PDA

View Full Version : The WTA is in trouble. Is their any way to fix it?


Golovinjured.
Mar 21st, 2009, 08:50 AM
..or should we just wait it out and hope for happy days?

The problems:
Burnout/Injuries/Slumps
Rankings that don't truly reflect the tour
The players don't ooze the same appeal that a Kournikova/Hingis/Williams/Seles etc. ever did. Except for Serena, Venus, and Sharapova.

The solutions:

:confused:

Are there any? Personally, I think that;

(1) There should be NO mandatory events, they just cause trouble and it's not really necessary. I mean, which players are going to bypass a slam or Miami/IW in the first place? Except for outstanding circumstances. Abandon that woeful TOP 10 rule, while they're at it.
(2) The whole season should be shortened by atleast 2 weeks, preferably 4. Longer offseason, preparation for a big year, and more likely to want to play more when the tour starts again. I don't know where the 4 weeks should come from, but two weeks could come directly from the scrapping of IW. There is already a 2-weeker in the US, we don't need 2 back to back, do we?
(3) Longer grass season, shorter clay season OR American hardcourt season.
(3) Less tournaments all up. Less places to play, more likely that top players with meet more in one event.
(4) A change in the ranking system, a dramatic change. One that preferably puts Serena at #1, Venus in the TOP 5, and Elena at some stage in the TOP 3. LOL.

These are just rough, off the top of my head. As I hear more opinions I'll probably alter it a bit.

Roookie
Mar 21st, 2009, 08:54 AM
Raise the money prizes of tournamets, maybe they'll try a little harder.

Lindsayfan32
Mar 21st, 2009, 09:47 AM
The simple solution get rid of Larry Scott and give the job to someone who can run more than a chook rafle. Come to think of it Larry Scott can't run a chook rafle either.

Golovinjured.
Mar 21st, 2009, 09:47 AM
So you think the players should be rewarded with more money, in hope that they'll try harder?

:help:

A Magicman
Mar 21st, 2009, 10:20 AM
Bring back average points with a minimum number of 12 tournaments and have no mandatory tournaments.

It used to be like that once upon a while and it was the fairest system of all.

Winning was rewarded, tanking was punished and the rankings reflected the real strength of all players.

Larrybidd
Mar 21st, 2009, 10:20 AM
The whole season should be over soon after the US Open. No more that 6 weeks after the Open should be the YEC and that's it. That might help with injuries by giving the players plenty of time to rest and recover.

As for the ranking system, seriously why is that a problem, except for die hard fans that like to argue about it. Who ever decided not to buy a ticket or watch a match because they disagreed with a WTA rank? College football fans HATE with passion the fact that a ranking system decides who plays for the national championship, yet the sports thrives despite it, some would say in part, because of it - as it gives fans reasons to argue about it.

As for the supposed lack of compelling stars - players become stars by winning on the highest stage. Unlike hollywood and the WWE, the tour can't fake it. Talented players just need to make it happen. And over time it will - always does.

Matt01
Mar 21st, 2009, 10:23 AM
..or should we just wait it out and hope for happy days?

The problems:
Burnout/Injuries/Slumps
Rankings that don't truly reflect the tour
The players don't ooze the same appeal that a Kournikova/Hingis/Williams/Seles etc. ever did. Except for Serena, Venus, and Sharapova.

The solutions:

:confused:

Are there any? Personally, I think that;

(1) There should be NO mandatory events, they just cause trouble and it's not really necessary. I mean, which players are going to bypass a slam or Miami/IW in the first place? Except for outstanding circumstances. Abandon that woeful TOP 10 rule, while they're at it.
(2) The whole season should be shortened by atleast 2 weeks, preferably 4. Longer offseason, preparation for a big year, and more likely to want to play more when the tour starts again. I don't know where the 4 weeks should come from, but two weeks could come directly from the scrapping of IW. There is already a 2-weeker in the US, we don't need 2 back to back, do we?
(3) Longer grass season, shorter clay season OR American hardcourt season.
(3) Less tournaments all up. Less places to play, more likely that top players with meet more in one event.
(4) A change in the ranking system, a dramatic change. One that preferably puts Serena at #1, Venus in the TOP 5, and Elena at some stage in the TOP 3. LOL.

These are just rough, off the top of my head. As I hear more opinions I'll probably alter it a bit.


