Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

sports media is also very aussie-centric in australia. last weekend tennis suddenly gets mentioned again, because hewitt managed to break his titles drought.

i don't think tv broadcasting gets as bad as repeating aussies matches instead of showing other matches live, but it comes pretty close. generally tv broadcasters here treat viewers like idiots with their programming, and not just in sports. and there isn't much tennis outside of january anyway. luckily for tennis viewers, their memory usually do last a year.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

I really do not know the answer to this, so I am interested in other fans' experiences/opinions.

Speaking for the US (well, actually speaking for myself), I think that part of the problem is a very narrow-minded way of televising the matches, which tend to make it seem that if a US favorite is not playing, then the matches are not much worth watching. For example, interrupting matches in progress with interviews of US players; over-hyping US players; telling the same stories about US players ad nauseum; making it incredibly difficult to find even scheduled matches on ESPN, which are changed without warning to re-broadcasts of American players; the strange idea that US audiences don't really need to see tennis matches live, and are happy to see them later on, when the scores are known or, by effort of the fan, the result has been carefully avoided in order to have the more exciting experience of uncertainty.

For many potential fans, TV is the entry. If it is too flawed, then the stimulus to go to tournaments is diminished. As for TTC, I have never seen it because it is not available in the Bay Area of CA, and yes I have contacted them several times, and they say when ENOUGH people do they will start it . . . this does not help the sport either.

IMO, part of what makes sport so exciting is the uncertainty of it. We watch football, basketball, baseball, partly for the anxiety/pleasure of not knowing what the outcome will be. In those sports, too, sometimes the match-ups are so one-sided that it is pretty dull. Even in superbowls, we often have to resort to rating the commercials because the game itself is a letdown. (Not true this year!) If it were ONLY about athleticism, you could watch acrobats, ballet, and so forth, and if you want programmed aggression, WWF . The combination of athleticism and uncertainty is what makes sport so great, and tennis has everything that is needed. Tennis is fine the way it is. The way it is presented, at least in the US, is flawed.

Maybe the ATP needs our input, not just about axing RR, but about other changes which will fill the stands.

That's my two cents worth. Thoughts?

It's not just the U.S., it's like that with every country.

Here in Canada, (we don't have any notable singles tennis players so I'll live up to my stereotype and use Hockey as an example instead), they will replay Team Canada games that took place a day or two ago, rather than show like Sweden vs Finland live.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

I agree with most of what you said.

Bottom line is that it's difficult to follow tennis in the US. Sports are about competition, but simply speaking, it's supposed to be fun too to follow your favorite players or teams.

When you have to search for matches on TV, when there is constant re-airing of the same matches over and over again, when you have to hunt for information, and when many times following favorite players means sitting in front of your computer watching the mindnumbing movement of numbers on a live ticker (which more often than not freeze up at the worse possible moment), it's difficult and not very fun. :lol:

Much easier in the US to follow other sports. I've said this before so I'm repeating myself :lol: but if I want to watch the Yanks, I turn on my TV, and there's the Yanks live almost every night during the baseball season. Ditto NASCAR - I can watch NASCAR from the qualifying on Friday night to the Busch race and Nextel practice on Saturday to the actual Nextel race on Sunday - with tons of additional coverage. You get the point - I don't have to mention the wonderful coverage of (American) football, and basketball on TV. And unfortunately golf.

If I'm a big sports fan, more than likely I'll watch the sports that I can tune into by merely surfing on my remote. Not a sport that I never can see on TV.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

This is one reason the USTA and Tennis Australia going after fans who post matches on the net on youtube or other places, and organisations who stream TV channels on the net, really PISS me off.

It's hard enough to find tennis when you want to watch it - even here in the UK at times, and we perhaps have nearly the best overall coverage in the world - you have to hunt the channels and times and they may show it live or not, or show a 1 hour highlights instead of the full match. Or you're forced to install software written in Japanese and pore at a screen size of about 340x280 pixels streaming tennis from some far-flung location because that's the only way you'll see it live.

It's not easy being a tennis fan.

That's why I find the attitudes of the USTA and Tennis Australia absolutely bewildering - fussing about negligable value copyright issues and managing to deny new avenues for fans to discover tennis and enjoy it. If they could be any more short-sighted I struggle to see how.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

This is one reason the USTA and Tennis Australia going after fans who post matches on the net on youtube or other places, and organisations who stream TV channels on the net, really PISS me off.

It's not easy being a tennis fan.

That's why I find the attitudes of the USTA and Tennis Australia absolutely bewildering - fussing about negligable value copyright issues and managing to deny new avenues for fans to discover tennis and enjoy it. If they could be any more short-sighted I struggle to see how.

Totally agree! Pisses me off too.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Events is China struggle to get an audience, but I think that is more due to the fact that Chinese people are not inclined to take days off work to go see a sports event, especially if there are not Chinese players or reasonabe ticket prices. A lot of times, tickets are given away to businesses and business people end up being the ones attending the event.

The middle east events are a joke when it comes to attendence.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Events is China struggle to get an audience, but I think that is more due to the fact that Chinese people are not inclined to take days off work to go see a sports event, especially if there are not Chinese players or reasonabe ticket prices. A lot of times, tickets are given away to businesses and business people end up being the ones attending the event.

The middle east events are a joke when it comes to attendence.

Dubai was pretty full in the day sessions and overflowing in the night sessions all the week long this year.

Doha was quiet until the SFs and F but the weather was unseasonably cold there this past January. The attendance in the Middle East events is normally very good.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

The stands at the Tennis Channel Open

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Vegas was awful, but the bigger events in the US are well-attended. San Jose, Memphis, Houston, they are always well-attended, and the Masters events get HUGE crowds.

i really don't think attendance at US tourneys is any worse than most other places. I think Vegas was an aberration and a product of the horrific weather at this time of year.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Vegas was awful, but the bigger events in the US are well-attended. San Jose, Memphis, Houston, they are always well-attended, and the Masters events get HUGE crowds.

i really don't think attendance at US tourneys is any worse than most other places. I think Vegas was an aberration and a product of the horrific weather at this time of year.

From what I saw on TV last year, IW looked rather bad, at least at times.
What I am trying to understand, though, is this: Are experiments like RR being implemented because there is a sense of dire necessity to increase tournament attendance? And if that isn't the reason, what is the motivation for tinkering with the system?

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

^^ Thanks for the informed answer re IW. I appreciate it. It is certainly true that outer courts, and even practice courts, may be packed to stampede danger levels, while the televised courts may have just a handful of people.

Which leaves me wondering still, why the experiments?

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Well, in the latin american clay season, Buenos Aires attracts more than 64.000 fans, Viña del Mar and Costa do Sauipe usually get around 25.000.
I don't have the numbers of Acapulco, but I think they had good attendance figures last week.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Yep, as said, in Argentina, tennis attendance nor tv ratings are a problem. That obviously happens because of the lack of tournaments hosted in the country considering the ammount of argentines in the top 100 (11).

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

My impression is the Swedish tournies are doing pretty well. Night sessions at Stockholm Open were basically sold out. Båstad, I don't know, but they claim they do a profit.
Mainstream TV is dead outside the Swedish tournaments, you need cable/satellite for Masters and Majors. Minor tournaments outside the WTA is not shown much at all. Media coverage in general also suck when it's not Majors, DC, Båstad/Stockholm. Then the Toad is our highest ranked player so :shrug:

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Sweden used to have geat coverage when the Swedes were doing well, but they have cut it back since they aren't. That's the same for Germany as well.

Aussies only see the AO and Wimbledon on free to air, the Masters events and the other 2 Slams are on pay-TV.

Venue wise the crowds are excellent at the Australian events.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

In France there's just RG on free to air TV. (and they stop coverage earlier in the evening than Eurosport :retard: )
We also have one MC sf that is almost always cut to show the rugby HK and one bercy sf and the final.
When France is playing, and when France is playing ONLY, they show DC. But they don't show the 2nd friday match, the dead matches and more and more often the doubles. :retard:

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

AO turnout is usually excellent. It's not 'going to the tennis' over here - because of the fantastic location and weather it's usually a very popular social event or young people. To give you some idea of the pulling power of an Australian name for capturing the nation's interest, the AO 2005 was the most watched program in 2005 on Australian television for the whole year, with 4.04 million viewers, or 20% of the population. Tennis will grow even bigger when the next big Australian thing arrives.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

AO turnout is usually excellent. It's not 'going to the tennis' over here - because of the fantastic location and weather it's usually a very popular social event or young people. To give you some idea of the pulling power of an Australian name for capturing the nation's interest, the AO 2005 was the most watched program in 2005 on Australian television for the whole year, with 4.04 million viewers, or 20% of the population. Tennis will grow even bigger when the next big Australian thing arrives.

i think we need to explain to our foreign friends here that it's the school holidays in january, that's why no one seems to be working and kids aren't going to school

that's also why the AO constantly refuses to be moved not even shifting a few weeks to february, because that would mean a big blow to attendance.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

The attendance at the US tournaments aren't bad - in my original post, I was speaking more about TV rather than actually attendence.

Vegas was embarrassing - but it was cold.

And some of the time on TV it looks like there's no one there, but in reality, the tournament is full.

I know that from the US Open - people will tell me wow no one was in the stadium - pretty empty. And I've been there in person that day and know how crowded it is. It's because the people with the good tickets don't show up who have the good seats that get on TV - but the regular people are there crowded and cramped in the cheap seats.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

And some of the time on TV it looks like there's no one there, but in reality, the tournament is full.

