Mens Tennis Forums banner

When is domination boring?

  • Always, whether you like a player or not

    Votes: 9 18.4%
  • Never, always exciting to see someone be so dominant

    Votes: 5 10.2%
  • Only if you dislike the player in question

    Votes: 17 34.7%
  • Never if it is a player you like

    Votes: 7 14.3%
  • As a neutral it gets dull after a while

    Votes: 11 22.4%

  • Total voters
    49
1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have heard a lot of people say they have no interest in the FO because it's too obvious who the winner will be. I was just wondering when people think someone being so dominant at a slam gets boring to watch. Obviously I am not a Nadal fan and clay is also my least favourite surface, so the FO is not exciting for me. But surely it must get boring for neutrals? Would appreciate thoughts :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,399 Posts
When you have a guy with inhuman fitness levels reach 36 consecutive GS QF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,934 Posts
I don't think it's because of the monopoly, but the level of play of the whole tour is pathetic right now. When Federer dominated Wimbledon and US Open there were always high quality matches, so many people enjoyed this sport. Compared to French Open 2014, it's hilarious to see dull playing like shit but still managed to fluke another slam. Dull almost used up his energy in the fourth set, definitely not the staminabot we know. Fortunately Djoker choked accurately at this time. Murray played as badly as he could but still reached the semis, while Djoker with a terrible physical condition still managed to reach the final. Great era for tennis. No competition, only hierarchies.
 

·
Your visions will happen
Joined
·
47,137 Posts
When it is your least favorite player doing it.

2004-2007 for example
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
972 Posts
I don't think it's because of the monopoly, but the level of play of the whole tour is pathetic right now. When Federer dominated Wimbledon and US Open there were always high quality matches, so many people enjoyed this sport. Compared to French Open 2014, it's hilarious to see dull playing like shit but still managed to fluke another slam. Dull almost used up his energy in the fourth set, definitely not the staminabot we know. Fortunately Djoker choked accurately at this time. Murray played as badly as he could but still reached the semis, while Djoker with a terrible physical condition still managed to reach the final. Great era for tennis. No competition, only hierarchies.
Yes the legendary world class bouts involving Fed and world class GOATS like Andy and Hewitt who were getting bagelled left right and center by the only top tier player around whose peak suddenly ended when a 22 year old tore his ass apart on every surface.

NID>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,934 Posts
Yes the legendary world class bouts involving Fed and world class GOATS like Andy and Hewitt who were getting bagelled left right and center by the only top tier player around whose peak suddenly ended when a 22 year old tore his ass apart on every surface.

NID>
Any match in 2nd week of grand slam during 2004 to 2007 without dull's participation has higher quality than moonballing fest.:wavey:Tennis is ruined by dull. It's not the same intriguing sport that real tennis fans know any more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,469 Posts
When four overrated mugs with atrocious games win 35 of the last 37 slams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
Yes the legendary world class bouts involving Fed and world class GOATS like Andy and Hewitt who were getting bagelled left right and center by the only top tier player around whose peak suddenly ended when a 22 year old tore his ass apart on every surface.

NID>
Not true.

Even with the match up issue Nadal never exactly routined Fed until Roger was on heavy decline since 2013. Till 2012 they have played many great competitive matches. The only exception ofcourse was RG 2008. One match can happen when your opponent is playing his absolute best and you are below par. Happened to Nadal at WTF 2011 against Fed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,133 Posts
Always.

I do remember wanting Borg to keep winning Wimbledon, but then again he was mostly playing Connors and McEnroe, who were brats, and I was only 10 years old when he eventually lost. I found it hard to dislike Borg in those days. He was so phlegmatic, which allowed one to project all sorts of virtues onto him, which probably he didn't have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,564 Posts
Underwhelming choices. When it becomes overly predictable is the answer you're looking for.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,740 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Personally I think unless you are a big fan of a player, it does get a bit boring. Sometimes a new player dominating gives the tour a shot in the arm, like Novak in 2011. Aside from their fans, I think a lot of people were getting a bit tired of the Fedal duopoly. It is impressive to dominate but it is boring even when you are neutral, and of course more so when you dislike a player.

Interesting that some people voted that they find it boring even if they like the player dominating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,308 Posts
I have heard a lot of people say they have no interest in the FO because it's too obvious who the winner will be. I was just wondering when people think someone being so dominant at a slam gets boring to watch. Obviously I am not a Nadal fan and clay is also my least favourite surface, so the FO is not exciting for me. But surely it must get boring for neutrals? Would appreciate thoughts :)
I was bored by both Nadal's domination of the French and Fed's domination of Wimbledon. If you aren't a gloryhunter/tard it gets old pretty fast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,564 Posts
Interesting that some people voted that they find it boring even if they like the player dominating.
Obviously, if you're a fan it's easier to take, but it nevertheless becomes stale if it's too predictable :shrug:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
I think the general public, not tards from fan bases enjoy and admire greatness and domination. It's good for the sport, attracts attention. I have many friends that doesn't play or follow tennis regularly but they would watch the FO to see if Nadal can make more history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,537 Posts
I choose the Poll Option 'Never, always exciting to see someone be so dominant'.

For me it's never would get boring. Even if Rafa (by the Way i really think he could do it) wins the next 3 RG it will not effect me in this Way. I love the Sport too much. I think every Salm is special. I always look forward to the next Slam. There is this kind of Tension and the Tradion which makes each Slam so wonderfull. Even if one Player is likely the Winner on Sunday. Since I started watching Tennis closely, Rafa was basically always the Winner of RG except the (for Me) Fantastic 2009 Tournament. So no, a Slam Domination by One Player is still Exiting for me :)
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top