Ratings? - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 01:22 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
ktwtennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 3,338
                     
Ratings?

Does anyone know the numbers for the finals (men and women)?

Visit MONICA!

I am a sinner too!
Jesus answered and said to him[Nicodemus, a Pharisee],"Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again[of the Spirit/above], he cannot see the kingdom of God."--John 3:3

Good works can't save you from hell!! Jesus loves you and wants to be in your heart and mind!!!

I will worship Jesus forever!
ktwtennis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 04:19 PM
Senior Member
 
goldenlox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 97,968
                     
USAtoday.com says the final got a 4.0 in the U.S., up 3%
The men's final got a 2.5, down 31 %.

The most wasted of all days is one without laughter....
Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there
Enjoy This Moment!!
HEALTH and HAPPINESS to EVERYONE

goldenlox is offline  
post #3 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 04:53 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenlox
USAtoday.com says the final got a 4.0 in the U.S., up 3%
The men's final got a 2.5, down 31 %.
That is why Lindsay, Venus and others who are calling for parity in prize money allocation have a strong point.
In the past, the Grand Slam organizers have always said men deserve more because more viewers watch men tennis than womens tennis.
These number show it is no longer the case.

Right now, the women have more a variety of personalities, generating more interest in the women matches.

Wehre else can you find intringuing matches such as these
  1. Cream of of the cop Match Up
  2. Serena vs Any Player
  3. Venus vs Any Player
  4. Maria vs Aby Player
  5. Vera vs Any Player
  6. Big Babes Hitting
  7. Davenport vs Serena
  8. Davenport Venus
  9. Davenport Maria
  10. Davenport Mauresmo
  11. Davenport vs Kim
  12. Intriguing Encounters
  13. Mauresmo vs Serena
  14. Mauresmo vs Venus
  15. Mauremso vs Maria
  16. Conchita M vs Patty S
  17. Myskian vs Lena D
  18. Uneven/Even Contest
  19. JHH vs Venus
  20. JHH vs Serena
  21. JHH vs Maria
  22. JHH vs Davenport
  23. JHH vs Kim
  24. Nerves Match UP
  25. Kim vs Venus
  26. Kim vs Serena
  27. Kim vs Davenport
  28. Kim vs Maria
  29. Kim vs Mauresmo
  30. Lena D vs Mauresmo
  31. Kim vs JHH
  32. Others Intriguing
  33. Nadia vs Mary
  34. Nadia vs Conhita
  35. Nadia vs Venus
  36. Maria vs Any top 10 Russian
tennislover22 is offline  
post #4 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:08 PM
Senior Member
 
Veenut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,327
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenlox
USAtoday.com says the final got a 4.0 in the U.S., up 3%
The men's final got a 2.5, down 31 %.
I could have predicted that. A Williams match, even in doubles always draw better ratings.

That is why I can't understand why the tennis establishment doesn't recognize the prize players the have in the sisters. On the other hand, the golf establishment idolize Tiger. I've never heard any commentator say anything negative about him even when he was struggling. They realized his importance to their sport and they appreciate him. I'm sure women's golf would have given anything to have one star like Willliams much less two.

I guess you don't know how valuable someone is until you loose them!!!
Veenut is offline  
post #5 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veenut
I could have predicted that. A Williams match, even in doubles always draw better ratings.

That is why I can't understand why the tennis establishment doesn't recognize the prize players the have in the sisters. On the other hand, the golf establishment idolize Tiger. I've never heard any commentator say anything negative about him even when he was struggling. They realized his importance to their sport and they appreciate him. I'm sure women's golf would have given anything to have one star like Willliams much less two.

I guess you don't know how valuable someone is until you loose them!!!
You are right. Tiger is like a cash cow to golf.
Not only they do not criticize Tiger, they go back to history glory days and
show the matches where he dominated.

In addition, they have all kinds of Tiger specials.
Tiger Best Finishes, Tiger Best Come Fro Behind, Tiger At The Major,
Tiger At The US Open, and on and on
tennislover22 is offline  
post #6 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,156
                     
These numbers are for the United States, not the world. Television ratings in the U.S. have nothing to do with how much prize money is paid to the women or men.

Besides, TV ratings for tennis in the U.S. are below the ratings for bowling!! or cheerleading!! Maybe those people should be paid more money than tennis players.
miranda_lou is offline  
post #7 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:23 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,156
                     
Tiger Woods gets loads of criticism . . . most of it undeserved!!!

In fact, when he wasn't winning and dropped from the #1 spot, the criticism was awful. I don't know where your information is coming from. You must not read the sport pages. Reporters were saying the same thing about him that they are saying about Serena . . . no dedication; bored with golf; out of shape; not concentrating because of his fiancee/wife. Tiger was not spared, believe me.