I know that from the US Open - people will tell me wow no one was in the stadium - pretty empty. And I've been there in person that day and know how crowded it is. It's because the people with the good tickets don't show up who have the good seats that get on TV - but the regular people are there crowded and cramped in the cheap seats.

This infuriates me to no end at every tournament I go to. The only tickets available for single sessions are in the nosebleed section. All the good courtside seats are taken by corporations or rich bigwigs who come only for the marquee match each night. They are too busy with their money making jobs to take time off work to attend the day session. So to the TV cameras, the place looks empty. Yet tennis fans are there up in the far reaches of the stadium court just salivating at all the empty seats down below. It boggles my mind that the tournaments refuse to allow ticket holders to move down to occupy seats that otherwise are empty all day long. You look at the Oscars and other award ceremonies where the organisers have seat fillers to sit in a celebrity's seat if they get up for any reason, even to go to the bathroom. That "not an empty seat in the house" look makes the event seem so much more important. And nobody wonders what will happen when the celebrity shows up for their seat. Obviously the seat filler gets up and moves on. I really don't understand why organisers won't believe tennis fans are capable of doing the same thing instead of using the argument "but what if the actual ticket holder shows up". I'd gladly move and say thanks for the opportunity I had to sit in a decent seat for even a part of a match. Frankly, that is I think part of the reason so many fans spend so much time on the outside courts rather than up in the nosebleed section. A close-up match experience between 2 lower ranked players can be a lot more excitiing and much more personal than watching 2 big name players as tiny figures in the distance. I also usually spend most of my time outside for that reason.

If deVilliers is really interested in making a change that fans will like, this would be a great one to try. Let anyone with a ticket for that specific stadium sit in any available seat once the match begins with the understanding that you move if the ticket holder for that seat shows up. A simple, "excuse me, you're in my seat" would be all that is needed from a late arriving ticket holder. Anyone who refuses to move will be ejected from the tournament by the usher. That penalty should pretty much guarantee that people would readily move to another open seat rather than causing any difficulties for the actual ticket holder. Though most fans would not need any threats anyway and would be extremely happy for the chance to watch from decent seats so that the penalty would rarely be needed.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Well here in Russia we only have one tounament plus Davis Cup. DC Friday is usually quite empty due to the fact that it's a work day, but weekends are usually packed. However with ticket prices these days I wouldn't be surprised if the stadium will not be too crowded.

As for Kremlin Cup Monday to Thursday is a total disaster, especially morning sessions. There are hardly any people there usually... gets a bit more packed in the evenings and then the weekends are a full house.

But with an excellent TV coverage we have for tennis here on the local cable - I think a lot of people just stay in and save money and hassle

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Well here in Russia we only have one tounament plus Davis Cup. DC Friday is usually quite empty due to the fact that it's a work day, but weekends are usually packed. However with ticket prices these days I wouldn't be surprised if the stadium will not be too crowded.

As for Kremlin Cup Monday to Thursday is a total disaster, especially morning sessions. There are hardly any people there usually... gets a bit more packed in the evenings and then the weekends are a full house.

But with an excellent TV coverage we have for tennis here on the local cable - I think a lot of people just stay in and save money and hassle

I must have missed something.. since when is St Petersburg not part of Russia anymore?

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

I really do not know the answer to this, so I am interested in other fans' experiences/opinions.

Speaking for the US (well, actually speaking for myself), I think that part of the problem is a very narrow-minded way of televising the matches, which tend to make it seem that if a US favorite is not playing, then the matches are not much worth watching. For example, interrupting matches in progress with interviews of US players; over-hyping US players; telling the same stories about US players ad nauseum;
That's my two cents worth. Thoughts?

Same situation in France. Lets say Kohlschreiber is playing against Richard Gasquet on the Suzanne Lenglen court during RG and Nadal vs Davydenko is being played on center court, there's no way the 2nd match will be shown live. Don't even think about it.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

I don't think of Vegas as being a tennis place. Vegas is in many ways a very ******* Republican golf kind of town. Just don't think it's a tennis town really.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Wimbledon, particularly, and Queens Club have no trouble attracting crowds in the UK. Wimbledon proves as difficult as ever to obtain tickets.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Wimbledon, particularly, and Queens Club have no trouble attracting crowds in the UK. Wimbledon proves as difficult as ever to obtain tickets.

