More wonderful espn converage [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

More wonderful espn converage

Maxpowers
03-27-2005, 10:28 PM
I went to the Lipton every day except thursday, including the qualifying, but just needed a day off to rest from the terrible heat. I was really excited about seeing Nadal vs Ferdasco, Safin, Ljubicic, or Nalbandian on tv and in the shade. I would have even liked to see some of the doubles matches that were going on. Instead I turn on the tv and see Serena Williams.

Everyone I talked to there said they were happy that the Wiliams sisters were not promoted this year as the main reason why you'd want to go to the event. Yet espn still shows one of them instead of a match people would actually want to see. I can't stand this.

El Legenda
03-27-2005, 10:31 PM
its ESPN..what do you expect..

Tennis Fool
03-27-2005, 10:32 PM
I went to the Lipton every day except thursday, including the qualifying, but just needed a day off to rest from the terrible heat. I was really excited about seeing Nadal vs Ferdasco, Safin, Ljubicic, or Nalbandian on tv and in the shade. I would have even liked to see some of the doubles matches that were going on. Instead I turn on the tv and see Serena Williams.

Everyone I talked to there said they were happy that the Wiliams sisters were not promoted this year as the main reason why you'd want to go to the event. Yet espn still shows one of them instead of a match people would actually want to see. I can't stand this.
:confused:

The Williams Sisters=Huge Ratings. Even those who don't llike them watch. I fail to see your point :confused:

Maxpowers
03-27-2005, 10:50 PM
My point is that other matches would have better ratings and the fans would enjoy them more. The only reason people are sitting in the stadium is because they paid for box seats and want to use them. They would be in there even if they gave 2 monkeys racquets and had them play. A lot of people sit there even when they bring little kids on the court or do stupid events like have people from the stands hit cones or something.

I don't think anyone turns on the tv and says "I hope they are showing the Williams sisters. I really want to watch them." There are a lot of people like me who want to see the players I mentioned before, and are not watching the match because they are showing one of the Williams sisters.

Gaucho
03-27-2005, 11:06 PM
I can't stand the Williams sisters especially Serena but the fact is that the average ESPN viewer is much more likely to watch her than Nadal, Verdasco, Ljubicic, Safin and Nalbandian. Honestly the average ESPN viewer will have no idea who any of these players are except possibly Safin. A hardcore tennis fan will watch those players but pretty much everyone else channel surfing will keep going unless they recognize the player.

Kathy
03-27-2005, 11:24 PM
Maxpowers, I could not agree with you more about ESPN and their lack of good tennis coverage and folks and their stadium seats. If I had more time, I would voice my thoughts, maybe later. Gaucho, you make a good point also about the average viewer of ESPN and yet I can't help but think that anyone with a good eye is going to stop their clicker if they see Nadal and Verdasco selling life insurance!

ftd999
03-27-2005, 11:28 PM
I went to the Lipton every day except thursday, including the qualifying, but just needed a day off to rest from the terrible heat. I was really excited about seeing Nadal vs Ferdasco, Safin, Ljubicic, or Nalbandian on tv and in the shade. I would have even liked to see some of the doubles matches that were going on. Instead I turn on the tv and see Serena Williams.

Everyone I talked to there said they were happy that the Wiliams sisters were not promoted this year as the main reason why you'd want to go to the event. Yet espn still shows one of them instead of a match people would actually want to see. I can't stand this.

Please, you must know nothing ever changes. Don't count on seeing Nadal, Ljubicic, Monfils, or even Federer. Now that Roddick is out, it's all Agassi and women's tennis from here on out. And if Agassi loses, we'll never see a men's match again :p

Tommorow's matches have already been announced. Sharapova at 1pm (ESPN) and Agassi at 3pm (ESPN 2)

Havok
03-27-2005, 11:33 PM
Matches involving people outside of WIlliams x2, Agassi, Roddick, Federer, Sharapova, Capriati, Davenport, Safin, Hewitt will NOT have better ratings. Sure die-hard tennis fans would enjoy seeing other matchups, but tv is all about ratings. Why the hell do people not understand this?

liptea
03-27-2005, 11:35 PM
I can't stand the Williams sisters especially Serena but the fact is that the average ESPN viewer is much more likely to watch her than Nadal, Verdasco, Ljubicic, Safin and Nalbandian. Honestly the average ESPN viewer will have no idea who any of these players are except possibly Safin.

The average tennis player is hardly going to tune in to watch any tennis on Easter Sunday.

That being said, it didn't look like Nadal-Verdasco was too good of a match, but I really wanted to see Nalbandian.

NATAS81
03-28-2005, 12:06 AM
Maybe one day, ESPN will televise a live match that is actually close.

ftd999
03-28-2005, 12:08 AM
:confused:

The Williams Sisters=Huge Ratings. Even those who don't llike them watch. I fail to see your point :confused:

Unfortunately, you're right. I complain, but I reward ESPN for their crappy coverage as well. Serena was up 5-0 in the first today, and, even though I wasn't really watching, I still had it on because I just like having tennis on in the background.

ftd999
03-28-2005, 12:11 AM
Maybe one day, ESPN will televise a live match that is actually close.

Keep telling yourself that :p I've been watching consistently since the eighties, and nothing has really changed much. There have been some networks with good coverage (I thought HBO and TNT did much better jobs than ESPN; and I think USA blows ESPN out of the water) but for some reason they always give up tennis coverage. Not profitable I guess.

liptea
03-28-2005, 12:12 AM
Unfortunately, you're right. I complain, but I reward ESPN for their crappy coverage as well. Serena was up 5-0 in the first today, and, even though I wasn't really watching, I still had it on because I just like having tennis on in the background.
:woohoo: I did the same thing. And I was writing a paper at the same time, but I just kept thinking, "How often is tennis ever on television? Take advantage of the crap."

NATAS81
03-28-2005, 12:14 AM
Keep telling yourself that :p I've been watching consistently since the eighties, and nothing has really changed much. There have been some networks with good coverage (I thought HBO and TNT did much better jobs than ESPN; and I think USA blows ESPN out of the water) but for some reason they always give up tennis coverage. Not profitable I guess.
Probably because ESPN is the main source for American sports, and they figure they will draw the diehard sports fans.

Either way ratings aside, I can't stand this bunch of sports-Nazi's much longer with what they're doing to tennis.

liptea
03-28-2005, 12:22 AM
Probably because ESPN is the main source for American sports, and they figure they will draw the diehard sports fans.

Either way ratings aside, I can't stand this bunch of sports-Nazi's much longer with what they're doing to tennis.

Um, when I was in Italy, during Miami, I didn't see tennis on TV except once. And they were playing the Miami final from two years ago, and then started showing soccer/football. And all our hotels had cable. Maybe I just missed the unlimited coverage that occurs outside of the US?

ftd999
03-28-2005, 12:26 AM
Probably because ESPN is the main source for American sports, and they figure they will draw the diehard sports fans.

Either way ratings aside, I can't stand this bunch of sports-Nazi's much longer with what they're doing to tennis.

Well, apparently, they just broadcast the home player in whatever country they're broadcasting in. So, they probably showed Nadal overseas, or maybe Ljubicic's tight win over Spadea (which looks like it was the best match of the day in terms of score, although I don't know about quality since I didn't get to see it).

What's sad about that is that its clear they have the ability to show other matches, and they do, we just don't have the choice. They've got the internet, and I'd be willing to pay an annual fee (like with basketball) so that I could choose my matches. I am hopeful that this can happen soon.

NATAS81
03-28-2005, 12:32 AM
What's sad about that is that its clear they have the ability to show other matches, and they do, we just don't have the choice. They've got the internet, and I'd be willing to pay an annual fee (like with basketball) so that I could choose my matches. I am hopeful that this can happen soon.
Exactly. They have all these sports packages that show most of the games on the schedule, and you can pick and choose.

What makes it most dumbfounding, is that there is only one venue per tennis event. So, that would seem easier to get just one sponsor to sign with them that would allow such a package to take place.

I don't understand the fiscal side of it all too well. I just know that they are the sports giants, have the technology and means to show different matches, and refuse to do so. It just burns me up. But what can you do.

And they will probably continue to show the "Sistahs" Andy, Lindsay, Marias because they've been the biggest ratings grabber in the past.

But until they put together a better organized package that allows the fan to select the court/match they want to view, it just isn't worth tuning into.

Paialii
03-28-2005, 01:26 AM
As much as I love both Venus and Serena, I too get tired of only seeing their matches. For those of you that have the tennis channel, are they airing coverage on that channel or no? If so, are more matches other than the Americans being shown?

ugotlobbed
03-28-2005, 01:28 AM
its cuz most of the black ppl i meet all like drool over the williams sister...they take a lot of pride that 2 black girls is so famous in tennis....i think they have their right...but a lot of tennis fans dont like em......bc of their style or watever...the way serena sports those fashions...their attitude etc etc...but they have positive sides too.......ah..its like sharapova...we love sharapova cuz shes pretty..they like williams bc their black........and i want to add..im not trying to make this post racist...so dont go aorund whining..i hate ppl who make race a big deal....we have to be able to talk about races without thinking racism ppl..

Paialii
03-28-2005, 01:32 AM
its cuz most of the black ppl i meet all like drool over the williams sister...they take a lot of pride that 2 black girls is so famous in tennis....i think they have their right...but a lot of tennis fans dont like em......bc of their style or watever...the way serena sports those fashions...their attitude etc etc...but they have positive sides too.......ah..its like sharapova...we love sharapova cuz shes pretty..they like williams bc their black........and i want to add..im not trying to make this post racist...so dont go aorund whining..i hate ppl who make race a big deal....we have to be able to talk about races without thinking racism ppl..

Actually, I think the entire "race" issue is 100% irrelevant.

The fact of the matter is, is that the Williams sisters are the face of tennis in the United States (and in countries outside the US) and they're big name players. They have eleven slam titles between the two of them, they've upped the ratings and popularity of the sport over the past seven years or so tremendously, and therefore they're going to be shown a lot.

I think them being black used to be a big deal, especially when they played each other for the 2001 US Open final; not only was it two sisters playing each other in a grand slam final (first time for over 100 years or whatever it is), but it was two African Americans. Pretty big deal then, but now that they've dominated the sport so clearly, I don't think race is too big of a deal any more.

It's an American tournament, with big name Americans there, so that's why ESPN is showing them. I'm not supporting or approving this, I'm just stating how it is.

ugotlobbed
03-28-2005, 01:34 AM
Actually, I think the entire "race" issue is 100% irrelevant.

The fact of the matter is, is that the Williams sisters are the face of tennis in the United States (and in countries outside the US) and they're big name players. They have eleven slam titles between the two of them, they've upped the ratings and popularity of the sport over the past seven years or so tremendously, and therefore they're going to be shown a lot.

I think them being black used to be a big deal, especially when they played each other for the 2001 US Open final; not only was it two sisters playing each other in a grand slam final (first time for over 100 years or whatever it is), but it was two African Americans. Pretty big deal then, but now that they've dominated the sport so clearly, I don't think race is too big of a deal any more.

It's an American tournament, with big name Americans there, so that's why ESPN is showing them. I'm not supporting or approving this, I'm just stating how it is.

u make an exellent point ....but wat im implying is that ive noticed that especailly the black ppl like them alot ....like every black guy ive met..so maybe ppl at espn has had the same experience....well yea their being grand slam winners is a factor too and the race is prob some of a factor also....its why like yao ming is so popular

Isabella
03-28-2005, 01:52 AM
no, the tennis channel only covered matches yesterday and will not air anything else for the rest of the tournament, at least not any singles.

i can't stand having to sit through another williams matches while all i want to see is Nadal or Nalbandian or whoever else

ftd999
03-28-2005, 02:01 AM
no, the tennis channel only covered matches yesterday and will not air anything else for the rest of the tournament, at least not any singles.

i can't stand having to sit through another williams matches while all i want to see is Nadal or Nalbandian or whoever else

Especially when Williams is winning 1 and 1 or whatever. Still, even though they didn't do it today, ESPN usually splits coverage and shows a woman's and a men's match. They had probably planned on a Roddick-Nadal 2nd round, and then didn't know what to do. My guess is they weighed replaying Agassi-Mathieu, Roddick-Verdasco, or the live Williams match.

I wish there was a way to copy and paste of all the ESPN threads (over the last two weeks) into an email and send it to them. Although a couple of posters were tired of hearing about it, I didn't see one positive post about ESPN's coverage. Many, including mine, were outright hostile towards ESPN's coverage. I think it might be interesting for them to know what the tennis fans on here think.

Givenchy
03-28-2005, 02:07 AM
They'll be showing Andre, Maria, and Serena tomorrow. :o

Gaucho
03-28-2005, 02:13 AM
I totally agree with this post. IN the end it is an American tournament and they will show all the big name American's on American televison. Every country is the same. I lived in Germany during the 90's and you have no idea how many tiresome Steffi Graf blowouts were covered from opening warmup through final shot while so many great matchups would be going on at the same time on other courts.


Actually, I think the entire "race" issue is 100% irrelevant.

The fact of the matter is, is that the Williams sisters are the face of tennis in the United States (and in countries outside the US) and they're big name players. They have eleven slam titles between the two of them, they've upped the ratings and popularity of the sport over the past seven years or so tremendously, and therefore they're going to be shown a lot.

I think them being black used to be a big deal, especially when they played each other for the 2001 US Open final; not only was it two sisters playing each other in a grand slam final (first time for over 100 years or whatever it is), but it was two African Americans. Pretty big deal then, but now that they've dominated the sport so clearly, I don't think race is too big of a deal any more.

It's an American tournament, with big name Americans there, so that's why ESPN is showing them. I'm not supporting or approving this, I'm just stating how it is.

uNIVERSE mAN
03-28-2005, 02:28 AM
I'll be following the live scores and OP & Scores forum for my favourite matches, I'm getting used to this shit. This has been going on since the invention of tv, nothing will ever change.

Maxpowers
03-28-2005, 05:25 AM
I think this has been a pretty good discussion so far. Does anyone actually know whether having players like the Williams Sisters on tv actually increases ratings? My view is that people who like and are going to watch tennis care more about the quality of the match than seeing their favorite or a popular player in a terrible one sided match.

One of the best matches that I've seen so far has been between Ferrero and Canas, because Canas tried so hard and Ferrero kept trying to put him away. It was great tennis and very exciting. I don't particularly like either player in general, but it was a high quality encounter that I enjoyed watching. As much as I like and respect Roger Federer, I don't like seeing nothing but him for the whole tournament.

I think if the people they are going after are casual tennis watchers, then they will appreciate if they turn on the match and see a good point, and will continue to watch. I don't think they say "Oh look, Venus Williams is up 6-1, 4-1, 40 love, I better keep watching to see what happens." Is there any way to see how the programming actually effects ratings so its not just speculation?

ftd999
03-28-2005, 07:15 AM
I think this has been a pretty good discussion so far. Does anyone actually know whether having players like the Williams Sisters on tv actually increases ratings? My view is that people who like and are going to watch tennis care more about the quality of the match than seeing their favorite or a popular player in a terrible one sided match.

One of the best matches that I've seen so far has been between Ferrero and Canas, because Canas tried so hard and Ferrero kept trying to put him away. It was great tennis and very exciting. I don't particularly like either player in general, but it was a high quality encounter that I enjoyed watching. As much as I like and respect Roger Federer, I don't like seeing nothing but him for the whole tournament.

I think if the people they are going after are casual tennis watchers, then they will appreciate if they turn on the match and see a good point, and will continue to watch. I don't think they say "Oh look, Venus Williams is up 6-1, 4-1, 40 love, I better keep watching to see what happens." Is there any way to see how the programming actually effects ratings so its not just speculation?

All I ever hear about ratings is that they're unreliable. But that is just based off what I've read in some articles. I think in the past they used to select a certain number of 'Nielsen' families, then gave them a box that attached to their TV and recorded what they watched. Then, that information was extrapolated to the public as a whole using statistical methods. I don't know if this is still the method that is used though.

Here is a link to the site How Stuff Work regarding TV ratings. It basically says what I said above, and notes that the Neilsen sample is only 5000 families out of 99 million TV viewing households. It also notes that this is a very small sample, and that billions of dollars in advertising ride on these ratings. I really hope 5000 people (probably 2 of which are actually watching tennis) aren't determining that I should watch Serena pummel some poor girl 0 and 2 :)


http://www.howstuffworks.com/question433.htm

Ferrero Forever
03-28-2005, 09:10 AM
What i have learnt about TV coverage is they will always show the matches you don't want to see. I still havent forgiven Channel 7 for showing Henman-Davydenko instead of Coria-Ferrero at the Australian Open, considering the limited coverage we get. No point in complaining though, something is better than nothing.

deliveryman
03-28-2005, 09:32 AM
Actually, most networks today get their rating statistics from cable companies, which does have a record of what you watch.

ftd999
03-28-2005, 05:16 PM
Actually, most networks today get their rating statistics from cable companies, which does have a record of what you watch.

I figured things might have changed. That old method just didn't seem reliable enough to risk billions of marketing dollars :) .

holagirl56
03-28-2005, 05:26 PM
Keep telling yourself that :p I've been watching consistently since the eighties, and nothing has really changed much. There have been some networks with good coverage (I thought HBO and TNT did much better jobs than ESPN; and I think USA blows ESPN out of the water) but for some reason they always give up tennis coverage. Not profitable I guess.

It just isn't, I guess. I hate ESPN though, their tennis coverage is all just the Williams Sisters and Maria Slutpova.