PDA

View Full Version : For tennis to be at its worst its quite amusing


wetfre
Sep 4th, 2009, 03:47 PM
Its quite enjoyable if you ask me, its very unpredictable at the moment. We dont really know who will win events anymore cause if one top player win the previous tournament they all of a sudden gets upset in the next. We all know at this stage Serena and Venus should be winning majority if not all the events in this state but there not. We dont know what to expect from them they can start the tournament off bad then finish good or vice versa. I think its exciting.

Golovinjured.
Sep 4th, 2009, 04:14 PM
It's fucking ugly and disgusting. Where's ur head at?

Vlover
Sep 4th, 2009, 04:22 PM
It's fucking ugly and disgusting. Where's ur head at?
Speak for your self. I see thousands of people in the stands enjoying themselves every day therefore you are in the minority. Who are you to dictate what others should like?:rolleyes:

Inktrailer
Sep 4th, 2009, 04:27 PM
It's interesting, nothing worse than watching match after that match where the favourite pisses it. We have players like Pennetta and Wozniacki sailing through their matches, JAnkovic and Dementieva being upset, Venus pushed and Safina being on the verge of losing each time. It makes it fun to watch and is what sport should be, in terms of results.

Golovinjured.
Sep 4th, 2009, 04:29 PM
I am speaking for myself... and I think it's fucking ugly and disgusting. You think it's a good thing that we're now watching matches decided on UE's? Or that our top players are so inconsistent, showing up for some events and leaving their brains at the airport on the way to the next one? It sickens me.

Vlover
Sep 4th, 2009, 04:46 PM
I am speaking for myself... and I think it's fucking ugly and disgusting. You think it's a good thing that we're now watching matches decided on UE's? Or that our top players are so inconsistent, showing up for some events and leaving their brains at the airport on the way to the next one? It sickens me.
Obviously most people are not bothered by UE as you are.:lol: They know it comes with the territory if you like offensive play, so?:shrug: It's suppose to be entertainment not science so calm your nerves.:drink:

Golovinjured.
Sep 4th, 2009, 04:52 PM
I'm not bothered by a point ending in an unforced error.. Dokic is my favourite player for crying out loud. But, I do have a problem with 90% of WTA matches being decided on who can hit the ball out less. Most players aren't playing within themselves, you can still be offensive and play within yourself - but the WTA has no interest in that it seems.

Vlover
Sep 4th, 2009, 05:01 PM
But, I do have a problem with 90% of WTA matches being decided on who can hit the ball out less.
Maybe that is your problem, stop the error counting and try to enjoy the match for what it is worth. An exciting, entertaining match is not dependent on error count. Some of the most boring matches are those with the least ue count. Lighten up!

sammy01
Sep 4th, 2009, 05:05 PM
i'll bump this thread when you have oudin or whoever getting crushed in the 4th round and qtrs and safina playing bad tennis but still winning because theres no one around to keep their heads together.

Golovinjured.
Sep 4th, 2009, 05:07 PM
Maybe that is your problem, stop the error counting and try to enjoy the match for what it is worth. An exciting, entertaining match is not dependent on error count. Some of the most boring matches are those with the least ue count. Lighten up!

Why does it have to be a problem that I'm not enjoying WTA tennis at the moment? As far as I'm concerned it's the WTA that has the problem, I'm not gonna go out of my way to enjoy it.

I know how a tennis match works, I've seen enough of them. A high error match can be fine, as long as the rallies are good, but more and more often I see the error coming in the first 5 strokes of a rally. It's predominantly basher tennis, and that is the cost. It'll go full circle, and return to pretty, skillful tennis sometime soon though.

Marshmallow
Sep 4th, 2009, 06:19 PM
I'm with Vlover! [Venus fans always speak sense :rocker2:]

On tuesday when there were highlight shows from the first night session - normally we see the womens match crammed into 15 minutes while the men's highlights are given at least 45 minutes to an hour. Eurosport gave the whole 1 hour to Venus V Dushevina. Skysports gave the 1 hour and 30 minutes (of their 2 hour show) to Venus V Dushevina, and 15 minutes to Roddick - 15 minutes for chit chat.

