Rooting against a player

First topic message reminder :

I did not initially want to post this so close after Rafa's loss, but with Federer also gone in a similar manner, I feel it is ok to go ahead now.

After Rafa lost, a number of posters expressed the sentiment that rooting against a player was not right.  If not outright inappropriate, then at least inferior to rooting for a player.  I wholeheartedly disagree.

In all kinds of sports, I often root against players or teams, and see no reason why not.  It is usually nothing personal, of course, it may just be that I do not like the style of their play, or maybe I cannot even pinpoint the reason myself.  But why should it be a bad thing to do?

In some mechanical respects, I even find rooting against a player preferable; everything else being equal, I prefer rooting for the underdog.  Now, there are four options:

a. I root for a very good player - in this case, he will typically not be the underdog, so it is suboptimal
b. I root for a not so good player - in this case, he will often lose early and I will not get to see him play that much - again suboptimal
c. I root against a not so good player - suboptimal for reasons similar to b
d. I root against a very good player - in this case, he will typically be the favorite, and will go deep in the tournaments, so I will have ample opportunity to root against him (and thus implicitly for his underdog opponents) - so this actually works best in a way

Of course, if the player I root against loses, I am not going to come here and start posting about "what a loser he really is".  I may even avoid some of the rational arguments with his fans for a while, to give them time to digest the loss of their favorite player.  But I do object to the notion that we should not be rooting against players, or that we should not show excitement at their losses.  I see it as no worse than posters showing excitement at the win of their favorite - after all, that win would have been accompanied by a loss of another player anyway.

I suspect that people who object to rooting against players tend to like players on a somewhat personal level.  I expect that if someone is looking at it from that perspective, then rooting against a player may appear to them to be similar to disliking the player on a personal level, which can then look odd.  My view on that is two-fold.  First, not everyone chooses their favorite players based on their like or dislike of the player as a person, and rooting for or against a player may not mean much more than liking or disliking certain style of play.  Second, if it is odd to dislike a player you do not really know, then why should it not be similarly odd to like a player you do not really know.  In other words, why is rooting for a player not viewed as similarly bizarre?

Anyway, really glad that Rafa lost early

lydian. Very eloquently put

I think the concept of rooting against a player is more to do with wanting a player to lose regardless of who they are playing. This is different from hoping a player loses because they are playing someone you like or because they may pose a threat to someone you like later in the tournament.
Wanting a player to lose regardless, because you've somehow created a negative emotional response to them is pandering to our lower basic instincts. I guess it can be harmless if the negativity is not too deep, but it can be a sign of emotional immaturity if taken to far, and it creates an overall negative effect in yourself, which can't be a good thing.

summerblues wrote:Is Mr. Borg given here as a positive example (kept cool in his matches) or as a negative example (cracked at 25 years old)?

Both. The immediate context of keeping cool vs. a lack of emotional attachment to the sport when the desire and passion were gone.

@Lydian... quite agree that the context is changed with

that emotions have meaning and serve a necessary purpose in environmental response and survival. It seems to me that to deny emotions is to switch off a key part of ourselves.

When a Tennis match is over, the opponent still survives, perhaps in a physical sense, more so than the emotional sense. Does Federer have emotional scars from Rome 2006?

This not the Roman Circus or the Klingon High Council, full of warriors, after blood-lust.

It seems to me that to deny emotions is to switch off a key part of ourselves.

If rooting for a player X against player Y, generates, a negative emotion - especially ones which devalue player Y - I expect such irrationality (IMO) to be unjustifiable, instead of hiding behind the fact that emotions are necessary for survival/propagation. Perhaps such delineation is where I feel human failure lies.

Staying neutral, i.e. avoiding emotional involvement...

That is not my position. See above for clarification. I am certain Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dalhmer or Kazcinsky or Charles Manson did not feel any compassion for their victims. (Quite agree with you on this one HE).

I would far rather get emotionally involved with a tennis player I liked to watch even if their demise in an event, set of results/statistics or career affects my inward (and sometimes outward) mood for an amount of time.

606v2, JA606, MTF, 606 seem to put no such limit on GOAT debates, do they? There is one everyday.

@SB... If not said earlier, excellent debate. I am looking forward to Federer joining the Tour of Champions in 2020, followed by Nadal in 2021, while Djokovic-Murray is played on the CC.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I think the concept of rooting against a player is more to do with wanting a player to lose regardless of who they are playing. This is different from hoping a player loses because they are playing someone you like or because they may pose a threat to someone you like later in the tournament.
Wanting a player to lose regardless, because you've somehow created a negative emotional response to them is pandering to our lower basic instincts. I guess it can be harmless if the negativity is not too deep, but it can be a sign of emotional immaturity if taken to far, and it creates an overall negative effect in yourself, which can't be a good thing.

A few random thoughts on this:

What do you mean by deep negativity here?  When I talk about rooting against a player, I am not expecting any negative feeling whatsoever against the player as a person (unless perhaps in the odd case where we may know something negative about the player which may then make us root against them).  Though, to be honest, I find strong positive feelings toward a player as a person similarly odd.

I am talking about rooting against them in the sport of tennis, not rooting against them as human beings.  In that respect, I am not sure I agree with you that wanting a player to lose "just because" is so bad.  But, in practice, I think it is a more or less hypothetical scenario anyway.  I think when we root against someone, it is almost always - in some respect - just because they represent a threat to something that we are rooting for.  It may be that the player is a threat to another player we like, or because their style of play is a threat to the style of play we would like to see, etc.

What I do agree with (well, of course, do I even need to spell it out?) is that we need to be able to separate tennis from life so to speak.  I like being emotionally invested in the outcome of a match (though, as I said earlier, it is becoming harder and harder to do as I am getting older ).  However, I certainly hope I can keep it at that - I am not going to dislike a player just because I like rooting against them.

laverfan wrote:

summerblues wrote:Is Mr. Borg given here as a positive example (kept cool in his matches) or as a negative example (cracked at 25 years old)?

Both. The immediate context of keeping cool vs. a lack of emotional attachment to the sport when the desire and passion were gone.

You have me a little confused now.  You were advocating - as I understand it - for less emotional involvement, and then produced an example which is conflicting at best.

Speaking of player examples, you may have heard of Mr. Federer.  He has been known to cry after he loses a match - or even after he wins one.  Yet, he managed to have a decent tennis career .

laverfan wrote:@SB... If not said earlier, excellent debate.

Thank you, LF.