 are all playing and fit) pencil in the 4 semi finalists is both a good and a bad thing.

Tennis makes money from its stars and its rivalries. Commercially, the ATP needs the top 4 to be playing all the big matches.

In terms of individual matches (outside of the top 4 routing people in three sets) the mens game is often extremely entertaining. But overall, the lack of an underdog, any real young talent threatening to break through, and the fact that ultimately the big events are a forgone conclusion, means the mens game is lacking something I find so enjoyable about the womens, the fact that truly anything can happen.

And to be honest, I've seen enough Roger vs Rafa, Roger vs Novak, Rafa vs Novak matches that the finals weekend of the French Open (as much as I will sit and enjoy the matches) doesn't really fill me with all that much excitement.

-- Edited by PaulM on Monday 3rd of June 2013 04:13:41 PM

Spectator · All-time great

I don't think men's tennis is boring - definitely side with those who say the game has never been better and it's a delight to see people playing so well. Agree that if you were a bettor or a player below the rank of 10, it might feel (a) boring or (b) discouraging, but since I'm just a Spectator, it's fine.

One thing which is of interest: it will come down with the winners of the two 4th round matches on court, but at present the average age of the men's QF is (using whole years only) 30.3. Quite remarkable.