Roddick V Phau probably had fewer errors and better shoulder rotations or whatever you want to see. Venus V Dushevina was going by people's comments on here a mess... but it was ENTERTAINING. You had butt clenching drama from the start to finish, a possibly major upset brewing, Venus injured and forced to fight like a wounded lioness, high quality rallies, and shocking errors to add to the tension and drama. Will Venus fight back, will her leg hold up, will Dushevina hold her nerve, will she get her biggest win, why have we never seen her play so well before...

It was just tense drama and it was entertaining. The women's tour ATM is filled with these stories and dramas and is giving tennis journalists much to discuss. The quality isn't great because it is in transition... we seem to be seeing greater depth than before. And by god, for decades tennis fans have been gagging for competeive early rounds and surprise and now we have it we're moaning for more of old... where the contenders play well from day one and win 6-0 6-0 with fabulous footwork and knee bends.


OoP... Sanya Richards just won the Jackpot *\o/* :woohoo:

Yea, so I agree with the OP. I love the stories, I love the drama. And I'm patient, the quality will come.

Olórin
Sep 4th, 2009, 06:43 PM
i'll bump this thread when you have oudin or whoever getting crushed in the 4th round and qtrs and safina playing bad tennis but still winning because theres no one around to keep their heads together.

Yet in another thread you were chiding someone for saying Safina would probably do this, and implying that she would likely improve by the time she got to the latter stages. It seems to me that your opinions vary from thread to thread according what you can whine about the most.

This thread started with positive intentions and I agree with Marshmallow and VLover. I really don't know why some of you even come on this forum.

sammy01
Sep 4th, 2009, 07:07 PM
Yet in another thread you were chiding someone for saying Safina would probably do this, and implying that she would likely improve by the time she got to the latter stages. It seems to me that your opinions vary from thread to thread according what you can whine about the most.

This thread started with positive intentions and I agree with Marshmallow and VLover. I really don't know why some of you even come on this forum.

my point being the more top players that bite the dust the more chance safina has of playing bad tennis and progressing (which then everyone will moan about), rather than being forced to raise her level against the better players (like i for one want). i think she will probably pick her game up, but looking at her draw she may not need to which is only a sad comment on womens tennis not safina.

Donny
Sep 4th, 2009, 07:08 PM
my point being the more top players that bite the dust the more chance safina has of playing bad tennis and progressing (which then everyone will moan about), rather than being forced to raise her level against the better players (like i for one want). i think she will probably pick her game up, but looking at her draw she may not need to which is only a sad comment on womens tennis not safina.

When has she done this before?

DutchieGirl
Sep 4th, 2009, 07:10 PM
I like the fact that you can't pick who's gonna win tournaments... just wish my faves would actually do a bit better. :lol:

Lunaris
Sep 4th, 2009, 07:27 PM
Good to know that some people finally realize this "weak era" is caused by increased depth of the field rather than by weak top players (though they too could be better, then this era would be almost perfect).

DutchieGirl
Sep 4th, 2009, 07:31 PM
Good to know that some people finally realize this "weak era" is caused by increased depth of the field rather than by weak top players (though they too could be better, then this era would be almost perfect).
:yeah: ;)

Marshmallow
Sep 4th, 2009, 07:45 PM
Good to know that some people finally realize this "weak era" is caused by increased depth of the field rather than by weak top players (though they too could be better, then this era would be almost perfect).

Yeah it's simultaneous.

It is possible to simultaneously have an increase in depth and a weakening at the top of the game, in fact a weakening at the top of the game can build confidence in lower ranked players that help them have improved performances on the biggest stages - where before the would be so nervous at the Aura of the opposition that they'd give pitiful performances.

But specifically, and this was stated by Sam Smith (pretty respected commentator also), there seems to have been a slight increase in the depth of womens tennis, but on the down side, the top girls haven't quite adapted to this change. A combination of the two things produces more upsets.

veryborednow
Sep 4th, 2009, 08:00 PM
All the most entertaining matches of the US Open so far have been the women's - the Vika/Franny match was fantastic. Franny hitting some truely spectacular shots. Problem is that GSs just fall apart towards the end which has been frustrating at times and then the women's tournament gets forgotten while the press has a collective orgasm over Federer's latest win.