This must a bad joke. :rolleyes:
Maybe later more about this crap...

volta
Mar 21st, 2009, 10:25 AM
Raise the money prizes of tournamets, maybe they'll try a little harder.

reduce it and see them try even harder :o

anyway , WTA is just on a transition phase , it's kinda bad right now but there is always the after the storm . (same happened on the ATP and now look)

iPatty
Mar 21st, 2009, 10:25 AM
Bring back quality points.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Mar 21st, 2009, 10:30 AM
Less weeks of competition = players with the same number of tournaments that they play actually (15-20) in a shorter period of time. I don´t think it is a good idea

Talula
Mar 21st, 2009, 11:35 AM
This must a bad joke. :rolleyes:
Maybe later more about this crap...

Why do you think this is crap? The Tour is in dire straights. Womens tennis has never had such a low profile in the media - which of course is catch 22 as that just perpetuates the lack of interest.

I personally think it's a lot to do with the players. They just aren't delivering. Which is why seeing Amelie win Paris and her reaction was just so thrilling - she cared. So many don't come across as caring. When I recall how much the likes of Graf, BJK, Seles, Navratilova, Evert, Hingis (for a while), Sabatini, Novotna, Capriati and many others appeared to really care about their game and wins/losses, the majority of the current bunch just don't seem to have their hearts in it. To be a real champion it has to mean everything. And that shows.

Slutiana
Mar 21st, 2009, 11:42 AM
klkNGxuLcl8

ElusiveChanteuse
Mar 21st, 2009, 11:49 AM
klkNGxuLcl8

:worship:

Sam L
Mar 21st, 2009, 11:54 AM
WTF? And where are the stars on the ATP tour? Federer? Nadal? That's it.

The WTA has Venus, Serena and Sharapova. 3 > 2.

scoobsuk
Mar 21st, 2009, 12:13 PM
Womens tennis does seem to be extremely dependent on 2 or 3 names. If they can't or won't show up to a big event, it's a big problem. The womens IW tournament has been practically anonymous this year - there has been little to excite the interest of me, who has been following both mens and womens tennis for a very long time. Nastya getting to a semi - good stuff. Beyond that it's been dreary - it's not like there's even been great tennis that's not been recognised - from what I've seen the standard of the tennis has been anonymous too.

This is why at 11am they put on a womens match featuring recent Aussie open semi-finalist Zvonareva on Stadium 1 and 5 man and his dog go to watch it. Meanwhile, recent Aussie open semi-finalist Verdasco is playing Kohlschreiber on Stadium 2, not Federer and Nadal, and the place is packed to the rafters with spectators.

When the mens match was over there was a mass exodus back to the main court.

And I can't say as I blame them. I would have gone to the Verdasco match too even if I had tickets for the main court.

It seems to me the fans here and elsewhere are voting with their feet. They have to put the womens final on the same day as the mens in Indian Wells so they don't get an embarrassingly small crowd.

The tour's problem is that the solution to this is a group of tough, competitive players who are mentally very strong as well as skilled tennis-wise, and for whom winning is everything and losing is agony. Somewhere along the line something has gone wrong - there seem to be a lot of players out there who don't mind losing as much as they should and are scared of winning the big matches. It's bizarre and does not make for a tour that's worth watching. I've been a staunch defender of womens tennis over the years but these days I'm struggling. I'm really struggling.

Vaidisova Ruled
Mar 21st, 2009, 12:22 PM
I think WTA lacks of stars. Yes, there is Venus/Serena/Maria.
And then there is Ana and JJ, but they are not at the same level.

It's too bad that Martina Hingis (even when she was not a slam contender anymore), Lindsay Davenport, Kim, Justine, Capriati are not playing anymore.

Before it was way more interesting. Now you know that one of the williams will win the tournament.

That's why there are not (apart from Venus vs Serena) any rivalry (like Capriati vs Serena).
And now, in the young players (apart from Pavlyuchenkova) I don't see any "future star".
I have nothing against Cornet, but her game is not really interesting and if she'll enter the top 10, it will be kinda sad.
There are not "big personalities" or rivalry. And the matches are kinda boring (lots of UE).
I think that if there were real stars (like before), so big rivalries with lots of drama, nobody would care about the UE.

Maria/Serena/Venus are not enough.

ps: lots of people are saying that azarenka will be a top player/star, but all of the mathes I saw, I didn't see anything big. However I never saw Azarenka vs Serena, and lots of you praised that match. Where can I see it?

goldenlox
Mar 21st, 2009, 12:38 PM
No matter how you rank them, this would probably be this final. Vera was in a quarter with Mauresmo, Razzano, who had recent good results, played Caro and Vika
Players are not consistent. Our current #1, Serena, has made one final in 6 months. And remember, Vika was up a set and had to retire against her

What do you want? The top 7 are the best 7, no matter how you rank them 1-7.

doujyr
Mar 21st, 2009, 12:53 PM
You can't just conjure up good players out of nowhere! Always makes me laugh to read this stuff. The crop of players are what they are, as it is in any sport. Fiddling with this or that isn't going to change that.

BartoliBabes
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:01 PM
OMG shut up about it already... its fine!

serenus_2k8
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:07 PM
OMG shut up about it already... its fine!

Uhm..the crowds speak for themselves...anyone who thinks its fine needs to pull their head out the sand and take a look around.. If Venus and Serena hung up their rackets and Maria's shoulder never recovered, even the slams would be filled with 'sorry, who?' players that generate 0 interest. ATP = the future of tennis :armed:

joz
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:15 PM
Is it in toruble? If it is I think it's because fans have lost interest. No rivalaries is one reason, but the biggest reason is that stars treat it like a parttime job and money has become absurd. It's also hurt in the U.S. because fans in the states just won't support non-U.S. stars, unless they're "hot". My friends in Eastern Europe don't think the tour is in trouble at all.

serenus_2k8
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:22 PM
Is it in toruble? If it is I think it's because fans have lost interest. No rivalaries is one reason, but the biggest reason is that stars treat it like a parttime job and money has become absurd. It's also hurt in the U.S. because fans in the states just won't support non-U.S. stars, unless they're "hot". My friends in Eastern Europe don't think the tour is in trouble at all.

Of course your Eastern European friends arent going to think its in trouble while Eastern European tennis players are scooping up big titles...:weirdo:

scoobsuk
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:32 PM
I think that if what is supposed to be one of the WTA tour's most prestigious and important events, a Premier, mandatory event for the top players, and it can pass by with so little spectators viewing the womens matches, so little fan interest, and frankly, so little good tennis, then there is a problem somewhere.

It's not like this is a freak situation either, although it is exacerbated by not having Venus and Serena here.

Unfortunately I don't see how it is fixable. The top players are what they are - it's just that it seems like most of them are not hungry enough, or not mentally strong enough, or not fit enough, or not consistent enough, or in the case of the Williams, just don't play often enough, to be really dominant forces.

I hate the fact that I hardly care about who wins these events anymore.

Elisse
Mar 21st, 2009, 01:45 PM
The simple solution get rid of Larry Scott and give the job to someone who can run more than a chook rafle. Come to think of it Larry Scott can't run a chook rafle either.

True :o Getting rid of 'dear ol' Larry' is the best thing WTA could do :tape:

In fact, I think most true tennis fans could actually run the Tour far better than the mess Larry has made of things recently!

Personally, I wish they hadn't changed the ranking system, think they should put back the quality points again. For me, none of the recent changes have done anything to improve the Tour...in fact it's totally the opposite. Rather than raise the prize money at the big events, I think they should drop it slightly and in line with that, also drop the ticket costs for the fans...some of the tournaments at the moment are crazy price :help: That would encourage fans to come to the tournaments..and for the fans that are at home, WTA should be desperately doing something to encourage better coverage on the TV........coverage of Indian Wells and WTA in general this year has been the worst ever!! How do they expect to get new fans to the game when so little of it is actually being shown.

And as for the rest of us, the die-hard fans who travel the world for tournaments, stay online for hours on end just to follow the livescores, or desperately searching the whole of the internet for a livestream....what is WTA doing for us? Nothing - just making it more and more difficult to find out commitments info, pathetic livescore coverage at some tournies, giving out inaccurate info for other tournaments, late releases of draws and that's just for starters......so many things about the management of the Tour is bugging me at the moment :o

joz
Mar 21st, 2009, 02:03 PM
Of course your Eastern European friends arent going to think its in trouble while Eastern European tennis players are scooping up big titles...:weirdo:
Actually those friends enjoyed the WTA when non-Eastern European's were winning everything too. They loved it when Justine, Kim, Serena, Venus and Lindsey were dominating, they loved it when Hingis and Davenport were dominating, also when Sanchez, Graf, Seles and Sabatina. I guess it's the difference between liking the game for the game and liking a few "hometown" favorites.

