Andre vs Android got better ratings, commentary than Sisters C/P [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Andre vs Android got better ratings, commentary than Sisters C/P

tennischick
09-10-2002, 04:03 PM
Last Word on the Finals

Mary Carillo and John McEnroe analyzed the men's and women's finals of the United States Open for CBS, but they were only effective in one of them: Pete Sampras's four-set victory over Andre Agassi on Sunday. In that match, they were superb diagnosticians, maintaining a running commentary on Sampras's superiority through the first two sets, and Agassi's mysterious lethargy.

But for Serena Williams's straight-sets triumph over her sister Venus on Saturday night, Carillo and McEnroe seemed as energy-deprived as Agassi, letting opportunities for insight pass.

In fact, the best commentary of the match did not come from the booth, but from Richard Williams when he was interviewed by Pam Shriver early in the second set. "Looks like Venus's game is falling to pieces," Williams said. "Could be it's the blister in her hand, I don't know. Her feet aren't moving. She's falling back on her shots."

That was concise analysis — little of which McEnroe or Carillo noted beforehand, or followed up on. Maybe they were fatigued by a long day Saturday, which culminated in the Williams-Williams prime-time final.

The analysts did not discuss the possible reasons for Venus's many double faults or speculate on the potential effect of the blister. The comments were obvious, like Carillo's "Venus is having an off night serving," and Dick Enberg's "Venus isn't serving well; it's her Achilles' heel."

After Venus's seventh double fault, McEnroe said, "That just makes you more tentative."

More perspective was needed on their past finals, when one always seemed to outplay the other dramatically, as if these close sisters were unable to go full tilt at the same time. And more analysis was needed to pinpoint Venus's erratic play or to detail what was wrong with her misfiring serves.

With a late-afternoon start for the men's final on Sunday, Carillo and McEnroe sounded fresher, discoursing on Sampras's difficulties returning a wide forehand; the mechanics of Sampras's serve; Agassi's sluggishness; how Sampras was stepping into his backhand; and how Agassi had to slow his pace and use his legs better to get more on his second serve.

McEnroe rooted openly for Agassi to revive, looking for brief energetic moments that would presage a five-set match. "I think Agassi is the favorite to win if he wins this set," McEnroe said late in the third set. Agassi won the set as Sampras grew weary and his serve weakened. "I can assure you Agassi feels better now than at any time in the match," he said, combining analysis with wishful thinking.

Carillo and McEnroe even analyzed Sampras's slowdown tactics in the fourth set, including his walking over to the ball boys instead of having new balls tossed to him.

"He checks those balls like he's harvesting them," Carillo said.

In a surprise to those who believe that the Williams sisters are tennis's only hope, at least with regard to television ratings, consider this: the Sampras-Agassi match produced a 7.9 overnight Nielsen rating, up 44 percent from last year. It was the highest-rated men's final since 1990 — when Sampras beat Agassi. By comparison, the women's final rated a 7.2. Each overnight rating point equals 717,310 TV households.

new york times

TheBoiledEgg
09-10-2002, 04:31 PM
not very suprising is it ;)

tennischick
09-10-2002, 04:37 PM
honestly i thought it was a toss-up and in a way i was surprised by the results. imagine the Old Fogeys beating out the two dominant players on the WTA tour. who woulda thunk it! :eek: :eek:

Lily
09-10-2002, 05:04 PM
well, c'mon, how many new and interesting things can you say when your watching practically the same match again. They might as well get out their FO and Wimby notes and read those. ;)

Thanks TC! :)

Chloe le Bopper
09-10-2002, 05:12 PM
I'm not surprised one bit, I suggested that this might happen the other day..

Thanks for solid evidence though ;)

TheBoiledEgg
09-10-2002, 05:14 PM
but the rest of the world knew that the ATP was better anyway ;)

it just takes 2 yanks to boost their home ratings

Tennis Fool
09-10-2002, 05:17 PM
Only because it was Andre v Pete. Anybody else, nobody would've watched (sadly).

