PDA

View Full Version : The French Open: Who Cares?


Jaffas85
Jun 9th, 2006, 10:40 AM
The following article is from an Australian newspaper, "The Sydney Morning Herald" and is about how French Open champions go on to have little to no success in the other Grand Slams (especially Wimbledon) thereby asserting that the French Open is pretty much the most worthless slam and its results and players the most forgettable because of how different its inconsistent its results are when looking at who the top players are and how they play at the other, more mainstream Grand Slams.

Article: "The French Open - Who Cares?":

http://blogs.smh.com.au/sport/archives/2006/06/the_french_open_1.html


What do you all think?

Personally, I think the French Open is the least important of the grand slams because it's played on Clay meaning that many of the world's best players can't produce their best or most consistent results, ie. Federer. And also, its out of step when compared to how the other grand slams are and its results are not considered very important in terms of how a player will go in other grand slams. It's a bit of an anamolie.

Fedcup
Jun 9th, 2006, 10:55 AM
rubbish

Maybe they better focus on their own australian open. With the great history they have like the french open ;)

Mateo Mathieu
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:12 AM
What do you think? We won't see an Australian player win the title in next 100 years, that's why they wrote this article ;)

selestribe
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:13 AM
They'd better look at the French Open's champions names ... of course nobody : Nadal, Kuerten, Agassi, Courrier, Moya, lendl, Wilander, Borg, Vilas ... who knows these names ??? :rolleyes:
On the women's side : Henin, Capriati, Serena Williams, Graf, Seles, Sanchez, Pierce, Evert, Navratilova, King, Court ... players of the second tier I suppose ...
That's so stupid to say one slam is better than another, it's really dumb to say a slam is meaningless. As far as I'm concerned I enjoy all slams because they're all different and have their own athmosphere and red clay is great between hard court and grass, where's the problem ?
Actually, the French has always been a problem for all the others because it was played on clay when all the other slams were played on grass, so nothing new about that.

Louis Cyphre
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:14 AM
They'd better look at the French Open's champions names ... of course nobody : Nadal, Kuerten, Agassi, Courrier, Moya, lendl, Wilander, Borg, Vilas ... who knows these names ??? :rolleyes:
On the women's side : Henin, Capriati, Serena Williams, Graf, Seles, Sanchez, Pierce, Evert, Navratilova, King, Court ... players of the second tier I suppose ...
That's so stupid to say one slam is better than another, it's really dumb to say a slam is meaningless. As far as I'm concerned I enjoy all slams because they're all different and have their own athmosphere and red clay is great between hard court and grass, where's the problem ?
Actually, the French has always been a problem for all the others because it was played on clay when all the other slams were played on grass, so nothing new about that.
:yeah:

per4ever
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:18 AM
What a rubbish :D The least important Grand Slam because it's played on clay LOL
Clay is a surface as any other, so if some players can't produce their best tennis on clay it's their own fault. How many players are really good at grass??? Not that many so does that mean that Wimbledon is definitly the least important GS? :rolleyes:

Yasmine
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:24 AM
it's amazing how people become so unsporty when players they like or they think are the best don't do well on a surface!
I've been appalled how not only journalists but also people on this board kept saying how the french open is crap because of the croud, because it's clay, because blablabla... Are we forgetting it's tennis we're talking about, not only celebrity shining here? And it's not because players we like don't do well here that it makes it a less important or prestigious tournament.

smiler
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:25 AM
I care.

saki
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:25 AM
Eh, it's difficult to win the RG-Wimbledon double but that's more, IMO, to do with scheduling than to do with the players. A lot of players that are good on clay play well on grass too - ASV, Steffi, Justine (Wimbledon finalist, won Rosmalen a couple of times on grass..), Serena (has won both), Venus (finalist at RG, won clay warmups, won Wimbledon) - it's just that winning them both within the span of a few weeks is very very tough.

Dani12
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:30 AM
That's stupid. The French open is unique and it takes a real champion to win it.

DomenicDemaria
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:32 AM
Well there is no clay courts in Australia thats why no Australian is good on clay. They should stop trying to produce great grass courters when there are only a few tournaments on grass and three months on clay. They should built clay courts meaning more better Australian clay court players meaning more interest in the French Open because Australians could do well there. The french open is the only slam not covered by free television.

Justine Fan
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:33 AM
It's from Austrialia .... of course it doesn't make sense :rolleyes:

What do you expect?

DomenicDemaria
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:35 AM
Also in Australia on free to air television we get full coverage of AO and Wimbledon. Nothing at all from the French (we used to get the final). Quarters onwards of the USO. (we used to get full coverage).

Yasmine
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:37 AM
Also in Australia on free to air television we get full coverage of AO and Wimbledon. Nothing at all from the French (we used to get the final). Quarters onwards of the USO. (we used to get full coverage).
having said that, in France on free tv the only tennis you can watch is the french open, Davis Cup and Fed cup (and when the french do well there :help: ) so Australia seems to have better coverage of slams;)

Mateo Mathieu
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:45 AM
Also in Australia on free to air television we get full coverage of AO and Wimbledon. Nothing at all from the French (we used to get the final). Quarters onwards of the USO. (we used to get full coverage).
From QF of the US Open? I'm sure they show all rounds from first round last year because I watched it :p Maybe I was watching Foxtel :lol:

Diam's
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:49 AM
having said that, in France on free tv the only tennis you can watch is the french open, Davis Cup and Fed cup (and when the french do well there :help: ) so Australia seems to have better coverage of slams;)

Nothing from Fed Cup this year :mad:
I think that France2/3 cover the slams when a French player reaches the semis or the final.
And last year there was Wimbledon coverage on Canal+ for free :)

Yasmine
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:52 AM
Nothing from Fed Cup this year :mad:
I think that France2/3 cover the slams when a French player reaches the semis or the final.
And last year there was Wimbledon coverage on Canal+ for free :)
oh yeah we saw the AO semi and final this year I forgot! ;)
But yes Fed Cup only if they do well :rolleyes:
Let's hope Canal+ does it again this year :shrug:

Diam's
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:55 AM
oh yeah we saw the AO semi and final this year I forgot! ;)
But yes Fed Cup only if they do well :rolleyes:
Let's hope Canal+ does it again this year :shrug:

Don't forget the WORLD CUP :sad:

Yasmine
Jun 9th, 2006, 11:58 AM
:help: football :eek: :scared:

jj74
Jun 9th, 2006, 12:34 PM
it's amazing how people become so unsporty when players they like or they think are the best don't do well on a surface!
I've been appalled how not only journalists but also people on this board kept saying how the french open is crap because of the croud, because it's clay, because blablabla... Are we forgetting it's tennis we're talking about, not only celebrity shining here? And it's not because players we like don't do well here that it makes it a less important or prestigious tournament.

Good point, and if surface was the point Wimbledon will be the less important tournament because grass is the less important surface, and the truth is wimbledon is the most prestigious tournament even when a good bunch of top players are really bad on grass.
In Spain Roland Garros is the most important Grand Slam by far, maybe because our players grow on that surface