Do you prefer your favorite players to have a boring win or an exciting loss? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Do you prefer your favorite players to have a boring win or an exciting loss?

HKz
04-02-2013, 11:33 PM
Simply put, do you prefer to watch your favorite players partake in a very boring win or play in a highly entertaining match that results in a loss?

:tennis:

Topspindoctor
04-02-2013, 11:35 PM
Only a fake fan would want their favorite to lose. I'd rather sit through a 5 hour ugly mugfest than to see my favorites lose.

Kyle_Johansen
04-02-2013, 11:37 PM
As a Federer fan, no win is boring since he usually comes up with a few amazing shots and points every match.

Fed fordawin
04-02-2013, 11:40 PM
Boring win of course.
I'd rather a boring loss than an exciting loss as a matter of fact. Exciting losses are the most painful.

arm
04-02-2013, 11:41 PM
:rolls: A boring win of course.

arm
04-02-2013, 11:41 PM
Boring win of course.
I'd rather a boring loss than an exciting loss as a matter of fact. Exciting losses are the most painful.

This times infinity. I hate it he loses by a very small margin.

Trollicki
04-02-2013, 11:41 PM
You should ask Murray fans how they feel about his win of last Sunday. Though boring might not be the adjective of choice here.

HKz
04-02-2013, 11:42 PM
Only a fake fan would want their favorite to lose. I'd rather sit through a 5 hour ugly mugfest than to see my favorites lose.

A fake fan of what? Gloryhunting? Watching sports like any other "entertainment" is to provide entertainment afterall. Acknowledging the fact that you only find entertainment or enjoyment through a player's success is merely "gloryhunting."

Kyle_Johansen
04-02-2013, 11:45 PM
Exciting and close losses only hurt afterwards once your player has lost. But during the match it is very fun and captivating to watch. Wimbledon 2008, AO2009, and many other close but painful Federer defeats are matches I loved watching.

TBkeeper
04-02-2013, 11:49 PM
I'm a tard just like topspinnurse , you got the answer ;)

Han Solo
04-02-2013, 11:49 PM
In other words, are you a fan of tennis or a fan of a tennis player?

I've found myself drifting from the latter to the former as I get older, so yeah, nowadays an exciting loss is more "fun" to watch than a boring win.

Topspindoctor
04-02-2013, 11:50 PM
A fake fan of what? Gloryhunting? Watching sports like any other "entertainment" is to provide entertainment afterall. Acknowledging the fact that you only find entertainment or enjoyment through a player's success is merely "gloryhunting."

It's not gloryhunting. I don't like it when someone I support loses, simple as that. I don't derive any entertainment from losses, no matter how good the match was :shrug:

Moozza
04-02-2013, 11:50 PM
Who would choose exciting loss? :lol:

Murray Mint
04-02-2013, 11:50 PM
Boring win, all day long. Exciting loss is the choice of the neutral, not the choice of a supporter.

Certinfy
04-02-2013, 11:52 PM
Boring win of course.

But I admit entertaining losses can be alright at times. I mean for example Berdych vs Federer Toronto 2010 hurt but the quality of tennis for 3 sets was so fucking insane it's hard to get over.

Time Violation
04-02-2013, 11:52 PM
A fake fan of what? Gloryhunting? Watching sports like any other "entertainment" is to provide entertainment afterall. Acknowledging the fact that you only find entertainment or enjoyment through a player's success is merely "gloryhunting."

Lol, who wants their favorites to lose? And in "entertaining" way no less, meaning they most likely p****d away numerous chances or choked horribly? :p I guess you're some kind of masochist most likely :wavey: Btw, it was you who offered only two options - I personally prefer my favorite to win in an entertaining way.

Sombrerero loco
04-03-2013, 12:01 AM
boring win of course

HKz
04-03-2013, 12:02 AM
Lol, who wants their favorites to lose? And in "entertaining" way no less, meaning they most likely p****d away numerous chances or choked horribly? :p I guess you're some kind of masochist most likely :wavey: Btw, it was you who offered only two options - I personally prefer my favorite to win in an entertaining way.

Pissed away numerous chances? So one couldn't say a boring win for a top player normally just involve the losing opponent playing far below his potential?

I'm a masochist for loving high quality and dramatic matches? Great definition.

And no shit sherlock, I would imagine people like when their favorites win in an entertaining way.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 12:08 AM
Pissed away numerous chances? So one couldn't say a boring win for a top player normally just involve the losing opponent playing far below his potential?

I'm a masochist for loving high quality and dramatic matches? Great definition.

And no shit sherlock, I would imagine people like when their favorites win in an entertaining way.

Well, what's the point of making a stupid limited options if not to make people look bad? Everybody loves high quality and dramatic matches, but they would rather their favorites win such matches :wavey:

Yolita
04-03-2013, 12:15 AM
In other words, are you a fan of tennis or a fan of a tennis player?

I've found myself drifting from the latter to the former as I get older, so yeah, nowadays an exciting loss is more "fun" to watch than a boring win.

That's a false dichotomy: we can be both, and I'm sure most of us are.

We are tennis fans, but when it comes to one player, being a fan of that player trumps being a tennis fan.

In most of the matches I watch, I want good, entertaining tennis, with great shots and good tactics. And if it's a long, exciting match, even better.

But if Novak is playing, I don't care about the quality of the match: I want him to win more than I want a good match. If I can have both, then I'm in heaven. :)

Newcomer
04-03-2013, 12:36 AM
that's wrong construcion. Most of us supports one of the participants during the match.
But in some case - YES. I'd prefer watching high quality tennis with neutral players rather then boring match of my fav. player.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 12:42 AM
I'd prefer watching high quality tennis with neutral players rather then boring match of my fav. player.

That's different, not every match can be entertaining. :) However, saying (for example) that a Fed fan would prefer Federer losing to Nadal in entertaining way, to Federer winning over Nadal in a boring way is just unimaginable.

redshift36188
04-03-2013, 01:01 AM
I can't give a general answer, it depends on what is at stake and how epic the match was in case of loss. In MM events I'd generally take exciting loss.