Chloe le Bopper
09-10-2002, 05:19 PM
Nobody? So I guess that means nobody watched the French Open final, for example? Since it didn't have Andre or Pete?

I have a sneaking suspicion that it was watched in Spain, for example ;)

YOu earlier asked something like "who will watch" or " who will care" about Pete and Andre in the final, well now you have your answer...

(sorry if its a misquote I don't recall exactly what you said)

tennischick
09-10-2002, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by Lily
well, c'mon, how many new and interesting things can you say when your watching practically the same match again. They might as well get out their FO and Wimby notes and read those. ;)

Thanks TC! :)

you're welcome Lily. and of course you're right. i read yesterday on tennisone.com that the the women's finals ratings this year were slightly better than last year but were way, way down from 1999 when the Sisters first clashed in a finals. however, the semi-final matches ratings improved considerably this year. now that's an interesting twist, don't you think! :eek:

tennischick
09-10-2002, 08:59 PM
last year's Potato-Android final got a 5.5 ratings share. i guess the Potato isn't an attention-grabber is he?

this year's 7.9 rating is a whopping improvement over that. all credit to Agassi!! :p :p

meanwhile...the first all-Williams USO final got a 7.9 rating. so the men did indeed go waaaayyyy up while the women went down about 5-6%.

some hands must be seriously wringing over in Camp WTA :eek: :eek:

i wonder how much attention a Navratilova-Evert re-match would attract? ;) ;)

mboyle1988
09-10-2002, 09:30 PM
Actually the first all williams final got a 6.9 or 6.8 (I know it was a high 6). It also went up, but not as dramatically. As said, if it wasn't Pete vs. Andre, no one would have watched. (I didn't sadly because my parents made me clean my closet :o . Boy was THAT a nightmare :angel: )

tennischick
09-10-2002, 09:39 PM
not true. all the reports say that the first all-Williams was the highest rated ever. i'll double-check the actual statistic.

i didn't watch the fellas either. been there, saw that...:o :o

irma
09-10-2002, 09:48 PM
the media always manipulate stats:o

Chloe le Bopper
09-10-2002, 10:07 PM
As said, if it wasn't Pete vs. Andre, no one would have watched.

Mboyle both you and tennis fool say this, and I could not disagree more.

Who is nobody? You mean to tell me that if 2 Swedes, or 2 Spaniards, or 2 Argentines reached the US Open final "nobody" would watch?

I think that comment is VERy xenophobic. LOTS of people would watch. I really wish people would stop refering to 350 million people as the whole world, it is very irritating.

Would lots of Americans watch? Maybe not. And that is a problem with the USA, NOT wiith tennis.

Chloe le Bopper
09-10-2002, 10:15 PM
If I totally misinterpreted both of you, I'm happy to be corrected..

I just don't understand who else one could say "nobody will watch".

Vera
09-10-2002, 10:17 PM
Well said, Rebecca!

This is the US network rating which indicates only the preferrence of US viewers. So everyone in the rest of the world should relax, no panicking over the end of ATP tour. Must be shocking that World Cup still exists without anyone in US watching.

Well, imagine Henman playing Rusedski in Wimbly, will the whole England watch? You bet! I also suspect that all Aussie will be watching if Hewitt played Mark P in Aussie Open, (I know, I know, Mark is not the same with that knee). How 'bout Grosjean vs little Richard Gasquet at RG, wow! How do you say it in French? Fantastique!

Tennis Fool
09-10-2002, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by Rebecca
If I totally misinterpreted both of you, I'm happy to be corrected..

I just don't understand who else one could say "nobody will watch".

Sorry, Rebecca. Since TC posted about the Nielsen ratings (which rates the number of Americans households watching on an American network) my answer was in directly reply to that.

In other words, if it weren't Americans playing (specifically Pete v Andre) the Nielsen ratings would have been down.

I don't know how the final scored with viewers outside of the States...

