Tennis Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,803 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
He says that he proposed this last year, and when it was rejected was when he began to consider leaving his position.

Larry Scott said:
Speaking at the Sony Ericsson Open, Scott said he favors a merger of the tours because he believes both are hurt by differences in rules, branding and sponsorship.

“The easier we make it for fans to follow tennis and understand, the more following there will be, and the stronger we’ll be commercially,” he said. “We would present the sport in a less fragmented way if it was together.

“An example: This tournament, if you’re a fan in Europe, you watch the men’s matches on one channel, the women’s matches on a different channel. That can’t be the smartest way to present the sport.”
http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_y...YF?slug=ap-wta-scottresigns&prov=ap&type=lgns

I think it would be a good idea. Poor Larry. :awww: I know it would mean more coverage in Australia of womens matches, and it would probably see the rebirth of mixed doubles. Part of me thinks that it was proposed just to ride the coattails of the ATP success, though.

So, thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,110 Posts
W's basketball and M's basketball are both run by the NBA, but they might as well be run by different organizations with their different schedules, marketing etc. Same goes for W's and M's soccer, the LPGA and PGA.

However just about every Olympic sport has men's and women's under one national governing body.

It's a tough issue. A combined tour would definitely attract more attention like the slams, IW and Miami. At the same time, it also risks relegating the women to second tier status, with way more M's matches shown than W's. I think it'll only work if the combined organization commits to promoting both M's and W's as equals and require TV networks to show equal number of M's and W's matches, sort of like the way they do it in the slams. But this would also make each non-slam tournamnet twice as big, not sure if the organizers of those events will bite, especially in this economy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,369 Posts
The WNBA is lucky to even still be standing, much less even be considered to be under the same governance of the NBA. Tennis is the only sport of its stature where there is a reasonable level of parity between men and women.

With that said, I'm not sure what - if any - benefit the ATP would get out of merging. Women's Tennis is simply an inferior product to the men and the tour relies more on people than play.

You might think that Daveydenko is boring or that Schuttler is, well Schuttler, but that match up is vastly superior to one random -ova against a random -eva. Women's tennis thrived in the late 90s because of the people not the game. Even the Williams sister finals, despite their high ratings and fan fare, had up to 100 errors combined and had a majority of rallies under 10 shots. What about boom boom S&V tennis on the men's side? That made it even higher quality as it was virtually 0 errors and the tiebreaks would be exciting as you'd see who would finally cave into losing serve.

What I'm getting at is that the women's tour relies on the players, while the men's tour can more rely on the game. Until that changes, the tours simply should not be equal.

Nor the pay for that matter, but thats another discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
The reason there IS a Women's Tennis Association is that the women got short-changed when tennis was ruled by one governing body. Why would it be different now? There are people who come to this board everyday to post that the women's game isn't as good as the men's. Women's tennis is a workable business proposition. It's doesn't need to merge with the ATP.

Women's sports, ALL women's sports, have an inherent advantage with one segment of the fan base. Serious阿阿mateur athletes. Your average male amateur athlete will learn more about tennis from watching SVetlana Kuznetsova than he ever will from watching Andy Roddick. Because he can't DO what Andy Roddick does. He can't do what Kuzzy does either, the the differential is smaller.

It's another sport, but a couple year ago, John Wooden (practically a god among basketball coaches) noted that the best pure basketball was played at the women's collegiate level. Not the most athletically gifted players, but they played the best basketball. Tennis is a bit like that. I improved my game quite a bit by re-making my serve based on Serena's. I'd LOVE to be able to serve like Goran Ivanisevic, but I'm not a genetic freak.

The WTA should focus on the athlete population, male and female, as opposed to the fan(tasy) population. Is there as much money in it? No. But it surer money. An amateur tennis player who wants to get better, not just fantasize 三/he's Roger Federer, is WAY better off studying Vera Zvonareva then Nikolai Davydenko.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slammer7

·
#GloballyEli
Joined
·
16,291 Posts
WTA/ATP merger? HATE the idea....so thank God he's going!!!

Both are very different and as we all know, the majority of us mainly follow one Tour or the other...merging them is not gonna make us who love WTA follow ATP players more. It would be a big mistake to merge the Tours, the women would play an even more infuriour role to the men and I can't see any advantage to it...at all! I prefer the way things are already, we love women's tennis so we follow WTA...easy as that, no need to make things more complex.