The Prince
04-03-2013, 01:25 AM
Exciting loss any day of the week, but that's more because I'm not really a fan of any one player in particular but more a follower of quite a few players who I deem to be interesting.

Call me cynical, but it's not me as the fan who gets the ranking points and prize money for the wins, so I don't really care much for that, more to see an interesting match.

ProdigyEng
04-03-2013, 01:32 AM
50/50 for me. A lot of the time it depends on the circumstances. For example, if the match was a Slam Final, obviously would want them to win it, even if it was boring I wouldn't care, whereas a loss, no matter how good the match would just be heartbreaking.

On the other hand, if it was a measly 250 event, and they lost, I wouldn't care, in fact I'd rather they lost the match in an entertaining manner, than a crap manner.

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 01:32 AM
Depends on the situation, but I'm generally more excited about the tennis itself than the result and as a fan of the sport ahead of any individual player I prefer to see quality tennis regardless of the end result.

If it's a Slam, I'll prefer my favorite to get the win no matter how ugly it might be, although I won't hold it against his opponent if he plays better tennis and wins, in minor events I've often found myself just happy to watch a great match even if the end result wasn't that one I wanted.

Murray Mint
04-03-2013, 01:48 AM
That's a false dichotomy: we can be both, and I'm sure most of us are.

We are tennis fans, but when it comes to one player, being a fan of that player trumps being a tennis fan.

In most of the matches I watch, I want good, entertaining tennis, with great shots and good tactics. And if it's a long, exciting match, even better.

But if Novak is playing, I don't care about the quality of the match: I want him to win more than I want a good match. If I can have both, then I'm in heaven. :)
Nicely summarised.

Sunday's match is a fine example. It was ugly as hell, Murray was diabolical, but after the title was won I had a big shit-eating grin on my face all day, and I'm sure I wasn't alone. Whereas the final in Shanghai against Djokovic was an exciting match with some brilliant points, and I felt sick to the stomach afterwards.

vpmrosulate
04-03-2013, 01:52 AM
Exciting losses are emotionally draining for me and probably not too great for the mentality of the player either.

On the other hand, if a boring win is defined as a match where one side doesn't play well and the winner didn't need to do anything special, then obviously I don't enjoy the actual course of the match as much as I would an exciting loss--before the loss actually solidifies.

But even when I know my favorite will probably lose (either boring loss or simply after the tide turned in an exciting match), I watch until the end, which I can't explain.

Anyway, to look at it mathematically:
0 enjoyment during the match plus 5 contentment after the match (boring win)
10 enjoyment during the match plus -5 contentment after the match (exciting loss)
So really I guess it evens out, although it depends on the match. JMDP-Nadal at IW, for example, probably came out a little negative for me in the end, and it has nothing to do with gloryhunting.

rocketassist
04-03-2013, 01:56 AM
Depends really on the situation and the story of the occasion.

For example USO final last year was a scrapfest and about as pretty as a back alley whore, but all of Murray's classic matches had ended in defeat, so there was no way I could take another one and I settled for the win ugly method. The drama and occasion made it a worthwhile watch anyway even if the tennis was muggy.

Hewitt =Legend
04-03-2013, 02:08 AM
Hewitt's wins are never boring so my decision is compromised.

Edda
04-03-2013, 02:10 AM
I prefer boring, straightforward victories for my favorite players. The only matches I like to see go the distance are matches between two favorites. I don't want to see two boring players go at it for three sets in a standard tournament or five sets in a major-unless I just saw one of my favorites win a particularly exciting match and need a rest.

BackhandDTL
04-03-2013, 02:11 AM
A boring win, easily. Let someone else's favorite lose some epic.

Murray Mint
04-03-2013, 02:23 AM
Depends really on the situation and the story of the occasion.

For example USO final last year was a scrapfest and about as pretty as a back alley whore, but all of Murray's classic matches had ended in defeat, so there was no way I could take another one and I settled for the win ugly method. The drama and occasion made it a worthwhile watch anyway even if the tennis was muggy.
The crazy thing for me watching that match was, I barely even realised how ugly it was. Was just absorbed with the hunt for that first slam. First set finished, good stuff. Second set finished, shit, nearly there! Then after the next two sets I just felt as low as could be, everything going down the toilet, and seriously worried about how the defeat would affect Andy's mentality in the long term. Finally we had that exhilirating final set and the big win. I got so lost in the emotion and narrative that the scrappy nature of the tennis barely even registered. So I don't think when you're rooting heavily for a player that you're as sensitive to the quality of tennis, there's too much concentration on winning, from one point to the next.

BroTree123
04-03-2013, 02:58 AM
Stupidest thread ever. A win is a win, regardless of whether its ugly or not.

3DGNumberOneFan
04-03-2013, 04:05 AM
Is that a question? I'd rather see Rafa win all his matches. The WORST Rafa losses are the close exciting ones. I'd rather watch Rafa kill Fed all day than sit through another Aussie Open 2012 Final.

AntiTennis
04-03-2013, 04:46 AM
you can't prefer your favorite player to lose than to win, no matter how boring is the match

MuzzahLovah
04-03-2013, 05:14 AM
I'd rather a boring loss than an exciting loss as a matter of fact. Exciting losses are the most painful.

Exactly. As someone who has watched Murray lose several times from a match point up just in the last few months, I'd rather him get blown off the court, it's less painful.

se7en
04-03-2013, 05:17 AM
I don't know about "favorite"...But every Dull loss has been very exciting for me so far. :yeah:

Surcouf
04-03-2013, 08:10 AM
You'd rather see your favourite player loses a slam final in 5 sets than winning one easily in 3 sets?

Then you are not a true fan. You are a neutral observer.

BedsheetRubber92
04-03-2013, 08:31 AM
You'd rather see your favourite player loses a slam final in 5 sets than winning one easily in 3 sets?

Then you are not a true fan. You are a neutral observer.

Apparently most of MTF is teenagers with man-crushes.

acionescu
04-03-2013, 08:39 AM
according to MTF all my favorite player matches are boring so of course I'll prefer a win

Exciting losses are for....well.....losers :hug:

leng jai
04-03-2013, 08:50 AM
Boring wins can still be arousing.

retister
04-03-2013, 09:03 AM
1. Boring wins of my faves
2. Exciting wins of my faves
3. Boring losses of my faves
4. Exciting losses of my faves
Plenty of neutral matches to enjoy quality and excitement without compromising your general health.

Surcouf
04-03-2013, 09:09 AM
Apparently most of MTF is teenagers with man-crushes.

You are a fan of a player or you aren't.

Prefering losing over winning is just stupid in sport. When you football club plays, you'd rather see them loses an exciting game than winning?

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 09:15 AM
You are a fan of a player or you aren't.

Prefering losing over winning is just stupid in sport. When you football club plays, you'd rather see them loses an exciting game than winning?

Some people are just trying too hard to be perceived as so-called "fan of tennis", and to avoid the dreaded "fan of player" label at all costs :lol:

BedsheetRubber92
04-03-2013, 09:23 AM
But in tennis you don't often have to have an automatic connection to a player. My favorite football club is the Denver Broncos. Not because they are more entertaining to watch than other teams, but because I get a sort of nationalistic rise out of my home town team winning. I guess the situation is different when you have players from your country that don't suck, but I just like players that I enjoy watching. If all of their matches were boring and predictable, then I wouldn't enjoy watching them.

Nixer
04-03-2013, 09:28 AM
Some people are just trying too hard to be perceived as so-called "fan of tennis", and to avoid the dreaded "fan of player" label at all costs :lol:

They're not mutually exclusive. The majority of matches that people here watch don't include their faves (just mathematically on a center court of any tournament, for example).

Surcouf
04-03-2013, 09:30 AM
You have to define what is boring as well.

As a Nadal fan, I would much rather see him playing exceptionnal tennis and destroying Berlocq 6-1 6-1 than seeing him barely surviving a 3 setters with 8-6 in final tie break, in a "more exciting" match, but where he would have played much worse.

The kind of exciting and epic victories against a top player (Wimbledon 2008) is what is the best of course.

Benny_Maths
04-03-2013, 09:33 AM
It's not gloryhunting. I don't like it when someone I support loses, simple as that. I don't derive any entertainment from losses, no matter how good the match was :shrug:

I generally disagree with you but you're spot on here. Adding to this, all followers of a sport are spectators, no more no less. It's ridiculous when people try to put themselves on a pedestal by making an arbitrary distinction between gloryhunters and those who pretend to like every player.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 09:58 AM
They're not mutually exclusive. The majority of matches that people here watch don't include their faves (just mathematically on a center court of any tournament, for example).

Of course not. But some try to make it seem being a fan of player is a bad thing. Bunch of quasi-elitists :)

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 10:04 AM
Of course not. But some try to make it seem being a fan of player is a bad thing. Bunch of quasi-elitists :)

There is a difference between being a fan of the game first and foremost while having preferred players and being exclusively a player fan and not the game.

The latter receive warranted criticism, the first don't.

arm
04-03-2013, 10:15 AM
There is a difference between being a fan of the game first and foremost while having preferred players and being exclusively a player fan and not the game.

The latter receive warranted criticism, the first don't.

And why should the latter receive "warranted criticism"? Since when is anyone allowed to judge the reasons why someone likes a certain thing?

Surcouf
04-03-2013, 10:19 AM
There is a difference between being a fan of the game first and foremost while having preferred players and being exclusively a player fan and not the game.

The latter receive warranted criticism, the first don't.

It seems that you opinion is a very small minority. Nothing to brag about.

BedsheetRubber92
04-03-2013, 10:21 AM
And why should the latter receive "warranted criticism"? Since when is anyone allowed to judge the reasons why someone likes a certain thing?

It's more like..."don't post in a forum about tennis if you don't care about tennis" no?

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 10:22 AM
There is a difference between being a fan of the game first and foremost while having preferred players and being exclusively a player fan and not the game.

The latter receive warranted criticism, the first don't.

Yea, that's the quasi-elitism I'm talking about :lol: If you are spending time watching tennis and not basketball, baseball or whatever, then you obviously like watching tennis, even if it's just for one player.

erickmartins
04-03-2013, 10:23 AM
My favourites normally lose anyway, so an exciting loss is a good day at the office.

leng jai
04-03-2013, 10:23 AM
It's less to do with criticism and more to do with a distinction between the types of fans and their motivations. There are definitely a subset of "fans" who blindly follow the best player from their country or base 100% of their support on results. It's indicative of a "low brow" point of view to an extent but if you can't really argue with what people find satisfying. The issue comes when they jump in on discussions and make outlandish comments about their player when it's exceedingly clear they have very little knowledge of the sport itself.

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 10:24 AM
And why should the latter receive "warranted criticism"? Since when is anyone allowed to judge the reasons why someone likes a certain thing?

Because for the most part they are perceived as gloryhunters with no real appreciation or knowledge of the game. Of course this is not an actual problem in itself and doesn't really harm/upset anyone, until they start sharing their uneducated views on other aspects of the game, always with the sole goal of glorifying their player.

Yea, that's the quasi-elitism I'm talking about :lol: If you are spending time watching tennis and not basketball, baseball or whatever, then you obviously like watching tennis, even if it's just for one player.

There's a difference between liking tennis and liking one player. If you only blindly follow one player and don't watch the sport when he's not around, you're hardly a fan of the game. It's no elitism, there is an actual difference: like in football, there's a big difference between fans of the game and Messi/Ronaldo/whoever fangirls and even fans who only watch their club.

It's less to do with criticism and more to do with a distinction between the types of fans and their motivations. There are definitely a subset of "fans" who blindly follow the best player from their country or base 100% of their support on results. It's indicative of a "low brow" point of view to an extent but if you can't really argue with what people find satisfying. The issue comes when they jump in on discussions and make outlandish comments about their player when it's exceedingly clear they have very little knowledge of the sport itself.

Precisely.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 10:30 AM
The issue comes when they jump in on discussions and make outlandish comments about their player when it's exceedingly clear they have very little knowledge of the sport itself.

That's two different things basically. Just because someone is a fan doesn't mean he can correctly analyze the game, players, tactics or whatever. But you can still be a fan/enjoy the show even if you don't have in-depth knowledge :)

There's a difference between liking tennis and liking one player. If you only blindly follow one player and don't watch the sport when he's not around, you're hardly a fan of the game. It's no elitism, there is an actual difference: like in football, there's a big difference between fans of the game and Messi/Ronaldo/whoever fangirls and even fans who only watch their club.

So how many clubs one needs to watch to earn the coveted "real fan" title? Five? Ten? Whole league? Second and third league too? Junior and amateur leagues?

asmazif
04-03-2013, 10:33 AM
depends on who's on the other side of the net.

leng jai
04-03-2013, 10:34 AM
That's two different things basically. Just because someone is a fan doesn't mean he can correctly analyze the game, players, tactics or whatever. But you can still be a fan/enjoy the show even if you don't have in-depth knowledge :)

Well I'm referring to a specific section of top player fan bases which seem to make up the majority of this board :)

arm
04-03-2013, 10:36 AM
It's more like..."don't post in a forum about tennis if you don't care about tennis" no?

Wrong. :confused::facepalm:

First of all, it's impossible to like a player and not like the sport. You wouldn't watch matches if that were the case, not even matches of the given player.

Second, if the main reason why you do like a sport is a certain player, who the hell Has the right to say that person shoudn't post on a tennis forum?

I started watching tennis because of a certain player and my love for the sport evolved from there. Whether you accept it or not, this is the case with the majority fans of any sport.

It's less to do with criticism and more to do with a distinction between the types of fans and their motivations. There are definitely a subset of "fans" who blindly follow the best player from their country or base 100% of their support on results. It's indicative of a "low brow" point of view to an extent but if you can't really argue with what people find satisfying. The issue comes when they jump in on discussions and make outlandish comments about their player when it's exceedingly clear they have very little knowledge of the sport itself.

That is a whole different thing. You also have fans of the sport who are clueless and they don't have player preferences.

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 10:37 AM
So how many clubs one needs to watch to earn the coveted "real fan" title? Five? Ten? Whole league? Second and third league too? Junior and amateur leagues?

There's not a set number, but evidently you're not a football fan if you only ever watch one club: you're a fan of that particular club. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this by the way, but there's a clear difference between supporting one player/club and being a fan of the sport.

Wrong. :confused::facepalm:

First of all, it's impossible to like a player and not like the sport. You wouldn't watch matches if that were the case, not even matches of the given player.

Second, if the main reason why you do like a sport is a certain player, who the hell Has the right to say that person shoudn't post on a tennis forum?

I started watching tennis because of a certain player and my love for the sport evolved from there. Whether you accept it or not, this is the case with the majority fans of any sport.



That is a whole different thing. You also have fans of the sport who are clueless and they don't have player preferences.

This is normal, yes. I'm assuming that player is Djokovic; but with time you developed appreciation for other aspects of the game/styles of player/players... that's the difference between being a fan of the sport and being a player fan. They're not mutually exclusive, you can be both, supporting one player doesn't mean you can't appreciate other aspects of the sport.

leng jai
04-03-2013, 10:38 AM
Wrong. :confused::facepalm:

First of all, it's impossible to like a player and not like the sport. You wouldn't watch matches if that were the case, not even matches of the given player.

Second, if the main reason why you do like a sport is a certain player, who the hell Has the right to say that person shoudn't post on a tennis forum?

I started watching tennis because of a csrtain player and my love for the sport evolved from there. Whether you accept it or not, this is the case with the most fans of any sport.



That is a whole different thing. You also have fans of the sport who are clueless and they don't have player preferences.

These type of people are typically not what you find expressing their opinions on a message board dedicated to the sport.

arm
04-03-2013, 10:40 AM
Because for the most part they are perceived as gloryhunters with no real appreciation or knowledge of the game. Of course this is not an actual problem in itself and doesn't really harm/upset anyone, until they start sharing their uneducated views on other aspects of the game, always with the sole goal of glorifying their player.



There's a difference between liking tennis and liking one player. If you only blindly follow one player and don't watch the sport when he's not around, you're hardly a fan of the game. It's no elitism, there is an actual difference: like in football, there's a big difference between fans of the game and Messi/Ronaldo/whoever fangirls and even fans who only watch their club.



Precisely.

Perceived as gloryhunters? What type of extrapolation is that?

Not everyone if a fan of GS winners. Some people are big time tards of players who barely win titles. :confused: And you can be a the biggest Fed tard on Earth and have started following and liking him way before he won anything at all.

B-Nard
04-03-2013, 10:42 AM
I try and watch tennis from the most objective standpoint possible and would unquestionably prefer an entertaining, exciting loss than a muggy, ponderous victory. But it entirely depends on the tournament, the round, and opposition.

arm
04-03-2013, 10:43 AM
There's not a set number, but evidently you're not a football fan if you only ever watch one club: you're a fan of that particular club. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this by the way, but there's a clear difference between supporting one player/club and being a fan of the sport.



This is normal, yes. I'm assuming that player is Djokovic; but with time you developed appreciation for other aspects of the game/styles of player/players... that's the difference between being a fan of the sport and being a player fan. They're not mutually exclusive, you can be both, supporting one player doesn't mean you can't appreciate other aspects of the sport.

These type of people are typically not what you find expressing their opinions on a message board dedicated to the sport.

It doesn't matter! Most of us start as a player's or a team's fan before you evolve to actually loving the sport.

I was 3 years old and claiming to be a Sporting fan (football), because grandpa taught me to say and feel that. I didnt even know What football was :lol:

BedsheetRubber92
04-03-2013, 10:45 AM
Did anyone else start watching tennis because they like to..........play tennis?

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 10:46 AM
Perceived as gloryhunters? What type of extrapolation is that?

Not everyone if a fan of GS winners. Some people are big time tards of players who barely win titles. :confused: And you can be a the biggest Fed tard on Earth and have started following and liking him way before he won anything at all.

Never came accross such cases, not to mention I have serious doubts someone can be a huge fan of a (relatively) low ranked player without some real appreciation/understanding of the sport. Take Haas for instance (since Leng Jai is posting here), I believe Haas is the kind of player it's almost unfathomable someone can be a die hard fan of without some real apprecation/knowledge of the sport.