Vlover
Sep 4th, 2009, 08:57 PM
[QUOTE]Why does it have to be a problem that I'm not enjoying WTA tennis at the moment? As far as I'm concerned it's the WTA that has the problem, I'm not gonna go out of my way to enjoy it.
Let us do a fact check here hon. Remember you were the one questioning the OP because s/he had the audacity to find the tennis entertaining. Quite frankly I couldn't careless what you like but you have no right to be questioning what others choose to enjoy. Bitch and moan as much as you wish but don't expect everyone to be a misery as you are.:rolleyes:

I'm with Vlover! [Venus fans always speak sense :rocker2:]

On tuesday when there were highlight shows from the first night session - normally we see the womens match crammed into 15 minutes while the men's highlights are given at least 45 minutes to an hour. Eurosport gave the whole 1 hour to Venus V Dushevina. Skysports gave the 1 hour and 30 minutes (of their 2 hour show) to Venus V Dushevina, and 15 minutes to Roddick - 15 minutes for chit chat.

Roddick V Phau probably had fewer errors and better shoulder rotations or whatever you want to see. Venus V Dushevina was going by people's comments on here a mess... but it was ENTERTAINING. You had butt clenching drama from the start to finish, a possibly major upset brewing, Venus injured and forced to fight like a wounded lioness, high quality rallies, and shocking errors to add to the tension and drama. Will Venus fight back, will her leg hold up, will Dushevina hold her nerve, will she get her biggest win, why have we never seen her play so well before...

It was just tense drama and it was entertaining. The women's tour ATM is filled with these stories and dramas and is giving tennis journalists much to discuss. The quality isn't great because it is in transition... we seem to be seeing greater depth than before. And by god, for decades tennis fans have been gagging for competeive early rounds and surprise and now we have it we're moaning for more of old... where the contenders play well from day one and win 6-0 6-0 with fabulous footwork and knee bends.


OoP... Sanya Richards just won the Jackpot *\o/* :woohoo:

Yea, so I agree with the OP. I love the stories, I love the drama. And I'm patient, the quality will come.
Hey, Marsh!:wavey: Good to see you. We are not the only ones who hold this opinion. Pam had the guts to mention on the air how boring the men's matches are. Watching tennis emotionless gives me no pleasure.

Marshmallow
Sep 4th, 2009, 09:08 PM
All the most entertaining matches of the US Open so far have been the women's - the Vika/Franny match was fantastic. Franny hitting some truely spectacular shots. Problem is that GSs just fall apart towards the end which has been frustrating at times and then the women's tournament gets forgotten while the press has a collective orgasm over Federer's latest win.

Shame I missed Vika V Franny, sounds good. I know what regarding the rest of your post too. *Sigh*


Let us do a fact check here hon. Remember you were the one questioning the OP because s/he had the audacity to find the tennis entertaining. Quite frankly I couldn't careless what you like but you have no right to be questioning what others choose to enjoy. Bitch and moan as much as you wish but don't expect everyone to be a misery as you are.:rolleyes:


Hey, Marsh!:wavey: Good to see you. We are not the only ones who hold this opinion. Pam had the guts to mention on the air how boring the men's matches are. Watching tennis emotionless gives me no pleasure.

:wavey: :hug: I agree completely.

I like this thread a whole lot now. It's nice to see some positively intent stuff getting some life for a change around here. Good thread!

Rafito.
Sep 4th, 2009, 10:19 PM
I love tennis like this but only if it wasnt my favourite players who got upset :(

Vlover
Sep 4th, 2009, 10:41 PM
I love tennis like this but only if it wasnt my favourite players who got upset :(
Fair enough! Trust me as Marsh and I being Venus fans know what it is like when your fave get bounced early out of a major but it comes with the territory. The quality might not be the best but I don't think it is as bad as some are making it out to be.:tape: