Is Men's Tennis Boring?

Spectator · All-time great

RE: Is Men's Tennis Boring?

paulisi · Tennis legend

Spectator wrote:
In which case, I'm going to presume you weren't glued to the screen watching the Williams/Errani match!

Just watched the "highlights" video on the RG website. My goodness. Talk about dominating a match.

Your quite right. In fact i've been really busy and the only matches i have watched were two of the GB girls in the first round. I've not seen anything since and with Serena and Rafa short priced favourites and it's on clay plus an extremely busy weekend i don't expect to see any more tennis until i get down to Birmingham on Monday.

indiana · Tennis legend

Only saw the final set of Nadal beating Djokovic 9 - 7 in the fifth, but once again looked top quality. For me again, no way a bore. Although glad it didn't ultimately go on too long. Oh for final set TBs !

As for the old equal prize money arguements, men and women's tennis are essentially different products, and each have their place. I come and go a bit on whether the women "deserve" equal prize money. But I don't consider the women playing best of 3 sets as against the men playing best of 5 is fundamentally unfair. As I said, different products, 5 works for the men and 3 for the women.

chicken · Social player

The top 10 male tennis player are mostly very professional setting good examples in the way they behave and play but I like to watch colorful tennis players which adds another dimension to matches. When I was growing up I remember the drama of watching a very talented long haired tennis play shouting " you can not be serious". Safin was great to watch and I now find myself wanting to watch Gulbis and Delgopolov just to see something different.

PaulM · Tennis legend

The men's final was an absolute snoozefest.

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

After the first set, I went out and did some weeding.

But that was an exception. I would normally watch the men's final start to finish.

Spectator · All-time great

How true! Was there ever a point in recent years at which the potential inequalities of the draw were as great? (Had queried whether he might get a boost from the Wimbledon rankings system, but I gather that's not the case. Too bad - particularly if the draw goes the other way, and Mr Murray has Federer and Nadal in his half!)

-- Edited by Spectator on Wednesday 12th of June 2013 05:11:51 AM

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

I only hope that if Nadal gets seeded 5 we don't have the same scenario at Wimby.

steven · Tennis legend

RJA wrote:
Helen40 wrote:
I only hope that if Nadal gets seeded 5 we don't have the same scenario at Wimby.
What we want is Djokovic (seeded 1) to be in same half as Federer (seeded 3) and Nadal (seeded 5) while Murray (seeded 2) is in the same half as Ferrer (seeded 4).

Yes, though press reports seem to make the opposite scenario sound as if it's near-certain!

Making the (dodgy) assumptions that none of the top 5 withdraw between now and Wimbledon and none of the 'big 4' (i.e. WR 1-3 and Rafa) lose before meeting another member of the 'big 4,' the probabilities are:

Andy/Nole:

1 in 8 chance of having to beat 3 of the big 4 to win the title (i.e. Rafa in their quarter and Fed in their half)
5 in 8 chance of having to beat 2 of the big 4 to win the title (made up of 4 in 8 SF & Final, i.e. as normal for a 1-2 seed, & 1 in 8 QF & Final)
1 in 4 chance of having to beat just 1 of the big 4 to win the title

Fed:

1 in 4 chance of having to beat 3 of the big 4 to win the title (i.e. Rafa in Fed's quarter)
3 in 4 chance of having to beat 2 of the big 4 in the SF and Final to win the title (i.e. as normal for a 3-4 seed)
no chance of having to beat just 1 of the big 4 to win the title

Rafa:

1 in 2 chance of having to beat 3 of the big 4 to win the title (i.e. Rafa in the opposite half of the draw to Ferrer)
1 in 2 chance of having to beat 2 of the big 4 to win the title (made up of 25% SF & Final & 25% QF & Final)
no chance of having to beat just 1 of the big 4 to win the title

So Rafa being seeded 5th gives Nole and Andy twice as much chance of getting a dream draw (i.e. just 1 of the big 4 to beat) as of getting a nightmare draw (i.e. 3 of the big 4 to beat), though getting a normal draw (i.e. 2 of the big 4 to beat) is considerably more likely than either of those options.

Conversely, it gives Fed a 1 in 4 chance and Rafa a 1 in 2 chance of getting a nightmare draw and neither of them the chance of a dream draw.

-- Edited by steven on Wednesday 12th of June 2013 07:19:18 AM

RJA · Hall of fame

Helen40 wrote:
I only hope that if Nadal gets seeded 5 we don't have the same scenario at Wimby.

What we want is Djokovic (seeded 1) to be in same half as Federer (seeded 3) and Nadal (seeded 5) while Murray (seeded 2) is in the same half as Ferrer (seeded 4).

indiana · Tennis legend

Very interesting, Steven.

So Rafa being seeded 5 will more likely see Andy ( and Novak ) have an easier passage rather than harder in terms of playing other "big 4" players.

Of course, it is often part of the British psyche to immediately look at the worst case scenario and end up almost convinced that it is a real negative having Rafa seeded 5.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

indiana wrote:
Very interesting, Steven.

So Rafa being seeded 5 will more likely see Andy ( and Novak ) have an easier passage rather than harder in terms of playing other "big 4" players.

Of course, it is often part of the British psyche to immediately look at the worst case scenario and end up almost convinced that it is a real negative having Rafa seeded 5.

I don't think we're being negative, but rather saying that if Rafa is seeded five then the tournament might peak at the semis again instead of the final - which would be boring in terms of having the final as the peak - as it should be.

RJA · Hall of fame

The difference between here and the French is that the at the latter there was only two likely winners. Once Nadal and Djokovic were drawn in the same half their semi was effectively the final.

Wimbledon is totally different. All of the big four are genuine contenders to win and the you can make the case that Berdych, Tsonga and Del Potro could all win it if things went their way.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I agree with the above. It's one of the enjoyable things about Wimbledon. And not only the players RJA mentions but it is just conceivable that a big server (a Cilic/Isner player) could cause a big upset, or indeed a talented ball player-style guy like Gasquet or Haas who can't quite hack consecutive long matches.