If you started following Federer before he won anything at all, odds are you were following the sport in general at the time.

B-Nard
04-03-2013, 10:46 AM
Did anyone else start watching tennis because they like to..........play tennis?

No.

Nixer
04-03-2013, 10:47 AM
Well, that escalated quickly.

arm
04-03-2013, 10:52 AM
Never came accross such cases, not to mention I have serious doubts someone can be a huge fan of a (relatively) low ranked player without some real appreciation/understanding of the sport. Take Haas for instance (since Leng Jai is posting here), I believe Haas is the kind of player it's almost unfathomable someone can be a die hard fan of without some real apprecation/knowledge of the sport.

If you started following Federer before he won anything at all, odds are you were following the sport in general at the time.

I started watching following Nole and tennis before he won any major. :shrug: And let me be very clear, the very first match of tennis that I saw from start to finish was his win over Rafa in Montreal 2007. I didn't even understand how the score worked, I learned DURING that match. That was my knowledge.

arm
04-03-2013, 10:56 AM
You know what really annoys me? Is that these new fans of the sport/player, whatever, get teased and end up running away from forums like these. Just because you're only learning how the sport works and you're knowledge is still limited, it doesn't mean you don't have the right to post on places like these. You do. Sadly, you are going to get teased by supposedly "big fans" of the game who are too arrogant to actually try to welcome you to the sport and teach you something.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 10:56 AM
There's not a set number, but evidently you're not a football fan if you only ever watch one club: you're a fan of that particular club. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this by the way, but there's a clear difference between supporting one player/club and being a fan of the sport.


Nope, that's completely wrong. There's Real Madrid football club, Real Madrid basketball, Real Madrid handball and probably more. If I'm watching Real Madrid football club it means I want to watch football, not handball nor basketball, simple as that.

You know what really annoys me? Is that these new fans of the sport/player, whatever, get teased and end up running away from forums like these. Just because you're only learning how the sport works and you're knowledge is still limited, it doesn't mean you don't have the right to post on places like these. You do. Sadly, you are going to get teased by supposedly "big fans" of the game who are too arrogant to actually try to welcome you to the sport and teach you something.

Snobs :shrug:

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 10:58 AM
I started watching following Nole and tennis before he won any major. :shrug: And let me be very clear, the very first match of tennis that I saw from start to finish was his win over Rafa in Montreal 2007. I didn't even understand how the score worked, I learned DURING that match. That was my knowledge.

Wow, I got an autograph from him before you even watched him for the first time (Estoril 2007 final) :p

But yes, everyone generally starts by supporting one player before starting to appreciate other aspects of the sport/the sport in general, but some never do :shrug: Not to mention some support one player not even because of his tennis but the glory he represents.

Regarding your other post, they only get teased if they act like some tards on here using every gimmick to glorify their player, etc... otherwise they won't be bar by a select few trolls.

arm
04-03-2013, 10:58 AM
There's not a set number, but evidently you're not a football fan if you only ever watch one club: you're a fan of that particular club. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this by the way, but there's a clear difference between supporting one player/club and being a fan of the sport.


Sorry Manuel, but this is such BS. How do you put up 90 minutes of running around a field if you do not appreciate the sport?

Orka_n
04-03-2013, 10:59 AM
that's wrong construcion. Most of us supports one of the participants during the match.
But in some case - YES. I'd prefer watching high quality tennis with neutral players rather then boring match of my fav. player.Agreed.

B-Nard
04-03-2013, 10:59 AM
You know what really annoys me? Is that these new fans of the sport/player, whatever, get teased and end up running away from forums like these. Just because you're only learning how the sport works and you're knowledge is still limited, it doesn't mean you don't have the right to post on places like these. You do. Sadly, you are going to get teased by supposedly "big fans" of the game who are too arrogant to actually try to welcome you to the sport and teach you something.

The psychology of quickly patronising and demeaning an inexperienced tennis viewer is bewildering. If a casual tennis fan joins this forum and expresses his admiration for David Ferrer and his tennis, the heat would be unparalleled. It's impossible to say "I enjoy Ferrer and his style" without being endlessly ridiculed by moronic, egotistical caricatures who epitomise the words "online tennis community".

leng jai
04-03-2013, 11:02 AM
I started watching following Nole and tennis before he won any major. :shrug: And let me be very clear, the very first match of tennis that I saw from start to finish was his win over Rafa in Montreal 2007. I didn't even understand how the score worked, I learned DURING that match. That was my knowledge.

That actually proves his point to an extent. Djokovic was already a top 10 player in 2007. If you had zero understanding of the sport then your support for Djokovic was clearly not from his actual tennis but from other means such as his looks, mannerisms, nationality or ranking. There's much less chance you'd be supporting a low ranked player because you would have no reason to and most likely not even be exposed to them in the first place.

The only new fans that get made fun of are the ones that make offensive and ill-informed posts about their favourite player and bad mouthing the opposition with calls that show ignorance toward the sport. Why would a well mannered "new fan" who posted within their knowledge be made fun of? The only people who would involve themselves in that would be trolls.

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 11:06 AM
Sorry Manuel, but this is such BS. How do you put up 90 minutes of running around a field if you do not appreciate the sport?

Eh? Tons of people do that when international competitions come around. There's no shortage of people putting themselves through football matches because of one player (usually Ronaldo or Messi) they fanboy.

That actually proves his point to an extent. Djokovic was already a top 10 player in 2007. If you had zero understanding of the sport then your support for Djokovic was clearly not from his actual tennis but from other means such as his looks, mannerisms, nationality or ranking. There's much less chance you'd be supporting a low ranked player because you would have no reason to and most likely not even be exposed to them in the first place.

The only new fans that get made fun of are the ones that make offensive and ill-informed posts about their favourite player and bad mouthing the opposition with calls that show ignorance toward the sport. Why would a well mannered "new fan" who posted within their knowledge be made fun of? The only people who would involve themselves in that would be trolls.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

B-Nard
04-03-2013, 11:08 AM
The only new fans that get made fun of are the ones that make offensive and ill-informed posts about their favourite player and bad mouthing the opposition with calls that show ignorance toward the sport. Why would a well mannered "new fan" who posted within their knowledge be made fun of? The only people who would involve themselves in that would be trolls.

