Tennis Volume 7: Roger That!

[divica]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I can't find any hard data on viewership and ratings, but I think it's fair to guess that there's been greater growth in the U.S. than in Europe over the last 25 years, and Williams sisters would play a huge role in that. And that, in turn, brings people to the men's game as well, which leads to greater revenues. 

I have no idea why you would say that. From mcenroe, to Agassi to pete sampras to andy roddick the US has had great Champions in the last 25 years… There is no reason to think that the success of the williams has had a great effect in how the US watches tennis…

Then the great players have supporters form every country. I doubt that any american player has more fans than federer in the US...

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You're right to say they aren't as relevant outside of the U.S*., though you go to far, but you seem to fail to understand the economic driver the U.S. can be. 


*You could also flip that argument around. The directionality goes both ways. It always blows my mind that Nadal and Novak have like no marketing effect here.

Serena is hardly a consistent player (she plays 3 years and then disapears 1 or 2 years). And she is always creating problems outside the courts to justify her losses… It makes her lose a lot of support… 

And novak and nadal have a great effect in worldwide tennis. Bigger that the william sisters.

[Jeor]

I think we're probably talking at cross-purposes here.

The Williams sisters are obviously revered in the USA and they've contributed a huge amount to the popularity of the sport there. I don't doubt that they are seen as great champions and have done a huge amount for tennis in the States. Outside of the USA, they're seen in more "ordinary" terms. Great players, though Serena in particular a bit of a bad sport. 

@Tywin et al. You said that Nadal and Djokovic have virtually no effect in the US. Just flip it around again - that's how the rest of the world considers the Williams sisters. You may think it's wrong and that the rest of the world is dumb and unappreciative of their greatness, but that doesn't change the reality that that's just how it is.

[Jeor]

Interesting women's final set up. I was sure Konta and Barty were going to get through for a more "conventional final" but Barty got stretched and Konta actually lost. You'd have to think Barty would be the favourite but you never know.

Settling in to see Roger get beaten yet again by Nadal on clay.

[Mladen]

18 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

My issue, specifically with you, is that you completely reject trying to have any degree of empathy for her. I asked you to close your eyes, imagine that you’re a black woman who lived in the hood of all hoods in the U.S., and that you came up through a sport that is soaked in racism, sexism and classism, and that given all that, can you imagine that you might blow up in a heated moment when you feel you are being mistreated for the reasons I laid out. You categorically refused to do that, called the official a brave man, and said that Serena is a brat, a jerk, and she should shut her mouth.

And my issue, not specifically with you is that we have someone crying racism and sexism when she was pretty much aware that wasn't the case. And bigger issue is that next time she does become a victim of racism and sexism, she will be like that boy who cried wolf. Racism and sexism are not things you accuse someone of without thinking through. Unless you are a bully, which Serena was that day. She wasn't a diva, she was a bully. And everything that happened since that day, including the backpedaling support that Serena initially got, really shows how shallow and wrong her accusations have been. 

This was not a story of a wronged woman who accused someone of racism and sexism. This was a story of someone making an act in an attempt to cover her own loss. She behaved like the worst kind of a bully, and worst, she accused someone who professionally couldn't defend himself. And what is worse, even that night, she was very much aware that he is not a racist or sexist. And that what he did to her, he did across the board, to both men and women, black and white. But that simply didn't bother her.

18 hours ago, Maithanet said:

In the 16 years since Federer won his first major, the total Wimbledon prize pool increased from 8.8 million pounds to 34 million (2002-2018).  Which sounds really great, except the increase slightly less than the increase seen in the 16 years before that (1986-2002), from 2.1 million pounds to 8.8 million.  So I have trouble attributing the increase in popularity as entirely or even mostly the result of Federer.  Perhaps less reserved champs like Agassi were a little more captivating? 

Yes, but that said, we should also think about sales tickets, inflation, marketing deals etc. The Big Three earned more money that any other tennis player before them. And Federer is very lonely on top with the total net worth. 

18 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I wouldn’t be so sure about that. Fed's rise coincided with the Williams Sisters', and the latter is probably more likely to increase the sport's market share.

Federer's net worth is around half a billion dollars and Serena's around 200m USD. So that really speaks about where the money went.

[Free Northman Reborn]

The inevitable train wreck unfolding in the semi final at the moment is why I switched from supporting Federer to Novak about 5 years ago. It has proven to be an emotionally rewarding decision, bringing enjoyment back to my tennis watching again.

