PDA

View Full Version : Women's TV ratings


jenglisbe
Jun 15th, 2003, 07:12 PM
What were the final official ratings for the French final in the U.S.??

I know the first U.S. Open final between the sisters drew great ratings in the primetime debut...what were the ratings for last year's final like?

Opalgirl02
Jun 15th, 2003, 08:10 PM
I wish I could tell you. I looked in the US Today newspaper everyday to find the rating. It probably was so low, sportwriters were too embarassed to report it. The sportwriters did not want to make the ALL Williams final shined.

MarcusRock
Jun 15th, 2003, 08:33 PM
I recall seeing someplace that the ratings were a 1.3 I don't remember the source though. Sorry.

Rtael
Jun 15th, 2003, 08:44 PM
MR, someone reported that on the ESPn messageboards...an hour or two *before* the finals.... :rolleyes:

AjdeNate!
Jun 16th, 2003, 12:42 AM
http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/sports/030601sport.html

Women's 2003 French Open 4th Rd: 1,589,000
Men's 2003 French Open 4th Rd: 2,009,000

2001 US Open QF | Sampras v. Agassi 3,400,000
1999 US Open F | S Williams v. Hingis +3,000,000

They say the highest rated tennis program in the USA was the 2001 US Open QF for Sampras/Agassi for the men.... and the 1991 US Open Women's Final Seles/Navratilova for the women. But no numbers given.

Opalgirl02
Jun 16th, 2003, 12:52 AM
Thank, I just did not see it in any newspaper - that rating was pretty low.

Peridotpixie
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:02 AM
Well, to be fair, the final was on at 9 am--people are hardly up, let alone watching tennis on TV. Any show in primetime will get bigger ratings than in the morning or afternoon. People in the US are generally more interested in events being held in the country (like the US Open) and being contested by Americans. And Kim and Justine are relatively unknown to Americans who aren't big tennis fans. So it's to be expected that the numbers were low.

SJW
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:06 AM
peridotpixie.....Kim and Justine are relatively unknown to ANYBODY whos not a tennis fan outside of Belgium....thats just the way it is

Peridotpixie
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:10 AM
That's true, SerenaJwilliams...but as I live in the US, I felt I'd better stick to that. I'd guess some Europeans--Germans, French, maybe Dutch--know of them fairly well.
When I was at the US Open last year I was asking an usher about who was signed up to practice on Armstrong. I asked about Roddick, Hewitt, the Williams, and Seles, and he knew all of them. Then I asked about Kim Clijsters, and he said "who?" So I repeated the name, and he said, "I don't know if he's signed up today." Yes, he. That was not a typo.
I think that story is pretty telling.

AjdeNate!
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:11 AM
I thought 1.5 was very decent. It drew better than Clijsters/Capriati in 2001 (Of course, that was on tape delayed)

ksgyh
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:13 AM
Well, these ratings are probably a good indication of who the "real" tennis viewers are in the US. It wasn't based on media or hype, for once. But yes, Saturday morning TV watchers usually only consist of kids and their cartoons.

Of course, if this was New Year's, and it was all the college football bowl games, the ratings would have been different. But, alas, 1) it was the French Open (and we know how the crockety "anti-French" sentiment is these days, not to mention the actual time zone difference), 2) it was Saturday morning, 3) there was no necessary cheesy documentary with soaring orchestral music proclaiming the grandiosity that is American women's tennis. Thank goodness.

Given those 3 circumstances, I'm merely grateful NBC decided to even air the French Open finals. Who knows what to expect these days? When it comes to non-American players and tennis, I always expect the worst. Call me pessimistic, but you can also call me programmed-to-be-undemanding. :)

SerenaSlam
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:17 AM
Well, these ratings are probably a good indication of who the "real" tennis viewers are in the US. It wasn't based on media or hype, for once. But yes, Saturday morning TV watchers usually only consist of kids and their cartoons.

Of course, if this was New Year's, and it was all the college football bowl games, the ratings would have been different. But, alas, 1) it was the French Open (and we know how the crockety "anti-French" sentiment is these days, not to mention the actual time zone difference), 2) it was Saturday morning, 3) there was no necessary cheesy documentary with soaring orchestral music proclaiming the grandiosity that is American women's tennis. Thank goodness.

Given those 3 circumstances, I'm merely grateful NBC decided to even air the French Open finals. Who knows what to expect these days? When it comes to non-American players and tennis, I always expect the worst. Call me pessimistic, but you can also call me programmed-to-be-undemanding. :)
that is true, but I think when it comes to certain players, like Venus and Serena, when people find out they are playing eachother, or they are in a match, some non tennis fans just like to watch them play. i know i have a hell a lot of family that tells me to call them when venus or serena are on. they get a kick out of them playing. they can't stand to watch anyone else. they claim it is very noticable that athletically they are not where near venus and serena, and if they loose, its mainly b/c of venus and serena. they really trip on they errors. i had a cousin once break his big screen over a serena error. anyway. i think venus and serena draw crowds outside of tennis more than anyone else these days. that helps a lot, seeing the fact that ratings say 3-4 year ago weren't even close to what they are today.

Its just the "people knowing who they are" factor about ratings. it really doesn't mean much. although it does determine what type of tv viewing we will get the following year :)

SJW
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:18 AM
That's true, SerenaJwilliams...but as I live in the US, I felt I'd better stick to that. I'd guess some Europeans--Germans, French, maybe Dutch--know of them fairly well.
When I was at the US Open last year I was asking an usher about who was signed up to practice on Armstrong. I asked about Roddick, Hewitt, the Williams, and Seles, and he knew all of them. Then I asked about Kim Clijsters, and he said "who?" So I repeated the name, and he said, "I don't know if he's signed up today." Yes, he. That was not a typo.
I think that story is pretty telling.

yea i can understand u only wanting to talk about the US. but as a European i must admit, my friends (not tennis fans by ANY means) know only who the Willies (Wimbledon triumphs and the media here are so far up their asses) Seles (legend..and stabbing...and tabloids for Monic-ugh) Hingis (legend...so young....comments) Kournikova (who doesnt ;)) and maybe even Jennifer (drugs ;)) and Linzi (wimbledon) are.

i think if u told them the #2 and #3 players in the world were Clijsters and Henin, they WOULD ask "who?"

most ppl still think the Willies are 1 and 2 ;)

Rocketta
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:43 AM
um those were the ratingd for the weekend of the 31rst and June 1rst. That wasn't the final weekend.

The finals were 7th and 8th of June?? The ratings are not up yet. :sad: :sad:

alexusjonesfan
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:48 AM
Here's a quote by Jon Wertheim that I thought might be interesting:

Question:I've heard a lot of people complain that American TV's coverage of the French Open seemed to concentrate almost exclusively on American players, especially on the men's side. I'm sure that the TV networks would suggest people prefer watching U.S. players, and the popularity of women's tennis (as opposed to men's) in the U.S. would seem to prove this. But is it a vicious circle? Is there little coverage of foreign players because there is no interest in them, or no interest because there is little coverage?
—Craig Michaelson, Portsmouth, England

Agree, agree, a thousand times agree. The vast majority of people who watch tennis at noon on a Tuesday (on a cable network, no less) are going to be serious, well-informed fans. It is an insult to show them, say, James Blake playing Taylor Dent or Capriati beating some qualifier when infinitely better matches are going on. It's totally a vicious cycle (or a "viscous cycle," as Serena called it last week.) The networks and USTA suits conspire to shove Harkleroad and the like down our throats; then, when superior players like Vera Zvonareva and Nadia Petrova make the latter rounds of tournaments, viewers tune out because "unknown foreigners" are playing. I should add that Sports Illustrated is guilty of this, too. I know that if Agassi or the Williams sisters make the final, my story will get more space than if -- just to pick two names at random -- Ferrero and Henin-Hardenne win.

Here's some advice we could all stand to follow: SELL THE TENNIS. If you just do the honest thing and cover the most compelling tennis (nationality and personality of the players be damned), it's best in the long run. You might sacrifice ratings in the short term -- why are you giving me Gonzalez and Coria when Agassi is playing? -- but it is imperative to impress upon Americans fans that players who happen to hail from other countries are worth watching.

SJW
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:54 AM
GODDAMN he should stop complaining! the US have a lot of talented players and the networks are within their rights to show them! if i get Henman and Rusedeski shoved towards me @ every opportunity because YES some (stupid) Brits enjoy watching them play, then im sure some Americans would prefer watching an up and coming young American like Harkleroad over Zvonareva

the fact is, a lot of non Americans lack personality and i would prefer to watch Capriati curse than some unknown :D

note to Jon: personality sells :D

auntie janie
Jun 16th, 2003, 01:54 AM
See, Jon Wertheim IS smart! :)

lizchris
Jun 16th, 2003, 02:12 AM
I am not surprised that the ratings for this year's French Open for the women were low, but the live telecast wasn't an excuse. The Wimbeldon women's final was live last year and I think it got better ratings.

1jackson2001
Jun 16th, 2003, 02:14 AM
Heeeerrrrreee's Johnny!

Opalgirl02
Jun 16th, 2003, 02:26 AM
I believe the reason the threader started this thread about the rating for the women final is that everyone did not want to watch a Lier and Cheater (especially Serena FANS).

The reason I did not watch it because Justin had no sportmanship. If she had won or beat Serena fair and square, I would have watched the final.

I used to like Justin but to do what she did by not coming forward and letting the empire know that she did put her hand up, I didn't want to watch her play. She should have came to the net on her side and had the empire called a let and allowed serena a first service.

Justin has disrepected the game of tennis and her integrity has be damaged.

venusfan
Jun 16th, 2003, 02:30 AM
I'm not suprise the ratings was so small also.. I lost interest in the tournament when Serena lose and I'm sure a lot of people did also.. who wants to see an Henin vs Clijsters match on tv in america

ToeTag
Jun 16th, 2003, 02:40 AM
:rolleyes: Rocketta already posted earlier that those ratings were from 06/01/2003 & 05/31/2003....NOT the final weekend. :)

Opalgirl02
Jun 16th, 2003, 02:52 AM
You are right those ratings are from the 5/31/03 and 6/01/03 and not the Final. But, maybe the Final was much, much lower than 6/01/03. I'm sure it was - just too embarassed to post it.

alexusjonesfan
Jun 16th, 2003, 03:09 AM
let me be the devil's advocate for a second here. Do you think the fact that lots of people lost interest in RG after Venus and Serena (and other big name Americans) lost has anything to do with the fact that most people in the US never see anything but Venus, Serena etc. play? You can argue that they have more personality than the other players but on the court would you rather watch Capriati thrash a complete unknown like Julia Vakulenko (who?) 6-1, 6-2 when a potentially much more entertaining 3 setter is taking place between Ashley Harkleroad and Magui Serna? [ok..out of devil's advocate mode]

The US is in a unique position because it's got many more big name players than anyone else but we never even get a chance to see if any of the other players are worth watching or following. I've never watched a match from over half the players mentioned on this board and I probably never will unless they end up being cannon fodder for the Big Babes in the early rounds or somehow manage to pull a surprise and end up late into the second week of a grand slam.

Is Clarisa Fernandez interesting? I have no idea! because I've never heard her talk or know anything about her and I wouldn't even know she existed if she hadn't made the semi's of RG last year...

Frank_Rulez
Jun 16th, 2003, 03:15 AM
I'm not suprise the ratings was so small also.. I lost interest in the tournament when Serena lose and I'm sure a lot of people did also.. who wants to see an Henin vs Clijsters match on tv in america
i do.....:)

ksgyh
Jun 16th, 2003, 03:58 AM
Granted, the US women do comprise a major portion of the top players (the # in the top 10 is impressive, just as the # of Russians in the top 100 is impressive). However, we are a media powerhouse and that also lends to American players having more "personality," whatever that means. "Personality" is presented through media's eyes, and that, I must admit, is sorely sensationalistic. If I wanted to an editorial on the life of the groundskeeper at Wimbledon, who tends the courts daily, and give him/her "personality," I'll bet NBC or ESPN could do it, if they wanted.

Henin and Clijsters making up this first-time-ever all-Belgian final should have made huge tennis headlines, but it was underemphasized. Not only that, non-tennis fans do not know the importance of this, nor do they even know the players, because Henin and Clijsters are not shown on TV here.

Like caelestia and Jon Wertheim (I don't completely disagree with him at all) said, we've got to sell the other players, to give them an even playing field, before we can claim that only Williams and JCap can pull in interest and ratings.

alexusjonesfan
Jun 16th, 2003, 05:11 AM
Thanks ksgyh :)
I do agree, 'personality' does have a lot to do with spin and the media.

On a side note: I remember watching the post-match interviews that Justine Henin-Hardenne gave at Roland Garros this year. During the english part of the interview, the American media would ask her mundane questions usually involving Serena in some way (How do you feel about your chances against Serena?, What do you think about what Serena said about her play in Charlston? etc. etc. etc.) Such questions coupled with Justine's less than ideal expressiveness in English made her come off as bland in the American press. When she was questioned in French, she was much more exuberant, owing partially to speaking in her native tongue, but also because the questions she was asked were much more interesting. The francophone press asked her about the details of her morning on her 21st birthday, what she likes to do when she's home, her goals and other things besides her tennis. (Serena gets asked the same questions when she's playing at home)

The francophone press was obviously trying to make a 'personality' out of her whereas the American press was simply there to use her to add to Serena's 'personality'.

PS. I still haven't seen Francesca Schiavone play and I'm pissed at the broadcasters for keeping such an 'interesting' (;) if only for the grunt) player from me just so they could show 45 minutes of Serena steamrolling over an unfortunate qualifier int the first round. Don't get me wrong, I like watching Serena, but when there's absolutely no contest, it's not as much fun as watching two unseeded players slug it out.

Brian Stewart
Jun 16th, 2003, 07:16 AM
Actually, the numbers posted above are inaccurately labeled. The 1.5M+ viewers was not for the women's 4th round, but for NBC's Saturday telecast of the conclusion of the men's and women's 3rd round. That included just over half an hour of Capriati/Vakulenko, followed by almost an hour of V.Williams/Farina-E, then about 45 minutes of Costa/Lapentti. (Along with news, Sportsdesk, etc.)

Sunday's numbers are for men's and women's 4th round action, which included over an hour of S.Williams/Sugiyama, followed by almost an hour of Agassi/Saretta, then almost a half hour of V.Williams/Zvonareva.

The 2001 US Open final set a record, drawing about 23 million different viewers throughout the match. The average was quite high, too. The rating was the highest for a tennis match in a long time (since the early days of cable, when we had basically 3 networks to choose from.) Last year's reprise drew almost as high a rating.

I'd be very shocked if the women's final drew only a 1.3. Now, the telecast average might be a bit low, but that's because the women's final took up less than half of it. So if you see a 1.3 posted, that might be the average for the women's singles AND the men's doubles (which is typically the lowest-rated of the 5 events).

malaye
Jun 16th, 2003, 07:32 AM
Just for the record, this year French TV ratings for the women final were way up compared to 2002 (+8%).

SJW
Jun 16th, 2003, 09:36 AM
let me be the devil's advocate for a second here. Do you think the fact that lots of people lost interest in RG after Venus and Serena (and other big name Americans) lost has anything to do with the fact that most people in the US never see anything but Venus, Serena etc. play? You can argue that they have more personality than the other players but on the court would you rather watch Capriati thrash a complete unknown like Julia Vakulenko (who?) 6-1, 6-2 when a potentially much more entertaining 3 setter is taking place between Ashley Harkleroad and Magui Serna? [ok..out of devil's advocate mode]

thats not a very good hypo. Harkleroad is AMERICAN

yes i would prefer to watch Capriati play tremendous tennis to win 0 and 0 than see something like Smashnova and Coezter play a tight match

dont tell me you wouldnt

ksgyh
Jun 16th, 2003, 10:09 AM
I'm telling you I wouldn't. As long as it's good tennis. So you're saying you would rather watch Serena hit against a backboard than Zvonareva vs Petrova?

SJW
Jun 16th, 2003, 10:16 AM
NO cos i love Petrova!!!!

im saying i would prefer to see someone i love CREAM a player (not a backboard...i dont consider them players) rather than a really disinteresting matchup between two people i dont like

seldom83
Jun 16th, 2003, 10:18 AM
i would rather see two players of the same ability battle it out