I am finding this section of your post difficult to digest. If a new fan joins this forum and describes his love for David Ferrer and how is encounter at Miami against Andy Murray was "fun" to watch, which category does he fall into? The online tennis community would unquestionably label the fan as a troll or provoker for expressing such a moronic comment, but if that post was derived from his own box of tennis knowledge surely it can not be offensive or ill-informed since there was no such intent. So, really, new fans do get made fun of, even if they are not - as you put it - "offensive" or "ill-informed".

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 11:11 AM
I am finding this section of your post difficult to digest. If a new fan joins this forum and describes his love for David Ferrer and how is encounter at Miami against Andy Murray was "fun" to watch, which category does he fall into? The online tennis community would unquestionably label the fan as a troll or provoker for expressing such a moronic comment, but if that post was derived from his own box of tennis knowledge surely it can not be offensive or ill-informed since there was no such intent. So, really, new fans do get made fun of, even if they are not - as you put it - "offensive" or "ill-informed".

What are you even implying here? That only a new fan of the sport who doesn't know any better could find the Miami final an enjoyable match?

You're mixing up new MTF members with new tennis fans.

arm
04-03-2013, 11:11 AM
That actually proves his point to an extent. Djokovic was already a top 10 player in 2007. If you had zero understanding of the sport then your support for Djokovic was clearly not from his actual tennis but from other means such as his looks, mannerisms, nationality or ranking.

Of course it was not from his actual tennis, when did I ever say that? My point has nothing to do with that. My point is that there is NOTHING wrong with the way I started watching tennis, just as there is nothing wrong with ANY way or reason why anyone starts following a sport/team/player. It's nobody's business to judge that.

And look, the fact that you are completely wrong about the reason why I started following him only comes to show how you should NEVER judge and make assumptions. I developed interest because he beat Rafa and Roger back to back to in the tournament, and back then the only thing I knew about tennis was that Rafa and Roger won everything and dominated the sport. I was always fond of change and underdogs. He was the first player to threaten "Fedal" and that was what got me interested.

And yes, he was a top 10 but from that moment until the end of the season he won that tournament and reached USO final, it was 6 months until he won his first major. I have no idea what kept me interested... unless... WAIT! MAYBE, just maybe, because of my initial interest in him, I developed a true love for the sport....

leng jai
04-03-2013, 11:14 AM
I am finding this section of your post difficult to digest. If a new fan joins this forum and describes his love for David Ferrer and how is encounter at Miami against Andy Murray was "fun" to watch, which category does he fall into? The online tennis community would unquestionably label the fan as a troll or provoker for expressing such a moronic comment, but if that post was derived from his own box of tennis knowledge surely it can not be offensive or ill-informed since there was no such intent. So, really, new fans do get made fun of, even if they are not - as you put it - "offensive" or "ill-informed".

As I said, the only people who would make fun of them to the extent of scaring them away would be trolls - trolls or post the same standard of drivel to every type of poster new or old. Any reasonable poster would politely disagree with that at worst, and give them an explanation of why they feel the Miami match was anything but "fun" to watch. In the context of MTF it's worse because despite having a relatively small community, the prevalence of trolls is extraordinarily high.

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 11:14 AM
Of course it was not from his actual tennis, when did I ever say that? My point has nothing to do with that. My point is that there is NOTHING wrong with the way I started watching tennis, just as there is nothing wrong with ANY way or reason why start following a sport/team/player. It's nobody's business to judge that.

And look, the fact that you are completeley wrong about the reason why I started following him only comes to show how you should NEVER judge and make assumptions. I developed interest because he beat Rafa and Roger back to back to in the tournament, and back then the only thing I knew about tennis was that Rafa and Roger won everything and dominated the sport. I was always fond of change and underdogs. He was the first player to threaten "Fedal" and that was what got me interested.

And yes, he was a top 10 but from that moment until the end of the season he won that tournament and reached USO final, it was 6 months until he won his first major. I have no idea what kept me interested... unless... WAIT! MAYBE, just maybe, because of his initial interest in him, I developed a true love for the sport....
.

Luckily for you, you didn't start watching tennis a few months later in the indoor season. You'd have become a Nalbandian fan after watching him routine Federer and Nadal back to back twice and then be in for years of disappointment :p

leng jai
04-03-2013, 11:18 AM
Of course it was not from his actual tennis, when did I ever say that? My point has nothing to do with that. My point is that there is NOTHING wrong with the way I started watching tennis, just as there is nothing wrong with ANY way or reason why start following a sport/team/player. It's nobody's business to judge that.

And look, the fact that you are completeley wrong about the reason why I started following him only comes to show how you should NEVER judge and make assumptions. I developed interest because he beat Rafa and Roger back to back to in the tournament, and back then the only thing I knew about tennis was that Rafa and Roger won everything and dominated the sport. I was always fond of change and underdogs. He was the first player to threaten "Fedal" and that was what got me interested.

And yes, he was a top 10 but from that moment until the end of the season he won that tournament and reached USO final, it was 6 months until he won his first major. I have no idea what kept me interested... unless... WAIT! MAYBE, just maybe, because of his initial interest in him, I developed a true love for the sport....
.

Why would you use your own experience when it's painfully obvious that isn't the norm for majority (especially those that post here). Novak Djokovic wins a slam - instantly there are a legion of Serbian posters who would normally be nowhere tennis join the forum. That's where the vast majority of his fanbase comes from. It's the same for the other top players. Your constant ideal of thinking the best of people and not making assumptions (even when they are likely and make sense) is fine but makes for very boring discussion (if any).

arm
04-03-2013, 11:18 AM
Eh? Tons of people do that when international competitions come around. There's no shortage of people putting themselves through football matches because of one player (usually Ronaldo or Messi) they fanboy.



:lol: I love Nole. His tennis and his personality. But I would NEVER sit in front of a tv for x hours to watch him play a basketball or a baseball game. I would look for a few photos the day after and read a coupld of articles about it.

I am finding this section of your post difficult to digest. If a new fan joins this forum and describes his love for David Ferrer and how is encounter at Miami against Andy Murray was "fun" to watch, which category does he fall into? The online tennis community would unquestionably label the fan as a troll or provoker for expressing such a moronic comment, but if that post was derived from his own box of tennis knowledge surely it can not be offensive or ill-informed since there was no such intent. So, really, new fans do get made fun of, even if they are not - as you put it - "offensive" or "ill-informed".

Exactly.

Luckily for you, you didn't start watching tennis a few months later in the indoor season. You'd have become a Nalbandian fan after watching him routine Federer and Nadal back to back twice and then be in for years of disappointment :p

That's not going off topic in anyway :lol: :p

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 11:20 AM
Eh? Tons of people do that when international competitions come around. There's no shortage of people putting themselves through football matches because of one player (usually Ronaldo or Messi) they fanboy.

So what? They still enjoy football their favorite player plays. Perhaps they will "build" on that or not, you can't know that. Later they will maybe watch other players or whatever, again, can't know that. Any reason to follow a sport is good enough.

arm
04-03-2013, 11:20 AM
Why would you use your own experience when it's painfully obvious that isn't the norm for majority (especially those that post here). Novak Djokovic wins a slam - instantly there are a legion of Serbian posters who would normally be nowhere tennis join the forum. That's where the vast majority of his fanbase comes from. It's the same for the other top players. Your constant ideal of thinking the best of people and not making assumptions (even when they are likely and make sense) is fine but makes for very boring discussion (if any).

But I jut said that my point is that there is nothing wrong with whatever reason or occurrence drove you to start liking and following a certain sport. That's what I am trying to say here. :shrug:

But hey, thanks. :yeah:

arm
04-03-2013, 11:22 AM
Look out! We are having an interesting discussion and disagreeing with each other, this thread may end up closed.

leng jai
04-03-2013, 11:23 AM
Look out! We are having an interesting discussion and disagreeing with each other, this thread may end up closed.

This type of trolling is what drives new mods away.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 11:23 AM
Why would you use your own experience when it's painfully obvious that isn't the norm for majority (especially those that post here). Novak Djokovic wins a slam - instantly there are a legion of Serbian posters who would normally be nowhere tennis join the forum. That's where the vast majority of his fanbase comes from. It's the same for the other top players. Your constant ideal of thinking the best of people and not making assumptions (even when they are likely and make sense) is fine but makes for very boring discussion (if any).

What is the problem with that? Are you saying your reasons are more "noble" than that? There's a problem when someone from UK supports Murray?

arm
04-03-2013, 11:26 AM
This type of trolling is what drives new mods away.

:rolls: And with this I am off to study.

It was an interesting discussion guys. :yeah:

August
04-03-2013, 11:31 AM
Depends on the opponent. If I like the opponent, I'm probably still happy even if my favourite lost. But if I hate the opponent, then the loss is bad no matter how exciting the match was.

Mark Lenders
04-03-2013, 11:38 AM
So what? They still enjoy football their favorite player plays. Perhaps they will "build" on that or not, you can't know that. Later they will maybe watch other players or whatever, again, can't know that. Any reason to follow a sport is good enough.

Yes, I never said there was anything wrong with that and it does not warrant criticism per se. However, I'm sure you notice for instance the new batch of Djokovic 'fans' joining the forum every time he wins a Slam and posting some of the absurd gloryhunting nonsense imaginable, I'm sure you have an idea who I might be referring to. As Leng Jai pointed out, those are the ones to whom 'player fan' is applied in a derrogative way, and fairly so. This is of course not exclusive to Djokovic, Federer and Nadal have probably even worse tards and so will any player who wins multiple Slams.

Those are the ones who get criticized, not those who are trying/willing to learn about the sport and post within their knowledge.

Look out! We are having an interesting discussion and disagreeing with each other, this thread may end up closed.

If I were a moderator, I'd close this thread due to 'moderator bashing'.

erickmartins
04-03-2013, 11:42 AM
Look out! We are having an interesting discussion and disagreeing with each other, this thread may end up closed.

Infracted and banned for mod bashing.

:haha:

Interesting discussion, no doubt. Of course I'll always prefer to discuss tennis with someone who actually understands the game (being fan of a player or not), but most people start enjoying tennis after they see it on TV and feel sympathy for some specific player. I always cheer for the underdogs and don't really feel to passionate about any particular player, so I prefer to watch an enjoyable match than a boring one. But that is in no sense superior or inferior to someone who watches the game always expecting his/her favourite to win.



If I were a moderator, I'd close this thread due to 'moderator bashing'.

You've beat me to it. I need to type faster next time.

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 11:42 AM
Yes, I never said there was anything wrong with that and it does not warrant criticism per se. However, I'm sure you notice for instance the new batch of Djokovic 'fans' joining the forum every time he wins a Slam and posting some of the absurd gloryhunting nonsense imaginable, I'm sure you have an idea who I might be referring to. As Leng Jai pointed out, those are the ones to whom 'player fan' is applied in a derrogative way, and fairly so. This is of course not exclusive to Djokovic, Federer and Nadal have probably even worse tards and so will any player who wins multiple Slams.

Well, tennis is not football and tbh all fans are more than welcome. Of course their participation and behavior on an internet forum is a whole new topic.

TigerTim
04-03-2013, 12:45 PM
tbh I prefer for example a Murray v Nole Rome match to the one Murray just played. But that is two extremes, I'd prefer a boring win normally.

Timot
04-03-2013, 02:32 PM
Boring win. A win is a win and after some time few people will remember how you lost or won. It's the result that will be remembered and keep affecting the ranking.

Hewitt =Legend
04-03-2013, 03:19 PM
You know what really annoys me? Is that these new fans of the sport/player, whatever, get teased and end up running away from forums like these. Just because you're only learning how the sport works and you're knowledge is still limited, it doesn't mean you don't have the right to post on places like these. You do. Sadly, you are going to get teased by supposedly "big fans" of the game who are too arrogant to actually try to welcome you to the sport and teach you something.

