Federer makes tennis sink to new low? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer makes tennis sink to new low?

ToanNguyen
09-12-2005, 12:44 PM
I have just read this article.

CALGARY -- Roger Federer may very well end up being the greatest tennis player of all time, but his dominance threatens to sink the game to new lows.

It's no secret the last time tennis was exciting Andre Agassi had hair, which made it fitting that for the first time in well over a decade, the men's U.S. Open final offered up delicious intrigue yesterday, thanks to what could be Agassi's final Open appearance.

However, with millions of casual sports fans sitting down to watch what they hoped would be a magical finish to Agassi's career, Federer proved once again he's essentially invincible.

Despite early excitement, it ended the same way all his matches do.

Without a worthy rival, Federer's brilliance will be lost as more and more people ignore a sport that died when wooden rackets and colourful players gave way to a power game devoid of rallies.


The pending departure of Andre Agassi - the last of the game's great personalities - is going to make tennis matters a whole lot worse.


Oh please. I don't think so. I think he actually makes tennis much more exciting. I definitely was more interested in tennis than ever.
Roger, you are the KING :worship: :worship: :worship:

pesto
09-12-2005, 01:04 PM
Wow! That twuntish article brings sports journalism to a new low!

Puschkin
09-12-2005, 01:06 PM
:zzz:

NewTennisFan
09-12-2005, 01:07 PM
What's most irritating is how this know-nothing insults the sport and claims it's become a power game. What total crap.

Neely
09-12-2005, 01:19 PM
As a person who rarely likes such total dominance in sports in any sports, for me most Federer matches are everything else, but for sure not exciting because I already know in advance who is going to win for 98%. On the other hand, I don't think that Federer is bad for tennis because the way he plays and what he shows is high quality. But tennis is not only Federer or the #1. Others also have good skills and they are more exciting players for me. So therefore, "tennis minus Federer" (and some others) is for me still very very interesting and exciting for me and I love the new guys that break into the scene.

As for the dominance/monopoly thing, I'm trusting in the self healing effects of the markets, in analogy to economy. Maybe with Federer you just have to be a bit more patienet *g*

buddyholly
09-12-2005, 01:41 PM
The article states that Federer is brilliant. It also states that millions of ''casual'' tennis fans hoped to see a magical finish to Agassi's career (include me in, even though I knew it would not happen). Apart from saying that Federer ''will sink the game to new lows'' instead of saying ''will sink interest in the game to new lows'', the article was essentially correct.

Castafiore
09-12-2005, 01:49 PM
Apart from saying that Federer ''will sink the game to new lows'' instead of saying ''will sink interest in the game to new lows'', the article was essentially correct.
There's a degree of truth in it but there is a larger degree of nonsense in this article.

First of all, Federer is human. He's not invincible even if he's damn close to being unbeatable. But this year, Safin managed it, Gasquet did it and Nadal beat him. Other than that, a number of players have taken a set from him.
Beyond that, you really shouldn't focus too much on that number one spot and on his dominance. We've been able to see plenty of fun matches with lesser gods this year.

Secondly, saying that Agassi is the last of the game's great personalities is :bs:

Thirdly, saying that today's tennis is a game of power tennis devoid of rallies is utter nonsense and proof that this journalist is not interested in the sport.

Eclectic Goddess
09-12-2005, 01:54 PM
I never understand articles like this. Does the writer actually watch tennis?

