Are We Losing Interest?

Dear fellow 606V2er's,

I wanted to really gauge current interest in the game. Being a regular poster here, I have noticed over the last few weeks a real lack of activity towards live tournaments and the current game. A lot of off court activities have garnered more responses and attention than on court. I guess off court headlines catch on more than on court at the moment.

I do sense the interest in tennis in this section is becoming more dormant and so I wanted to see how posters were feeling towards the current game. I understand that life gets in the way of watching tennis or following tennis, but that aside I don't get the feeling posters are interested in the game. Has the tennis enthusiast in you slowly dying a death?

For me, despite being up and down the M25 on a daily basis travelling between meetings and getting generally fed up with daily stupidity on the roads, tennis is not quite satisfying for me to watch at the moment. 12 months ago I would do all I could to catch up with matches or follow on the ATP site, but now I don't do any of that. Tennis for me at the moment is like a big block of High Pressure (Djokovic/Federer/Murray/Nadal) that refuses to be shifted by Low Pressure (The rest of the field). I feel I could go off the grid for 12 months, come back and oh that High Pressure is still there. I am like Rodin's The Thinker. Sitting there waiting for something to lift my interest again.

So I ask you 606V2 to please take part in the poll and let the world how you feel about the current game and what your interest is on a 1-10 scale. Mine I would say is a 3 right now.

Interest in the game declining - no. Interest in debating how rubbish Murray is - definitely. I've lost the will to debate so now choose my posts more liberally.

I've deliberately backed off from tennis because I couldn't be bothered to go through the annual disappointment of getting drawn into Novak's Roland Garros campaign.

What has surprised me though is how little I've missed following tennis. Glancing at the results occasionally has been quite sufficient.

I agree with your point above. It just feels like the same old stories over and over again.

Will Novak win RG? This is the 6th year in row we've had that narrative.

Rafa back in form? I'm afraid I just can't get excited by a story which boils down to "the most successful clay court player ever has some more success on clay courts".

As for young players, I'd begun to convince myself that some talent was breaking through. Then I watched some old videos of Rafa and Novak at age 19/20 and was reminded that how much better they are than the current crop.

I didn't consciously choose to start following tennis, it just drew me in. But there's not much drawing me in at present.

I'm about a 3 too.

And I think there are reasons for post fall offs. My reasons are posted above and Federer's inactivity of late sees an inevitable drop in posts plus some would say Djokovic dominance doesn't help.

These forums often go up and down LK (I've been up and down myself admittedly) and there are a few reasons IMO...

1. The game is stuck in the same position it has been since around 2008...with the big 4/5 always in the running for QF/SF/F of the big titles. Especially with Novak dominating which probably isn't good for the game. The landscape isn't really changing...its not like we have a new "wunderkind" like Nad/Djo/Fed/Mur who is ripping up the tour.

2. Many of the threads on here are about the top 4...the forum doesn't tend to talk about as many things or as in much depth for example as you'll see on TT Warehouse, e.g. tactics, gear, coaching, strings, juniors, etc.

3. Its also a long time between AO (Jan) and RG (May/Jun) and it gets more quiet in between slams on here usually.

4. Regular posters don't actually create that many new angle threads...posters are free to create new threads rather than just comment on everyone else's. That's often the problem in this forum I see...not enough people throwing something new into the mix so the discussions follow the threads that the usual people put up, e.g. no use complaining if you're not creating many threads...

As for "debating how rubbish Murray is"...well that's a gross oversight/simplification of what was actually a highly informed discussion that generated >250 posts.

I suspect things will hot up as we get towards Rome & RG.

I've dropped off a little too. It's not really the state of the game. I've just begun a new job in a new city. My first, real proper 9-5 job. As such tennis is on the back burner.
More than that, there isn't much to say at the moment, activity always goes up the more fed wins and the more novak loses, just based on the forums overall interest.

Tbh these clay masters are a formality now. Rafa has hi mojo back, novaks still good, Federer won't even be playing most of them. It's all in hold till rg

Thanks guys

HM, do you feel like last year for once Djokovic went into RG as being the man? I see that being the case this year and wondered if you preferred Djokovic as the hunter rather than the hunted? I think sometimes the excitement varies on that basis.

There seems to be a bit of a rebellion against dominance. Seeing it when Speith lost at the Masters and Leicester winning the league. Feels like the working man feels more inspired by underdog stories. Like I would rather be Bruce Springsteen than Elvis Presley.

Like you I am surprised how much I don't miss it.

I don't think so much about the traffic, but even posters you feel like are stuck in a trench of primarily seeing Fed/Raf clear up, Djokovic/Murray become a chasing pack. Djokovic is dominating and Murray occasionly sneaks some titles and then the wave behind them limps. Stan gave us a little excitement, but again has fallen away.

I certainly feel posters are like 'meh' at the moment. We are doing timewarp again!

legendkillarV2 wrote:I don't think so much about the traffic, but even posters you feel like are stuck in a trench of primarily seeing Fed/Raf clear up, Djokovic/Murray become a chasing pack. Djokovic is dominating and Murray occasionly sneaks some titles and then the wave behind them limps. Stan gave us a little excitement, but again has fallen away.

I certainly feel posters are like 'meh' at the moment. We are doing timewarp again!

Fair points. Who knows what motivates posters to post? No doubt if something sensational came out of the Maria Sharapova incident interest would be piqued or say if Kyrgios went deep again in a slam or such-like. My experience of forums is that you can only talk about the same subjects a certain amount of time before it gets monotous especially if there are no new members coming at things from a different angle.

legendkillarV2 wrote:HM, do you feel like last year for once Djokovic went into RG as being the man? I see that being the case this year and wondered if you preferred Djokovic as the hunter rather than the hunted? I think sometimes the excitement varies on that basis.

Yes, Djokovic was definitely the favourite last year and will almost certainly be this year too.

As to whether I prefer him being hunter or hunted, I've decided not to have a preference! I refuse to engage in it this year.

But Novak's position is part of my declining interest. He's reached a level of achievement where it's really only slams that matter from now on. His legacy isn't going to change much however many Masters events he wins.

This means that I don't really care who wins outside of the slams. In some respects this is a good thing as it means I can watch tennis on its own terms without being a fanboy. But, as much as I'd like to be a fan purely of 'the game', not rooting for a player does seem to decrease my enthusiasm overall.

Well, at least for many of us we've arrived at the place many predicted would happen with the way the game has gone. It's not any players fault (unless they're running the sport), it's the effect of homogenisation. Some of us (many in fact, including a range of player allegiences) have seen this coming for years.

As a spectator sport, tennis has a strong default to being boring. It has always needed certain things to counter this; "characters" (especially bad v good rivalries), variety (of winners, surprises, etc), controversy (behaviour, contentious decisions) and so on. The game wouldn't have been anywhere near as interesting in the 70's without McEnroe being both a genius and a nutcase, or the contrast to Borg. On the other hand, Pete Sampras crimes extended beyond his short rallies; his relatively absent personality acted to dull the game down in the 90's. For a long time now the game has lacked any of this;

- the top players are all well behaved, unless Murray is losing in which case he swears but since he mumbles so much we don't get the payoff
- it's the same guys
- playing the sameish way
- at every tournament
- with similar results
- and the same supporting cast, with all the same failings

So here it is. The only surprise is that anyone is surprised, except stand by for Federer to retire and it'll get a boatload worse (and not only to Fed fans).

I did watch the Wimbledon Final from 1988 the other day. Sweet memories.

It may lack a bit of refinement of styles since, but for some reason I find something courageous with the diving and knee jerk reactions at the net.