The Witch-king
Mar 21st, 2009, 02:44 PM
..or should we just wait it out and hope for happy days?

The problems:

The players don't ooze the same appeal that a Kournikova/Hingis/Williams/Seles etc. ever did. Except for Serena, Venus, and Sharapova.

The solutions:

:

You know why that is? People don't know who the players are, they don't know their stories and who is coming up and what not. All they hear of are bunch of faceless Eastern Europeans who never seem to win anything big. Clearly people like Safina and Azarenka have interesting storylines but no one knows them.

Where I live they only show the semi finals and finals of 10 or so WTA events. How is anyone expected to get to know who these players are when you only ever get to see 4 people that you most likely wont see again (unless they are consistently successful like Williams/Ana).
I know all these random ATP players and how they play and what they are famous for because they show a lot more ATP tennis on my local TV stations... not because they are more interesting just because I get the oopportunity to see them.

Someone needs to do something about TV BROADCASTING.:fiery:

vadin124
Mar 21st, 2009, 03:01 PM
FORCE Justine and Kim out of retirement

a tour with Clijsters, Venus, Serena, Henin, Sharapova, Mauresmo, Ivanovic, Dementieva and Kuznetsova all healthy and playing well would be :hearts:

goldenlox
Mar 21st, 2009, 03:50 PM
All the WTA can do is get the best players in the same event.
The bottom half in Dubai had Dinara, Jelena, Vera and Sveta. 4 of the top 8, the last 2 slam finalists and YEC finalist
And Razzano made the final. Is that good or bad?
It's sport. You have to do it now, you don't win because you were good last year or last week

pwayne
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:05 PM
Womens tennis does seem to be extremely dependent on 2 or 3 names. If they can't or won't show up to a big event, it's a big problem. The womens IW tournament has been practically anonymous this year - there has been little to excite the interest of me, who has been following both mens and womens tennis for a very long time. Nastya getting to a semi - good stuff. Beyond that it's been dreary - it's not like there's even been great tennis that's not been recognised - from what I've seen the standard of the tennis has been anonymous too.

This is why at 11am they put on a womens match featuring recent Aussie open semi-finalist Zvonareva on Stadium 1 and 5 man and his dog go to watch it. Meanwhile, recent Aussie open semi-finalist Verdasco is playing Kohlschreiber on Stadium 2, not Federer and Nadal, and the place is packed to the rafters with spectators.

When the mens match was over there was a mass exodus back to the main court.

And I can't say as I blame them. I would have gone to the Verdasco match too even if I had tickets for the main court.

It seems to me the fans here and elsewhere are voting with their feet. They have to put the womens final on the same day as the mens in Indian Wells so they don't get an embarrassingly small crowd.

The tour's problem is that the solution to this is a group of tough, competitive players who are mentally very strong as well as skilled tennis-wise, and for whom winning is everything and losing is agony. Somewhere along the line something has gone wrong - there seem to be a lot of players out there who don't mind losing as much as they should and are scared of winning the big matches. It's bizarre and does not make for a tour that's worth watching. I've been a staunch defender of womens tennis over the years but these days I'm struggling. I'm really struggling.

Agree with statement bolded. If one or both of the Williams Sisters do not make the final at Key Biscayne, it will be interesting to see the attendance numbers since the WTA and ATP play their final on different days.

Kart
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:41 PM
Pay the women less.

The ones that have to struggle to make it are the ones that want it the most.

You can either incentivise them by making them need to play more to make a decent living and get the endorsements or you could appeal to their greed and offer them even more money - of course, knowing then that they only need to play a few times a year to make a decent income if they're good enough.

youizahoe
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:46 PM
* Fire lary scott.

* Get a better schedule and reduce the season.

Olórin
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:50 PM
Solution:

Stop the best players from retiring. No I'm not joking.

Kim is 25, Justine 26, Hingis 28. These three should all be in the top five and vying for every tournament they enter. if they hadn't retired we would not be having this discussion.

friendsita
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:55 PM
WTF? And where are the stars on the ATP tour? Federer? Nadal? That's it.

The WTA has Venus, Serena and Sharapova. 3 > 2.

Yeah it's true ATP is just Rafa and Roger, at least the WTA has 3 superstars.

goldenlox
Mar 21st, 2009, 04:59 PM
There is no perfect situation. They had everyone at the 2007 USO and the final was Justine Sveta.
Everyone was at the 2008 AO and Sharapova didn't have a close match.

