Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Who else agrees? This has been a terrible tournament so far, and it's only the second round.

So many retirements, and most of the interesting names are either not playing or have already lost.

For me, the only thing that could result in this tournament living up to expectations would be to see Mauresmo go deep, or Szavay or Safarova having a nice run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
its in a hard spot in the schedule. like how most years on the atp, toronto is good tennis, cincinnati has injuries as a precaution for the uso.
 

·
Winner
Joined
·
14,940 Posts
I agree the injuries have been bad but other than that, it's only been a couple of days, give it a chance.

The big names in a tournament do not decide how good the tournament will be. The tennis is the only thing that matters, and from what I've read the Kleybanova-Venus match was a good one, which is all that matters. Some people don't realise that, and automatically assume a semi-final line-up with the top 4 seeds means the tournament is a success.

I wouldn't care if say Kleybanova went on to win this Mandatory event, as long as she's playing well and the matches are good to watch. It wouldn't make the tournament any less significant compared to the other Mandatories.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I agree the injuries have been bad but other than that, it's only been a couple of days, give it a chance.

The big names in a tournament do not decide how good the tournament will be. The tennis is the only thing that matters, and from what I've read the Kleybanova-Venus match was a good one, which is all that matters. Some people don't realise that, and automatically assume a semi-final line-up with the top 4 seeds means the tournament is a success.

I wouldn't care if say Kleybanova went on to win this Mandatory event, as long as she's playing well and the matches are good to watch. It wouldn't make the tournament any less significant compared to the other Mandatories.
Fair enough, but it probably helps that the girl in your avatar isn't playing this tournament, right? ;) I mean I can't imagine you jumping for joy over Kleybanova's fantastic tennis if it meant she just beat a top player who was one of your favourite players.

I don't think that a tournament is only a success if the seeds make the semis, but I do think a tournament which has retirements galore and big names dropping out to players they generally wouldn't lose to isn't exactly entertaining.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,370 Posts
I agree the injuries have been bad but other than that, it's only been a couple of days, give it a chance.

The big names in a tournament do not decide how good the tournament will be. The tennis is the only thing that matters, and from what I've read the Kleybanova-Venus match was a good one, which is all that matters. Some people don't realise that, and automatically assume a semi-final line-up with the top 4 seeds means the tournament is a success.

I wouldn't care if say Kleybanova went on to win this Mandatory event, as long as she's playing well and the matches are good to watch. It wouldn't make the tournament any less significant compared to the other Mandatories.
i agree in part, but a great semi final btween 2 stars just has an extra something than a great semi between 2 good players. also i assume the tournaments success (bums on seats, t.v audiences) is more determined on star names winning through even if the tennis isnt the greatest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,613 Posts
^Yes and judging by attendance numbers, they really do need more bums on seats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
i agree in part, but a great semi final btween 2 stars just has an extra something than a great semi between 2 good players. also i assume the tournaments success (bums on seats, t.v audiences) is more determined on star names winning through even if the tennis isnt the greatest.
Yep, you bring up a good point. :yeah: A successful tournament is one that makes a nice profit, so that the tournament can continue on for the years ahead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,190 Posts
Not a failure. But we need stars to start doing well and having matches like the Safina-Venus semi last week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,144 Posts
Never seen such low crowds, even for the men. I haven't actually seen the crowds for the women but I assume they're low too.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,187 Posts
it's a joint event with the top men and women at this event. It will never be a fail since it is highly unlikely top seeds from both sides will be knocked off early.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
it's a joint event with the top men and women at this event. It will never be a fail since it is highly unlikely top seeds from both sides will be knocked off early.
I'd actually forgotten it was a joint event. :tape: Normally I love joint events, they're so fun because there are normally some off court functions that the players from both tours join up for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,495 Posts
Привет;15629265 said:
Fair enough, but it probably helps that the girl in your avatar isn't playing this tournament, right? ;) I mean I can't imagine you jumping for joy over Kleybanova's fantastic tennis if it meant she just beat a top player who was one of your favourite players.

I don't think that a tournament is only a success if the seeds make the semis, but I do think a tournament which has retirements galore and big names dropping out to players they generally wouldn't lose to isn't exactly entertaining.
so, you said it yourself. its a failure because your fave lose.
 

·
Winner
Joined
·
14,940 Posts
Fair enough, but it probably helps that the girl in your avatar isn't playing this tournament, right? ;) I mean I can't imagine you jumping for joy over Kleybanova's fantastic tennis if it meant she just beat a top player who was one of your favourite players.

I don't think that a tournament is only a success if the seeds make the semis, but I do think a tournament which has retirements galore and big names dropping out to players they generally wouldn't lose to isn't exactly entertaining.
Well it doesn't matter if I'm happy about the result or not, as long as the majority of the fans enjoy the tennis that's all that counts. I'm gutted when my faves lose but I'm just one person.

I think the unpredictablity aspect is one of the biggest draws to women's tennis actually. It makes the tournaments exciting that the top players don't win every match.


i agree in part, but a great semi final btween 2 stars just has an extra something than a great semi between 2 good players. also i assume the tournaments success (bums on seats, t.v audiences) is more determined on star names winning through even if the tennis isnt the greatest.
Only if the match is good. Lord knows how many times we have had matches between two top players hyped up only for them to be total flops. I'd perhaps agree with you if we had some great rivalries at the top, but we don't. One of the worst things about men's tennis for me is how the top players seem to cruise through the early rounds most of the time. But when it gets to the semis and finals we have a fantastic situation with the top 4 all going against each other. We don't have those rivalries on the women's side, and sometimes it's nice to have an unexpected breakthrough run from a little-known name than a Kuznetsova-Safina match.

As for bums on seats, the top players have enough problems with that as it is. :tape: The first few days of a tournament are almost always played in front of emtpy stadiums now. By the time it gets to the weekend (quarers, semis, finals), it becomes more about the occasion than the names. For instance, you'd never see Centre Court at Wimbledon empty on finals day, whether it was Serena vs Venus or Makarova vs Kirilenko.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,303 Posts
have yu guys forgotten there is ahuge financial crisis out there? The first thing to go when everyone panics are the luxuries such as tennis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,186 Posts
I don't think the tournie is a fail, but the official website definitely is! Go vertical, not horizontal
I totally agree. The site is a mess, looks cheap and is confusing. WTF were they thinking. Its too soon to say the tournament is a fail, i think people will show up to see Rafa...some will probably stay for other matches too. However what in the world happend to the spaniard women?, i don't think there's anyone left.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,514 Posts
don't we still have Safina, Kuzzie, Jankovic, Mauresmo and maybe some others? The sisters lost, but I mean I'm not crying new rivers about it. They have the rest of the year to win tournies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
so, you said it yourself. its a failure because your fave lose.
I don't know if you realise this, but my faves lose a lot! ;) And I still manage to enjoy the majority of those tournaments.

Madrid has not excited me so far, and I don't think it will. :shrug: Not like a major tournament should, anyhow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
Привет;15629155 said:
Who else agrees? This has been a terrible tournament so far, and it's only the second round.

So many retirements, and most of the interesting names are either not playing or have already lost.

For me, the only thing that could result in this tournament living up to expectations would be to see Mauresmo go deep, or Szavay or Safarova having a nice run.
Since this tourney is mandatory, the problems aren't about the tourney's inability to attract the best talent. Rather it's about injuries, inadequate prep, over scheduling, bad luck, and/or poor playing by the players. How is this the tourney's fault?

:confused:

P.S. Well, maybe you could blame it on the one peripheral 'blue clay' court --- that might be legit.

.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top