more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

Post by T » Fri, 06 Aug 1999 04:00:00


Is this true?  I would think so since tennis just deals with
individuals, where basketball and baseball uses whole teams.  I know a
lot more famous basketball players than tennis players.  Comments?

TS
Visit my page:
http://www.angelfire.com/ny2/timschmits

 
 
 

more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

Post by Dan » Fri, 06 Aug 1999 04:00:00


Quote:
> Is this true?  I would think so since tennis just deals with
> individuals, where basketball and baseball uses whole teams.  I know a
> lot more famous basketball players than tennis players.  Comments?

The world of sport doesnt revolve around US sports.What there is famous
basketballers and baseballers in the US are nobodys to the rest of the
World.Tennis players are much more famous than basketballers,but living in
the isolated and ignorant world of USA sport,you wouldnt know that.

 
 
 

more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

Post by Jeff Sik » Fri, 06 Aug 1999 04:00:00

Yeah uh wake up dude...Michael Jordan is the world's most famous
athlete...maybe even PERSON. He was recognizable by something like 85% of the
world's population, moreso than even those boring soccer player dudes like
Ronaldo and all them. US basketballers are quite famous across the world, and I
would venture to say some even more than foreign tennis players in other
countries where tennis is a much popular sport than basketball. The Dream Teams
have been drawing record crowds in the Olympics the last two times with people
getting in fights on site for tickets. That certainly is not because they are
unknowns.
So go back to your NON-USA "isolated and ignorant" country and just wish you
were 1/10 as famous as our basketballers are.

To answer the question posed in this thread....I would venture to say the
reason tennis players are not quite as famous is because they're not playing on
NBC or FOX in primetime every weekend of their season. Television and print
media largely put tennis in the back pages or minutes of telecasts in their
coverage. so it's not exactly getting top billing, which would certainly help.
Wimbledon, the French and US Opens get nice play but that doesn't make up for
the other 40 weeks of the year where there is little to no coverage. Basketball
and football....when it's in season is like 50% of Sportscenter (not that I'm
arguing I love basketball, football).
Plus, it takes great matches and decent rivalries to draw the average spectator
to tennis. It's an expensive sport to play and watch and that doesn't help
either.

Jeff

"I can't be having these feelings for you if I'm trying to take over the
world."
"God put me on this Earth to accomplish a certain number of things. Right now
I'm so far behind
I'll never die."

 
 
 

more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

Post by The Gramary » Sat, 07 Aug 1999 04:00:00

Quote:

> Is this true?  I would think so since tennis just deals with
> individuals, where basketball and baseball uses whole teams.  I know a
> lot more famous basketball players than tennis players.  Comments?

> TS
> Visit my page:
> http://SportToday.org/

    I think it has a lot to do with the difficultly of a casual observer
to really appreciate the game without any background playing the sport.
The action at a basketball game is a lot easier to figure out.  A dunk
almost explains itself.  But a kick serve that bounces up high to the
backhand side and forces an error?  From a channel-hopper's perspective,
they have no idea why a pro shouldn't be able to return that.  TV makes
everything look slower; Sampras, Ivanesivich, and a few others still have
serves that look fast, but it's hard to tell HOW fast.
    There's also the question of easy recognition, which I guess should be
one of the key criteria for being considered 'famous.'  There are college
basketball players that get more media exposure (at least within the US)
than most pro tennis players.  And the players are less physically
imposing.  If Michael Redd (2-guard for OSU) goes anywhere on campus,
people recognize him almost before he gets within shouting range.  The OSU
first singles player?  Don't know him, but my guess is he's a heckuva lot
better than Bob Weekender, and yet he could probably sit down across from
you at a restaurant and you would never have a clue that he was a tennis
player; actually, you'd probably be more likely to take him for an
intramural basketball player.  And I'll bet he never gets an interview for
anything more than a sports minute in the Columbus Dispatch or WOSU AM
radio.
    The point is it takes more than just being among the best in your
sport to get you fame.  At my high school (and this makes me gag), more
people have heard of Anna Kournikova than Pete Sampras.  Name a male pro?
Andre Agassi (name stands out is probably the only reason; most of them
couldn't pick him out of a crowd of two).  I ask them why him and they
usually say something like "isn't he the best in the world or something?"
Well, he's had his turn there, but then how come they've never heard of
Pete Sampras?  Duh....  Name a tennis tournament?  They hesitate, and
usually someone finally thinks of Wimbledon.  Name a college player?
Duh...... Ask them the same questions about basketball or football, and
most of them can talk all day, right down to their *** expressions,
height/weight, jersey number, recent trades, recent arrests, recent
affairs, etc.
    There has to be something really distinctive about a tennis player
before he/she really starts garnering enough attention to be considered
famous.  Distinctive about the players themselves as well as their games.
The Williams sisters are a prime example ... the Dennis Rodmans of the WTA
(I noticed someone on this ng calls them Medusa and Satana).  Kournikova
stands out simply because she would anywhere; people don't care that she's
never won a major tournament.  Agassi has a lot of charisma and camera
presence; he'd probably make a good actor, if he ever took an interest in
it.  But the huge spectrum of personal foibles, both in appearance and
character, that are commonplace in the basketball/football world (and
probably in the soccer world worldwide, since that's the big thing outside
the US) are much more scarce in tennis.  And it's not an innately
cinemagenic game.  That's why the Williams sisters and Kournikova have
attracted fans and media attention so quickly, and may ultimately be good
for the game (especially the women's game) even if they never win major
tournaments (even though from all indications, Big Sister is on the right
track).  People do want to see something GOOD, but even more important is
that it be INTERESTING.  Why do you think the World Chess Championships
never get a packed house in Madison Square Garden?  Everyone knows they're
good.  Who cares?

--
 The Gramarye

 TODAY'S WORDS OF WISDOM:

    Don't judge a book by its's cover.

 
 
 

more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

Post by al » Tue, 10 Aug 1999 04:00:00

Quote:

> Plus, it takes great matches and decent rivalries to draw the average spectator
> to tennis. It's an expensive sport to play and watch and that doesn't help
> either.

> Jeff

How is tennis expensive?  Where do you live?  Well I suppose it is some
places, around here a public court is a short drive away no matter where
you are.

--
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."  
                                                       -- Bertrand
Russell

 
 
 

more difficult to become famous in tennis than other sports ?

Post by Jeff Sik » Tue, 10 Aug 1999 04:00:00

How is tennis expensive?  Where do you live?  Well I suppose it is some
places, around here a public court is a short drive away no matter where
you are.
Well the answer to this question ....YES, tennis is expensive IF you want or
plan on becoming famous in it. By famous I'm assuming we're thinking about a
pro career. The sheer amount of dough forked out might blow your mind. Upwards
of $10,000 a year for lessons, rackets, shoes. strings. grips, clothes, tennis
bags, entry fees, travel to tournaments, food, lodging at those tournaments.
If you want to be a GOOD professional, you will REQUIRE all of this, not to
mention most likely having your kid play at some kind of tennis academy
routinely for competition. THAT was the question.
But, as far as for the average person, I think tennis is quite expensive. I'm
not exacly Donald Trump so that makes it even harder for me. $100 bucks for a
decent racket without strings is what you're looking at for startup. Hey, I
play as long as I can afford it. When I'd break strings on a once or twice a
week basis and had access to cheap string and a stringing machine where I could
do it myself at the tennis center I worked for, tennis was not too terribly
expensive. I had a way to get everything a little cheaper and got lots of
freebies. That made the difference surely. Now that I'm doing that no longer
what I plan on paying to play has changed. There are no decent free courts
---and no decent players their either (and the courts suck) anywhere nearby
where I live (And I live in a BIG TOWN). I'm looking at most likely a public
center where I'm going to be forking over $3.00 minimum per TIME to play. Well,
I don't know about you, but I like to play maybe 4-5 times a week. That gets
expensive when that place is 12 miles away. But I gladly do it as long as I
can. But, I always notice how much more money I have when I decide to play
basketball for a couple of weeks instead of tennis. So, that's just a little
comparison there for ya.

Jeff
"I can't be having these feelings for you if I'm trying to take over the
world."
"God put me on this Earth to accomplish a certain number of things. Right now
I'm so far behind
I'll never die."