1sun
09-12-2005, 02:02 PM
probably just some american student bitter about agassi's loss.
the game doesnt stop for anyone including andre and roger

buddyholly
09-12-2005, 02:04 PM
It really depends on which section of the paper it was published. It would not be good in the sports section, acceptable in the "What's on TV today'' section and ideal in the funnies.

gillian
09-12-2005, 02:05 PM
Power game devoid of rallies


Does this person watch tennis?

alfonsojose
09-12-2005, 02:07 PM
After Ferrero won Madrid, i wanted him to be the no. 1 in 2003. That TMC was really :yeah: Rainer, Coria, Nalbandian, ...what a bunch of players fighting ... well, we all know what happened next :shrug: :sad:

ToanNguyen
09-12-2005, 02:20 PM
Secondly, saying that Agassi is the last of the game's great personalities is :bs:

Thirdly, saying that today's tennis is a game of power tennis devoid of rallies is utter nonsense and proof that this journalist is not interested in the sport.
Agree completely. This is just non sense really.

daze11
09-12-2005, 02:25 PM
i just talked to someone who USED to watch tennis--got bored with all the mindless power bashing and stopped--and watched federer last night. she has been revived. his grace, his intelligence, his point construction (and deconstruction!), and radiance of true greatness can donothing but bring honor to the sport.

tennis has so many exciting players and rivalries, but the most rare thing is to have a true & golden leader. Now we do. And he's a great example of the highest possibiltities for tennis, so having HIM be most visible will always SPARK interest in the game.

For example, Chris Evert won more than 50% of the tournaments she entered over 18 years...No one got tired of her. She made people want to go pick up a racquet and play, brought the womens game into the professional era, and the respect the public had for her consistent success and high level of play solidified womens tennis as "real" to sports fans. Tennis has never suffered from a great leader.

If you already love tennis, then you will want to watch a master at his craft. People dont tire of Picasso. They just remain in awe....and will do so for hundreds of years. If you DON'T know tennis, Federer is a great entre into the sport so that it DOESN'T just look like a video game where a ball is getting hit from side to side.

But reporters are PAID to create STORIES and get people talking about them. It doesnt mean that even THEY believe what they are writing. But they believe it will get a response. And that is their job.

ExpectedWinner
09-12-2005, 02:28 PM
I suppose the author needed to put food on a table for his family. :shrug:

Sjengster
09-12-2005, 02:28 PM
I wondered whether he had a point about Federer's excessive dominance, but then as you all did I read the sentence about a power game devoid of rallies and realised that here was another journalist with rocks for brains who hasn't watched any of the men's game in this millennium. I mean, one could possibly say that Federer wins too many cheap points off his serve, even though he doesn't serve 140mph bombs, but it's hilarious to look at the no. 2 player in the world this year and then complain about a lack of rallies. And you just need to look back at the matches played at this US Open, the great five-setters, and ask yourself why tennis should be in trouble. Maybe when the media have something positive to say about it instead of embarking on nostalgia trips disguised as journalism, the popularity of the sport might actually increase!

mangoes
09-12-2005, 02:39 PM
Removing myself from the Roger fan club, yes he isn't that exciting a player to non tennis faithfuls. However, I think Nadal does bring to tennis a similar Agassi style in that he has a distinctive look on the court. Not the same as Agassi, but one that is unique. Roger is more a Pete Sampras. But I think the buck falls short at the USTA. They need to market Roger a bit more.

uNIVERSE mAN
09-12-2005, 02:44 PM
I suppose the author needed to put food on a table for his family. :shrug:

or maybe he could just put food ON his family.

nermo
09-12-2005, 03:01 PM
i think ppl. who really loves tennis would never say something like that..Federer is showing real good tennis quality ..the guy has one of the most brilliant talents in the game, and in my very humble opinion , i think he's a good athelete with good behaviour in and off court..how would this be a new low to the game??? :retard: ..and that dominance expression is not fair either to Federer and to all the guys on tour..there are always new talents , and improvements.. ppl. who work hard , show and use their talents in the best way ever, ..are the ppl. who deserve to win. there's no human dominance what so ever...this is a motive to give the best, yesterday was just a very recent example for this and it's all for the good of the game.. . :confused:

Chloe le Bopper
09-12-2005, 03:05 PM
Just be glad that Roger isn't a woman. You'd be seeing crap like that DAILY if he was.

vincayou
09-12-2005, 03:05 PM
In his next article, he will complain that there are too many rallies in RG, and that "top" players can't compete there...