Players are not consistent, and not always healthy

The best healthy players were all at the AO and Dubai and we had 2 lame finals.
The WTA can't correct that.

Olórin
Mar 21st, 2009, 05:01 PM
WTF? And where are the stars on the ATP tour? Federer? Nadal? That's it.

The WTA has Venus, Serena and Sharapova. 3 > 2.

Well the thing is that Federer is such a big star, given how international his appeal is, he's probably bigger than the WS combined.

Also Murray and Djokovic are on the verge of becoming international superstars.

As I said in my above post, the main thing that seems to be lacking to me is star power on the WTA. Ivanvovic seems to have such potential. This, despite her more mediocre play than Vera, is why I think it would be good if she re-established herself by winning IW.

Quality is an issue also, but the way to start is by having excellent showcase matches in the finals, semis etc. This will happen if there are a few stars who play consistently and have rivalries.

CJ07
Mar 21st, 2009, 05:14 PM
Nadal and Federer are two of the greatest players of all time and - lets face it - can actually PLAY tennis. Men's tennis is inherently a better sport than women's tennis as it is, and those two bring it to a higher level.

And most people would much rather watch Blake, Roddick, Djokovic, Hewitt, etc. than anyone not named Williams or Sharapova.

tropolis
Mar 21st, 2009, 05:23 PM
you need actual athletes to, that would be nice, and people who can play through a minor setback without retiring. retiring continues to kill the womens game, especially the womens game. how many retirements were there this week alone? if im down a set and a break, why keep on, just retire.

the game in the states is non existent. get rid of all the mickey mouse tournaments, punish retirements, get some actual athletic people out there.

vadin124
Mar 21st, 2009, 05:52 PM
Well the thing is that Federer is such a big star, given how international his appeal is, he's probably bigger than the WS combined.

Also Murray and Djokovic are on the verge of becoming international superstars.

As I said in my above post, the main thing that seems to be lacking to me is star power on the WTA. Ivanvovic seems to have such potential. This, despite her more mediocre play than Vera, is why I think it would be good if she re-established herself by winning IW.

Quality is an issue also, but the way to start is by having excellent showcase matches in the finals, semis etc. This will happen if there are a few stars who play consistently and have rivalries.

Venus/Serena/Sharapova/to a lesser extent Ivanovic >> Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray

i'm sorry but IMO Venus and Serena are bigger than Federer and Nadal...literally EVERYONE knows who the WS's are, even complete tennis ignorant people...they're even mentioned in songs for god's sake...

this is not the same for Federer and Nadal, who are only superstars in the world of tennis...

Expat
Mar 21st, 2009, 05:55 PM
Venus/Serena/Sharapova/to a lesser extent Ivanovic >> Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray

i'm sorry but IMO Venus and Serena are bigger than Federer and Nadal...literally EVERYONE knows who the WS's are, even complete tennis ignorant people...they're even mentioned in songs for god's sake...

this is not the same for Federer and Nadal, who are only superstars in the world of tennis...

Is this a joke :o
When federer nadal are beating williams sisters in ratings even in the states you can make such a claim

Wiggly
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:04 PM
Roger Federer is the superstar of tennis
Then you have the Williamses, Nadal and Sharapova (who's not playing).

And anybody would prefer to watch the likes of Murray, Djokovic, Tsonga, Roddick than Safina, Dementieva, or Kuznetsova.

The ATP has a much more better product, with a higher level. And the players don't have to play in brief boxers.

Half of the WTA top 10 is UEs machines.

MaBaker
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:09 PM
http://i42.tinypic.com/6t3coy.jpg

Vanity Bonfire
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:09 PM
What the fucking hell do you expect? Most of the girls on the tennis tour have never experienced a normal childhood, given that they have been travelling internationally from the age of 10, with only their parents and coaches for friends (believe me, I was once one of those girls, and the coaches are not pleasant). If (and it's a small if), they get to the pro game and if their not so aesthetically pleasing or don't spend their time posing for FHM everyone bitches about them being ugly/ a lesbian. And of course, if there is something that is not quite perfected about their game, everyone bitches about that as well. Tennis is a mental game, and the girls on the tour you see today will have been shunted into it at a young age, so they have had no time to mature.

Firing Larry Scott will do fuck all. People need to stop piling the pressure on these girls to be Grand Slam champions from the age of 10. The reason why Henin and Clijsters retired was because they were bored of tennis because they had been living the same damn day for about fifteen years.

In The Zone
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:10 PM
There, their, and they're.

There is a location. Their is possessive. They're is a pronoun + verb. :cringe:

Sammm
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:16 PM
One of the problems is the lack of variety amongst the players and I don't know how to fix that. Who doesn't play a baseline game with, usually, the backhand stronger than the forehand, hugging the baseline etc? Venus and Serena play very similarly, all the Russians have a pretty similar game, at least to the casual fan.



I'd love to see a longer grass-court season, but a shorter season in the main. But the top players need to stop whoring themselves out and playing exhos during the off-season (and the season itself. BJK cup :rolleyes: ) and actually prepare well during the off-season.

Temperenka
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:21 PM
Shorter season. These girls are getting burned out. Make American hard court season a month shorter and take away half the tournaments between US Open and YEC. Then have the YEC sometime in early October. Also, cut the mandatory tournaments. If these girls keep saying they don't want to play tournaments and then crash out in the first round... I won't want to watch the first rounds anymore. The roadmap is a bad idea.

Hurley
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:26 PM
There, their, and they're.

There is a location. Their is possessive. They're is a pronoun + verb. :cringe:

Seriously. :argh: :cringe: :suicidepact:

AnnaK_4ever
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:37 PM
Since 2005 women's tennis lost Henin, Clijsters, Hingis, Capriati, Davenport, Pierce, Myskina. That's seven Grand Slam chamions gone within three years and four of them could have easily played nowadays.

It's the whole new situation for WTA.

The Dawntreader
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:53 PM
Is in trouble from what exactly? Is a powerful beast going down from the sky and about to breathe fire at the state of the tour?

God help them all:rolleyes:

Seriously guys, this is absurd the amount of hysteria regarding women's tennis right now. It's going through major, and slightly bizarre adjustments, but the talent is still there and with or without ex Slam champs and distinguished retirees, the tour will still thrive. Even if the tour is in decline (which i think is unproven), it's far too early to throw that kind of statement around.

Just enjoy watching things unfold.

The Daviator
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:53 PM
Ivanovic-Pavlyuchenkova apparently had a very full crowd and there was no men's singles match before or after :shrug:

There was a post earlier in the week showing how well the WTA was doing revenue-wise, people need to stop moaning.

Olórin
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:56 PM
Venus/Serena/Sharapova/to a lesser extent Ivanovic >> Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Murray

i'm sorry but IMO Venus and Serena are bigger than Federer and Nadal...literally EVERYONE knows who the WS's are, even complete tennis ignorant people...they're even mentioned in songs for god's sake...

this is not the same for Federer and Nadal, who are only superstars in the world of tennis...

Hmm...well it's just my perception but...

In the west the Willies are possibly more well known than Fed. However, globablly I think Federer is at least equal in star power. He is a celebrity, and is seen as an international sports superstar. He has won so much and is seen as one of the most dominant forces in sports-history. Much as it pains me, no-one would ever say that about Serena :sad:

You must have seen these constant Gilette adverts with him, Thierry Henry and Tiger Woods. At the moment Federer has more exposure than any women's tennis star, it's a simple fact that he earns more from endorsements and the like. Consequently, he is presently bigger. Perhaps a Serena-Sharapova final could compete with Federer-Nadal in terms of numbers but in any other case Federer is a bigger star than any other tennis player right now.

None of this is particularly relevant of course. The ATP has slightly more star power than the WTA, but it wouldn't if Sharapova and Williams could meet more often in the latter ends of tournaments and just be as winningest as they are capable of being. Sharapova being a final isn't that common a thing really, ditto for Serena considering her legend, much less them actually meeting. We need more 'classics.'

edificio
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:57 PM
I disagree with the premise.

edificio
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:58 PM
...

And most people would much rather watch Blake, Roddick, Djokovic, Hewitt, etc. than anyone not named Williams or Sharapova.

I will never prefer a Djokovic, Hewitt, Roddick match. I'd rather see a young up and comer. Sorry.

In The Zone
Mar 21st, 2009, 06:59 PM
Not true. I will never prefer a Djokovic, Hewitt, Roddick match. I'd rather see a young up and comer. Sorry.

Most people, not all.

AnnaK_4ever
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:00 PM
Seriously guys, this is absurd the amount of hysteria regarding women's tennis right now. It's going through major, and slightly bizarre adjustments, but the talent is still there and with or without ex Slam champs and distinguished retirees, the tour will still thrive. Even if the tour is in decline (which i think is unproven), it's far too early to throw that kind of statement around.


