JoeWolf990 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I'm not sure why the lack of rivals comment is unfair. I'm not holding it against her, but this is about why Serena might not be getting the attention she deserves. I'm saying that she (and the sport) might get more attention if there was a big rivalry these days. I don't think it's a race debate. I think it's more of a gender debate. People talked about Tiger and Lebron chasing titles for years. she had rivals. You missed that in my post. By the way, what has absolutely killed Tennis in the US is the fact that nobody watches the men's game. Like at all. It's sort of staggering what has happened there. that, and tennis (and soccer) is a microcosm of the problems we have in American sports with developing athletes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 It has always irritated me that the Williams' sisters were so much more genetically superior than their opponents. It cheapened their success for me. I can still respect what she is doing to a degree though and I like her as a person. You realize, of course, that the woman Serena defeated the other day is much more of a genetic freak than Serena is. Maria Sharapova is six foot 2, with a wingspan like an Andean Condor, and natural foot speed of a woman much smaller. Her court coverage is far greater than any other woman who has ever played. If you were trying to design a perfect tennis player body, you would start with Sharapova. Plus, by all accounts she's kind of a ****. But she looks like a supermodel, so she is by far the highest paid woman athlete in the world, and will always be more beloved than Serena, even in the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Martina Navratolova never got the full credit, because of her appearance and playing style. People have written doctoral theses on Navratolova. An Eastern European who really never hid her sexuality in any way dominating a sport in Reagan's America and Thatcher's England. Frankly, it's kind of amazing that people weren't burning effigies in the street when she played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Again, not an expert on Tennis, but I have a question. Would going to three sets instead of five make the men's game more appealing? I've always thought maybe the matches are too long to pull in the non tennis watcher. I know there have been some epic matches with guys squeezing out every ounce of energy, but maybe with the shortened match, the points would be more at a premium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Maybe some Redskins fans don't like her because she dated Lavar Arrington... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Maybe some Redskins fans don't like her because she dated Lavar Arrington... Damn, she did? When was this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeWolf990 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Again, not an expert on Tennis, but I have a question. Would going to three sets instead of five make the men's game more appealing? I've always thought maybe the matches are too long to pull in the non tennis watcher. I know there have been some epic matches with guys squeezing out every ounce of energy, but maybe with the shortened match, the points would be more at a premium. the women's game has gotten faster, but its not as fast as the men. Also, and I hate to say this, but the women players quit easily. Serena is one of the few exceptions to that. Damn, she did? When was this?it was a rumor. Not sure if it was true but in the early aughts she messed with Lavar and Keyshawn Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I really thought I'd see some pics of her ass by now. #disappointed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Again, not an expert on Tennis, but I have a question. Would going to three sets instead of five make the men's game more appealing? I've always thought maybe the matches are too long to pull in the non tennis watcher. I know there have been some epic matches with guys squeezing out every ounce of energy, but maybe with the shortened match, the points would be more at a premium. I think the fact that the game is dominated by a bunch of Europeans who just seem to hit the ball as hard as humanly possible every time is the biggest problem. It's really weird to me: in the 70s, it seemed like everyone played tennis. Now, it seems like I know more people who play in weekend rugby leagues than who play tennis. By the way, golf is dying too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeWolf990 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I think the fact that the game is dominated by a bunch of Europeans who just seem to hit the ball as hard as humanly possible every time is the biggest problem. It's really weird to me: in the 70s, it seemed like everyone played tennis. Now, it seems like I know more people who play in weekend rugby leagues than who play tennis. By the way, golf is dying too. I dont think tennis participation going down is the biggest problem. I think other nations just teach the game better than us Americans do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I think two things are happening here: 1. There has been a steep decline in the overall interest in tennis in this country, which has not been helped by the lack of compelling American Men. 2. Typically, a dominant woman's player would help raise interest in tennis among Americans. But people don't seem interested in Serena aside as some kind of museum piece. Race and looks (which in this case are linked) have something to do with that. I don't think that can be ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Frankly, it's kind of amazing that people weren't burning effigies in the street when she played. In terms of support, they were. Just about everyone cheered against her until her later years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Again, not an expert on Tennis, but I have a question. Would going to three sets instead of five make the men's game more appealing? I've always thought maybe the matches are too long to pull in the non tennis watcher. I know there have been some epic matches with guys squeezing out every ounce of energy, but maybe with the shortened match, the points would be more at a premium. I think what reduced the attraction of men's tennis is the increasing power of the rackets and the move to slower surfaces. The game was a lot more diverse on grass and you could have titanic battles of the like of McEnroe and Borg who had quite different styles. Even the players have got bigger as the power game has increased. The best of five sets allow a great struggle to take place, but with longer rallies and evenly matched top players it can get way too much. I'd be more inclined to place limits on the racket technology so that attacking the net was viable again, than reducing the number of games required to win a match. Lack of popularity here is in part due to saturation of the other sports. Tennis is like track and field in that the American stars are much better known in Europe and elsewhere than at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Thanks for the feedback guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I am much more likely to watch a women's match because it's shorter. Men's matches can go on entirely too long and I don't have that kind of time for tennis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I think what reduced the attraction of men's tennis is the increasing power of the rackets and the move to slower surfaces. The game was a lot more diverse on grass and you could have titanic battles of the like of McEnroe and Borg who had quite different styles. Even the players have got bigger as the power game has increased. The best of five sets allow a great struggle to take place, but with longer rallies and evenly matched top players it can get way too much. I'd be more inclined to place limits on the racket technology so that attacking the net was viable again, than reducing the number of games required to win a match. Lack of popularity here is in part due to saturation of the other sports. Tennis is like track and field in that the American stars are much better known in Europe and elsewhere than at home. My interest in men's tennis has fallen in direct proportion to racket technology. There is nothing interesting about a 130 mph serve, return, then volley for winner. Nothing. Men's tennis sucks ass. Probably the worst sport out there right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 My interest in men's tennis has fallen in direct proportion to racket technology. There is nothing interesting about a 130 mph serve, return, then volley for winner. Nothing. Men's tennis sucks ass. Probably the worst sport out there right now. Technology seems to have forced everyone to play the exact same style too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Yep. Watching men's tennis is about as interesting as watching bowling now. Without different styles of play, it's just like watching Pong on a black and white tv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mursilis Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 By the way, golf is dying too. As it should. Golf is a good walk spoiled - Mark Twain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Golf is a lot like NASCAR, the American public decided about 10-15 years ago that it would be the next thing But as more people joined, more people realized they both kind of suck. (And yes I play golf). Now they are both back to the same core group they had in 1995 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PF Chang Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Technology seems to have forced everyone to play the exact same style too. Definitely. In 2003 at Wimbledon, Federer served and volleyed about 50% of the time, higher on first serves. Now, he'd be asking for a passing shot in trying that. Racket tech has forced everyone to play like Ivan Lendl. At this point, it seems like improvement at the ATP level is more about fitness than tactics. Player weaknesses are figured out quickly -- Nadal has owned Federer for a decade by going high to his backhand constantly. Novak Djokovic's game hasn't changed since before he was #1, but his training has. http://espn.go.com/tennis/story/_/id/8132800/has-novak-djokovic-become-fittest-athlete-ever-espn-magazine No idea how this would get done, but I'd love to see restrictions on rackets or at least faster playing surfaces. Could lead to more variation in tactics and more interesting matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeesburgSkinFan Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I suspect she and many of her female and male counterparts may be on PEDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Golf is a lot like NASCAR, the American public decided about 10-15 years ago that it would be the next thing But as more people joined, more people realized they both kind of suck. (And yes I play golf). Now they are both back to the same core group they had in 1995 That's probably part of it. I also think corporate belt-tightening has played a role. You probably know this more than me: but does anyone do business deals on the golf course any longer? Every year I've worked for my company, our expense policy has gotten more and more stringent. And that seems to be a trend. (We are way off subject, but I find this more interesting). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 LKB, indeed deals are still made on the golf course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 That's probably part of it. I also think corporate belt-tightening has played a role. You probably know this more than me: but does anyone do business deals on the golf course any longer? Every year I've worked for my company, our expense policy has gotten more and more stringent. And that seems to be a trend. (We are way off subject, but I find this more interesting). Maybe there's some truth to that. But I never bought that deals were ever made on golf courses. Just look at how many wildly successful business people don't even play I think golf with customers is simply relationship forming. Helps facilitate business. But there are more inclusive (lots of people don't play) and effective means of forming relationships that I think most companies employ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.