which has greater appeal? ATP or WTA [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

which has greater appeal? ATP or WTA

Sofonda Cox
10-28-2006, 10:00 PM
in terms of players that are more well known, newspaper/news coverage, and popularity in general

deliveryman
10-28-2006, 10:03 PM
Well the WTA only has one cash cow in Maria Sharapova and they're milking all that they can out of her.

I'd say the biggest star in Tennis belongs to the WTA,

However, I believe there are more stars in the ATP (Federer, Roddick, Blake, Nadal, etc).

So overall I'd say: The ATP and easily.

Sofonda Cox
10-28-2006, 10:06 PM
Well the WTA only has one cash cow in Maria Sharapova and they're milking all that they can out of her.

I'd say the biggest star in Tennis belongs to the WTA,

However, I believe there are more stars in the ATP (Federer, Roddick, Blake, Nadal, etc).

So overall I'd say: The ATP and easily.

:haha: nice one

croat123
10-29-2006, 12:16 AM
the men's tour has quality, the women's tour is sucking right now
wta has sharapova and no one else
atp doesn't have 1 player that is nearly as popular as maria, but overall has more recognizable players.
no offense, but i'm sure most non-tennis fans in the u.s. have no clue who mausresmo, jhh, kuznestova, dementieva, petrova and clijsters are. i'm sure at least some of them have heard of federer, nadal, roddick, and blake

Metis
10-29-2006, 01:40 AM
The WTA I think. Except for Sharapova, the Williams sisters are still making headlines although they are nowhere near the top 10 and the Hingis comeback has been a big story.

From a personal point of view, when I look at the list of players qualifying for the WTA championships and the one for the ATP Masters Cup, I have to say the women's field seems more exciting:

WTA
Mauresmo
JHH
Sharapova
Kuznetsova
Petrova
Dementieva
Clijsters
Hingis

Jimnik
10-29-2006, 01:02 AM
Actually, I'd have to agree that the women's looks more competitive. I believe Petrova is the only one on that list who hasn't won a slam. Whereas the men's list consists of only three slam champions.

But still, I don't think I'll ever find the WTA more appealing than the ATP. :p

Johnny Groove
10-29-2006, 01:04 AM
to the general public? WTA. Why? look between the shoulders and when they bend over to return. As pathetic as it seems, its true. Whereas the ATP is quality, real tennis while the WTA is bend-over orgasm ball bashing.

Tennis Fool
10-29-2006, 01:14 AM
Is Sharapova really a star? I don't think she has the mass appeal the media wants you to believe.

Bremen
10-29-2006, 01:16 AM
Actually, I'd have to agree that the women's looks more competitive. I believe Petrova is the only one on that list who hasn't won a slam. Whereas the men's list consists of only three slam champions.

But still, I don't think I'll ever find the WTA more appealing than the ATP. :p

Elena D has yet to win a slam though she did make two finals in 2004. But yeah...none of those women are jokes the way lubo or robredo is. I mean they've all pretty much been #1.

Allure
10-29-2006, 01:24 AM
For me, the ATP is more appealing. But to the media, WTA. Sharapova is in the news a lot whereas the only male tennis player I see in like E! is Roddick.

Metis
10-29-2006, 02:03 AM
to the general public? WTA. Why? look between the shoulders and when they bend over to return. As pathetic as it seems, its true. Whereas the ATP is quality, real tennis while the WTA is bend-over orgasm ball bashing.
:lol:
I disagree!!! I love it when the ATP players bend over to return (esp. Rafa) :devil:
In any case I think that more women are attracted to ATP players than men are attracted to WTA players. IMO the :drool: quality of the ATP tour is superior by far plus we get to see them take their shirts off during changeovers. :p

General Suburbia
10-29-2006, 02:21 AM
to the general public? WTA. Why? look between the shoulders and when they bend over to return. As pathetic as it seems, its true. Whereas the ATP is quality, real tennis while the WTA is bend-over orgasm ball bashing.
Which players are you talking about? Don't tell me Mauresmo or JHH make you hard. There are about 5 hot women players on the tour, and they suck. Actually, women's tennis in general sucks, ever since the girls starting imitating the men's play. Now, whenever I watch women's tennis, I just see a slower and more boring version of the men's game. I also don't know what the media's trying to do with "glamming" tennis up on the womens side, cause it sure as hell isn't working, and it's making tennis in general look pretty pathetic.

I'm pretty sure by now you know what appeals more to me.

Ernham
10-29-2006, 02:30 AM
Hmmm. They are about the same. Outside of the Tennis world, only Roger is very well-known for the ATP. But the WTA has Sharapova and Anna K, and to a lesser degree the Williams sisters(only because they are black and the media loves its black folks). Actually, I'd have to tip my hat to the WTA as being "more appealing", at least in the way your qualified "appealing", which is a little misleading IMO.

Johnny Groove
10-29-2006, 02:34 AM
Which players are you talking about? Don't tell me Mauresmo or JHH make you hard. There are about 5 hot women players on the tour, and they suck. Actually, women's tennis in general sucks, ever since the girls starting imitating the men's play. Now, whenever I watch women's tennis, I just see a slower and more boring version of the men's game. I also don't know what the media's trying to do with "glamming" tennis up on the womens side, cause it sure as hell isn't working, and it's making tennis in general look pretty pathetic.

I'm pretty sure by now you know what appeals more to me.

im not talking about me. Im talking about other guys in general.

partygirl
10-29-2006, 06:36 AM
The ATP has dick.

mandoura
10-29-2006, 06:56 AM
:lol:
I disagree!!! I love it when the ATP players bend over to return (esp. Rafa) :devil:
In any case I think that more women are attracted to ATP players than men are attracted to WTA players. IMO the :drool: quality of the ATP tour is superior by far plus we get to see them take their shirts off during changeovers. :p

:worship: :lol:

The ATP has dick.

:haha: I second that, with a broader range than the one you have in mind. :lol: :aplot:

Definitely ATP for me. :D

spooky105
10-29-2006, 08:41 AM
in terms of players that are more well known, newspaper/news coverage, and popularity in general

if you ask this question here what answer you expect? :wavey:

Sofonda Cox
10-29-2006, 09:54 AM
if you ask this question here what answer you expect? :wavey:

im asking which has greater appeal not which people like more:rolleyes:

Action Jackson
10-29-2006, 09:56 AM
The poll results so far are surprising.

charlie666
10-29-2006, 10:42 AM
Sharapova is the only real star the WTA has got, while the ATP-tour has got Federer, Nadal and Roddick who are in magazines all over the world.

Ernham
10-29-2006, 10:59 AM
Sharapova is the only real star the WTA has got, while the ATP-tour has got Federer, Nadal and Roddick who are in magazines all over the world.

No one knows or cares about Nadal or Roddick outside of the tennis world, at least not in the USA or Canada. Everyone knows the Williams siststers, Anna K, and Sharapova, techinically all of which are part of the WTA. Given that, you'd have to be extremely delusional to vote ATP.

*Ljubica*
10-29-2006, 10:59 AM
For me personally - ATP. Most womens' tennis drives me crazy with boredom :yawn: and I can't deny it.

But from a non-personal view - I think a lot depends on where you live, so taken world-wide the appeal is probably fairly equal. I understand that in the States for example - the WTA probably has a greater appeal with so many successful home-grown players like the Williams Sisters, Davenport, Sharapova (who is far more American than Russian) and, formerly, Capriati. Conversely, here in the UK - the normal (non tennis) newspapers only ever mention tennis in the context of the ATP because of Henman, Rusedski and Murray (we really have no successful WTA players to speak of), - and the only exception is the occasional "glamour" shot of Sharapova in the run-up to Wimbledon. And in Europe generally, the success of more "local" players like Federer and Nadal, the Spanish players and the Croats for example, make the ATP more attractive to fans and sponsors - you only have to look at the virtually empty stands at WTA tournaments on Eurosport to prove that point - tickets for ATP tourneys in Europe sell far better than those for WTA.

Ernham
10-29-2006, 11:06 AM
I think some of guys aren't actually reading what the "pollster" wrote. The Poll is asking:

"In terms of players that are more well known, newspaper/news coverage, and popularity in general, which has greater appeal? ATP or WTA?"

Note, there is nothing mentioned about quality of tennis/competition levels/personalities/etc.

cmurray
10-29-2006, 01:13 PM
I'd say that depends HIGHLY on where in the world you live. For instance, you cannot convince me that WTA is bigger in, say, Argentina than ATP. Same with Spain. Now a place like Russia, where there are lots and lots of women stars, I'm sure WTA is bigger.

charlie666
10-29-2006, 01:21 PM
No one knows or cares about Nadal or Roddick outside of the tennis world, at least not in the USA or Canada. Everyone knows the Williams siststers, Anna K, and Sharapova, techinically all of which are part of the WTA. Given that, you'd have to be extremely delusional to vote ATP.

You'd have to buy a magazine over here, apart from Sharapova, nobody from WTA appears in the issues. While Roddick, Federer and Nadal are story feed every week. Never in a correct way, of course. Last week, some paper had "exclusive pictures" of Roger Federer and his new girlfriend, Mirka.:rolleyes:

adee-gee
10-29-2006, 01:50 PM
I never ever thought I'd say this, but probably the WTA at the moment purely on the fact that there's about 10 people who could win a slam.

Corey Feldman
10-29-2006, 01:59 PM
The ATP has dick.Yep.. all 6"8 of the big belgian star :hug:

ATP for me obviously... i only like watching the woman matches when its the top players against each other (and not mixed with the mens events) and i will watch next week in Madrid, wta champs is always a decent watch.

Go Momo!!

Ernham
10-29-2006, 02:15 PM
You'd have to buy a magazine over here, apart from Sharapova, nobody from WTA appears in the issues. While Roddick, Federer and Nadal are story feed every week. Never in a correct way, of course. Last week, some paper had "exclusive pictures" of Roger Federer and his new girlfriend, Mirka.:rolleyes:


Raising the BS flag here. No one in the world knows who the hell Roddick or Nadal are outside of people that watch tennis. Everyone in the world knows of Roger and Sharapova AND Anna k. how many of those are on the ATP? The WTA?

star
10-29-2006, 03:01 PM
I think the WTA is probably more exciting in terms of who will finish the year number one and because there are several players fighting to establish themselves at the top of the game. That makes it interesting.

However, when you go to a tournament where both men and women are playing, the men's matches are better attended. The quality of the tennis and the competition is better.

princediablo
10-29-2006, 03:28 PM
Raising the BS flag here. No one in the world knows who the hell Roddick or Nadal are outside of people that watch tennis. Everyone in the world knows of Roger and Sharapova AND Anna k. how many of those are on the ATP? The WTA?

You joking me? In the states, Federer and Roddick are both more well known than anyone in the WTA except maybe Sharapova. And the three of them are on the same level.

Ernham
10-29-2006, 03:32 PM
You joking me? In the states, Federer and Roddick are both more well known than anyone in the WTA except maybe Sharapova. And the three of them are on the same level.

Getting really god damn sick and tired of repeating myself because people can't read. WTA players are 10 times more famous in the USA because of the williams sisters. So you have Sharapova, Anna K(paris hilton figure of tennis), and the williams sisters versus basically Roddick and Roger. ATP loses in the USA, and it loses in the world. Deal with it.

alias
10-29-2006, 06:58 PM
Is Sharapova really a star? I don't think she has the mass appeal the media wants you to believe.

I agree, I thought she would have the same popularity Kournikova had but no. She's a winner and she's pretty, she just doesn't have the same magnetism.

Ernham
10-29-2006, 07:14 PM
I agree, I thought she would have the same popularity Kournikova had but no. She's a winner and she's pretty, she just doesn't have the same magnetism.

According to Forbes, she is the 15th most mentioned person in the world media/news, well ahead of Michael Jordan and Michael Schumacher.


That's pretty damn popular in the world media. Annak did not even make the top 100 of their list.

DDrago2
10-29-2006, 07:28 PM
I never ever thought I'd say this, but probably the WTA at the moment purely on the fact that there's about 10 people who could win a slam.

and in ATP there's one man and one monkey

DDrago2
10-29-2006, 07:31 PM
20.59% traitors here in this moment

Sofonda Cox
10-29-2006, 07:31 PM
and in ATP there's one man and one monkey

calliing ljubicic a monkey is harsh

DDrago2
10-29-2006, 07:33 PM
calliing ljubicic a monkey is harsh

Ljubo will never win a slam - you know, I know, he knows, his little baby knows

Sofonda Cox
10-29-2006, 07:34 PM
Ljubo will never win a slam - you know, I know

hehehe ;)

DDrago2
10-29-2006, 07:40 PM
The ATP has dick.

:haha: :haha:

The sky has dick
The moon's got dick

The Daviator
10-29-2006, 07:40 PM
You joking me? In the states, Federer and Roddick are both more well known than anyone in the WTA except maybe Sharapova. And the three of them are on the same level.

You think Federer and Roddick are more well-known in the States than Venus and Serena Williams? :tape:

The Williams Sisters and Sharapova are the three most famous active tennis players in the world right now, I voted WTA, at the WTA YEC, three players will fight it out to claim the year-end #1, at the ATP Masters Cup, one player will wipe the floor with the rest and claim his 13th title of the season :)

Sofonda Cox
10-29-2006, 07:41 PM
:haha: :haha:

Sky has dick

anything with dick gets my vote:angel:

charlie666
10-29-2006, 08:30 PM
Getting really god damn sick and tired of repeating myself because people can't read. WTA players are 10 times more famous in the USA because of the williams sisters. So you have Sharapova, Anna K(paris hilton figure of tennis), and the williams sisters versus basically Roddick and Roger. ATP loses in the USA, and it loses in the world. Deal with it.

I see. The next time, before anyone creates a poll, he'll come to you first so you can just give the ONLY correct answer. :wavey:

Ernham
10-29-2006, 08:49 PM
I see. The next time, before anyone creates a poll, he'll come to you first so you can just give the ONLY correct answer. :wavey:

If you respond to one of my posts specifically, you better be prepared to be fried if you managed to stick your head up your ass enroute to the "post" button.

Naranoc
10-29-2006, 08:59 PM
That's all very well, but don't ATP matches (particularly in Slams) generate a much higher viewing audience? :confused:

Shappica
10-30-2006, 06:43 PM
ATP is boring because of Federer! When he plays (exept on caly) you know he is going to win. So where is fun in that? OK he's good player, but I think he's bad for ATP!

angiel
10-30-2006, 10:14 PM
[QUOTE=princediablo;4368913]You joking me? In the states, Federer and Roddick are both more well known than anyone in the WTA except maybe Sharapova. And the three of them are on the same level.[/QUO


you say Federer is well known in the States??:rolleyes: :rolleyes: want to bet on that, take a poll and see how many Americans actually knows who Roger is? not a lot. Roddick and Sharapova is a different matter now.

morningglory
10-30-2006, 10:25 PM
IF Andy were to dominate, tennis would be 10x more popular in the US I can assure you :p Already few Americans follow tennis, so logically even less people know who Fed is... he needs to do TV shows and parties more often to get some exposure
I repeat Fed is currently NOT well-known in the US... I repeat! Far from Sharadick's level... REAL far... :p

General Suburbia
10-30-2006, 10:32 PM
ATP is boring because of Federer! When he plays (exept on caly) you know he is going to win. So where is fun in that? OK he's good player, but I think he's bad for ATP!
Um, yea. Have you ever seen a match in the WTA? This is how a typical tourny for the WTA works: The first 3 rounds show seeded players brushing through their opponents 6-1 6-0. At least the crappiest players in the ATP can manage to hold their serve more than once a match.

angiel
10-30-2006, 10:43 PM
Um, yea. Have you ever seen a match in the WTA? This is how a typical tourny for the WTA works: The first 3 rounds show seeded players brushing through their opponents 6-1 6-0. At least the crappiest players in the ATP can manage to hold their serve more than once a match.

The question was which has the greater appeal???? and it is difinetly not the ATP.:sad: :sad: :sad:

Aloevera
10-31-2006, 02:56 AM
ATP is a bit more entertaining I guess.

The significant difference is, ATP players could play tennis unlike WTA giant babes who are just inconsistent ball-bashers with no charisma (except Sharpie).

Mauresmo and Henin got much better game but they're (always) boring and they don't look like a 100% woman.

Players like Hingis, Williamses who could spice up the competition with drama just sucked day by day...

Aloevera
10-31-2006, 03:02 AM
ATP is boring because of Federer! When he plays (exept on caly) you know he is going to win. So where is fun in that? OK he's good player, but I think he's bad for ATP!

Not really. Whenever wherever whatever he plays, history is being made or re-written. That can be entertaining, too. But yeah, of korz a rivalry would make it even better. At first you like it becoz someone plays at much higher level but when the others cannot follow up, it becomes boring to watch.