The tour will definitely thrive but the talent (I mean new talents) is not there... yet.

AnnaK_4ever
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:01 PM
Btw, Djokovic/Roddick was a truly horrible match. All credit to Djoker :tape:

Olórin
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:03 PM
The tour will definitely thrive but the talent (I mean new talents) is not there... yet.

The talent is either raw and unestablished or injured.
I think it will come through; but the tour is in a very transitory stage at the moment, and the transition will be less smooth than in previous generations.

Wiggly
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:03 PM
Shorter season. These girls are getting burned out. Make American hard court season a month shorter and take away half the tournaments between US Open and YEC. Then have the YEC sometime in early October. Also, cut the mandatory tournaments. If these girls keep saying they don't want to play tournaments and then crash out in the first round... I won't want to watch the first rounds anymore. The roadmap is a bad idea.

It is now a month long. ;) The other month is a MM clay events in Europe.
The facts that top players complains about the calendar all the time and then go play exhibitions all over the world isnt't helping their credibility.

The Dawntreader
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:05 PM
The talent is either raw and unestablished or injured.
I think it will come through; but the tour is in a very transitory stage at the moment, and the transition will be less smooth than in previous generations.

But as long as it is there, quality will begin to seap through.

People need to be more patient, much more actually.

Matt01
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:49 PM
Why do you think this is crap? The Tour is in dire straights. Womens tennis has never had such a low profile in the media - which of course is catch 22 as that just perpetuates the lack of interest.


This is crap and you know it (if you are born after 2000, then maybe not...:p)

I'm not saying the WTA Tour is all perfect currently, but IMO is not half as bad as some posters here make it out to be. And I have nothing against ideas and arrangements to improve the current situation (which definately could and maybe should be improved). But these ideas and arrangements should at least be reasonable and have some common sense...and when I already here these things like "rankings should be modified so that the 2 best players in the World (=WS) are on Top" then I'm already vomitting...

Olórin
Mar 21st, 2009, 07:53 PM
But as long as it is there, quality will begin to seap through.

People need to be more patient, much more actually.

The problem is that we have players like Tatiana Golovin who made waves at the US Open in 2004 as a young teenager and is now floundering on the edge of retirement; she isn't the only example. The thread starter is ridiculous, but it's easy to see how some people are starting to get frustrated and concerned. We have been waiting along time for new talent to come through and stay here.

bobbynorwich
Mar 21st, 2009, 08:02 PM
As posted on another thread about the WTA viability, from a financial standpoint WTA is quite solid and doing much better in recent years. See Canadian Business article (Feb 2009) below.
Since 2006, the WTA's operating revenue increased 22%, cash reserves increased 36%, marketing increased 219% and international sales increased 136%. Today, the tour takes in about US$50 million in revenue. Need further proof of the tour's success? Sony Ericsson extended its historic US$88-million title sponsorship of the WTA in March 2007, one year early, for another two years — meanwhile, the men's tour remains without a title sponsor.

Stacey Allaster, president of the Women's Tennis Association, is confident her sport is on strong financial footing after locking up long-term sponsorship, television and year-end championship agreements. Under Allaster's leadership during the past three years, women's professional tennis has undergone a transformation, from a "quiet, please" atmosphere, to one where improving the fan experience has led to fundamental changes in the way the game is played. In retrospect, these recent changes could be viewed as a pre-emptive strike against an economic downturn.

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/managing/strategy/article.jsp?content=20090127_10004_10004.
There's more interesting info on the business side of the WTA in this article. ;)

rjd1111
Mar 22nd, 2009, 03:09 AM
No! Pull the plug and put it out of its misery.

R. I. P. IW

Layed to rest by the Williams Tennis Association.

fammmmedspin
Mar 22nd, 2009, 03:46 AM
Since 2005 women's tennis lost Henin, Clijsters, Hingis, Capriati, Davenport, Pierce, Myskina. That's seven Grand Slam chamions gone within three years and four of them could have easily played nowadays.

It's the whole new situation for WTA.

Worse than that on decent form for them and the current level of the top 10 the youngest three of those 7 would be in the top 5 and winning the GS.

We also have the injured and underperforming list. Maria suggests a continuing problem with big serve tennis. Momo seems to have a problem with lack of goals. Sveta has no consistency or confidence . Anna C has never recovered from her burglary fright. Thats another 4 of the potential top 10 badly underperforming.
One big problem is that as a result the top of the game is dominated by up and coming players who come up before they are ready and go down leaving someone else to come up. The established element is limited to the William's sisters who turn up intermittently and Elena D and Vera Z who know how to play intelligent tennis. With the youngsters when they are up no one knows who they are because they have not been around long , there are more and more of them and they havn't won much to get where they have. As they don't tend to stay at the top long enough - so no one cares much about whether they win. Its made worse because the lack of older top players around means the younger ones only learn from each other and it shows.

There is no cure to that other than time and hope unless the WTA can get Kim, Justine and Nastya back, in form and with the right changes to the ranking rules to stop them having to start from scratch again. It also needs some luck with Maria's shoulder. In time it needs a couple of younger players who are better than the pack to emerge as the new top 2 and stay there.Problem is the situation is as likely to get wose rather than better. Schnyder and Schiavone who might teach the younger players some variety may not be around much longer. The Williams sisters a probably will also go soon too reducing US interest to an all time low and increasing the imbalance between where the fans and the tradition and the money is and where the players come from.

LDVTennis
Mar 22nd, 2009, 05:34 AM
As posted on another thread about the WTA viability, from a financial standpoint WTA is quite solid and doing much better in recent years. See Canadian Business article (Feb 2009) below.
Since 2006, the WTA's operating revenue increased 22%, cash reserves increased 36%, marketing increased 219% and international sales increased 136%. Today, the tour takes in about US$50 million in revenue. Need further proof of the tour's success? Sony Ericsson extended its historic US$88-million title sponsorship of the WTA in March 2007, one year early, for another two years — meanwhile, the men's tour remains without a title sponsor.

Stacey Allaster, president of the Women's Tennis Association, is confident her sport is on strong financial footing after locking up long-term sponsorship, television and year-end championship agreements. Under Allaster's leadership during the past three years, women's professional tennis has undergone a transformation, from a "quiet, please" atmosphere, to one where improving the fan experience has led to fundamental changes in the way the game is played. In retrospect, these recent changes could be viewed as a pre-emptive strike against an economic downturn.

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/managing/strategy/article.jsp?content=20090127_10004_10004.
There's more interesting info on the business side of the WTA in this article. ;)


Larry Scott better put all those cash reserves under a mattress because there is trouble on the horizon. See Link --- http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090320/bs_nm/us_telecoms;_ylt=Ar0mMa_GuKPDooNzLio.EGCX.aF4;_ylu =X3oDMTE5Z3ZzazMzBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bi1tb3N0LXZpZXdlZ ARzbGsDc29ueWVyaWNzc29u.

This is the relevant excerpt: Sony Ericsson said it expected to make a pretax loss of 340-390 million euros ($459 million-$526 million) in the quarter as it heads into a second year of losses.
"It's a real catastrophe. Those are very big losses and they are probably losing a lot of market share," said Greger Johansson, from analyst firm Redeye.
"It's obvious that the volumes are much lower than the market had thought. And first and foremost, the losses are much, much bigger," he said.
Sony Ericsson, the no. 4 global handset maker after Nokia, Samsung and LG, said it expects gross margins to decline both year-on-year and sequentially.

Ouch, with those kind of losses, just how much longer will Sony Ericsson want to continue their relationship with women's tennis? They are losing market share even with their current association with the WTA. If they haven't figured out that Serena and company don't help them sell enough mobile phones to justify the sponsorship deal, it is only a matter of time before they do. One more quarter like this and it will be a foregone conclusion.

graffan20
Mar 22nd, 2009, 05:39 AM
I think Henin and Clijsters and Sharapova are the 3 the WTA misses the most by far. Henin and Clijsters retiring when they did was completely unexpected, and at a time both were presumably in their primes with more years of near peak tennis to come. Sharapova is still an active player of course, but lets face it she could be all but finished ala Austin at this point, or atleast finished at her 2004-2006 level (with a brief healthy resurgence at the very end of 2007 and start of 2008) before her shoulder woes.

The others? Not so much. Davenport and Capriati were getting old and it was time to move on anyway. Pierce's strong 2005 was always bound to be a last hurrah given her age and injuries. Myskina was a fluke slam champion ala Majoli. Hingis's best days were clearly behind her despite her age, and it isnt that surprising a player who began their prime at only 15 and 16 to already be past their prime by their mid 20s.