Best commentator

by shivfan Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:26 am

My favourite is Mats Wilander....

Unlike Andrew Castle, Wilander talks from the experience of having won five Grand Slam titles, and therefore speaks with a certain level of authority.

Wilander gives you an insight into how a Grand Slam champion thinks. For example, during the US Open, he described how he felt in the minutes before a final, saying that he was booed in the last final, and he didn't want it to happen again, and how that preyed on his mind. Just a while ago, he spoke about how fired up he was during a French, but he always felt he didn't belong on the courts at Wimbledon.

In an interesting interview with Nadal, he asked the Spaniard if he looked at the draw on the eve of its start, and said, "I can beat him, beat him, beat him, maybe, beat him, beat him, etc." Of course, Rafa denied it! What else could be do? But Wilander asked that question, because he knew that's how champions thought when they looked at the draw....

That kind of honesty from a former great is refreshing, and what makes Wilander a unique commie IMHO....

by Guest Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:31 am

Wilander is a bag of poo as a commentator.

Peter Fleming arguably the best commentator out there.

by Turron Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:36 am

legendkillarV2 wrote:Peter Fleming arguably the best commentator out there.

... if you like your commentators to stop in mid phrase while they search through their lexicon of telling clauses. He's better than many because he tries to limit the hyperbole but to be honest, I don't think that he anywhere near Frew McMillan in terms of insight.

by barrystar Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:37 am

Lindsay Davenport for me, sans pareil; she never slips into clichés and analyses the details of what the players are doing and why. It opens up a passage of play for me - she can even make a first serve into the net make sense when she tells you what the server is trying (but failed) to do and why the pattern of the last few games has suggested that tactic to the server.

by Guest Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:38 am

For analysis, Petchey all day.

by Turron Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:01 am

legendkillarV2 wrote:For analysis, Petchey all day.

For someone who can be analytical, his lapses into exaggeration are wearing.

by Danny_1982 Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:35 am

In no particular order Davenport, Fleming, Petchey.

Good technical analysis, and apart from Petchey occasionally, they don't go over the top (describing every good match as one of the best ever).

I like McEnroe too, even though he talks too much. The greats that have moved into commentary seem absolutely fixated with the mental side, phychological advantages and disadvantages and the like... They speak like it is the most important aspect by a mile, whereas us fans focus a bit more on who's got the better backhand, serve, return etc...

I wonder if it will be the same in ten years when the current crop are retired?

by barrystar Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:45 am

Danny_1982 wrote:In no particular order Davenport, Fleming, Petchey.

Good technical analysis, and apart from Petchey occasionally, they don't go over the top (describing every good match as one of the best ever).

I like McEnroe too, even though he talks too much. The greats that have moved into commentary seem absolutely fixated with the mental side, phychological advantages and disadvantages and the like... They speak like it is the most important aspect by a mile, whereas us fans focus a bit more on who's got the better backhand, serve, return etc...

I wonder if it will be the same in ten years when the current crop are retired?

The greats should know, but I think it's lazy to focus on the mental side because it's easier to BS and it's inseparable from the physical side in the sense that the more reliable the technique or the fitter the player the less the effect. I suspect that if only they knew it when they talk about the mental side they are automatically reading the respective merits of the players' games - it would be nice if they gave us that advantage as well.

by Jahu Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:51 am

David Mercer and Fleming.

by Danny_1982 Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:57 am

Barry - very true, it's very easy to BS when talking about the mental side. Wanting it more, showing fight... And other such cliches. Sometimes it could be David Brent in the commentary box!

Becker for example, you'd never hear him say in commentary that a player likes rotating from too low a starting point on the backhand side, therefore could be suceptable to high bouncing balls on that side... It's all "he's the the mental edge at the moment, he wants it more".

Lack of expertise on the technical side? Or just keeping it back? I can't possibly image a great of the game doesn't have great technical expertise, so surely it's the latter...

by DJB14 Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:17 pm

I find this topic very subjective but here are my picks. I like the following:

Peter Fleming
John McEnroe
Mats Wilander (although does have a tendency to exaggerate at times)
Time Henman (although he can be boring)
Boris Becker (again like wilander he can exaggerate)

I cannot stand John Loyd or Andrew Castle both talk absolute drivel and Murray worshipers. Barry Cowan used to be alright when he was discussing anyone but Murray but now he just seems to have no clue at times.

by Danny_1982 Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:21 pm

DJB14 - I agree about Castle and Lloyd. Horrible to listen to when any if the top guys are involved, not just Murray. Just sycophantic fawning.

Equally, when talking about a player outside the top 4 they are very patronising towards them. So for me I can't stand them at any time. Cowan is actually the most critical of all the British commentators towards Murray, which I quite like. He is a bit like an annoying school kid though.

by Haddie-nuff Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:51 pm

John McEnroe WITH Boris (certainly not Boris on his own) these two make a comedy duo imo.-
Max Wilader may have been a good player as a commentator he is absolutely the pits.. he is biased and changes his opinion at the drop of a hat. I like Henman but he is a bit monotone. I like Petchey as has been said very analytical and I like that.

by banbrotam Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

Not certain why Willander gets all this negativity

For me he gives a considered opinion, just because he might change it occassionally is wrong??

I feel that lots don't like how smug he is. Obviously, like Cash and Castle he loves himself - but he at least gives us some good insights

My favourite is Jim Courier

Becker is easily the worst, he has nothing to bring to the commentary table in terms of tactics etc other than be aggressive. We get no technica insights as we do with Willander and Courier

Mac is another (a bit like Cricket's Michael Vaughan) who is becoming more known for been a 'wit' than their knowledge

by Haddie-nuff Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:12 pm

I dont think you could question Mac´s knowledge .. it might appear to get lost whilst he is trying to be a comedian.. but get him talking seriously and the man knows his tennis

by **laverfan** Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:29 pm

Patrick McEnroe, Cahill on this side of the water are pretty reasonable. Courier is insightful (even with the 5 minutes of post-match stuff).

Hewitt has been covering AO to some extent, and perhaps will join it permanently.

Stolle is good.

Jimmy Arias, Leif Shiras, Gilbert and many others end up being comical, at times.

Shout for Frew McMillan, too.

Evert is good (and I have a soft spot for her).

Never warmed up to Wade or Croft.

Like Mercer.

Bud Collins is now getting on, but used to be very good.

by banbrotam Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:36 pm

Haddie-nuff wrote:I dont think you could question Mac´s knowledge .. it might appear to get lost whilst he is trying to be a comedian.. but get him talking seriously and the man knows his tennis

I agree and along with Vaughan are my favourite players of their respective sports. But I just wish they would do less of the larking around

For me Courier has the perfect balance

by banbrotam Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:37 pm

laverfan wrote:Patrick McEnroe, Cahill on this side of the water are pretty reasonable. Courier is insightful (even with the 5 minutes of post-match stuff).

Hewitt has been covering AO to some extent, and perhaps will join it permanently.

Stolle is good.

Jimmy Arias, Leif Shiras, Gilbert and many others end up being comical, at times.

Shout for Frew McMillan, too.

Evert is good (and I have a soft spot for her).

Never warmed up to Wade or Croft.

Frew's a great call. I also think that Wade is pretty good. She tends to have a jumbled way of explaining her point, but is often spot on. I've not idea why Croft is anywhere near a TV camera, covering Tennis!!

Like Mercer.

Bud Collins is now getting on, but used to be very good.

by bogbrush Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:59 pm

Less is always more when it comes to commentary.

Wilander is appalling. The man is a random opinion generator.

by bogbrush Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:01 pm

banbrotam wrote:Not certain why Willander gets all this negativity

For me he gives a considered opinion, just because he might change it occassionally is wrong??

I feel that lots don't like how smug he is. Obviously, like Cash and Castle he loves himself - but he at least gives us some good insights

My favourite is Jim Courier

Becker is easily the worst, he has nothing to bring to the commentary table in terms of tactics etc other than be aggressive. We get no technica insights as we do with Willander and Courier

Mac is another (a bit like Cricket's Michael Vaughan) who is becoming more known for been a 'wit' than their knowledge

Quite. I can't help but smile at the effect this is supposed to have on Djokovic's game. Any Slams he wins with Boris count double in my book.

by Talatonian Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:35 pm

Who is the man with the boring supercilious voice. He speaks more sense than his voice .

by ZZ Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:37 pm

I think Wiklander, Castle and Lloyd are rubbish. The only person worse than them is the guy who usually commentates alongside Wilander, Chris something I think. Just dreadful. Adds nothing to the analysis, gushes sycophantically and makes random statements which are not funny and bear no relation to whats going on.

The best are the ESPN crew, and Koenig and Goodhall.

Davenport, Courier and Hewitt are excellent as far as former players goes.

Talatonian I think you may be referring to Frew Macmillan. Sounds boring as hell but actually speaks sense.

by Lionel Hutz Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:48 pm

Rusedski and Castle. That's my dream team. Hehehe

by bogbrush Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:18 pm

Lionel Hutz wrote:Rusedski and Castle. That's my dream team. Hehehe

You had me going for a moment there.

by lydian Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:46 pm

Simon Reed does my fruit.

by Henman Bill Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:07 am

lydian wrote:Simon Reed does my fruit.

Good shout here for most random comment of the day.

by LuvSports! Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:35 am

Robbie Koenig and Jason Goodall.

by socal1976 Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:28 am

Jason Goodall, Mac, and Chris fowler on the US Espn is really good although he is not a tennis player he has a love for the game and is not an obnoxious personality.

by slashermcguirk Sat Jan 25, 2014 10:45 am

Peter Fleming is superb, so easy to listen to and never biased towards any player. Also like McEnroe at times and petchey can be good for analysis. I find becker quite entertaining too.

Can't stand Andrew castle!!! So irritating and his bias is unrivalled!!

by The Special Juan Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:32 am

Jimbo Courier for me. I like him both as a pundit and a commentator because he talks sense, something which some commentators don't know how to do. I like Boris' hair but that's about it when it comes to him. Also, a shout out for the great Martina who's been a welcome edition to the commentary box.

David Mercer - the Clive Everton of tennis.

by consigliare Sat Jan 25, 2014 10:33 pm

Frew Macmillon is about the only proper skilled commentator left out there.

by **laverfan** Sun Jan 26, 2014 2:30 am

consigliare wrote:Frew Macmillon is about the only proper skilled commentator left out there.

Very glad to see you back. rose

by Sponsored content

Best commentator

Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator

Re: Best commentator