He never doubted himself though and that's what counts.
miranda_lou is offline  
post #8 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:27 PM
Original Queen, Majestic V!
 
ico4498's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Roundiway
Posts: 4,899
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by miranda_lou
Television ratings in the U.S. have nothing to do with how much prize money is paid to the women or men.
it does.

ico4498 is offline  
post #9 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:32 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by miranda_lou
These numbers are for the United States, not the world. Television ratings in the U.S. have nothing to do with how much prize money is paid to the women or men.

Besides, TV ratings for tennis in the U.S. are below the ratings for bowling!! or cheerleading!! Maybe those people should be paid more money than tennis players.
While you are right that the numbers are in the US, not England, it does not negate the point that women tennis has more viewership than men tennis.


Second, I have to see hard numbers supporting the fact that bowling has more viewers than tennis. Did you just make that up?
Keep in mind, this is not a contest between bowling and tennis, rather it is between men tennis and women tennis.
tennislover22 is offline  
post #10 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:39 PM
Senior Member
 
lizchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Bergen County
Posts: 20,943
                     
Exclamation

I am not surprised by the wome's numbers, but I am surprised by the men's numbers, since an American was the runner-up.
BTW, I doubt that bowling and cheerleading have better numbers than tennis, but who knows?

Good Luck In 2012 To The Following:
Venus Williams
Serena Williams
Vania King, Sloane Stephens
Michael Joseph Jackson|1958-2009|RIP King of Music

Whitney Elizabeth Houston|1963-2012|RIP Queen of Music
lizchris is offline  
post #11 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 05:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,156
                     
On ESPN, the PBA (Professional Bowling Tour) usually gets ratings in the 3 to 4 range, on average, each time it's on. It's a very popular sport. (I just threw in the cheerleading. )

Tennis only gets a 4.0 when Venus, Serena or Andre are in the finals. So, the 4 rating for the womens' final is not surprising. Also, Andy Roddick, despite the hype, is not nearly as popular as Agassi.
miranda_lou is offline  
post #12 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 07:22 PM
Senior Member
 
franny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,207
                     
Wtf, Bowling? That is ludicrous to think that that many people are willing to watch it. But, these "numbers," don't they merely represent the percentage of all households currently watching television that is watching the program? So a 4 rating means that out of 100,000 households, 4% were watching tennis right? So then doesn't the rating vary with timeslots? For example, for a primetime program, the audience is much greater and vast. A program that drew 28% means that for every 1 million households, 28% of households may have watched the program. But a program, like bowling which usually comes on at 2 pm, getting a 4 means that 4% out of only maybe 10,000 households watched that program. So what I'm saying is if we were to compare shows in different timeslots, I think we need more hard numbers, such as exactly how many people watched in order to compare them. I doubt that there would be as much viewers at 2 p.m on a weekday when everyone is at work than at 9 am on a saturday morning where everyone is just waking up and getting ready for their day off. Of course, correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I may be, I'm just basing this on what I've heard and read about the neilson ratings.

hunger, desire, fire..........
stength, power, precision.........
talent, court sense, smartness........
no i am not talking about a racket or a squirrel, i am talking about the former and future number 1..............
martina hingis!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good Luck Justine Henin Hardenne, Venus Williams, Maria Sharapova, Mary Pierce, and any of my other favorites that I might have forgotten about at this moment.
franny is offline  
post #13 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 07:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Veenut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,327
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by miranda_lou
Tiger Woods gets loads of criticism . . . most of it undeserved!!!

In fact, when he wasn't winning and dropped from the #1 spot, the criticism was awful. I don't know where your information is coming from. You must not read the sport pages. Reporters were saying the same thing about him that they are saying about Serena . . . no dedication; bored with golf; out of shape; not concentrating because of his fiancee/wife. Tiger was not spared, believe me.

He never doubted himself though and that's what counts.
You missed my point. My contention is not with the so called "sport's writers" and talking heads, I was referring to the "golf establishment" I watch when Tiger plays and I can't recall ever hearing a commentator make any such comments. Yes I do hear them on the sport talk shows but never on commentary. They stick to his stats, playing motions and style and deservingly praise him when he makes brilliant shots. They always want him to do well every time he steps on the course. That is the difference I'm talking about.
Veenut is offline  
post #14 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 07:49 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 40,129
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veenut
You missed my point. My contention is not with the so called "sport's writers" and talking heads, I was referring to the "golf establishment" I watch when Tiger plays and I can't recall ever hearing a commentator make any such comments. Yes I do hear them on the sport talk shows but never on commentary. They stick to his stats, playing motions and style and deservingly praise him when he makes brilliant shots. They always want him to do well every time he steps on the course. That is the difference I'm talking about.
Excelent point.
tennislover22 is offline  
post #15 of 27 (permalink) Old Jul 6th, 2005, 07:55 PM
Senior Member
 
faboozadoo15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: united states
Posts: 22,405
                     
the women's final being up 3% has a lot to do with how long it was compared to last year.

the men's final with andy and federer should not have gone down 31%, but it was a much shorter and easier match that took up less time on the telecast. remember last year there were rain delays that push the match into more viewer friendly times of the day.
faboozadoo15 is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome