PDA

View Full Version : Why has Tennis been a European race dominated Sport?


Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:01 PM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race, then why only tennis? what could be the reasons? are afros more athletic than europeans and are suited for far more physical games? or is it just that europeans are more interested in this sport and other races not that much?

how do you see the sport transitioning forward? with the sport becoming physical with each passing day, do you see more afro players joining the mix? what progress do you see in tennis as far as the five major races are concerned - african, indian, asian, middle-eastern and european?

duhcity
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:03 PM
Um....the Williams Sisters?

moby
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:05 PM
I don't even know how to begin with this thread.

ShiftyFella
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:06 PM
this thread:facepalm:

Libertango
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:07 PM
Well this is going to go well.

:p

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:08 PM
Um....the Williams Sisters?

i knew somebody would ask this......williams sisters are just two among hundreds of white players and maybe a few more non-white players?

Caipirinha Guy
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:10 PM
I don't know what you mean by MAJOR sport. :spit: Being a good tennis player demands a good coaching, traditions and money which you don't have in poor countries where African/Asian people live.

Caipirinha Guy
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:10 PM
I don't know what you mean by MAJOR sport. :spit: Being a good tennis player demands a good coaching, traditions and money which you don't have in poor countries where African/Asian people live.

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:16 PM
Is this a legitimate question. And are you 3 years old, or pulling our legs? :facepalm:

And why would you post this today, during the middle of a match? :help:

Stonerpova
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:17 PM
I don't even know how to begin with this thread.

+1

OP please leave and never return.

tennisbum79
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:20 PM
Um....the Williams Sisters?
I don't like thread question, but your question is equally misguided.

It is like saying because Tiger Woods had dominated golf at some point, it is not a white dominated sport.

All sports whose roots are in private club are white dominated.
Polo is the other sports.

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:21 PM
why not take this thread in the spirit it was meant to be? this being the largest tennis forum in the world, the thread will be paid attention to and could evolve and serve as a blueprint for development of tennis in non white parts of the world......so lets chip in with knowledgeable posts......

edificio
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:21 PM
Mainly because it started in private clubs. The cost of membership kept it rather exclusive.

ViceUltramontain
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:23 PM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race, then why only tennis? what could be the reasons? are blacks more athletic than whites and are suited for far more physical games? or is it just that whites are more interested in this sport and other races not that much?

how do you see the sport transitioning forward? with the sport becoming physical with each passing day, do you see more black players joining the mix? what progress do you see in tennis as far as the five major races are concerned - black, indian, asian, middle-eastern and white?

Races don't exist among the Human race. Next.

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:24 PM
Tennis is expensive and the majority of black people on the planet tend not to have access to the resources and facilities necessary to build the skill necessary to become a great professional player from a young age.

Obviously the Williamses and other black pros have shown that their pigment has nothing to do with the ability to play.

that's a strong argument for african countries but what about the rest of the world? canada and united states has plenty of rich non whites......india (please stop categorizing india among asia, we are NOT asians) and asia invest a lot in sports in general......we are a different story because of our addiction to cricket but what about countries like in middle east where people are the richest on earth?

Kasey
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:29 PM
STOP just STOP, enough with this shit:facepalm:

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:29 PM
Races don't exist among the Human race. Next.

i am a firm believer in that but this is merely an observation and is an indication that the sport hasn't spread to all parts of the world......

Miracle Worker
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:30 PM
You need money, good coaches, sports facilities, tradition of playing tennis... And I think black people prefers other sports than tennis...

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:35 PM
You need money, good coaches, sports facilities, tradition of playing tennis... And I think black people prefers other sports than tennis...

Yup Yup.

Everything you said, including access and interest.

The irony is though, if you look at France and the US (two countries that have enough black people), you'll see a lot of their top pro's or juniors are black (and increasingly so), which is one of the reasons why I find this question so incredulous. :help:

And the last that I knew, tennis wasn't a "MAJOR" Sport. Of course it's a "Major" individual sport. But you have a much better chance of viewing/knowing an athlete from a team sport on TV, as well as playing/making money in it, than an individual sport like tennis.

You need a lot of desire, excess funding, training or money to excel in tennis, cause the odds are more in your favor to turn your efforts toward team sports.

manu32
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:37 PM
Mods?

saint2
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:37 PM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race, then why only tennis? what could be the reasons? are blacks more athletic than whites and are suited for far more physical games? or is it just that whites are more interested in this sport and other races not that much?


Basketball and table tennis...

gc-spurs
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:38 PM
There's an answer to this question, but you're stupid if you have to ask it.

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:39 PM
Basketball and table tennis...

basketball is totally an american sport and table tennis is an asian sport......they do not have the same kind of global appeal and participation as tennis......

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:41 PM
There's an answer to this question, but you're stupid if you have to ask it.

why is it so difficult to discuss like adults? are you sure that that is the only answer? what if there are other reasons and someone comes up with more information that we never knew?

saint2
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:42 PM
basketball is totally an american sport and table tennis is an asian sport......they do not have the same kind of global appeal and participation as tennis......


Tennis also doesn't have much "appeal and participation" in Africa.

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:44 PM
basketball is totally an american sport and table tennis is an asian sport......they do not have the same kind of global appeal and participation as tennis......

I would beg to differ.

I would say basketball is more popular around the world than tennis.

I don't see tennis being popular in Africa, many parts of Asia, in China (Li Na or not), and many parts of S. America.

Even in South America, except Argentina, I don't think Tennis is as popular as basketball. And Argentinians love Basketball I think, more than Tennis as well.

Basketball is one of China's most popular sports, due Yao Ming. We know that.

And every continent has various professional, Amateur basketball leagues, except the desolate Antarctica.

So I beg to differ. And guess what, many of those people can play in professional basketball leagues in their own countries/continents. You would have to be top top 100-150 in the world, just to make a decent living out of playing tennis.

But why are we still talking about this in the first place. Lol

Sammo
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:45 PM
Because black people are minority?

tennisbum79
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:46 PM
that's a strong argument for african countries but what about the rest of the world? canada and united states has plenty of rich non whites......india (please stop categorizing india among asia, we are NOT asians) and asia invest a lot in sports in general......we are a different story because of our addiction to cricket but what about countries like in middle east where people are the richest on earth?
Are you saying in a country of 1 billion people, obsession with cricket has has kept the entire population from looking at other sports?

I have this debate with India before ragrding other sports, and to a man/woman, their reason has been because India value education anything else.
When I challenge but sport played an important role in a society, especailly for males population ages 15-30, they simply repeated to the same answer that parents do not think sport is a priority.


As for rich middle east country, it does not surprise me.
As I posted before, the sport is dominated by white people because it started in private clubs or country clubs where the membership is confined to highest strata of the society.
However, if you noticed, the chanpions come from humble, middle and lwer class famility.
The reasons? Because in any country, the best athletes are usually from modest or lower or working class family.

They are more motivated, more determined, more hungry, more atheletic than those in the upper class. They see sport as a way to improve their family condition.
There is no such motivation among the upper class people, they have everytying they need, there is no incentive to look for anything.
It is only recreational and leisurely for the upper class to play sport, they have no interest in pushing to a competitive level.


That explains why rich middle eastern countries have no outtsanting atheletes, including in tennis.

Why don't think Indians are Asians? I though in Europe and Australia and Sotuh Africa, they are classified as Asians

Stamp Paid
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:46 PM
Because of white supremacy.

The Witch-king
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:48 PM
that's a strong argument for african countries but what about the rest of the world? canada and united states has plenty of rich non whites......india (please stop categorizing india among asia, we are NOT asians) and asia invest a lot in sports in general......we are a different story because of our addiction to cricket but what about countries like in middle east where people are the richest on earth?

I think that tennis just isn't part of the wider culture in a lot of non-European countries. I attribute this partly to the money factor (it's so much easier for a kid to pick up a football/basketball/soccer ball and go play with a bunch of friends on a public field/court/pitch somewhere than it is to buy tennis balls, buy a racket, restring them, buy special shoes, find a court every week) and the fact that tennis goes back in countries like England over a hundred years. Was tennis even a factor in India prior to independence just 65 years ago?:unsure: There's an obvious lack of parity there for comparison purposes.

Oh and while there are rick blacks in Canada and the US (as there are in Africa), non-whites remain an economic minority, which is why there are bound to be less black American, for example, tennis players in a sport historically associated with wealth.

Question - Why aren't Indians Asian?

ViceUltramontain
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:48 PM
i am a firm believer in that but this is merely an observation and is an indication that the sport hasn't spread to all parts of the world......

If there's a problem, it's about the social and cultural situation of people in the sport. And that problem is slowly beginning to disappear. The colour of the skin has nothing to do with the way you perform in tennis.

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:49 PM
I would beg to differ.

I would say basketball is more popular around the world than tennis.

I don't see tennis being popular in Africa, many parts of Asian and in China (Li Na or not).

But Basketball is one of China's most popular sports, due to Li Na.

And every continent has various professional, Amateur basketball leagues, except the desolate Antartica.

you may be right with the recent trends but going by history until most recent times basketball is popular more as a recreation than profession......yes it's becoming huge in china but it still professionally hasn't caught up much in other large countries......

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:50 PM
Because black people are minority?

YOu mean, "White people are a minority", cause the question was, "why do WHITE people dominate the sport.

There a whole bunch more people of color around the world, than white people.

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:52 PM
you may be right with the recent trends but going by history until most recent times basketball is popular more as a recreation than profession......yes it's becoming huge in china but it still professionally hasn't caught up much in other large countries......

Huh?

Aren't there multiple professional leagues in Europe, South America, Australia and China?

Hell, some Mexican league just offered Shaq $$ to play in it. :lol:

LoveFifteen
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:52 PM
Dear OP, please create a new alias at MTF and go back there. We don't want you here! :hysteric:

tennisbum79
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:56 PM
If there's a problem, it's about the social and cultural situation of people in the sport. And that problem is slowly beginning to disappear. The colour of the skin has nothing to do with the way you perform in tennis.
Not now, but don't forget the legacy of discrimination in sports considered dominated by whites.

Those things are internalized by generations(of both the excluded and those who did the excluding) even after discrimination have been forbidden by law.
It takes generations to completely wipe them out, if at at all doable

Miracle Worker
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:58 PM
YOu mean, "White people are a minority", cause the question was, "why do WHITE people dominate the sport.

There a whole bunch more people of color around the world, than white people.

You're right, but...

Right now tennis is popular in Europe, North America, Argentina, Australia and some countries in Asia. In Europe white people are majority. In Argentina too. In Canada too. In USA, I can only guess, but I guess that white people are majority too.

We should connect this with the countries where tennis is popular.

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:59 PM
Why don't think Indians are Asians? I though in Europe and Australia and Sotuh Africa, they are classified as Asians

Question - Why aren't Indians Asian?

the answer would be the same as to a question like "why aren't middle-eastners black/white?"......we are just not asian......the entire indian subcontinent is racially indian......so why do we call ourselves asians when we are not?

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 08:59 PM
I find it amazing that someone who's been a long time tennis fan, or member of this board wouldn't know fundamental answers (the thread title), and notice trends-recent influx of people of color in the sport. :shrug::

Gawain
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:01 PM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race, then why only tennis?

Short track speed skating and ski jumping are also pretty much dominated by whites.

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:02 PM
Why don't think Indians are Asians? I though in Europe and Australia and Sotuh Africa, they are classified as Asians

Question - Why aren't Indians Asian?

the answer would be the same as to a question like "why aren't middle-eastners black/white?"......we are just not asian......the entire indian subcontinent is racially indian......so why do we call ourselves asians when we are not?

But the oldest Indians The Dalits, "Dravidians", "Untouchables", etc., come from Ethiopia, East Africa. That's been scientifically and historically proven, so please don't argue with me. Same with many in "The Middle East". They are not racially unique (though they would like to think so) or untainted; not in the least. So Indians were not created in a vacuum.

And this is one of the reasons/answers you'll get, why people sighed when you created this thread. SMH :lol:

tennisbum79
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:07 PM
Why don't think Indians are Asians? I though in Europe and Australia and Sotuh Africa, they are classified as Asians

Question - Why aren't Indians Asian?

the answer would be the same as to a question like "why aren't middle-eastners black/white?"......we are just not asian......the entire indian subcontinent is racially indian......so why do we call ourselves asians when we are not?

Is this pushback widespread among Indians?
If yes, is there any movement or senisibilization to stop the rest of world calling Indian Asians?

Some Indians prefer to be called Indo-Europeans, even though a big chunk sub-group in India do not have European features

Can you also address the rest of the point I made in this post http://www.tennisforum.com/showpost.php?p=22166417&postcount=29 (post #20)

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:14 PM
Why don't think Indians are Asians? I though in Europe and Australia and Sotuh Africa, they are classified as Asians

Question - Why aren't Indians Asian?

the answer would be the same as to a question like "why aren't middle-eastners black/white?"......we are just not asian......the entire indian subcontinent is racially indian......so why do we call ourselves asians when we are not?

PS: "Asian" is more of a geopraphical designation" in this discussion, especially when you include Indians. So don't take offense when people say that, though India is known as the "Indian Sub-Continent" for a reason. I get it.

It's the same thing with "Middle East", those are more geographical designations, cause though people take them as Cultural/racial, when they really are not; cause many of those places have varied racial stock, though we or they don't identify or know it as that. But that's a whole nother story. :lol:

You picked the wrong subject. :lol:

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:14 PM
But the oldest Indians The Dalits, "Dravidians", "Untouchables", etc., come from Ethiopia, East Africa. That's been scientifically and historically proven, so please don't argue with me. Same with many in "The Middle East". They are not racially unique (though they would like to think so) or untainted; not in the least. So Indians were not created in a vacuum.

And this is one of the reasons/answers you'll get, why people sighed when you created this thread. SMH :lol:

you make me laugh......once again a typical ignorant trying to stereotype indian race just by reading some bullshit published online......indians are original, mixed and every other category you could imagine......

i will educate you in PMs more about it but for now just remember that there have been classifications of "white", "non-whites" thousands of years ago in india......please don't come to me with the notion that this "white", "non white" concept emerged in the west......the entire west itself emerged from indians, africans and mesapotamians......FACTS! no ill-will intended......

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:16 PM
PS: "Asian is more of a geopraphical designation". So don't take offense when people say that, though India is known as the "Indian Sub-Continent". I get it.

Same thing with "Middle East", those are more geographical designations, cause though people take them as Cultural/racial, they really are not; cause many of those places have varied racial stock, though we or they don't identify it as that.

But that's a whole nother story. :lol:

i din't speak about it in regional terms and you know it.....

Excelscior
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:19 PM
you make me laugh......once again a typical ignorant trying to stereotype indian race just by reading some bullshit published online......indians are original, mixed and every other category you could imagine......

i will educate you in PMs more about it but for now just remember that there have been classifications of "white", "non-whites" thousands of years ago in india......please don't come to me with the notion that this "white", "non white" concept emerged in the west......the entire west itself emerged from indians, africans and mesapotamians......FACTS! no ill-will intended......

Do your research. I'm not going to argue with you. If you don't want to know, believe that's on you.

There are many DNA, Geographical, Cultural, Archaeological, Anthropological and historical links that prove this, including from highly regarded, accredited scientist.

With all due respect, you appear to be the ignorant one (not surprised judging by your thread title), for being so immediately close minded to the notion.

Start da Game
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:23 PM
Is this pushback widespread among Indians?
If yes, is there any movement or senisibilization to stop the rest of world calling Indian Asians?

Some Indians prefer to be called Indo-Europeans, even though a big chunk sub-group in India do not have European features

Can you also address the rest of the point I made in this post http://www.tennisforum.com/showpost.php?p=22166417&postcount=29 (post #20)

i will do it tomorrow, i am going to bed......

DOUBLEFIST
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:35 PM
Just wanted to say :wavey: before the lock.

Sweety Darling
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:36 PM
Oh, shock......another racist thread on this forum :rolleyes:

BillFromRichmond
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:45 PM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race, then why only tennis? what could be the reasons? are blacks more athletic than whites and are suited for far more physical games? or is it just that whites are more interested in this sport and other races not that much?

how do you see the sport transitioning forward? with the sport becoming physical with each passing day, do you see more black players joining the mix? what progress do you see in tennis as far as the five major races are concerned - black, indian, asian, middle-eastern and white?

So I guess you choose to ignore other sports like golf and soccer.

Why don't you start a thread asking why Basketball and American football are Black Dominated sports?

Linguae^
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:50 PM
When a thread like this appears, it's so epic fail. :p

TheHangover
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:52 PM
speaking about my experience, so here in italy, tennis is a pretty expensive sport, don't know about other countries, that's may be the reason, cause obviously there are a lot more white people than black that can spend (or throw away) a lot of money. phisically obviously blacks have an edge

laurie
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:56 PM
Start Da Game is such a character, every forum he's posted on he causes mayhem, he's posted on quite a few with the same Nadal avatar :lol:

Well so many other posters have pinpointed the "obvious" reasons. Having said that, many black and asian players have made significant contributions to tennis over the decades:

Like Arthur Ashe (hence Arthur Ashe stadium ;)), Michael Chang, Zina Garrison, Chanda Rubin, James Blake and many other Americans, Lori McNeil, Althea Gibson and of course Venus and Serena.

The French have produced a few good players like Yannick Noah, Tsonga, Monfils.

The key thing is opportunity, opportunities for young kids in inner cities to play, that's where we could get some real gems if the relevant associations were to look hard enough and adapt their system. At the moment the kids with athletic ability gravitate to other sports to play where there are more opportunities. But tennis is also an athletic sport and needs to be sold as such, not this hang up over "hand eye co-ordination" which the British tennis establishment has certainly been guilty of over the decades.

Monzanator
Sep 7th, 2012, 09:57 PM
Tennis is a rich man's sport. Historically the Caucasian race always had the easiest path to making money and therefore succeed in this discipline. Nowadays just about everyone can make big money regardless of the race, but the lines have been drawn long time ago already.

laurie
Sep 7th, 2012, 10:02 PM
Tennis is a rich man's sport. Historically the Caucasian race always had the easiest path to making money and therefore succeed in this discipline. Nowadays just about everyone can make big money regardless of the race, but the lines have been drawn long time ago already.

But also recently we have seen a real glut of players from the former Eastern bloc who see tennis as an opportunity to make a name for themselves and a lot of money, or I suppose the parents have these ideas a lot of the time.