Federer has never been able to break his Nadal mental block, which is why he cannot be the best ever, sadly.

[Mladen]

4 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Federer has never been able to break his Nadal mental block, which is why he cannot be the best ever, sadly.

He has won the last what 5,6 matches in a row.

[Free Northman Reborn]

3 minutes ago, Risto said:

He has won the last what 5,6 matches in a row.

I should have been more specific. His mental block against Nadal in grand slam tournaments.

[Mladen]

1 minute ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I should have been more specific. His mental block against Nadal in grand slam tournaments.

He won AO 2017 against Nadal. But that wasn't clay

[Gronzag]

RG is a mess. The roof should have been built years ago.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

I’ll have to address some of this dreck later because I have a ton of meetings to prep for, but I have to say, as a long time Nadal supporter, dude, shave your head. You’re not fooling anyone. Come on home!

[Jeor]

Well that was a disappointing Fed/Nadal match.

Hopefully we get a close match out of Djokovic/Thiem, although I'm not holding my breath. Thiem's obviously most at home on clay, but Djokovic has been in good form. I don't see him losing this one.

[Jeor]

These conditions are awful. I've never seen it so windy that the TV image is actually sometimes obscured.

Djokovic not coping either, we might have a match on here.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

23 hours ago, divica said:

I have no idea why you would say that. From mcenroe, to Agassi to pete sampras to andy roddick the US has had great Champions in the last 25 years… There is no reason to think that the success of the williams has had a great effect in how the US watches tennis…

Then the great players have supporters form every country. I doubt that any american player has more fans than federer in the US...

Great champions doesn't necessarily lead to great viewership. Like I said before. tennis (and golf) have largely been seen as rich white guy sports. in the U.S. (I have no idea how they're viewed in Europe). The Williams sisters, like Tiger, introduced a new paradigm that vastly expanded both game's popularity here in the U.S.

Additionally, while those players you listed were great, they never were bigger than their sport. McEnroe has a small, niche place in pop culture, but it's nothing comparable to Serena.

Quote

Serena is hardly a consistent player (she plays 3 years and then disapears 1 or 2 years). And she is always creating problems outside the courts to justify her losses… It makes her lose a lot of support… 

You act like other players don't do that too. I'd suggest checking out some sociological studies that look at how we view women differently than men when they're angry and how black women are viewed when they're perceived to be angry. The results might help change how you view some things.

Quote

And novak and nadal have a great effect in worldwide tennis. Bigger that the william sisters. 

Probably, but as they say in real estate, "location, location, location!" Being one of the biggest athletes in a country with the best economy matters. And that's part of the point I've been trying to make. Bridging tennis into the U.S. plays a role in how you view a player's importance, whether you like it or not.

23 hours ago, Jeor said:

I think we're probably talking at cross-purposes here.

The Williams sisters are obviously revered in the USA and they've contributed a huge amount to the popularity of the sport there. I don't doubt that they are seen as great champions and have done a huge amount for tennis in the States. Outside of the USA, they're seen in more "ordinary" terms. Great players, though Serena in particular a bit of a bad sport. 

@Tywin et al. You said that Nadal and Djokovic have virtually no effect in the US. Just flip it around again - that's how the rest of the world considers the Williams sisters. You may think it's wrong and that the rest of the world is dumb and unappreciative of their greatness, but that doesn't change the reality that that's just how it is.

I mean I literally did say just that.

9 hours ago, Risto said:

And my issue, not specifically with you is that we have someone crying racism and sexism when she was pretty much aware that wasn't the case. And bigger issue is that next time she does become a victim of racism and sexism, she will be like that boy who cried wolf. Racism and sexism are not things you accuse someone of without thinking through. Unless you are a bully, which Serena was that day. She wasn't a diva, she was a bully. And everything that happened since that day, including the backpedaling support that Serena initially got, really shows how shallow and wrong her accusations have been. 

This was not a story of a wronged woman who accused someone of racism and sexism. This was a story of someone making an act in an attempt to cover her own loss. She behaved like the worst kind of a bully, and worst, she accused someone who professionally couldn't defend himself. And what is worse, even that night, she was very much aware that he is not a racist or sexist. And that what he did to her, he did across the board, to both men and women, black and white. But that simply didn't bother her.

You never seem to learn. I have said that I don't think the official was being overtly racist or sexist, but you can never discount the possible affects of latent racism. Moreover though, it just appears the dude is widely seen as a jerk.

Now that said, what you are doing here is specifically what I challenged you to try not to do. You're making your value judgement. Try understanding hers. You can't say with any certainty that she was faking how she felt, and to express such an opinion is reckless and frankly, dumb. You need to listen to people when they're expressing themselves. This isn't some high minded psychology stuff, it's basic knowledge in the corporate world, and it's why we have things like diversity training. To call her a bully and a liar only reflects poorly on you, not her.

Also, you talk like an authority on racism and sexism, yet you seem to understand how they work. It's not simply black and white, so as I said to divica I'll say to you, go actually ready some studies and educate yourself. This is not hard, and the data is not hard to track down. All it takes is your willingness to punch some search terms into the Googles.

 

Quote

Federer's net worth is around half a billion dollars and Serena's around 200m USD. So that really speaks about where the money went.

Well if the stat I saw is correct, which is that the men's Finals worldwide have out drawn women's Finals by three times the amount (granted just one example), then one can conclude that Serena has over performed relative to Federer, even if his bank account is bigger.

Also, in digging around for some better data, which sadly there is very little, it appears that when Serena is in the Finals, her match outdraws the men's Finals, so no, it's not correct for people to say definitively that Rodger is more popular than her here in the States.

And with that, I'm out. Catch ya'll on the flip side after my boy Nadal beats the breaks off of whoever comes out of the delayed semis.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Actually I lied. I'll at least make it easy for you to start to understand. Give this podcast a listen. It's about 50 minutes. Too much work you might say? Well at least read this excerpt in a good faith effort to try and understand how society views women and anger:

Quote

"We really understand from a very early age what the risks and costs of our displaying full emotions, and particularly this emotion, are. We're not misunderstanding the situation. I mean, study after study after study shows that when men display anger, it reaffirms gender norms, it reaffirms masculinity. And so there are rewards for doing that, they gain power from doing that even if it's ugly and uncomfortable and causes people distress. They are not penalized in the same way as when women do it, it actually transgresses, so we violate gender norms. And we end up being powerless in that situation."

 

[Jeor]

Well, that was a weird call to suspend play in the Djokovic/Thiem match. I wonder whether the players were reluctant to come back out because of the wind, and the officials tacitly approved?

Thiem has the tools to defeat Djokovic, if he can play really, really well. But I think having escaped a possible heist (Thiem was dominating him in that first set) Djokovic should have time to reset and recover.

[Jeor]

Well, Thiem has Djokovic on the ropes, leading 4-1 in the fifth and with Djokovic stuck on deuce, and once again the rain comes to Djokovic's rescue. Thiem must be frustrated he just can't put him away.

The more I see of Thiem, the more I'm liking his play. He's only 25 so I could see him winning a few French Opens once Nadal is out of the picture, his game is perfectly suited for it. I used to think it would be weird to have a one-handed backhand on clay, but I guess other guys like Thomas Muster and Gustavo Kuerten have managed it and still dominated the surface. Thiem also reminds me a little bit of Robin Soderling with the massive windups and huge arcs when he swings his forehand.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Really disappointing outcome. Djokovic has been off his game from the start. He just hung on for a 5 setter through sheer tenacity.

Anyway, that’s sport, I guess.

[Jeor]

You've got to feel for Ash Barty and Vondrousova as well - a bit anti-climactic to be waiting all day to play the final and to have this men's match delaying it all. But now we're back on!

[Jeor]

Well, he did it! Thiem takes out Djokovic. I'm glad, it would have been cruel for him to lose after having opportunities to close it out being thwarted by the rain. Djokovic has to wait again for another Slam. Nadal, assuming he takes it out, while inch closer to Fed's overall tally.

I wonder how much Thiem will have in the tank for tomorrow. On the one hand, even though it was a five-setter he wasn't out on the court for more than a couple of sets continuously, so hopefully the length of the match and the extra day won't affect his performance against Nadal.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Djokovic hasn’t played well after the Australian Open. Since this whole ATP election debacle he got embroiled in. Nadal would have beaten him in the final in any case.

He needs to get his head straight and his game back to the level it was in the Australian Open final. Else he can kiss Roger’s record goodbye.