Chloe le Bopper
09-10-2002, 11:24 PM
Nielson ratings...gotcha.

My bad.

TheBoiledEgg
09-11-2002, 03:40 AM
basically the rest of the world doesn't give a XXXX about US ratings.

J. Corwin
09-11-2002, 04:07 AM
no surprises;)

Lily
09-11-2002, 09:42 AM
I loved watching the World Cup. I miss getting up in the middle of the night to see Brasil or USA play (actually I enjoyed all the matches) The ratings, surprisingly were high for most of them. Closet soccer watchers here :D

okay, back to tennis :)

Williams Rulez
09-11-2002, 10:12 AM
No surprise there... Andre and Sampras is a huge attraction...

I think any match with Andre gets a crazy rating in the US... :)

tennischick
09-11-2002, 05:08 PM
all four finalists happened to have been American, playing at the US Open in New York city at the height of post 9/11 patriotic fervor. the pollsters, as Tennishack points out, are also American. the American audience response was therefore of interest to me. not that i didn't care what the rest of the world thought, but in this case, i found it interesting that Americans seemed to be saying that they preferred to watch two aging Gladiators over the two dominant sisters. i can't help but wonder if part of that reaction was simply nostalgic. in these Sept 11th times, maybe folks enjoyed a reminder of the way things used to be when all was (relatively) well in the world and Sampras used to beat the crap out of Agassi, the enduring crowd fave.

i prefer to believe this than the alternative which may be a creeping rejection of the Sisters. in any event the fluctuating figures for the Sister-Sister match-ups must present a challenge to the WTA. how the heck do they market these girls? i don't think it will be a problem in the future bec Serena has clearly gotten over her hang-up about playing against her sister. her recent decision to play doubles with Alex Stevenson in Leipzig is a brilliant one IMO. let's get a real rivalry going here. i expect her to move house any month now...;) ;)

meantime, over on the ATP, it is kind of sad that the New (American) Balls are not attracting the kind of viewership they deserve. when Gambill gets so easily beaten by Gladiator #2 (Agassi), and when Roddick allows himself to be so soundly thrashed by Gladiator #17 (and dropping), the American viewing audience must be wondering what the hell is going on in American men's tennis. it doesn't look good.

and i agree with Williams-Rulez -- Agassi does sell tickets. which is why the ATP fined his butt when he withdrew late from a tourny -- they knew it would hurt ticket sales if he didn't appear. apparently the Old Balls seriously still rule...:eek: :eek:

Go Nalby
09-11-2002, 06:05 PM
The reason the ratings were so high for Pete-Andre was because there were a lot more casual tennis fans, or non-tennis fans who tuned in.

Those of us who are big tennis fans would've tuned in to watch a final between any two players.

tennischick
09-11-2002, 06:11 PM
point taken Indy...;) ;)

forgot to mention that Pete ruined the whole thing with his terribly ungracious acceptance speech. he is such a jerk. he is a great tennis player but such a clod. he didn't even acknowledge Andre. he was like beating his chest and shouting "I am back!". ugh. that alone should have made the ratings plummet.

Chloe le Bopper
09-11-2002, 06:12 PM
Tennischick - my American rambling was more to those who said "nobody would watch", not accounting for what the Neilson ratings were ;)

It isnt' that I'm not interested in American stats either, it is just that I misunderstood what someone said.

:wavey:

tennischick
09-11-2002, 06:21 PM
gotcha. in general your point is well-taken actually. :wavey:

the cat
09-11-2002, 07:50 PM
Hi TC! Thanks for the N.Y. Times article! For a second there, I thought you wrote the article! I hoped so anyway!

Who would have thunk it? You've got to be kidding, TC! ;) The day Williams vs. Williams outdraws Sampras vs. Agassi in T.V. ratings or in attendance in America, or anywhere in the world for that matter, is the day I jump off the Brooklyn Bridge! :eek:

TC, Sampras' acceptance speech? Tony Trabert let him speak for about 10 seconds. And Pete, to the shock of many, let it slip out that he deseved to win! :eek: But that was an accident.