Larry only wanted the two merged so that Mr.Ego (Larry Scott) could be in charge of both Tours.......gawd the man has an ego the size of a mountain! :rolleyes: Just thankful that his idea got rejected :worship:


Larry 'The Ego' Scott :smash:

The quicker he goes the better!!! :eek:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
63,587 Posts
I'm sure Fernando Verdasco would love if it ever happens :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Elisse

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
The reason there IS a Women's Tennis Association is that the women got short-changed when tennis was ruled by one governing body. Why would it be different now? There are people who come to this board everyday to post that the women's game isn't as good as the men's. Women's tennis is a workable business proposition. It's doesn't need to merge with the ATP.

Women's sports, ALL women's sports, have an inherent advantage with one segment of the fan base. Serious阿阿mateur athletes. Your average male amateur athlete will learn more about tennis from watching SVetlana Kuznetsova than he ever will from watching Andy Roddick. Because he can't DO what Andy Roddick does. He can't do what Kuzzy does either, the the differential is smaller.

It's another sport, but a couple year ago, John Wooden (practically a god among basketball coaches) noted that the best pure basketball was played at the women's collegiate level. Not the most athletically gifted players, but they played the best basketball. Tennis is a bit like that. I improved my game quite a bit by re-making my serve based on Serena's. I'd LOVE to be able to serve like Goran Ivanisevic, but I'm not a genetic freak.

The WTA should focus on the athlete population, male and female, as opposed to the fan(tasy) population. Is there as much money in it? No. But it surer money. An amateur tennis player who wants to get better, not just fantasize 三/he's Roger Federer, is WAY better off studying Vera Zvonareva then Nikolai Davydenko.
that is like saying that kids all over the American basketball courts were trying to mirror their games after Steven Kerry instead of Michael Jordan :lol:... you completely underestimate the power of dreaming and ego, people like or want to think they can play like the best (or at least what the market tells you who the best are), that is why amateur players fancy themselves on Agassi, Federer, Serena and few others, not on some lower ranked player no matter how more attainable his/her strokes seem to be... Can you really imagine young players saying on court they want to hit their forehands like Zvonareva instead of Federer? I didn't think either
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,215 Posts
that is like saying that kids all over the American basketball courts were trying to mirror their games after Steven Kerry instead of Michael Jordan :lol:...
First of all, I have know idea who Steve Kerry is. However there WAS a basketball player named Steve Kerr who had a jump shot that quire a few serious basketball player DID emulate. Straight lift, high release, very accurate. And of course, since he won a couple championships as Jordan's designated jump-shooter, a lot of people saw him.
you completely underestimate the power of dreaming and ego, people like or want to think they can play like the best (or at least what the market tells you who the best are), that is why amateur players fancy themselves on Agassi, Federer, Serena and few others, not on some lower ranked player no matter how more attainable his/her strokes seem to be... Can you really imagine young players saying on court they want to hit their forehands like Zvonareva instead of Federer? I didn't think either
While you points are well, made, I don't it obviates mine. Yes, people who are busy dreaming about it may well imagine they are Federer. People who are serious about improving can be interested in looking at players who physical skills more closely match their own.

I'm reminded of the last YEC in Los Angeles. Empty seats far and wide, all the way to the semis. When there are tens of thousands of amateur players in Claifornia who they could have simply given those tickets to. Just contact the athletic departments the day before and say 'we got free tickets if your players want to have a clsoeup look at some pros'.

Maybe I do underestimate the power of dreaming and ego. But definitely I understand the power of having models you can actually emulate.
 

·
Winner
Joined
·
14,940 Posts
Keep them seperate.

I'm very disappointed that Eastbourne is being combined. That will mean less WTA coverage not more. In a combined state, men's tennis will always overshadow women's tennis in every aspect, it's just the way it is unfortunately.

I see ATP and WTA as different sports. They both have their good and bads, but in general I prefer the WTA and I like that my tennis fandom can exist solely in WTA territory. If I want to watch men's tennis I will, but I don't want it forced on me like it is at the slams.

I will say that the WTA need to seriously work on the way they are promoting the tour, but leaning on the ATP is not the answer.
 

·
Hoping for less D'oh and more woohoo!
Joined
·
14,454 Posts
Keep them seperate.

I'm very disappointed that Eastbourne is being combined. That will mean less WTA coverage not more. In a combined state, men's tennis will always overshadow women's tennis in every aspect, it's just the way it is unfortunately.

I see ATP and WTA as different sports. They both have their good and bads, but in general I prefer the WTA and I like that my tennis fandom can exist solely in WTA territory. If I want to watch men's tennis I will, but I don't want it forced on me like it is at the slams.

I will say that the WTA need to seriously work on the way they are promoting the tour, but leaning on the ATP is not the answer.
:worship::worship::worship: Totally agree. A combined tour will only hurt what the women have been building and will only regress the progress they have made over 30+ years.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top