I agree BB that tennis needs 'characters' I do find a wry smile and enjoyment in a Murray or Fognini implosion because they take hump with things that would annoy me. As much as Federer's stylish play has impressed me over the years, sometimes it's down and out dogfight that sometimes satisfies me if I am convinced both players are emotionally invested in the contest. I guess that's why I found Hewitt endearing.

I remember Murray's run to the US Open Final in 2008 when he faced Melzer and when he finally won the match he launched a ball out of the stadium in home run fashion. I like a bit of that.

Its also part of the society we live in now too...people are risk-averse and made to conform more...so we see personalities subdued, safe % tennis...in contrast to the swash-buckling days of the 70s/80s where the guys would charge the net on a whim and see what happens when they got their...so matches had an element of surprise. Now its automaton tennis...back and forth the ralleys go, no-one taking real charges to the net except for some of the old guard (Federer and his SABR, Lopez and dare I say Stepanek who is still good value to watch).

I agree that homogenisation is a prime culprit, but then so is uniformity of coaching techniques, diets, getting to bed by 9pm every night or whatever...that all tends to produce a row of square, dull 'boxes'. Must admit that once the current top 3-4 have disappeared what's going to happen to the game...if its anything like the womens game then we're headed for trouble.

Maybe tennis has hit a bit of a stasis in terms of popularity? I know people on here incomprehensibly hate social media, but Nadal's Facebook "likes" has been stuck on 14.5 million for a while now. Same with Federer. For comparison Ronaldo has gained roughly that amount in the last twelve months.

Tldr: No new fans.

bogbrush wrote:
- and the same supporting cast, with all the same failings

A good point.

The proverbial QF against Berdych or Ferrer plays out the same way every time. There's no drama to it.

I personally have lost interest with the people who have been loudly telling me they have lost interest in the boring sport of tennis since about 2009. Talk about dull and tedious. I am just wondering when those who have been telling us about their waning interest for nearly a decade will lose what little remaining interest they have in the sport and will let those of us who like the tour enjoy it? Maybe we need a second poll?

I think you might think it a little more boring social if your player was not at the top of the pile every tournament.. if it had been another player your viewpoint may have been somewhat different. Personally I don't care, but Sampras bored me so it doesn't have to be Novak !!!
The tour is crying out for fresh blood .. and what is boring there is nothing on the horizon. Every tournament is predictable .. where are the surprises coming from ?

Yes Haddie and I would say there is a lot of interesting and watchable tennis players outside the top 4. I love watching Novak but Novak matches are small percentage of the tennis I watch maybe 10-20 percent. If someone doesn't find Kyrgios to be interesting or Paire or Gasquet or Nishikori or Zverev or Thiem; well then maybe that person should take up cribbage and stop complaining for a decade that the sport they comment and watch religiously is boring; I mean nobody is being held at gun point to watch or follow the sport. They can chose not to follow tennis at any time, but instead they feel it is incumbent on them to follow the sport for a decade and keep telling everyone how they are losing interest and how the sport sucks and the players you and others like are boring.

What I have found in life is that some people are only happy when they are complaining and unhappy, so caring about their complaints and taking them seriously will only drive you insane.

Fed's absences have obviously had an effect on interest levels but we've had Rafa's resurgence and a lot of good results from the younger brigade. Even during comparatively dull times there ought to be enough to keep people interested.
Can understand, though, that many fans are just waiting for the French to start before getting stuck in again.

socal1976 wrote:Yes Haddie and I would say there is a lot of interesting and watchable tennis players outside the top 4. I love watching Novak but Novak matches are small percentage of the tennis I watch maybe 10-20 percent. If someone doesn't find Kyrgios to be interesting or Paire or Gasquet or Nishikori or Zverev or Thiem; well then maybe that person should take up cribbage and stop complaining for a decade that the sport they comment and watch religiously is boring; I mean nobody is being held at gun point to watch or follow the sport. They can chose not to follow tennis at any time, but instead they feel it is incumbent on them to follow the sport for a decade and keep telling everyone how they are losing interest and how the sport sucks and the players you and others like are boring.

What I have found in life is that some people are only happy when they are complaining and unhappy, so caring about their complaints and taking them seriously will only drive you insane.

I'm not suggesting the some of the players are interesting, there are many I like to watch, however I am still living in hope that I will find one that is not only interesting but has the skills and ability to challenge for the No 1 spot.

However, I did find Vesley interesting to watch recently he wasn't a bit boring

Haddie-nuff wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Yes Haddie and I would say there is a lot of interesting and watchable tennis players outside the top 4. I love watching Novak but Novak matches are small percentage of the tennis I watch maybe 10-20 percent. If someone doesn't find Kyrgios to be interesting or Paire or Gasquet or Nishikori or Zverev or Thiem; well then maybe that person should take up cribbage and stop complaining for a decade that the sport they comment and watch religiously is boring; I mean nobody is being held at gun point to watch or follow the sport. They can chose not to follow tennis at any time, but instead they feel it is incumbent on them to follow the sport for a decade and keep telling everyone how they are losing interest and how the sport sucks and the players you and others like are boring.

What I have found in life is that some people are only happy when they are complaining and unhappy, so caring about their complaints and taking them seriously will only drive you insane.

I'm not suggesting the some of the players are interesting, there are many I like to watch, however I am still living in hope that I will find one that is not only interesting but has the skills and ability to challenge for the No 1 spot.

However, I did find Vesley interesting to watch recently he wasn't a bit boring

There you go, now if Novak lost two out three tournaments like a normal number 1 you wouldn't enjoy it as much when he gets beat. I am glad you enjoyed that match and the banter that ensues afterwards. My only advice would be to all fans to watch these guys outside of the top 5-10 guys who we have seen an talked about a thousand times. I find this new generation to be the most watchable generation of the last 20 years WITH the exception of course of the golden generation of Nadal/Djoko/Murray class of players, these guys will have to make some serious bones if they want to top the golden generation.

It was banter and ironically though it makes my point.. there are many out there that are interesting but that is as far as it gets.. we have been seriously spoilt and the top echelon are hard acts to follow .
There are a few I find entertaining, but few I can champion because I do not see them carrying the torch. I will continue to live in hope however and continue to watch, even if I do moan

sirfredperry wrote:Fed's absences have obviously had an effect on interest levels but we've had Rafa's resurgence and a lot of good results from the younger brigade. Even during comparatively dull times there ought to be enough to keep people interested.
  Can understand, though, that many fans are just waiting for the French to start before getting stuck in again.  

Be interesting to see reactions and interest when the FO swings round.

I thought HM made a good point now only being interested in Slams because of the legacy enhancing points it provides.

It seems to me everyone, or at least nearly everyone, lost interest in woman's tennis some time ago.  

In the men's game the top three + one have declined, apart from Djokovic who just doesn't get pushed much nowadays.  Those outside of the top three plus one have fallen off a cliff, Berdych, Tsonga, Monfils, Ferrer, Gasquet, US male tennis players.  Wawrinka isn't as good as last year.  The next generation have reached their ceilings.  Men's tennis is just not as good nor as competitively good as in the past.  It has become predictable, it is played at a lower level, all the players are older, the younger players haven't broken through.  It is an "aging era".

For British men's tennis - where is the next top ten British player?   There is nothing beyond Murray to excite the British audience.  Murray is part of a continuing generational cycle where there was at least one British male tennis player in the top 10.  Murray is getting on, his performance level has dropped off, yet there is nobody in the wings that looks like will be getting into the top ten, or even top twenty to take over interest from him.

Haddie-nuff wrote:It was banter and ironically though it makes my point.. there are many out there that are interesting but that is as far as it gets.. we have been seriously spoilt and the top echelon are hard acts to follow .
There are a few I find entertaining, but few I can champion because I do not see them carrying the torch. I will continue to live in hope however and continue to watch, even if I do moan

Well, we may not get players that replicate the success of the top three guys of this era, I guess you are right it is a bit of being spoiled by a good thing. But when the time is right the young guys will take over, its inevitable. Also they will do it with a game that will be very watchable and marketable. And this current crop that are early twenties and teens now is very good. I don't know you got aging legends and now you have young talent coming up.