But Pete did acknowledge Andre by saying Andre brings out the best in him. Which is what you've said all along, TC! And it proved to be true once again.

And don't forget that the players are under the gun in the ceremonies because they don't even have the time to thank their significant others and coaches. It's terrible the way the USTA runs their championship ceremonies! :mad: And being a USTA menmner, maybe I should say soemthing to them! Would it have really hurt CBS if Sampras and Agassi got to speak for about 30 seconds each? Of couse not.

ys
09-11-2002, 08:00 PM
Would it have really hurt CBS if Sampras and Agassi got to speak for about 30 seconds each? Of couse not.

But what for? Would you expect them say something you would not already know?

Nothing interesting, nothing new in this match. Agassi can't deal with Sampras's serve in Grand Slams. Didn't we know it alerady for few years? They both should thank their lucky stars that Potato got out of form for a little while. Otherwise, Sampras would have been broken more times than he would held.

the cat
09-11-2002, 08:20 PM
What for, ys? For my enjoyment. I watch for 3 hours, I want to hear them say something significant. For all we know Sampras might have said goodbye. And I'd atleast like to hear him speak about what winning the Open for the fifth time, but the first time in Aurthur Ashe Stadium, meant to him.

Lily
09-11-2002, 10:17 PM
oh yes, the acceptance speeches. What acceptance speeches??? They're given like 5 seconds (okay, 10 seconds at the most) to say something meaningful. Its pitiful! I mean, here is the richest sporting event (you notice how they always mention the amount of $ given out?) and they dont have the grace of allowing the 2 players to thank their people and say what they want to say. Its really so very different compared to the French and Wimby where they spend like 10 mins talking to both players. They should be more respectful to the players and to the fans who care what they have to say.

safin_fan
09-11-2002, 11:31 PM
Women's tennis(some I wonder if they really are women) reminds me of an Andy Roddick match ALL HYPE!!!

tennischick
09-12-2002, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by the cat
Hi TC! Thanks for the N.Y. Times article! For a second there, I thought you wrote the article! I hoped so anyway!

... TC! ...TC .... TC!

you talking to me cat?

er...check my post again and you will see the words "new york times" appearing in italics at the bottom. i thought it was pretty clear that i wasn't claiming authorship of the article.

as for the Android's acceptance speech, what he actually said was: "Well, I guess I'm back! ... I played a fantastic match! ... I deserved to win!"

i'm sorry but that was conceited, self-centered, classless, appalling, and ungracious. i have friends and family who were there -- some of whom are diehard Pete-o-holics -- and they just sat there mouth-open in amazement. the crowd was stunned; the commentators said not a word.

if either Venus or Serena had made a statement like that, we wouldn't have heard the end of it.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2002, 12:49 AM
Originally posted by tennischick


you talking to me cat?

er...check my post again and you will see the words "new york times" appearing in italics at the bottom. i thought it was pretty clear that i wasn't claiming authorship of the article.




TC, you are one testy individual. The Cat wasn't deriding you. Why are you getting defensive.

the cat
09-12-2002, 01:07 AM
Oh TC! :sad: I wasn't deriding you. I like you alot!

And I never intimated that the article was yours. But while I was reading it it sounded like something you could have written. Then at the bottom of the article, I saw The New York Times. And I credited The N.Y. Times for writing it.

I agree, disagree and agree with TC! Whilst I agree with you about being surprised that Sampras said he deserved to win the match, I disagree about Sampras being classless. He has about 14 years of being a class individual in tennis, IMO. And he should be allowed one momentary lapse in judgement. Especially after so many people, including me, wrote him off and said that he was embarrasing himself and his incredible legacy with his poor play! But I do have to agree with you about if either Williams sister said what Pete said, people would have jumped all over her for saying such a thing! :eek:

Well said Lily! :) Especially about the 3 other grand slams having much better award ceremonies, where the players actually have plenty of time to speak and thank their loved ones and coaches.

Jorge
09-12-2002, 02:04 AM
For me The willimas-williams freak show was the most horrible final match of a grand slam that i ever see. in the other hand the match between the "bald" and the "old pistol" was much better, not the best males match but a good one.
the williams horror show was plenty of fool mistakes, incredible errors and Horrors, a waste of time to see it, i blame myself for to saw it.:rolleyes:

tennischick
09-12-2002, 03:00 PM
Jorge i disagree. i thought the Sisters played a terrific match. i really enjoyed watching Serena win.

Tennis Fool, stay out of it. the Cat knows exactly what i reacting to. don't you Cat? hey Cat, i read your second message Cat, and i still think Cat that that will go down as one of the worst acceptance speeches of all time Cat. let's agree to disagree OK Cat? :)

the cat
09-12-2002, 03:16 PM
Jorge, calling the Williams sisters a freak show is quite harsh! :eek: Even if you don't like them, that's okay. Call them what you want. But make sure you call them the 2 best players in women's tennis! ;)

Tennis Fool, thanks for the protection! :) But I can handle tennischick all by myself! I think! :eek:

Okay TC, let's agree to disagree about Sampras' acceptance speech! He spoke for about 10 seconds. And that's no speech in my opinion! But I will admit that he let it slip out how he deserved to win! :eek: And that caught me off guard.

And yes TC, I know what you were reacting to. Sorry! :kiss:

Lily
09-12-2002, 09:48 PM
I thought this was :D

In 1 of the papers here:

Last year, when Lleyton Hewitt met Pete Sampras in the men's U.S. Open final, the broadcast averaged only 6 million tennis fans. Swap gorgeous Agassi for ho-hum Hewitt this year and that number jumps to more than 9 million.

:D

Chloe le Bopper
09-12-2002, 09:52 PM
Gorgeous Agassi? Who the hell writes that crap :eek:

If Hewitt was American it'd have been written the other way around :)

tennischick
09-13-2002, 02:00 PM
:kiss: Agassi :kiss: gorgeous man :eek: :eek: (tormenting Becca)

kalforpete
09-13-2002, 03:31 PM
While like a lot of you, I was surprised Pete said he "deserved to win" but what was so wrong with him saying it?

All he did, was in actuality refute was going to be said and was already being said during the match. That Pete had an easier time of it because Agassi had a difficult time of it with Hewitt in the semis. That Hewitt wore Agassi down in the semis.

I would point out that there were only 35 minutes difference in Pete's match with Schalken and Andre's match with Hewitt. Pete was the one who had to play 5 matches in seven days. Three of his matches were back to back matches (Sun. Mon. and Tuesday). Two of his matches went over 3 hours.

As for the comments of the commentators and writers since, that Agassi wasn't up to par because of his semi match with Hewitt, who is the one to be always commented on as being fit, in great shape and can outlast any player when it comes to stamina?

In my opinion, the "deserved win" remark by Pete was just an honest gut reaction to the remarks made about him over the last two years. He knew exactly what was gonna be said. That Hewitt wore Agassi down for him. His remark seems to be a defensive type statement than bragging.

Pete did deserve the win, because he outplayed Agassi.

Dissident
09-14-2002, 12:11 AM
In the end of the day, Pete had a wonderful win, shut the hell up from everyone and there´s no way someone can diminish it.

Other than that, everyone stick to their opinions. :D

Tennis Fool
07-03-2006, 03:56 AM
Bump as Agassi retires :)

JimmyV
07-03-2006, 04:18 AM
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/8103/colon203px3uy.jpg

AgassiDomination
07-03-2006, 04:29 AM
http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/8103/colon203px3uy.jpg
:spit:

star
07-03-2006, 04:56 AM
Is this bump old threads day?

Tennis Fool
07-03-2006, 04:57 AM
Is this bump old threads day?
Nathalila asked me to bump some classic threads, so I pulled a few ;)