HippityHop
Sep 7th, 2012, 10:04 PM
In before the lock. :D

laurie
Sep 7th, 2012, 10:06 PM
I was also going to say that two of America's most celebrated players of recent times both came from 1st generation immigrant backgrounds. Sampras' father was Greek American and mother came from Greece, and Agassi's father came over from Iran of Armenian descent(boxed for Iran in an Olympics once?) Both men have talked about that, that should inspire other young Americans of different backgrounds hopefully. And Michael Chang's influence is not to be underestimated either.

Morning Morgan
Sep 7th, 2012, 11:04 PM
Why are people still feeding this troll with semi-serious replies? Just post joke posts and let him self-implode

dencod16
Sep 7th, 2012, 11:26 PM
For one reason it's not a poor man's sport. If you read Monaco's interview in DEUCE, he said that they would play only one ball for days and days till it wears off, and they will wait for days to get another one. Most Black people are from Africa and Africa isn;t a rich continent.

homogenius
Sep 7th, 2012, 11:34 PM
because Blacks suck ? :confused: :scratch:

TheLegendof
Sep 8th, 2012, 12:07 AM
Before even talking about race, methinks a lot of people should visit http://understandingrace.org/home.html. 'Cause the ignorance here makes me cringe.

KournikovaFan91
Sep 8th, 2012, 12:14 AM
Since most black people live on the world's poorest continent Africa its hardly a surprise people there don't exactly produce sports stars on a conveyor belt, you know lack of facilities and funding might just be a tiny problem. :rolleyes:

Regarding Asia well they dominate other sports, Table Tennis, Badminton, etc. I mean China's medal tally shows Asia is successful in sport.

#1SteffiGraf#1
Sep 8th, 2012, 01:15 AM
People are SO sensitive nowadays it's just crazy. The OP simply asked why its dominated by more white players. Not enough minorities are top players? When tennis is such a physical sport, why aren't more minorities top players?

Why get so worked up over a true question? Man, it's like somebody can't say or ask anything anymore.

It's simple answer though. Minorities from around the globe find it MUCH easier to play basketball and football/soccer. That easy.

Moveyourfeet
Sep 8th, 2012, 01:18 AM
Why are people so fucking stupid sometimes????

tennisbum79
Sep 8th, 2012, 01:29 AM
People are SO sensitive nowadays it's just crazy. The OP simply asked why its dominated by more white players. Not enough minorities are top players? When tennis is such a physical sport, why aren't more minorities top players?

Why get so worked up over a true question? Man, it's like somebody can't say or ask anything anymore.

It's simple answer though. Minorities from around the globe find it MUCH easier to play basketball and football/soccer. That easy.
That is the easy answer, but ardly the only one.

If you care to read the thread, you'll find more thoughtful, well argued answers.


As the visceral reaction to the thread, apparently there seems to be a beef between the thread author and some posters.
Their comments are not actually addressing the topic, they chastising the OP for past run-ins.

producer88
Sep 8th, 2012, 01:31 AM
It's simple

1)The cost of raising a tennis player

2)In the case of the USA, there's not enough tennis courts in areas populated by minority groups. It's very rare to find a free public tennis court. There's mainly basketball courts, or baseball fields. Also the popularity of American Football, and the opportunity of playing American Football can give you a free scholarship for college. I've never heard of a player getting a full-scholarship for playing Tennis, it may happen but I've never heard of it.

I'll be honest, I'm Dominican (Hispanic), and many of my Spanish friends call me weird and not a true "Dominican," because I'm more interested in Tennis than baseball (which is a stereotype that we all play well, and are interested in it). I root for Alex Rodriguez, but I prefer watching some great tennis matches (both men & women), and playing tennis is A LOT more fun to me, than baseball.

Each group has a certain interest in certain sports, but I consider it more of a social issue, than a racial issue to be honest.

Morrissey
Sep 8th, 2012, 01:36 AM
There are a couple of reasons why tennis is white dominated. One reason is obviously money it costs more to train and develop a tennis player than to play other sports like Basketball or soccer.

Another problem is the WHITE SUPREMACIST MENTALITY in professional tennis which a lot of people ignore. Richard Williams gets criticized a lot on this website but he makes a cogent argument.

Richard told the NY TIMES a few years ago the USTA is very anti black. Patrick McEnroe racism continues to be exposed look at the Taylor Townsend controversy. Patrick is a bigot and he needs to be disciplined ASAP!

Look at how Taylor Townsend got treated by the USTA TODAY by Patrick McEnroe and the USTA!

The USTA wants to claim they are progressive but the truth is, they really have a very myopic and negative attitude about blacks.

As other posters pointed out Taylor is only sixteen she won a junior grand slam and she is a black girl.

Coco a white female is out of shape and so is Melanie Oudin I do not see the USTA attacking them!

Stamp Paid
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:38 AM
Before even talking about race, methinks a lot of people should visit http://understandingrace.org/home.html. 'Cause the ignorance here makes me cringe.Preach that gospel!

miffedmax
Sep 8th, 2012, 03:00 AM
Whites dominate tennis for the same reason we used to dominate every sport, and, indeed, invented the majority of them.

We were the first to aggregate enough wealth to have the leisure time for sports (and yes, I am aware there was some unpleasantness associated with this, and that maybe some people were forcibly exploited and had their land stolen and the occasional massacre and all).

Other ethnic groups have accumulated the wealth and leisure time necessary to participate in sports, and it's only logical that whites have become less dominant over time. Things like interests, the rate at which wealth is accumlated, etc. play a role in how this process plays out. There are far more black, Eastern European and Asian players on the tour now than their were in years past, and that trend will probably continue.

On the other hand, geography probably means that it won't happen it skiing for the most part. But you never know.

Thirty All
Sep 8th, 2012, 05:11 AM
No offense to any black or Hispanic people, but they generally don't have the income level Whites do (according to statistics).
Tennis is an expensive: individual lessons, club membership, rackets, balls, coaches, trainers, academies, etc.
The reason I think Asians don't is because generally they are smaller in size and are less exposed to tennis, although Li Na's recent grand slam runs may help that.

égalité
Sep 8th, 2012, 05:19 AM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race

Oh cool, your post got off to a really accurate start :D

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/hockey-stanley-cup-1.jpg
http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0608/nba_g_oneal_580.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/Wang_Liqin_from_ITTF.jpg/250px-Wang_Liqin_from_ITTF.jpg

producer88
Sep 8th, 2012, 05:31 AM
Once again people are confusing social issues to racial.

If you grow up in an environment where basketball is more popular, you will play it more.

Simple as that, it's a social issue, not racial.

Start da Game
Sep 8th, 2012, 05:59 AM
People are SO sensitive nowadays it's just crazy. The OP simply asked why its dominated by more white players. Not enough minorities are top players? When tennis is such a physical sport, why aren't more minorities top players?

Why get so worked up over a true question? Man, it's like somebody can't say or ask anything anymore.

It's simple answer though. Minorities from around the globe find it MUCH easier to play basketball and football/soccer. That easy.

thank you so much......now i know that at least one person understood the thread......the answer is still not that simple though......there are many affordable non whites and yet the percentages of non whites is nowhere near what it should be......

i am beginning to think it's actually got to do with the interest levels and other reasons more than affordability......affordability is only an issue in the african continent......

Start da Game
Sep 8th, 2012, 06:00 AM
@egalite

they are not major global sports......they are region specific......

Serenita
Sep 8th, 2012, 06:06 AM
Townsend

Jeff
Sep 8th, 2012, 06:15 AM
Look at how Taylor Townsend got treated by the USTA TODAY by Patrick McEnroe and the USTA!

The USTA wants to claim they are progressive but the truth is, they really have a very myopic and negative attitude about blacks.

As other posters pointed out Taylor is only sixteen she won a junior grand slam and she is a black girl.

Coco a white female is out of shape and so is Melanie Oudin I do not see the USTA attacking them!

So true!

Stamp Paid
Sep 8th, 2012, 06:17 AM
There are a couple of reasons why tennis is white dominated. One reason is obviously money it costs more to train and develop a tennis player than to play other sports like Basketball or soccer.

Another problem is the WHITE SUPREMACIST MENTALITY in professional tennis which a lot of people ignore. Richard Williams gets criticized a lot on this website but he makes a cogent argument.

Richard told the NY TIMES a few years ago the USTA is very anti black. Patrick McEnroe racism continues to be exposed look at the Taylor Townsend controversy. Patrick is a bigot and he needs to be disciplined ASAP!

Look at how Taylor Townsend got treated by the USTA TODAY by Patrick McEnroe and the USTA!

The USTA wants to claim they are progressive but the truth is, they really have a very myopic and negative attitude about blacks.

As other posters pointed out Taylor is only sixteen she won a junior grand slam and she is a black girl.

Coco a white female is out of shape and so is Melanie Oudin I do not see the USTA attacking them!Institutional racism, another reason why.

Start da Game
Sep 8th, 2012, 06:17 AM
i don't know about those other names but oudin is definitely overrated......

tennnisfannn
Sep 8th, 2012, 12:02 PM
Interesting thread and awkward to discuss coz we don't know if we are being racist or 'realistic'.
The olympics just ended and we barely saw a black person in the pool. You hardly saw white people in the sprints'' finals. They were either Carribean or West Africa for the most part. When it comes to long distance, the East Africans featured. Obviously these are general comments but not completely off the mark. Is there a reason blacks are more dominant in basketball than whites?
We can all watch the different sports and pretend we don't see certain patterns emerging, but we are not fooling anyone.
Is tennis different, at this point we should be making the observation that Eastern Europeans are ruling the sport, so what's happening to the whites in Australia, America,Uk etc?
nature + nurture will combine to produce the results we see.

jj74
Sep 8th, 2012, 12:08 PM
Well, the original post is not exactly true. Swimming is a basically white sport, but lately asians are becoming great at it.

Tennis was a privileged class sport in the past, so it's not that rare that it was white dominated, and at the begining other races were banned from playing it. Thank's to people like Althea Gibson, the race bareer was broken.

Right now there's a lot more white players, but that's because white people are majority on the countries who use to play the sport.
References are necesary to atract new players, and the success of William's sister is obvious in atracting new black players, a good bunch of the most promising american players (Duval, Vickery, Townsend, Keys, Tornado) are black

pov
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:20 PM
- Someone posting "Why is basketball a Black dominated sport?" would be accused of racism. That only seems to go one way though.

- All current major sports have been White dominated at one time. Whites invented the sports and were the first ones playing them. This is Western society - like it or not - it's been developed mostly by Whites. And it is still populated mostly by Whites.

As long as nowadays there is no push or significant bias to stop any ethnicity from participating, I'm all set.

pov
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:25 PM
The olympics just ended and we barely saw a black person in the pool. You hardly saw white people in the sprints'' finals. They were either Carribean or West Africa for the most part. When it comes to long distance, the East Africans featured. Obviously these are general comments but not completely off the mark. Is there a reason blacks are more dominant in basketball than whites?
We can all watch the different sports and pretend we don't see certain patterns emerging, but we are not fooling anyone.
Is tennis different, at this point we should be making the observation that Eastern Europeans are ruling the sport, so what's happening to the whites in Australia, America,Uk etc?

:yeah:

chingching
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:25 PM
Because tennis is an expensive sport, and in General, Whites have money :(
It's the sad reality :(

cehowardrx7
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:31 PM
That is a double ended question. First off, I am 72, getting ready to turn 73, I have been around a long time. I was here when Jackie Robinson first sat foot on the field in MLB. All sports are/were white-dominated. First off, minitorties weren't allowed, period. Things have changed, this is a GREAT COUNTRY. The Constitution has a way of righting itself. This country has progressed a lot.

But, to answer your question, all sports are white dominated. But, the barrier has been broken and you are seeing minorities competing and winning. It balls down to this, and I have learned this through the length of my years, we are all equal, and if given the chance, can do just as good as anybody else. The times of shutting out minorities is over with. You still get the hate coming at minorities. That was passed down from the hater's parents. People are not born with racism, it is learned.

QuestJon
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:37 PM
Well done, guys.
You made my day.:hearts:

Most of the posts in here are so much more funny
than the best posts in the funny gifs threads ever can be.

:worship::worship::worship: :bounce::bounce::bounce: :worship::worship::worship:

doomsday
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:45 PM
It's all about the money, money, money. We don't have enough money, money, money. We just wanna make the world change.:lol:

blackandblue
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:53 PM
The best black athletes pursue other sports.

Monzanator
Sep 8th, 2012, 02:59 PM
But also recently we have seen a real glut of players from the former Eastern bloc who see tennis as an opportunity to make a name for themselves and a lot of money, or I suppose the parents have these ideas a lot of the time.

I can only speak of Polish players, Robert Radwanski went the Richard Williams way and put all-in for his daughters (allthough he was a tennis player himself) while Lukasz Kubot's father has ties with the biggest copper and silver mining company in our country and one of the biggest in the world (KGHM). The money was there in first place alright.

Lourdes27
Sep 8th, 2012, 03:04 PM
How much does it cost for boys and girls to get a basketball or football and play football? That's right, nothing except buying the ball. How much does it cost to buy golf clubs, golf coaches and pay for golf membership? Or how much does it cost to buy tennis racquets, balls, tennis courts, coaches? There you have it, somethings just come cheaper which means it's more accessible.

Invisible Fan
Sep 8th, 2012, 03:09 PM
White power :o

miffedmax
Sep 8th, 2012, 04:01 PM
@egalite

they are not major global sports......they are region specific......

Um, no.

Basketball is probably the third most popular sport in the world after soccer and auto racing.

Oh, and speaking of sports that are white-dominated...

Start da Game
Sep 11th, 2012, 10:23 AM
if we take no. of global population following into account, football and cricket rule......basketball and tennis don't even belong in the top 5......

Start da Game
Sep 11th, 2012, 10:25 AM
serena is a standing symbol for the non whites in tennis......if she goes on to become the greatest ever by winning a few more slams, it would be the biggest irony in a sport that is predominantly dominated by whites......we are living in a very strange world......

Invisible Fan
Sep 11th, 2012, 10:42 AM
Cricket is only played seriously by about 10 countries. Basketball is played in most countries.

NashaMasha
Sep 11th, 2012, 10:54 AM
Cricket is an English-speaking sport , nobody cares about it outside India, Pakistan , British Commonwealth, Saudi Arabia.

Tennis - much more global sport

For instance in post USSR countries nobody knows anything about cricket, and i'm sure that even curling is more popular here ))))))))

PhilePhile
Sep 11th, 2012, 12:03 PM
I think rugby may be even more popular than cricket. A rugby team from China ...

1hbUD_AJXfQ

NashaMasha
Sep 11th, 2012, 12:27 PM
Google Trends gives it's rates

rugby - 0,7
cricket 0,9
tennis 1.0
basketball 1,05

Sgt.Timmykinz
Sep 11th, 2012, 12:36 PM
Maybe because in countries like the UK you can be the number 1 ranked player from your country, go deeper in slams than your fellow county women have for years, steadily improve and move up the rankings, but because you have an ethnic background no one will give you any attention because an average looking white girl is doing it all too (albeit less well).

NashaMasha
Sep 11th, 2012, 12:40 PM
Maybe because in countries like the UK you can be the number 1 ranked player from your country, go deeper in slams than your fellow county women have for years, steadily improve and move up the rankings, but because you have an ethnic background no one will give you any attention because an average looking white girl is doing it all too (albeit less well).

it was told not once , that even Ciara will be earning more than Serena and Sharapova together. It's not the problem of white girl that top 10 in tennis is not composed by Miss Universes

Sgt.Timmykinz
Sep 11th, 2012, 01:00 PM
it was told not once , that even Ciara will be earning more than Serena and Sharapova together. It's not the problem of white girl that top 10 in tennis is not composed by Miss Universes

I'm not going to even pretend to understand what you were trying to say.

But what I was talking about was not about attractiveness but about skin colour.

Heather Watson and Laura Robson both have achieved very similar things with Heather edging out Laura on ranking until very recently, but according to British media only Laura has achieved anything, Heather is constantly paid dust by the Brits. She doesn't get featured in vogue or get any endorsements, and its not like Laura is supermodel hot, she's as average as they come.

Why would any British parent who harbours any sporting ambition for their ethnic child pick tennis for them when there are so many other sports where ethnic minorities get better exposure and better opportunites (like athletics)?

Despite the Williams Sisters tennis is still seen as a white sport. For years the sisters where ruining the sport (those critics have only shut up because the girls have made them shut up with their results) but now I think by many white folk (probably not the sort you'd find on here) they are seen as the token black players as opposed to pioneers paving the way for other races entering the sport.

At my local tennis club in an affluent white neighbourhood, there is a black family who practice with their sons 4/5 days a week when the weather is good (I suppose they go elsewhere when winter comes) but one time they were there an older member of the club complained to me that one of the boys wasn't wearing proper tennis shoes...I certainly at the time was not wearing "proper tennis shoes" and I could see others falling into that boat too. But the next time I went to the club there was a sign about correct footwear. I assume someone told the family as they were all in the "correct" shoes next time I saw them but I didn't bother changing my shoes. Whenever they are there you always get the chorus of tutting from the other patrons of the club, no matter what they are doing.

I even heard one time a lady asking the mother whether tennis would be the right route for the boys or would they be better off playing football.

To be fair though they're also quite open about their disapproval of the eastern european players...apparently they're the reason why precious Laura Robson hasn't won wimbledon yet.

I know this isn't the case for a lot of serious tennis fans, who want to see the best players pushing the sport higher and higher no matter what their race is. Its the fans who have followed the sport for years and years, but aren't serious enough to follow it throughout the year but aren't casual enough that they don't know the major players.

WowWow
Sep 11th, 2012, 03:49 PM
Um, no.

Basketball is probably the third most popular sport in the world after soccer and auto racing.

Oh, and speaking of sports that are white-dominated...

I think tennis is ahead of basketball worldwide. It comes second after car racing, I believe.

pov
Sep 11th, 2012, 04:05 PM
Most popular sports in the world:

1 Soccer
2 Cricket
3 Field Hockey
4 Tennis

http://mostpopularsports.net/

(I wouldn't vouch for the methodology but :shrug:)

Start da Game
Sep 11th, 2012, 06:53 PM
^^that and there are many other proven sources which hand the top two spots to football and cricket respectively as far as popularity by numbers is concerned......

miffedmax
Sep 11th, 2012, 07:22 PM
And plenty of sources say F1 is the second most watched sport after soccer. There are a lot of ways to measure "most popular." Plus F1 is only one form of motorsports.

Petronius
Sep 11th, 2012, 08:40 PM
To develop tennis skills you need equipment, courts, facilities and coaches. So you need to be at least relatively rich. Not long ago, white people held about 3/4 of the world's wealth so they could afford investing in expensive sports like tennis. Although things are changing, especially in Asia, this will take time.

Another reason is tradition and attractiveness of the sport for non-whites, who often give preference to basketball (esp. USA), soccer, cricket or table tennis (esp. Asia).

Moreover, the four biggest tournaments which draw most attention (grand slams) are held in countries with the dominant white population: USA - about 75-80%, UK - about 90%, France - about 80-85% , Australia - about 90%

Also, tennis is very popular in some Central/Eastern European countries, which have almost 100% white population, especially the Czech Republic and Russia (just these two countries account for 20% of the WTA TOP100) and it seems that tennis is also on the rise in Poland.

So the domination of whites in tennis is hardly surprising.

bandabou
Sep 11th, 2012, 08:46 PM
Too expensive, other sports are easier and odds for non-whites to get in, dominate and make money is easier.

sravat1234
Sep 20th, 2012, 08:21 AM
illuminati baby

Start da Game
Nov 16th, 2012, 08:05 PM
To develop tennis skills you need equipment, courts, facilities and coaches. So you need to be at least relatively rich. Not long ago, white people held about 3/4 of the world's wealth so they could afford investing in expensive sports like tennis. Although things are changing, especially in Asia, this will take time.

Another reason is tradition and attractiveness of the sport for non-whites, who often give preference to basketball (esp. USA), soccer, cricket or table tennis (esp. Asia).

Moreover, the four biggest tournaments which draw most attention (grand slams) are held in countries with the dominant white population: USA - about 75-80%, UK - about 90%, France - about 80-85% , Australia - about 90%

Also, tennis is very popular in some Central/Eastern European countries, which have almost 100% white population, especially the Czech Republic and Russia (just these two countries account for 20% of the WTA TOP100) and it seems that tennis is also on the rise in Poland.

So the domination of whites in tennis is hardly surprising.

good post but still the argument that so and so groups are not wealthy enough to make it big in tennis isn't really convincing......

middle east are filthy rich and yet most of them are taking to soccer......lot of rich people in asia as well but they take to badminton, TT and other asian games......

there could be something wrong with the administration......nobody wants to see himself in a place where he feels uninvited and uncomfortable......imo ITF are not expanding the sport and seem to be content with the income they have presently......

how do you explain 1 grandslam and 4 masters events for north america and 0 grandslams and 0 masters events for south america on the men's side?

rjd1111
Nov 17th, 2012, 03:16 AM
i knew somebody would ask this......williams sisters are just two among hundreds of white players and maybe a few more non-white players?


As to the thread title:


Tennis is filled with mostly white players


But it has been dominated by a Black Player for years now.



To borrow from the post of Laj


peak Anybody vs. peak Serena is an oxymoron. Peak Serena is obviously Serena at her very best. As such, peak Serena is virtually unbeatable
1. 1999 Grand Slam Cup.........Vs. ASV........................6-3, 6-1.
2. 2001 Indian Wells...........vs. Lindsay Davenport..........6-1, 6-2.
3. 2001 Indian Wells...........vs. Kim Clijsters..............6-0, 6-2.
4. 2001 US Open................vs. Martina Hingis.............6-3, 6-2
2002 Miami..................vs. Martina Hingis.............6-4, 6-0.
5. 2002 Miami..................vs. Venus Williams.............6-2, 6-2.
6. 2002 French Open............vs. Mary Pierce................6-1, 6-1.
7. 2003 French Open............vs. Amelie Mauresmo............6-1, 6-2.
8. 2004 Miami..................vs. Elena Dementieva...........6-1, 6-1.
9. 2004 Wimbledon..............vs. Jennifer Capriati..........6-1, 6-1.
10.2007 Australian Open........vs. Maria Sharapova............6-1, 6-2
2007 Miami..................vs. Maria Sharapova............6-1, 6-1
2011 Stanford...............vs. Maria Sharapova............6-1, 6-3
2012 Madrid.................vs. Maria Sharapova............6-1, 6-3
2012 Olympics...............vs. Maria Sharapova............6-0, 6-1.
11.2008 Miami..................vs. Justine Henin..............6-2, 6-0.
12.2009 Australian Open........vs. Dinara Safina..............6-0, 6-3.
13.2012 Charleston.............vs. Samantha Stosur............6-1, 6-1.
14.2012 Madrid.................vs. Victoria Azarenka..........6-1, 6-3
2012 Olympics...............vs. Victoria Azarenka..........6-1, 6-2.
15.2012 Olympics...............vs. Caroline Wozniaki..........6-0, 6-3
16.2012 US Open................vs. Anna Ivanovic..............6-1, 6-3.

HippityHop
Nov 17th, 2012, 03:56 AM
I blame George Bush. :devil:

TheBoiledEgg
Nov 17th, 2012, 04:00 AM
Most popular sports in the world:

1 Soccer
2 Cricket
3 Field Hockey
4 Tennis

http://mostpopularsports.net/

(I wouldn't vouch for the methodology but :shrug:)

thats a load of :bs:
Athletics is way more popular than all of them except football

Start da Game
Nov 17th, 2012, 06:09 AM
thats a load of :bs:
Athletics is way more popular than all of them except football

that list is right.....they are the four most followed sports.....field hockey's position is arguable because of its losing popularity but the other three are just too strong for other sports......

stromatolite
Nov 17th, 2012, 08:18 AM
I think you have to take into consideration that the popularity of all sports (like other manifestations of mass culture) is highly path dependent. Tennis was originally very much a sport of the higher social classes, which naturally excluded most black players. This was true in America well into the sixties and even the seventies, at precisely the time when tennis was coming into its own as a sport where you could make a lot of money.

It probably didn't help that the other dominant tennis country in that era was Australia, which at the time was also not exactly known for its enlightened attitude towards race. For non-whites interested in a career in sports there must have been a lot of options that seemed more attractive than tennis at that time (basketball, athletics, etc.).

Although the race barriers have broken down somewhat since then, the role models for young non-whites are still massively concentrated in other sports, although I think the succcess of Serena and Venus has increased its popularity among young African Americans at least. It will be interesting to see whether that trend continues after S&V retire. I'm not very optimistic: Arthur Ashe and Evonne Goolagong were hugely popular in their day, but this didn't have much of a long term effect in terms of attracting non-whites into tennis.

Stamp Paid
Nov 17th, 2012, 08:21 AM
I think you have to take into consideration that the popularity of all sports (like other manifestations of mass culture) is highly path dependent. Tennis was originally very much a sport of the higher social classes, which naturally excluded most black players. This was true in America well into the sixties and even the seventies, at precisely the time when tennis was coming into its own as a sport where you could make a lot of money.

It probably didn't help that the other dominant tennis country in that era was Australia, which at the time was also not exactly known for its enlightened attitude towards race. For non-whites interested in a career in sports there must have been a lot of options that seemed more attractive than tennis at that time (basketball, athletics, etc.).

Although the race barriers have broken down somewhat since then, the role models for young non-whites are still massively concentrated in other sports, although I think the succcess of Serena and Venus has increased its popularity among young African Americans at least. It will be interesting to see whether that trend continues after S&V retire.How is that "natural"?
Watch your words.

stromatolite
Nov 17th, 2012, 08:28 AM
How is that "natural"?
Watch your words.

Such oversensivity is not helpful. I was not using the word in its literal sense, as you must know if you took a second to consider your reaction before posting.

Start da Game
Nov 17th, 2012, 12:15 PM
I think you have to take into consideration that the popularity of all sports (like other manifestations of mass culture) is highly path dependent. Tennis was originally very much a sport of the higher social classes, which naturally excluded most black players. This was true in America well into the sixties and even the seventies, at precisely the time when tennis was coming into its own as a sport where you could make a lot of money.

It probably didn't help that the other dominant tennis country in that era was Australia, which at the time was also not exactly known for its enlightened attitude towards race. For non-whites interested in a career in sports there must have been a lot of options that seemed more attractive than tennis at that time (basketball, athletics, etc.).

Although the race barriers have broken down somewhat since then, the role models for young non-whites are still massively concentrated in other sports, although I think the succcess of Serena and Venus has increased its popularity among young African Americans at least. It will be interesting to see whether that trend continues after S&V retire. I'm not very optimistic: Arthur Ashe and Evonne Goolagong were hugely popular in their day, but this didn't have much of a long term effect in terms of attracting non-whites into tennis.

how do you explain cricket, a so called "higher sections" sport taken over and dominated by carribbeans for decades until 1990s?

west indies made their international entry in 1928 when all the already existing cricketing nations were all white - england, australia, south africa and new zealand......NZ entered just 2 years later in 1930.....

Start da Game
Nov 17th, 2012, 12:19 PM
i believe that there is something wrong with the administrators of the sport......they seem to be content with the current revenues and are least bothered about expanding the sport......

only a matter of time before their strategy backfires......they are only netting themselves in danger by ignoring the massive indian and asian market......what if the west slides into full-blown recession and revenues start decreasing?

stromatolite
Nov 17th, 2012, 12:27 PM
how do you explain cricket, a so called "higher sections" sport taken over and dominated by carribbeans for decades until 1990s?

west indies made their international entry in 1928 when all the already existing cricketing nations were all white - england, australia, south africa and new zealand......NZ entered just 2 years later in 1930.....

Easy to expain: cricket was exported to the British colonies, so that the great white masters could still play while they were away from mother England lording it over their dominions. When they first taught the locals to play they never imagined that they would end up far better at the game than they were.

I said that the popularity of sports was path dependent, not that every sport follows the same path.

thegreendestiny
Nov 17th, 2012, 12:53 PM
It's a sport that needs more brain cells than just muscles. :p Kidding.

Well, it's kind of expensive and elitist.

Start da Game
Nov 17th, 2012, 02:36 PM
Easy to expain: cricket was exported to the British colonies, so that the great white masters could still play while they were away from mother England lording it over their dominions. When they first taught the locals to play they never imagined that they would end up far better at the game than they were.

I said that the popularity of sports was path dependent, not that every sport follows the same path.

that's a myth......below is the list of english colonies which did not take up cricket and totally suck at it......

canada

united states

egypt

sudan

kenya

somalia

tanzania

uganda

iraq

oman

aden

palestine

burma

malaysia

jordan

kuwait

bahrain



now the list of major cricketing nations,

india

south africa

west indies

new zealand

australia

pakistan

sri lanka

i can agree that your argument might hold good for south africa and australia as they were basically english......but it doesn't hold water to other nations......

india (i mean the indian subcontinent) has a sport called "gilli danda"(started in 7th century AD) which is very similar to cricket......that is believed to be the main reason behind fascination towards cricket in india (and pakistan & srilanka)......

Start da Game
Nov 17th, 2012, 02:38 PM
It's a sport that needs more brain cells than just muscles. :p Kidding.

Well, it's kind of expensive and elitist.

middle easterners are filthy rich......what's stopping them to taking to this sport?

Start da Game
Nov 17th, 2012, 02:47 PM
i will say it again - non whites are feeling like uninvited guests if they happen to possess great tennis talent and end up in tennis profession......

ITF, ATP and WTA should be held responsible for this idiotic recklessness......they have failed to take this sport to all parts of the globe......

what will they do the day when power shifts to the east?

Invisible Fan
Nov 17th, 2012, 03:13 PM
The WTA top 100 have a sprinkling of "non-white" players even if you don't count Paszek and Watson. Their will be more in the future you would imagine.
BTW some people on here think the WTA has gone to Asia too much in terms of playing tournaments there at the expense of European touraments :o

stromatolite
Nov 17th, 2012, 03:13 PM
india (i mean the indian subcontinent) has a sport called "gilli danda"(started in 7th century AD) which is very similar to cricket...... that is believed to be the main reason behind fascination towards cricket in india (and pakistan & sri lanka)......

I don't want to get into a detailed discussion of the history of cricket, which as you suggested is not necessarily and sufficiently explained by English colonial expansion alone, but I'm glad to see that you agree with my basic point about path dependency.;)

Getting back to tennis, which I assume is still the point of this thread, I maintain that it's pointless to try to explain it's relative white dominance by citing current conditions. You have to look at its history, which is thankfully also a good deal more complex than the handful of lines I wrote about it.

Each new generation doesn't start with a clean slate and decide which sports, music, movies, lifestyle, etc. it likes. You can throw all the money, publicitly campaigns, etc. at them you can think of, but as long as their main role models are concentrated in other sports, non-whites are not going to suddenly switch en masse to tennis.

rjd1111
Nov 17th, 2012, 06:43 PM
I'm not going to even pretend to understand what you were trying to say.

But what I was talking about was not about attractiveness but about skin colour.

Heather Watson and Laura Robson both have achieved very similar things with Heather edging out Laura on ranking until very recently, but according to British media only Laura has achieved anything, Heather is constantly paid dust by the Brits. She doesn't get featured in vogue or get any endorsements, and its not like Laura is supermodel hot, she's as average as they come.

Why would any British parent who harbours any sporting ambition for their ethnic child pick tennis for them when there are so many other sports where ethnic minorities get better exposure and better opportunites (like athletics)?

Despite the Williams Sisters tennis is still seen as a white sport. For years the sisters where ruining the sport (those critics have only shut up because the girls have made them shut up with their results) but now I think by many white folk (probably not the sort you'd find on here) they are seen as the token black players as opposed to pioneers paving the way for other races entering the sport.

At my local tennis club in an affluent white neighbourhood, there is a black family who practice with their sons 4/5 days a week when the weather is good (I suppose they go elsewhere when winter comes) but one time they were there an older member of the club complained to me that one of the boys wasn't wearing proper tennis shoes...I certainly at the time was not wearing "proper tennis shoes" and I could see others falling into that boat too. But the next time I went to the club there was a sign about correct footwear. I assume someone told the family as they were all in the "correct" shoes next time I saw them but I didn't bother changing my shoes. Whenever they are there you always get the chorus of tutting from the other patrons of the club, no matter what they are doing.

I even heard one time a lady asking the mother whether tennis would be the right route for the boys or would they be better off playing football.

To be fair though they're also quite open about their disapproval of the eastern european players...apparently they're the reason why precious Laura Robson hasn't won wimbledon yet.

I know this isn't the case for a lot of serious tennis fans, who want to see the best players pushing the sport higher and higher no matter what their race is. Its the fans who have followed the sport for years and years, but aren't serious enough to follow it throughout the year but aren't casual enough that they don't know the major players.



" Despite the Williams Sisters tennis is still seen as a white sport. For years the sisters where ruining the sport (those critics have only shut up because the girls have made them shut up with their results) but now I think by many white folk (probably not the sort you'd find on here) they are seen as the token black players as opposed to pioneers paving the way for other races entering the sport."



I disagree with this point. I think Ashe, McNeil, Garrison, Washington etal were

considered more like " token " blacks. Mainly because they conformed to the

age old tennis norms. They tried to fit in. In dress, manner, and decorum.

Just hearing Arthur Ashe speak one couldn't tell if he was black or white so

the average black on the street had a hard time relating to him. I later

learned he was a great advocate of racial equality but that wasn't my first

perception.


The Sisters blew all that out of the water. With beads flying, loud colors,

and outragious demeanor they came in doing it on their terms. At first they

were laughed at and ridiculed. But as they started winning the tennis world was

forced to see them in their own light. There was no doubt about where they were

coming from and they demanded accceptance in no uncertain terms. The tennis

world rebelled and still are. But as long as they keep winning.............

They were pioneers paving the way for young blacks by relating to them in ways

they were used to. And not only blacks, look at the

colorful persona's out there today instead of the

old stodgy elitest styles of yeaterday.

miffedmax
Nov 17th, 2012, 07:07 PM
Ashe and Gibson had to put up with crap no modern player can conceive of. Not that today's nonwhite players haven't had to deal with racism and other issues.

Raiden
Nov 17th, 2012, 08:22 PM
Most popular sports in the world:

1 Soccer
2 Cricket
3 Field Hockey
4 Tennis

http://mostpopularsports.net/

(I wouldn't vouch for the methodology but :shrug:)Rubbish stats.

The position of cricket and field hockey is inflated by just one country: India (which all by itself constitutes more than 75% of all players & fanbases of both sports).

The real top 3 "most widespread" sports are without a shadow of a doubt
1 = soccer
2 & 3 = athletics and basketball

Tag
Nov 18th, 2012, 01:22 AM
is this thread trolling?

i really can't decide

thegreendestiny
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:34 AM
middle easterners are filthy rich......what's stopping them to taking to this sport?

Again, this sport requires brain cells and money. Middle easterners may be filthy rich but they are _________________ (fill in the blank) :p

gbenga
Nov 18th, 2012, 06:55 AM
Again, this sport requires brain cells and money.

No. As in other endeavors success beget success. Until these other countries, either poor or rich have a breakout player to inspire them they won't take to the sport.

DeucesAreWild
Nov 18th, 2012, 08:49 AM
is this thread trolling?

i really can't decide

Same here.

If tennis originated as an aristocratic sport in England does it not stand to reason that the majority(whites and non-whites alike) did not play the sport? If so, go down through history and see that tennis obviously didn't hold the attention or interest of the majority for that reason. You then factor in the individuality of the sport in opposition to team sports. Take the US for instance, organized team sports are apart of the extracurricular fabric of the majority of children's lives in schooling from elementary through college. Doesn't it stand to reason the major sports in the US would be team sports? And why the majority of non-whites as the majority of whites are not as interested in tennis? I don't see tennis as being "dominated by whites" as I see simply a smaller population of whites(that made up the majority in the world of tennis) came up knowing and liking tennis. And thus passed it on to their children. The perception seems to belie the reality. As more and more begin to challenge their own perceptions and witness others doing so it makes an impact. And the tennis world will continue to expand. That's My $.02

bandabou
Nov 18th, 2012, 09:43 AM
There's no fame and glory to be found in tennis for non-whites. Serena and Venus STILL are threated with double-standards. Despite ALL the beatdowns Maria has been given by Serena, people still wanna act like she's equal to Serena.

NFL and NBA it's more easier to get the rich and get the fame and respect.

doomsday
Nov 18th, 2012, 10:05 AM
There's no fame and glory to be found in tennis for non-whites. Serena and Venus STILL are threated with double-standards. Despite ALL the beatdowns Maria has been given by Serena, people still wanna act like she's equal to Serena.

NFL and NBA it's more easier to get the rich and get the fame and respect.

Really? Who are those people exactly? I can assure you that in here, French media is all over Serena and deservedly so. But what Maria has achieved shouldn't be neglected, after the French Open she may have stolen the spotlight to Serena a lil bit but since that, it' all about Serena ruling women's tennis.
It may be different in US I don't know but not here.

Chrissie-fan
Nov 18th, 2012, 10:30 AM
Despite ALL the beatdowns Maria has been given by Serena, people still wanna act like she's equal to Serena.
I don't think that's entirely true. Virtually everyone considers Serena an all time great, and a tier one all time great at that, on par with Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf and the rest of them. Sharapova gets a lot of praise as well (and what's wrong with that?), but I never heard a commentator say that she's as great, let alone greater than Serena. Maria may be as POPULAR as Serena, but she would also be this popular if there was no Serena or if Serena was white. You can't stop (or blame) people for loving who they love. Kournikova was also the most popular player when she was around, even though she didn't achieve nearly as much as Hingis, Davenport and some of her other very white contemporaries (or Sharapova for that matter).

bandabou
Nov 18th, 2012, 11:27 AM
I don't think that's entirely true. Virtually everyone considers Serena an all time great, and a tier one all time great at that, on par with Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf and the rest of them. Sharapova gets a lot of praise as well (and what's wrong with that?), but I never heard a commentator say that she's as great, let alone greater than Serena. Maria may be as POPULAR as Serena, but she would also be this popular if there was no Serena or if Serena was white. You can't stop (or blame) people for loving who they love. Kournikova was also the most popular player when she was around, even though she didn't achieve nearly as much as Hingis, Davenport and some of her other very white contemporaries (or Sharapova for that matter).

The regular crowd loving who they wanna love is fine..but the love was INSTALLED by the media. Ever since '04..they were just waiting for their token 'white blue eyed blond'-player to come and stop the Williams.

Of course that never really happened, but it isn't til now that media have accepted that Serena IS and ALWAYS was the better player. Maria was media-darling from day uno...Serena and Venus had ALWAYS to fight to get a lil bit of respect and even then it has come only reluctantly.

For instance..the yec final was deemed: power vs grace. All I've to say.

stromatolite
Nov 18th, 2012, 12:35 PM
The regular crowd loving who they wanna love is fine..but the love was INSTALLED by the media. Ever since '04..they were just waiting for their token 'white blue eyed blond'-player to come and stop the Williams.

Of course that never really happened, but it isn't til now that media have accepted that Serena IS and ALWAYS was the better player. Maria was media-darling from day uno...Serena and Venus had ALWAYS to fight to get a lil bit of respect and even then it has come only reluctantly.

For instance..the yec final was deemed: power vs grace. All I've to say.

You have a point about the media fueling the public's love for hot-looking players (although you can also argue that they're just giving people what they want), and there may even be an element of latent racism in that.

I don't like that any more than you do, but at the end of the day Chrissie-fan is right. There is no serious dispute as to who is the greatest player of this generation, and to suggest that Serena and Venus only get a "lil bit of respect" is frankly silly.

No offense, but Serena (and Venus) fans have just the hugest chip on their shoulder of any group of tennis fans. You're pretty fair-minded in general compared to some of the more fanatical of your peers, but even you can be pretty intolerant of people not showing your faves as much respect as you think they deserve. Not every compliment handed to another player carries an implicit slight towards Serena and Venus. Really.

jj74
Nov 18th, 2012, 12:41 PM
Sorry but i don't agree, by when Maria appeared Serena and Venus didn't dominate the way they dominated in 2002-2003, they have a clear opposition in the belgians. The times of all Williams finals at the Slams were practically over. Both were top players, and both won more Slams but they didn't have the monopoly anymore

The loving of Maria in the media has nothing to do with race. They wanted a teenage queen, and Maria was the new Kournikova but winning big tittles, so the media explode with joy

bandabou
Nov 18th, 2012, 12:57 PM
You have a point about the media fueling the public's love for hot-looking players (although you can also argue that they're just giving people what they want), and there may even be an element of latent racism in that.

I don't like that any more than you do, but at the end of the day Chrissie-fan is right. There is no serious dispute as to who is the greatest player of this generation, and to suggest that Serena and Venus only get a "lil bit of respect" is frankly silly.

No offense, but Serena (and Venus) fans have just the hugest chip on their shoulder of any group of tennis fans. You're pretty fair-minded in general compared to some of the more fanatical of your peers, but even you can be pretty intolerant of people not showing your faves as much respect as you think they deserve. Not every compliment handed to another player carries an implicit slight towards Serena and Venus. Really.

Not there may be...there IS an element of racism in that. But it is what it is.

After 15 majors, surely it couldn't be a serious discussion..because that would make the hating way too obvious, no?! So the respect was earned the HARD way. Let me just say that Serena with four majors wasn't this gushed over as Masha's being right now.

The YEC final deemed as power vs grace...that isn't taking shots/ shading Serena?! Really?!

stromatolite
Nov 18th, 2012, 01:16 PM
Not there may be...there IS an element of racism in that. But it is what it is.

After 15 majors, surely it couldn't be a serious discussion..because that would make the hating way too obvious, no?! So the respect was earned the HARD way. Let me just say that Serena with four majors wasn't this gushed over as Masha's being right now.

The YEC final deemed as power vs grace...that isn't taking shots/ shading Serena?! Really?!

Tbh I think it's too ridiculous to count as serious shade. I'm not disagreeing with you about the fact that attention paid to players isn't proportional to their achievements. But as Chrissie fan pointed out, there is only one of the current generation who is regarded as a serious GOAT contender. Everybody seriously interested in tennis knows that, including Maria and 99.9% of her fans.

At the end of the day, I think Masha would happily give up all the gushing she currently receives if she thought there was a snowball's chance in hell that she could ever achieve anything close to what Serena has achieved.

bandabou
Nov 18th, 2012, 01:47 PM
Tbh I think it's too ridiculous to count as serious shade. I'm not disagreeing with you about the fact that attention paid to players isn't proportional to their achievements. But as Chrissie fan pointed out, there is only one of the current generation who is regarded as a serious GOAT contender. Everybody seriously interested in tennis knows that, including Maria and 99.9% of her fans.

At the end of the day, I think Masha would happily give up all the gushing she currently receives if she thought there was a snowball's chance in hell that she could ever achieve anything close to what Serena has achieved.

Look, I'm not complaining. I'm just keeping things real.
The only thing that is in Serena's hands is winning matches, majors...and that she's doing great, better than anybody since Graf/Navratilova et al..and the rest well, it's gonna be what it is.

If people gonna gush for a much much less acomplished player, just because she is white with blue eyes?! Then...:shrug:

But we don't have to play dummy and silly, like that it ISN'T the case.

kiwifan
Nov 18th, 2012, 03:31 PM
money (how many pick up soccer games can you have for the price of two decent tennis rackets and a new can of balls - I'm thinking about 8; that's 200+ kids playing soccer for the same price as two playing tennis)
traditional class snobbery (which began fading only with McEnroe/Connors era)
reverse working class snobbery (tennis is for girly men, prissy preppie boys, not real men; again which began fading with Connors)
actual racism (even in my lifetime, I've been told tennis is a "white sport")
rise of team sports (baseball, basketball, football & soccer all were more welcoming of minorities before tennis)
fade of tennis in popularity (when I was a kid, late 70s it seemed like everyone owned a tennis racket & everyone knew who the top American players were if not the top players in the world; definitely not the case now)

Start da Game
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:22 PM
Rubbish stats.

The position of cricket and field hockey is inflated by just one country: India (which all by itself constitutes more than 75% of all players & fanbases of both sports).

The real top 3 "most widespread" sports are without a shadow of a doubt
1 = soccer
2 & 3 = athletics and basketball

hahaha.....cricket is australia's national sport and has a massive following in the country including its prime minister.....needless to talk about its hugeness in england and wales, southern africa, carribbean islands and its ever increasing popularity in many parts of the world......indian subcontinent constitutes a major chunk of followers of course......

nobody gives a real damn about basketball outside united states except maybe china and one or two small nations......athletics are just olympic sports......athletics is also a very broad collection in general with several sub-sports and we know what they worth individually in comparison to sports like cricket......

football is the only sport which excels cricket in popularity and of course by a big margin......

hablo
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:29 PM
Well, I watch more athletics. Never seen a game of cricket in my life... :lol:

Frankly, I've even seen soccer games on tv here, never any cricket. :tape:

Start da Game
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:34 PM
Again, this sport requires brain cells and money. Middle easterners may be filthy rich but they are _________________ (fill in the blank) :p

i know what you mean but still if we can have players like qureshi and jaziri, imagine what would have happened had they taken initiatives and spread this sport......

they run behind doha because they are thrown with millions by those sheiks......they go to abu dhabi and qatar for the same reason......

running after nations whichever throw money......what "higher section" behavior is that and what "supremacy" are we talking about?

how about protecting its identity and building a bigger base to survive in all world conditions? they can learn a lot from FIFA......

i am blaming the system for throwing a "white" outlook to the sport and totally failing to bring a bigger global appeal to tennis......who's with me?

Start da Game
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:37 PM
Well, I watch more athletics. Never seen a game of cricket in my life... :lol:

Frankly, I've even seen soccer games on tv here, never any cricket. :tape:

then i am sorry to say you have missed a lot of fun.....

Chrissie-fan
Nov 18th, 2012, 04:57 PM
i know what you mean but still if we can have players like qureshi and jaziri, imagine what would have happened had they taken initiatives and spread this sport......

they run behind doha because they are thrown with millions by those sheiks......they go to abu dhabi and qatar for the same reason......

running after nations whichever throw money......what "higher section" behavior is that and what "supremacy" are we talking about?

how about protecting its identity and building a bigger base to survive in all world conditions? they can learn a lot from FIFA......

i am blaming the system for throwing a "white" outlook to the sport and totally failing to bring a bigger global appeal to tennis......who's with me?
Well, it's harder for an individual sport to gain popularity and to hold on to it once it's there than for a team sport because every country, every city and in some cases even every village has a home team. For an individual sport like tennis it's popularity depends to a large degree on whether there are any great home players around. In Belgium tennis was very popular when Clijsters and Henin were playing. But many of them weren't real tennis fans - they were Clijsters and Henin fans. As soon as they were gone, so was the audience (or most of them anyway). Now they go nuts over Colsaerts, the golfer. Since he was selected for the Ryder cup a few months ago I've seen more articles about golf than in the previous twenty years combined. And I think the situation is more or less the same in most countries. As individual sports go however I think that tennis has a substantial and loyal fanbase.

rjd1111
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:23 PM
I don't think that's entirely true. Virtually everyone considers Serena an all time great, and a tier one all time great at that, on par with Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf and the rest of them. Sharapova gets a lot of praise as well (and what's wrong with that?), but I never heard a commentator say that she's as great, let alone greater than Serena. Maria may be as POPULAR as Serena, but she would also be this popular if there was no Serena or if Serena was white. You can't stop (or blame) people for loving who they love. Kournikova was also the most popular player when she was around, even though she didn't achieve nearly as much as Hingis, Davenport and some of her other very white contemporaries (or Sharapova for that matter).

Mary Carillo said Maria was still the better player when

announcing a match that Serena won

hablo
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:32 PM
then i am sorry to say you have missed a lot of fun.....

Maybe.

bandabou
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:33 PM
Mary Carillo said Maria was still the better player when

announcing a match that Serena won

It's those lil things that just makes you...:shrug:

hablo
Nov 18th, 2012, 05:35 PM
Mary Carillo said Maria was still the better player when

announcing a match that Serena won

What an odd thing to say. :o

Start da Game
Nov 18th, 2012, 06:00 PM
Do your research. I'm not going to argue with you. If you don't want to know, believe that's on you.

There are many DNA, Geographical, Cultural, Archaeological, Anthropological and historical links that prove this, including from highly regarded, accredited scientist.

With all due respect, you appear to be the ignorant one (not surprised judging by your thread title), for being so immediately close minded to the notion.

this funny post got lost in the mix i see......i thought i would answer it even though the ignorance displayed doesn't deserve a response......

it's not even funny you try to suggest that the original indians dravidians as "ethiopeans" based on one claim from some random clown whom nobody cared, when there are several strong claims from other scientists that dravidians have caucasian roots......talk about selective memory......

what exactly is "white" or "black" and who are we to define that? further being from india a country which classified people based on skin colour some 1000s of years ago, i find it funny that people like you conclude based on the "white", "black" definitions given in what is it 18th century AD?

have you ever seen northern indians, central indians and east indians? greeks, spaniards and several others look way darker in comparison......

so who are we to decide what's white or what's black when humans were all the same when the species first evolved 700 thousand years ago?

and note that it is impossible to stereotype indian race or indian skin colour......

Start da Game
Nov 18th, 2012, 06:03 PM
Well, it's harder for an individual sport to gain popularity and to hold on to it once it's there than for a team sport because every country, every city and in some cases even every village has a home team. For an individual sport like tennis it's popularity depends to a large degree on whether there are any great home players around. In Belgium tennis was very popular when Clijsters and Henin were playing. But many of them weren't real tennis fans - they were Clijsters and Henin fans. As soon as they were gone, so was the audience (or most of them anyway). Now they go nuts over Colsaerts, the golfer. Since he was selected for the Ryder cup a few months ago I've seen more articles about golf than in the previous twenty years combined. And I think the situation is more or less the same in most countries. As individual sports go however I think that tennis has a substantial and loyal fanbase.

this is a good point and that's where ITF can chip in......there are hardly any campaigns and fundings to improve the sport......

Volcana
Nov 18th, 2012, 06:26 PM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race, then why only tennis?First of all, I disagree with your premise. But to the extent it's true, the anser is ..... Money.

Tennis requires large facilities that require constant maintenance. Very few sports are like that. Golf, football, baseball, basketball, the required facilities are inexpensive. The only sport that is much like that is gymnastics, for the same reason. Costly, specialized equipment. So it's only played a lot in richer countries, and the European and European-descended countries are the richest. No surprise that the non-White countries that do produce top tennis players are rich too. Japan, China, India.

There's also a regionality issue to it in the States. In Georgia, a lot of Blacks play tennis. In New York, not so much. One reason why? Money. In Georgia, there are a lot of public courts. There are a lot of public courts in New York/New Jersey too, but for a quarter of the year, they're covered with snow. So people who want to play have to pay for indoor court time. The average white household has ten times the wealth of the average Black household in the USA.

Tennis is great, but the cost of indoor court time is to the sky.

Start da Game
Nov 18th, 2012, 06:45 PM
First of all, I disagree with your premise. But to the extent it's true, the anser is ..... Money.

Tennis requires large facilities that require constant maintenance. Very few sports are like that. Golf, football, baseball, basketball, the required facilities are inexpensive. The only sport that is much like that is gymnastics, for the same reason. Costly, specialized equipment. So it's only played a lot in richer countries, and the European and European-descended countries are the richest. No surprise that the non-White countries that do produce top tennis players are rich too. Japan, China, India.

There's also a regionality issue to it in the States. In Georgia, a lot of Blacks play tennis. In New York, not so much. One reason why? Money. In Georgia, there are a lot of public courts. There are a lot of public courts in New York/New Jersey too, but for a quarter of the year, they're covered with snow. So people who want to play have to pay for indoor court time. The average white household has ten times the wealth of the average Black household in the USA.

Tennis is great, but the cost of indoor court time is to the sky.

tennis is played at a serious level only by 1000s around the world, in comparison to 10s of thousands in football or even more, and similar figures in many other sports......

when the participation count is not too high, it also should not be so difficult to carve out few decent tennis players from non white regions when there are lots of people who can afford in all parts of the globe......it's certainly not like you are spending as high as for formula 1 training......

so one has to wonder are they really being invited to the sport? that seems to be the only real reason to me.......

Invisible Fan
Nov 18th, 2012, 07:35 PM
hahaha.....cricket is australia's national sport and has a massive following in the country including its prime minister.....needless to talk about its hugeness in england and wales, southern africa, carribbean islands and its ever increasing popularity in many parts of the world......indian subcontinent constitutes a major chunk of followers of course......

nobody gives a real damn about basketball outside united states except maybe china and one or two small nations......athletics are just olympic sports......athletics is also a very broad collection in general with several sub-sports and we know what they worth individually in comparison to sports like cricket......

football is the only sport which excels cricket in popularity and of course by a big margin......

Small nations like Russia, Greece, Serbia, Croatia, Lithuania, Spain etc etc
I guess seeing your flag I shouldn't be surprised you seriously think cricket is more popular worldwide than basketball.
Outside of the subcontinet it has very limited appeal globally.

rjd1111
Nov 18th, 2012, 11:45 PM
What an odd thing to say. :o


I know..........But Carillo is kinda .....Odd

Start da Game
Nov 19th, 2012, 08:20 AM
Small nations like Russia, Greece, Serbia, Croatia, Lithuania, Spain etc etc
I guess seeing your flag I shouldn't be surprised you seriously think cricket is more popular worldwide than basketball.
Outside of the subcontinet it has very limited appeal globally.

yeah right......cricket has very limited following in australia, england, south africa, west indies, new zealand......try telling that to IPL followers in australia, england, south africa, united states and canada......

IPL(club cricket) alone washes away basketball's popularity......we don't even need to go to international level......

Beat
Nov 19th, 2012, 09:46 AM
every other major global sport is not dominated by any particular race

not true.

Invisible Fan
Nov 19th, 2012, 10:51 AM
yeah right......cricket has very limited following in australia, england, south africa, west indies, new zealand......try telling that to IPL followers in australia, england, south africa, united states and canada......

IPL(club cricket) alone washes away basketball's popularity......we don't even need to go to international level......

If you say it it must be true :o
Cricket isn't that popular in South Africa and New Zealand and your wise not to go to international level seeing as only about 10 teams play international cricket regularly.

Start da Game
Nov 19th, 2012, 02:30 PM
quality over quantity in cricket......cricket is just too big and too tough for too many small regions in this world......hence less participation from small nations......
almost all 10 teams play at a high quality level......that's the high point of cricket......besides there are several associate nations which play the sport at a different level......

basketball has a good club appeal but internationally it's not that big no matter how many teams take part in one or two random international tournaments outside that insignificant little world cup they have for themselves......