Nore Staat wrote:
For British men's tennis - where is the next top ten British player?   There is nothing beyond Murray to excite the British audience.  Murray is part of a continuing generational cycle where there was at least one British male tennis player in the top 10.  Murray is getting on, his performance level has dropped off, yet there is nobody in the wings that looks like will be getting into the top ten, or even top twenty to take over interest from him.

I forgot was there ever a period when Britain was producing a steady stream of top pros in numbers? I mean isn't Murray the first Brit to win a slam since Fred Perry?

So let me get your perspective straight, the best British tennis player of the last 80 years is near his physical peak, and there are more British youngsters now in the top 200 than there was for most of the last oh I don't know eons, and your opinion is that there is little on offer nowadays for British fans? I mean did I miss this golden age of British tennis that existed before the terrible doldrums of today?

Not to pick on you Nore, but this unfortunately another one of the glass is half empty arguments that we always hear on this site. Why can't you just enjoy the modern British GOAT? I mean for 80 years British people were able to enjoy tennis without a multi-slam winner to cheer for, now they have what they asked for and are still unhappy.

socal1976 wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:
For British men's tennis - where is the next top ten British player?   There is nothing beyond Murray to excite the British audience.  Murray is part of a continuing generational cycle where there was at least one British male tennis player in the top 10.  Murray is getting on, his performance level has dropped off, yet there is nobody in the wings that looks like will be getting into the top ten, or even top twenty to take over interest from him.

I forgot was there ever a period when Britain was producing a steady stream of top pros in numbers? I mean isn't Murray the first Brit to win a slam since Fred Perry?

So let me get your perspective straight, the best British tennis player of the last 80 years is near his physical peak, and there are more British youngsters now in the top 200 than there was for most of the last oh I don't know eons, and your opinion is that there is little on offer nowadays for British fans? I mean did I miss this golden age of British tennis that existed before the terrible doldrums of today?

Not to pick on you Nore, but this unfortunately another one of the glass is half empty arguments that we always hear on this site. Why can't you just enjoy the modern British GOAT? I mean for 80 years British people were able to enjoy tennis without a multi-slam winner to cheer for, now they have what they asked for and are still unhappy.

Well to be fair in the late 90s and early 00s Britain did have Tim Henman and import Greg Rusedski high up in the rankings (both in the top 20 or better at one time). However, before that it was like a black hole. I remember it was seen as a massive and very rare feat if a British man reached the second week of Wimbledon such was the dearth in talent. You know how bad it was when Andrew Castle was the leading light. Prior to that Britain's last serious contenders would have been John Lloyd and Buster Mottram in the 70s.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:
For British men's tennis - where is the next top ten British player?   There is nothing beyond Murray to excite the British audience.  Murray is part of a continuing generational cycle where there was at least one British male tennis player in the top 10.  Murray is getting on, his performance level has dropped off, yet there is nobody in the wings that looks like will be getting into the top ten, or even top twenty to take over interest from him.

I forgot was there ever a period when Britain was producing a steady stream of top pros in numbers? I mean isn't Murray the first Brit to win a slam since Fred Perry?

So let me get your perspective straight, the best British tennis player of the last 80 years is near his physical peak, and there are more British youngsters now in the top 200 than there was for most of the last oh I don't know eons, and your opinion is that there is little on offer nowadays for British fans? I mean did I miss this golden age of British tennis that existed before the terrible doldrums of today?

Not to pick on you Nore, but this unfortunately another one of the glass is half empty arguments that we always hear on this site. Why can't you just enjoy the modern British GOAT? I mean for 80 years British people were able to enjoy tennis without a multi-slam winner to cheer for, now they have what they asked for and are still unhappy.

Well to be fair in the late 90s and early 00s Britain did have Tim Henman and import Greg Rusedski high up in the rankings (both in the top 20 or better at one time). However, before that it was like a black hole. I remember it was seen as a massive and very rare feat if a British man reached the second week of Wimbledon such was the dearth in talent. You know how bad it was when Andrew Castle was the leading light. Prior to that Britain's last serious contenders would have been John Lloyd and Buster Mottram in the 70s.

I mean if British tennis fans aren't happy now after waiting for their domestic Wimbeldon champion for 60 years you have to wonder what will make them happy? I mean where were all these great British tennis players before Murray? Can't you just enjoy the man's talents without complaining about the state of British tennis? No offense, British tennis at the ATP level was a joke before; how did the hearty Brits still enjoy tennis in the 80s, 70s, and 60s then?

You need to learn to read others peoples opinion.  My comment says nothing about happiness rather it is giving a rationale behind my choice of the OPs question: Is your interest in tennis declining at the present time, or is your interest in tennis not declining.  Watching strangers playing sport is in itself totally irrational unless one is watching for a rational reason such as a desire to learn from watching.  But even our selection of what to learn may be an irrational choice.  There is no point in moaning about other peoples choices like you appear to be doing in such matters - it's like moaning about someone's favourite colour being red rather than say blue.  The best one can hope for is people being honest in their preferences and being open in their own reasoning.

You yourself are a great advocate for personal choice and "market value" based on personal preference when it comes to discussing how prize money should be awarded between men and women's tennis.

We will have to agree to disagree then Nore, this thread is on losing interest in the game, I mean if British tennis fans can't get excited about the British GOAT of the last 70 years playing near his peak then when are they going to interested and or not bored?

I don't care what opinion anyone has. But frankly, I am tired of the relentless negativity from some quarters about the tour. If they hate the tour please accept my invitation to stop watching then I don't have to listen to their moaning.

These people are like a guy who invites himself on the camping trip, you don't really want him to go because you know what he is like. The whole time he is cold, he is hot, the chicken is dry, is too salty, isn't salty, the bugs are terrible, and he can't stop telling everyone how much he hates camping. And then you ask yourself then why did you invite yourself to a camping trip, just so you could make sure I hate my trip as much as you are hating yours? Sorry, you can voice your opinion all you like, and then other people get to voice their opinion about how much your opinions annoy them. They get freedom speech to bellyache and tell us how bored they are for a decade, I also get freedom of speech to tell them what I think about their behavior. Freedom of speech is a two way street. I am frankly tired of them raining my parade, if you are losing interest the sure way to cure that is to stop watching and find a new hobby. Hell Ill pay for their first couple of golf or snooker lessons or whatever if they guarantee me I won't have to hear them anymore.

Fed is not playing much these days, so who cares for tennis any more

Djoko and his robotic repetitive tennis have ruined tennis for good, in a same way these young guns for last 5 years can't do sh!t to beat the old guard.

This Tennis section has become too much sanitized, politically correct, hidden behind Legal & Libel crap to shut our comments, even Socal's 1970's Taxi jokes were fun compared to this situation now

Also no ladies to hit on here, all are some married Grandmoms or geeky younger ones, who sleep with tennis balls under their pillow

Lol...sounds like this place needs to change to a kind of dating site called www.(tennis)match.com

Trust Jahu to bring perspective

Very interesting views from most.

Isn't hitting on ladies on an anonymous internet forum kind of limiting?

You are indeed welcome to simply go away and let the people who do enjoy tennis and talking about it amongst equals to do soo. If you only come here to s@itpost you can go to tumblr instead

Temp you talking to me?

Since you become a mod, this forum has gone down, and after all complains against you, you still are around.

So get of my back and grow up girl.

bogbrush wrote:Isn't hitting on ladies on an anonymous internet forum kind of limiting?

Yes, and all limited things are good, make you work harder to make them unlimited.