That's true. The thing that pleasantly surprises me about Wimbledon though is the pull it still has over the TV ratings in the UK. The men's and women's final still get between 50% and 55% of the entire TV audience in the UK at the time the final is on. Even the day to day play at Wimbledon in the first week gets bigger audiences than normal programming on BBC would in the weeks without Wimbledon. The demand is there, but the BBC really only concentrates on grass court season and Davis Cup. As scoobsuk says though, we are quite lucky here in the UK for tennis coverage compared to some, especially during Wimbledon on BBC with a choice of 5 courts; and US Open, Master Series, Davis Cup and World Team Cup on Sky (when you get a choice of courts at US Open and Masters Series). Add to that Australian Open, French Open and some smaller events like Palermo, Kitzbuhel, Memphis, New Haven, San Jose, Estoril, Vienna, Gstaad, Halle, Queens, Doha, Dubai, Stuttgart etc. on Eurosport, we can't really complain too much.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Okay, as I consider this an interesting subject (because of its relevance to the whole problem of 'getting more people into tennis' and the questionable measurements the ATP is taking for that reason ), I'll chime in with my 0.01 cents worth on the situation in The Netherlands...

We only have the ABN-AMRO Tournament in Rotterdam, and the ticket sales were much lower than last year. It was said per many including the tournament director Richard Krajicek that this was due to the Big Stars (the 'Usual Suspects' ) refusing to play there.

I dare to doubt this was the true or only reason, however.
First - there were quite a lot of good players around, including a fair number of guys in the Top 20. Plenty enough for an interesting tournament, anyway.

But... (oh dear, why is it that I *hate* patriottism so much... ), there's currently no Dutch player in the top 150 (alright, corrected here: it seems Robin Haase has reached the #144 spot by now) so the PTB thought this yet another reason why the tournament wouldn't be interesting - there was hardly ANY coverage on TV, only very short highlights and the SF and finals were shown live.

Futhermore - nearly all the good seats went to Business Bosses, VIPs, sponsors and the like - people who appeared to be interested in anything, most notably the champagne in the backstage area, but NOT in tennis, as the telly constantly showed a nearly empty first ring.
The REAL tennisfans were banned to the cheap upper seats, where you need a telescope to actually recognize who's playing! Now this really pisses me off...

And then, the coverage in the national papers. All reported the tournament 'not being interesting', if they gave it any attention at all in this football-blinded country. Some even suggested that Youzhny was a very weak player to win this tournament - apparently they didn't even know the guy.

All in all, a very sad situation indeed.
So, to answer the OP - no, it's not just a problem in the US.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Australian Crowds are very solid. Hopman Cup gets packed, sydney is usually pretty full with about 7-10,000 there for the night sessions, although ticket sales are usually slow until the tournament starts. The australian open will always do well with people loving the 'big event' and especially with so many Australians in the draw. But lets hope we can get some more good players!

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

skysports seem to have good coverage but does anyone know if i can get it from Sweden?
the only channels we have here are ES and ES2, and a new channel were they show some footage from Wimbledon and Båstad and that's it =/

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

http://www.thedesertsun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070307/EVENTS10/703070334/1120/events10

LOCAL FLAVOR HELPS: Although they don't keep numbers for the first two days, tournament director Steve Simon said he has to believe the huge crowds on Monday might be the largest for the first day.

Simon estimated the crowds were in the 5,000-to-6,000 range.

"It was a nice open house day," Simon said. "It shows the continued growth of the event. We had quite a few with the prequalifying event (over the weekend) and that was driven by the local flavor of having Pam (Montez of La Quinta) and Coco (Vandeweghe, who trains in Palm Springs). This event is becoming a three weekend event now."

===========================

so 5,000-6,000 people showed up for pre-qualifying and women's qualifying. doesn't sound like an attendance problem to me.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

so 5,000-6,000 people showed up for pre-qualifying and women's qualifying. doesn't sound like an attendance problem to me.

Well, how much were ticket prices? If it is $0 or $10 or $20, people generally indifferent about TV versus courtside will go.

Attendance is a problem when ticket prices play a BIG role in decisions. USO tickets (even bleachers) are/were very expensive by the time the second week rolled around, but empty seats were not a giant problem if you looked around. That's a slam, though. At smaller tournaments, the casual fan is going to show up only if it is reasonably pricey to do so (Diehard fans will show up most of the time anywhere anyway).

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

Houston's attendance is wonderful because of the promotion job Mattress Mack does. 3 years ago when i went, it was full for first round matches. Plus, a lot of people who are members of the club go to the tourney. Houston is a huge city and has some very very poor parts. The Westside Tennis Club is not particularly in an upscale part of the city. Houston is incomparable to a very affluent place like IW.

the LA tourney is also pretty well-attended even early on.

 

Re: Is Match Attendance Just a US Problem?

That's good news on IW.

I go to New Haven every year. I wouldn't say it's great, but then again, it's not bad either. Sometimes it's hard to tell because a lot of families go - and they tend to hang around the kids play area (which is big), the food court, and outer courts where they have better seats.

Again, I don't think attendance is a problem in the US - it's more getting these same people to turn on their TV sets. But then again, it takes a lot of effort to find tennis on TV so it's kind of like a Catch-22 situation today.