This really moved me... beautiful post..

arm
04-03-2013, 03:21 PM
This really moved me... beautiful post..

Stop teasing me. :sad:

Hewitt =Legend
04-03-2013, 03:30 PM
Stop teasing me. :sad:

Check fb brooo. Wasn't even teasing... it's true... barely managed to suppress the waterworks...

arm
04-03-2013, 03:39 PM
Check fb brooo. Wasn't even teasing... it's true... barely managed to suppress the waterworks...

Is this drunk posting on GM? :D

Hewitt =Legend
04-03-2013, 03:45 PM
Is this drunk posting on GM? :D

Nah mate. Can't you tell from my impeccable grammar? Don't wanna get banned for making a spelling mistake :scared:

NJ88
04-03-2013, 04:29 PM
A boring win by far. If I've got a favourite player, I want them to win no matter how crap the match is. In fact, having them lose in an epic 5 setter is probably worse than having them lose in straight sets because they will have had a big chance...yet not quite got it done. Obviously I would prefer ultimately for an a win in an exciting match but you can't have everything!

HKz
04-03-2013, 05:39 PM
Seems like in the earlier posts things got quite ugly.

This thread has nothing to do with wishing your favorite players would lose or win. Sure, heartbreaking losses can be a little painful to watch (seems like a little too much pain for some here....perhaps stepping back a little would help some posters) but especially since I play tennis and additonally having gone to watch many matches live at Indian Wells, and as someone earlier pointed out "as I have gotten older," I would prefer to watch an exciting and dramatic match which results in the loss of my favorite player than a 6-0, 6-1 win where his opponent was just plain bad that day (which is normally how most blowouts occur).

Yes of course the situation applies for many matches (IE slam final, ranking on the line, etc) that is not a problem. Just as an example, you have to be foolish to tell me you enjoyed Murray vs Tomic Miami 2013 where Murray won 6-3, 6-1 more than Murray vs Djokovic Rome 2011. And for those that claim you only remember wins, what kind of selective memory is that? I'm sure there are many more heaps of people that remember the Murray/Djokovic Rome match then there will be of those that remember Murray and Tomic in Miami.

arm
04-03-2013, 05:42 PM
Seems like in the earlier posts things got quite ugly.

This thread has nothing to do with wishing your favorite players would lose or win. Sure, heartbreaking losses can be a little painful to watch (seems like a little too much pain for some here....perhaps stepping back a little would help some posters) but especially since I play tennis and additonally having gone to watch many matches live at Indian Wells, and as someone earlier pointed out "as I have gotten older," I would prefer to watch an exciting and dramatic match which results in the loss of my favorite player than a 6-0, 6-1 win where his opponent was just plain bad that day (which is normally how most blowouts occur).

Yes of course the situation applies for many matches (IE slam final, ranking on the line, etc) that is not a problem. Just as an example, you have to be foolish to tell me you enjoyed Murray vs Tomic Miami 2013 where Murray won 6-3, 6-1 more than Murray vs Djokovic Rome 2011.

Ugly? :confused:? There was a friendly, civilized and interesting discussion? Disagreeing =/= things got ugly.

HKz
04-03-2013, 05:46 PM
Ugly? :confused:? There was a friendly, civilized and interesting discussion? Disagreeing =/= things got ugly.

Sure, post page 3. Hilariously you quote my entire post and only point out the most meaningless line in my post? :o


E: Regardless, I find it quite entertaining in a way to realize how much a loss or a win means so much more than the quality of the match itself for seemingly a good majority of the people on MTF.

arm
04-03-2013, 05:49 PM
Sure, post page 3. Hilariously you quote my entire post and only point out the most meaningless line in my post? :o

But I had nothing else to say. :confused: :lol: :p

HKz
04-03-2013, 05:58 PM
But I had nothing else to say. :confused: :lol: :p

Just found it odd that's all. :shrug:

Andi-M
04-03-2013, 09:49 PM
When it comes to Murray I just want to see him win, i LOVE it when he plays well, but I'll settle for him just winning boring or exciting - most Murray matches have some degree drama in them anyway as he very rarely makes things easy on himself.

With my other faves (tsonga/ferrer/delpo/kohli) it depends on the situation (GS QF/SF - i'd take boring win vs 250 - exciting loss ), the opponent Fed,Nadal, Tomic -- I'd take boring win vs someone i like/ dont mind -- exciting loss.

It all depends :D

Time Violation
04-03-2013, 10:19 PM
Yes of course the situation applies for many matches (IE slam final, ranking on the line, etc) that is not a problem. Just as an example, you have to be foolish to tell me you enjoyed Murray vs Tomic Miami 2013 where Murray won 6-3, 6-1 more than Murray vs Djokovic Rome 2011.

That's not really comparable. Early rounds where a top player plays a journeyman is almost guaranteed to be "boring", of course a SF or a F between two top players is going to be more dramatic. Otoh, I don't think any Murray fan would prefer Shanghai final to USO final.

janko05
04-03-2013, 10:28 PM
That's not really comparable. Early rounds where a top player plays a journeyman is almost guaranteed to be "boring", of course a SF or a F between two top players is going to be more dramatic. Otoh, I don't think any Murray fan would prefer Shanghai final to USO final.

I would! And I'm a closet Murray fan too :yippee:

nole_no1
04-03-2013, 10:29 PM
A win is a win so here is your obvious answer

samanosuke
04-03-2013, 10:32 PM
:facepalm:

Haven't red any posts but just the thread title made me stunned. It's like you ask me: Do you like more pragmatic life or adrenaline death ?

BauerAlmeida
04-03-2013, 10:43 PM
My favorite players wining over them losing no matter how boring or entertaining the match is. Always.

miura88
04-03-2013, 10:54 PM
I think the importance of the match is more significant than whether or not it's a boring win or an exciting loss. For instance: Would you rather watch Nadal's routine win over Kuznetsov in the first round of the Australian Open or his 5-set defeat in the final at the hands of Djokovic?

I'm not too emotionally invested in my favourite player(s), so I went with an exciting loss