Alan
09-12-2005, 03:35 PM
I thnk Fed has taken men's tennis to new highs... now it's up for the rest of "the other guys" to catch up. That's the news. Everything seems so "low" cause federer's raising the bar so high... go fed! :D

R.Federer
09-12-2005, 03:39 PM
Seems like just other day when people here and other boards were complaining about 8 different GS slam winners in 8 succesive Grand Slams, and too much depth.
I agree that Roge needs competition, real rivalry to keep interest but it is up to other rivals to come up. rafa and marat are real rivals, so there are such

Rex
09-12-2005, 03:49 PM
federer sets a standard which players will learn to get use to. Then everyone else will get better.

mandoura
09-12-2005, 04:07 PM
How can someone who loves tennis belittle it to just the #1 personna? Tennis is not just RF. Besides, Roger's schedule this year was limited.

This article erases the effort, result, talent, ... of the rest of the players in the tour. Did he watch Sanguinetti/Scrichapan, Blake/Nadal, Ginepri/Gasquet matches?

Tennis is and will remain a facinating sport with or without Federer, Agassi, Safin, Roddick, ...

DDrago2
09-12-2005, 04:15 PM
Despite all the Federer's brilliance, it doesn't seem to work for many, not to say for most of the people. People generaly can't realy follow the game and they often find some classless matches more interesting than top-tennis (just look how many people think that womens tennis is more interesting than mens).

This journalist is obviously in that majority. And don't expect that this majority will change in future...

selesfan
09-12-2005, 04:18 PM
Federer has made me interested in men's tennis again, before the men didn't have many rallies now there are a lot more ralleys with such a wide variety of shots by Roger. The author of the article is probably the typical American fan who was upset that Andre lost.

andre the great
09-12-2005, 05:12 PM
It will be a sad day when Andre retires.His rollercoaster career has really caught the imagination. What the game definitely needs is a colourful rival to Fed. Marat and Rafa need to come good and genuinely challenge Fed all the way. Then we'll have real excitement.

MariaV
09-12-2005, 05:14 PM
I never understand articles like this. Does the writer actually watch tennis?
Well, clearly he does NOT. :(

MariaV
09-12-2005, 05:15 PM
How can someone who loves tennis belittle it to just the #1 personna? Tennis is not just RF. Besides, Roger's schedule this year was limited.

This article erases the effort, result, talent, ... of the rest of the players in the tour. Did he watch Sanguinetti/Scrichapan, Blake/Nadal, Ginepri/Gasquet matches?

Tennis is and will remain a facinating sport with or without Federer, Agassi, Safin, Roddick, ...
:worship: :worship: Mandoura, sorry I cannot rep you at the moment, I try to do it asap.

darnyelb
09-12-2005, 05:18 PM
Roger Federer and the phrase "sink the game to new lows" should never, ever be in the same sentence.

If anything, it's the inability of anyone on the tour to consistently challenge the Ninja that is making people lose interest. Safin tried, Roddick, Hewitt, Agassi tried, Nadal is working at it. But so far, no one is yet capable.

Blame it on the others, not Roger Federer.

MisterQ
09-12-2005, 05:21 PM
The article is crap, it's just that simple. I'm sure Agassi would be the first to agree that there will be plenty of personality and amazing tennis even after he steps down.

deekaye
09-12-2005, 05:55 PM
I have just read this article.


Oh please. I don't think so. I think he actually makes tennis much more exciting. I definitely was more interested in tennis than ever.
Roger, you are the KING :worship: :worship: :worship:

ToanNguyen

I agree it is absurd to link R.Federer with the phrase "tennis sink to new low".
It is like blaming him for being the best player in the world. There is sure to be an exciting future with young players like Nadal,Gasquet,and Berdych already making their presence felt. Even Roger can have the odd bad day and whoever is playing on that bad day could cause a shock of world-wide proportions. However,as a declared fan of RF,I hope such days will be extremely rare :)


Deekaye

Neely
09-12-2005, 06:04 PM
The article is crap, it's just that simple. I'm sure Agassi would be the first to agree that there will be plenty of personality and amazing tennis even after he steps down.
Agassi would be the last one to say something else because he is just too classy :)

deliveryman
09-12-2005, 06:57 PM
Roger Federer is the reason I got into Tennis, mid 2003.

ToanNguyen
09-12-2005, 07:20 PM
Agassi would be the last one to say something else because he is just too classy :)
That's true. Agassi is a very classy man. I am a big fan of Roger but I am also Agassi's fan. I remember I always root for him during his rivalry with Sampras. I feel so sad yesterday that he lost. He looks so sad. But on the other hand, I am so very happy that Roger won. It was a tough match for me. Happy and sad at the same time.

PamV
09-12-2005, 07:37 PM
What's most irritating is how this know-nothing insults the sport and claims it's become a power game. What total crap.

He also seems to think Agassi is the last colorful personality left in tennis. ha ha! Actually Agassi is pretty sedate these days. There are plenty of colorful prersonalities if one pays attention.

soonha
09-12-2005, 10:56 PM
Fools are never satisfied :o ........

- We have a classy no.1 with extraordinary game as well as humility.

- We have a group of guys with their own quality of game and personality, trying hard to narrow a gap between the no.1 and themselves.

- We have a bunch of really talented young contenders coming.

- We have an active 35-YO Agassi who, though the oldest finalist at USO since Ken Roswell in 1974, still has the crowd gone wild.

- We have valuable 13 different players who won at least one tournament this year aside from Federer and Nadal.

- We have more successful GS events than ever before in terms of the no. of attendance, quality of the matches, TV rating, etc.

.............Will they be satisfied, ever?

BTW, was it long ago when people were whinning about too many baseliners and their endless rallies in tour?

mellowyellow
09-12-2005, 11:03 PM
federer revitalize my love for tennis, thats for sure

Eclectic Goddess
09-12-2005, 11:03 PM
Excellent points, soonha!

DayTripperGH
09-13-2005, 12:10 AM
how can federer sink the game to new lows?
i mean total dominance is enjoyed because of the beautiful shots he hits

and how will people lose interest?
im sure there are tons of people who wouldn't mind having a crack at beating federer (its not possible)
having a player who dominates only increases popularity in sports
because it tends to be talked about more often

did people say pete sampras sunk the game to new lows?

and aren't you sick of old people talking about how the game has evolved into baseliners? its getting pretty old

DayTripperGH
09-13-2005, 12:11 AM
BTW, was it long ago when people were whinning about too many baseliners and their endless rallies in tour?


nice point
now they complain about too short rallies

NYCtennisfan
09-13-2005, 03:58 AM
The outcome of that match was very much in question in the third set. The first three sets were about as good as tennis gets and you can ask anyone of the 23,000 people that were at Ashe on Sunday if they got their money's worth. It was great, great tennis and it was due to Roger elevating other players' play to challenge him. Agassi played as well as he could to make that match a match.

NYCtennisfan
09-13-2005, 03:59 AM
Fools are never satisfied ........

- We have a classy no.1 with extraordinary game as well as humility.

- We have a group of guys with their own quality of game and personality, trying hard to narrow a gap between the no.1 and themselves.

- We have a bunch of really talented young contenders coming.

- We have an active 35-YO Agassi who, though the oldest finalist at USO since Ken Roswell in 1974, still has the crowd gone wild.

- We have valuable 13 different players who won at least one tournament this year aside from Federer and Nadal.

- We have more successful GS events than ever before in terms of the no. of attendance, quality of the matches, TV rating, etc.

.............Will they be satisfied, ever?

BTW, was it long ago when people were whinning about too many baseliners and their endless rallies in tour?

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: