Real ones remember when Wimbledon used to be on NBC and US Open used to be on CBS. Not putting grand slams on mainstream channels did hinder exposure to tennis in US
In the 80s and 90s, tennis was on espn every weekend. Now you can only see tennis by buying a membership to tennis tv. No tennis on tv unless you pay. Also there are no rivalries in tennis. With so many great players retiring (Serena, Federer) the sport has definitely taken a hit.
well there are definitely some rivalries forming on the horizon, or actually already long in play - see sinner and alcaraz these two beasts been going at each other since challenger level 4 years ago and to be honest, almost everytime they meet, they produce unprecedented rallies, which are reallly up at the big 3 level. (see miami, see us open) But I agree, we will have to see if they can hold their place and can stay consistent (alcaraz seems the most promising, sinner also on the horizon however with his occasional hiccups). If the can, then I think we got some worthy contenders to continue the legacy of the big 3. But its gonna be hard, the competition is big and the margins seemingly become smaller and smaller.
This is actually the main issue and even when Espn shows the US open their coverage is awful, if even the grand slams were treating like March Madness where every game is on a channel somewhere, people would obviously be more included fo watch and want to learn more about the sport. espn is killing tennis and they don’t value it so it needs to find another Avenue
Tennis has always been personality driven. You need substance AND style to drive interest in tennis. It’s almost like boxing that way. Problem right now is there aren’t a lot of up & coming stars who have either quality in abundance.
I never played tennis growing up, but I remember watching tennis in the 90’s. Andre, Pete, and the Williams sisters. I never thought I’d play. Until I signed my son up for JTT and became the team mom. I started taking lessons so I could hit with my son. I’ve played for the last 9 years. I’ve captained teams, gone to districts, added playing mixed. Play all year long. I’ve never watched so much tennis on tv in my life. I wish I could go to watch tournaments at their venues, but they are so very expensive, in addition to travel. I can just watch at home.
You make so much sense. I played growing up, I had a UK ranking growing up, which isn't much compared to most, but it's still better than the 'average' player. . I won lots of tournaments and captained teams also. The expense should be stopped as it still is this middle-class game. I moved from working class Glasgow to the tennis club and my parent couldn't afford to pay for things so much. These things happened though
To quote Nick Bollettieri, “I used to be able to watch a junior and say ‘I’ve got another Agassi or Seles’ but I can’t anymore because you’ve got the WHOLE WORLD out there playing tennis.” It’s no longer just 5 countries.
The real issue is the TV coverage in America. ESPN puts out baseball coverage like it’s the only sport when a tennis matches are inherently more exciting and a quick paced sport. Grand slams should be on all channels like March Madness games, if that was the case there would be exponentially more tennis fans, but currently the access to the sport is difficult
Yes, but TV networks play more baseball games because that is what gets viewers. If tennis would get more viewership than baseball than more networks would cover tennis.
It's a bit of a circular argument from ESPN and other sports channels. They don't see tennis as having much of a market so they don't air much of the sport despite part of the reason being because it isn't aired much. When they do air tennis it is on ESPN 3 or something. The grand slams generate good coverage. I'm watching Wimbledon on ESPN right now, but those are 2 week tournaments 4 times a year. I think this video makes a good point that outside of the top 5 or so players in the world there aren't really players that generate wide interest in the fans following their career. Part of what makes team sports popular is the rivalries and fans getting to watch their team play one or more times a week during the season depending on the sport. Tennis doesn't have that. World Team Tennis aimed to address this, but it never really took off the way people had hoped. I find for many fans such as myself we watch cause we love the sport, and just want to see high quality tennis despite who the players are. Though, there is no social atmosphere surrounding the fans, which is a shame. I have no one to share it with. If I enjoyed any of the major team sports I could have plenty of people to watch with, and that would be fun.
here in italy the situation isn't bad we have Supertennis which is a tennis broadcasting channel made by the italian national tennis federation you can see every tournament except for Atp finals, atp masters and men's AO open, Roland Garros and Wimbledon if you want to see on live these men's prestigeous tournaments you have to pay by watching them on sky, dazn or Now Tv
Here in Australia, it's pretty much dead locally, I would say participation rates are on the rapid decline worldwide. Grand Slams are putting out record prize-money but that doesn't show the full story in less your in the top 50 in the world you are not making good money, also the marketing component has drastically decreased the big sponsors no longer seem as interested in players. A lot of TV stations/PayTV are showing less & less tournaments around the world, it's getting hard to follow tennis seriously if your a diehard fan.
I play tennis since I can remember and I always found it hard to explain how the game works for people who don't know the sport. It's an individual sport, the scoring system is unconventional and hard to relate for most people. One of the things that put people away is that to fully appreciate the strategy and variations in game style you must be a little more into the sport, 'cause for someone who just picked up watching it, it feels like two dudes or women smacking the life out of a yellow ball, but even if players hit hard, there are an infinite amout of subtleties in the way the game is played, the angles, depth of shot, consistency and so on. It saddens me to see that the organizations running the show can't addapt. I mean, Formula 1 is an even more elitist sport that is literally made for rich people, but has been able to grow a lot since Liberty Media came around. Why can't tennis follow a similar path?
First of Liberty Media's best move was DTS. If it wasn't for that F1 wouldn't be nearly as popular as it's becoming right now. Also I've been playing for years and I've never had any problem explaining the game, most people know the scoring system and are aware of the way games and sets are won. Sure the subtleties are difficult to explain but so are they in any other sport. For me tennis isn't more popular because until recently it was only reserved for the rich so not as many people could take an interest in the sport, which lead less screen time.on TVs, which in turn means more fans for the sports shown on said TV and less for tennis. Also it's probably not as flashy as some other sports so it's harder for people who don't know much to get hooked
Tennis is harder to understand than all the rules in NFL or NBA or futbol? Understanding tennis scoring system is harder than understanding American football scoring system or what the hell a point guard is for in the NBA?
I'm sorry but blaming the problem on anything other than the fact that there are no Americans competing for the slams is just ignorant. We all know how much Americans love their own so when you haven't had someone consistently fighting for slams since Roddick it's obvious that the American crowd has lost interest. In the 80s and 90s they had the biggest names in the sport and now their best talent is Fritz, who is a fantastic player but nowhere near the top (I'm aware he is top 5, I'm talking in terms of his game here). Also, the big three slowly fading away is going to be a big problem for tennis since there isn't as much hype anymore. As someone who's been watching tennis for years now these are the main reasons tennis is in a decline
But why are there no men competing for slams? A multitude of factors that must be analyzed if things are to change. I would argue one major reason is tennis is just not a popular sport, it's very niche - and thus doesn't attract the best US athletes. Tennis fell out of popularity before the drought of men's contenders. Sports landscape got extremely crowded and attention spans shortened
@@gaudiofan The cost to be ready to compete when you are 18 years old is just astronomical as well It is absolutely not a regular person sport ... So few Americans grow up playing it competitively Like in San Diego, well over half of the city's High Schools don't have tennis courts, where the rich parts of course do... But just in that right there the pool of players coming out of a pretty big city is already so small.
@@gaudiofan Im sure its crazy expensive there .. But I cant speak on Serbia But I was just agreeing that it is already niche, and then its super expensive to go along with it Which hurts USA tennis' ability to get the best athletes from a young age
Here in Italy things have changed in recent years (3/4 years) people also started to talk and bet on tennis matches while before it was only about soccer
The problem with tennis is its marketing . If you create a promo and event with dancers , singers , local stars and promote local products such as food and local sponsors for opening and closing every different tournament in the atp giving a distinctive feel , increase at least by 5% all court speeds resulting in less grueling defensive plays and make ticket prices more affordable for the common man while also bringing back more team events such as hopman cup , team world cup alongside the davis and united cup and bring back the grand slam cup and many charity and exhibitional events with different concepts (for example wood rackets , the senior tour , the UTS etc..) and start huge ads and promotions in the cities and culture that the tournament will take place a month before it starts the sport will start booming and crowds will start coming even on the 1st day of a 250 event .
I think they understand this, but I think tennis wants to retain its sense of tradition and culture (exclusivity). Im guessing it "doesnt want to be like all the other sports" and wants to be able to survive the world of sports without introducing anything else like performances and such. (Superbowl game vs Superbowl half-time show for example). F1 has obvi taken a different route and it has worked for them-ish, aside from all the grand prix in the US, the tradition remains at every track/circuit. Like Monaco which is always has a celebrity/influencer-filled paddock
I am a football , basketball and tennis player. This is my opinion on why tennis isn’t as popular as before: 1) weather : too windy, rainy u can’t play outside. But the indoor courts are three times as expensive as the outdoor courts (where I live). If u live in a place where it rains 200+ plus days a year, that alone restricts your playability. Football and basketball, as long as it’s not massive pouring rain, u can still play outside. Even if u hire indoor courts, because more people are playing, the cost per person is much less. 3) equipment costs are very expensive now days. A flagship premium racket can easily cost around $250 usd. Plus tennis shoes and other things as well. Basketball and football are cheaper to be ready to play. 3) The modern tennis game is lonnnnnnnnnng rally game. A lot of ppl who don’t play tennis find it very boring to watch. If u find boring to watch, how can they have the interest to play themselves? 😅
For me in the US, it’s frustrating how few tournaments are actually available to watch, Wimbledon, us, Aus open, (not the French) are on common stream platforms or channels unless you get very expensive select services, not to mention the time differences of worldwide events
I think making the different surfaces play actually differently would be huge. An actual clash of styles was part of the driving force that made the big 3. Most elegant one handed player meets his nemesis in topspin lefty master and they both have to face off against a baseline wall with unreal psychological resilience. Great triangle. I love Alcaraz v. Sinner but their game (along with FAA, Rune and others) is essentially the same. Aggressive baseliners. More grass tournaments (M1000 and more) and sped up hardcourt would be a great start. The huge difference would be a surface where serve and volleyers had a real chance. That would change the game. Don't really know what that looks like though.
Serve and volley is killed more by modern equipment than surface speeds. It is simply too easy to hit returns right at the servers feet with modern string technology because of the amount of topspin you can easily create. Though faster surfaces would in general make net approaches more effective and would certainly promote more net play.
I am fairly new to tennis fandom. I tried to get my siblings and parents to watch matches with me and I deliberately picked some big events like Wimbledon and the US Open, hoping the grandeur of the occasions would intrigue them 😂 I guess my father summed it up best when we watched Alcaraz against Djokovic in the final at Wimbledon. He said: I am German, this a tournament in England, starring men from Spain and Serbia. Who am I rooting for? Plus, he mentioned that commentary does not go out of its way to help new people understand the tactics and strategies of the sport. When the first set clocked in at around an hour, he turned to me and said: if this game goes the distance of five sets, we could tune back in in three hours to see the end of the game. Long story short: 1) the issue of who to root for is a real problem. 2) commentary (at least on German TV) hardly does anything to help new fans understand the sport. 3) games can be too long (especially five set matches) for casual sports fans since they consider most rallies to be samy. 4) there are too many breaks in the game. According to the British Journal of Sports Medicine, the effective playing time in tennis is 10-15% on fast courts and 20-30% on clay.
I feel like the "who to root for" quandary is just solved by personality or play-style. I will always root for a player with a more graceful and agile playstyle, no matter what country they are from. For example, I always rooted for Hsieh Su-Wei even though I have no connection with or thoughts about Taiwan. Maybe that's just me though. That said, your dad is dead-on about the commentary. It's quite odd how quiet and unexpressive they are, hardly ever describing what is happening unlike in football or basketball. That alone is a huge roadblock for new fans and a great point! Watching the French Open with my gf who is new to tennis she kept wondering why they aren't telling us what's going on!
People from non base ball countries always get lost by the American enthusiasm towards baseball due to probably 5% effective play of the prolonged game😂
On #4 this is part of why I've been so down on Nadal for years, despite everyone else loves him. I think his matches were for the most part intensely boring with all his time wasting and tics. Because he was so popular the sport took way too long to legislate a serve clock.
I watched Wimbledon with my friends this summer and found it a borefest compared to the Roddick/Federer. The interviews after every match is annoying and Carlos Alcaraz/Jannik Sinner just aren’t engaging personalities to keep watching. When the friends weren’t around to WNBA or MLB Baseball as those are more exciting. Carlos Alcaraz can barely give an interview or talk straight and they expect to grow the sport on a new generation that isn’t trained like Shohei Ohtani or Nikola Jokic from other sports.
I just read between 1982 and 1986, esp 83/84/85 in US tennis their were a grand total of 41 mens players in the top 10, phenomenal for 1 country, that's 40% of the players, now in 2023 only 7. It's mad, I guess tennis now is such a niche sport whereas back then it wasnt.
According to the video , negativity and players tantrum were the reason tennis was popularity in the 80s and 90s and because most tennis players are behaving professionally now, tennis popularity declined. But the same people criticize Djokovic for him being competitive and occasionally showing attitude during play. I think the only reason tennis in decline in US is because there is no American grand slam men’s champion in last 20+ years and no women champion after Serena. Americans were dominating in the 90’s and game has changed since Federer and shifted the power to Europe. Andy Roddick is the last American grand slam champion. If there is one American grand slam champion, then the game will come back in America.
Tantrums, and drama queens bring popularity to the sport from people who otherwise weren't so interested. Someone like Kyrigos has this kind of fanbase from what I observe on social media, but a lot of the established fanbase are turned off by that kind of behavior and see it as threatening to the purity of the game. I would like to see America producing more champion level players, but I haven't seen any sign of this yet. Tiafoe, Fritz, Cressy, Korda, Tommy Paul, but no one I could see as a real slam contender yet.
Comparing tennis to F1, or even team sports, is missing the commercial aspects behind them. In F1, you had Bernie Ecclestone, who was a single decision maker, for a global sport. In many US team sports, they have a single body representing the players, who have come together with stakeholders to provide a 50/50 revenue split with the teams (not counting individual sponsorship deals). In tennis, you have 7 different organisations (ATP, WTA, ITF, and 4 grand slams), all doing separate deals. They cant have one voice to negotiate with media companies, to produce a single, united front, for the betterment of the players. Mainly because, sadly, they're not interested in the betterment of players at all. All they're interested in, is lining their own pockets with as much revenue as possible. This is why, in tennis, players dont get 50/50, but instead, get 7% of the revenue generated. And this is deplorable. When did a fan ever say they went to a tournament to see how well the administrators administered? Never. Without the players, there is no tennis. And yet, I can play tennis at any one of thousands of facilities, without having to worry about supporting an administrators lifestyle, pay their mortgage, or put their kids through college. Players dont need administrators taking 93% of all the revenues that players generate. That is just theft. I think the first step is to get the 7 organisations to put aside their selfish interests, and come together behind a single united front to negotiate with media interests, to generate a much bigger pie for the PLAYERS, and to ALSO take a smaller percentage of the pie as well. For far too long have the players been treated as second class citizens.
Pickleball isn’t even on the US sporting radar, mate. As for the decline in boxing’s popularity, a lot of that comes down to increasing public awareness of the fact that head trauma is really, really bad for you. American football is still very popular but the pool of future players is drying up. Youth football in the US is in steep decline & kids aren’t into the game the way older generations are.
It’s easy. The things that have been constant are not to blame. It’s always been an individual sport. So what has changed? The lack of variety in play styles, caused by lack of variety in court characteristics. Yes the surfaces are different, but they’ve become more similar than before. Different styles of play attract different player personalities, and that allows for suspense in points. Suspense of a serve and volleyer against a great returner was like a duel, for each point. I fall asleep once a point takes over twenty strokes.
What was Agassi without Sampras? The contrast of Pete's cool demeanor, big serve and attacking net game provided an interesting contrast Agassi's baseline style and amazing returns. IMHO the bad boy personas were overblown. Nick is fun to watch... when he decides to play.
The broadcast has made it difficult to reach the majority fans , you need multiple subscriptions to watch the matches , courts/costs/availability of courts are a concern too but still fixing the broadcast to me is 1st .
nice analysis! I agree with most, and it saddens me to see my favorite sport on the decline. Especially the threat of padel makes me nervous, since you can cram about twice the amount of courts on the same surface area, and you don't need to be particularly skilled to be able to play...that's a dangerous mix in these overcapitalistic and plug-and-play times. One thing I don't agree with though is the characters. Yes there was more drama back in the 80s and 90s, but if you watch the game for that go and watch love island or something 😊
Totally agree that the money in the sport has taken away the incentive for players to be who they really are. The players of today are driven by corporate sponsorship. It’s a snooze fest out there. The homogeneity of styles doesn’t help either. Winning Wimbledon from the baseline… pathetic. Attacking play is no longer rewarded.
Roger Federer will always be my favourite player, but I already have new players that I follow closely and want to see succeed. If I'm in the minority of RF fans, so be it, but I loved watching Roger because he made tennis so beautiful. Alcaraz has the all court game to do the same in his generation.
What is happening in the US with pickeball is what is happening here in Brazil with Beach Tennis. I have no idea why, but this sport just exploded here in the last couple of years. The amount of beach tennis players in my club already far surpassed the amount of tennis players (which only decreases), and there has been pressure to get rid of some tennis courts to build beach tennis ones.
I think there is a novelty for those sports right now as they are just currently booming in popularity. The question is will they continue to be so popular when the novelty wears off?
Hmmm not sure how true this is. Attendance at the US Open and Indian Wells keeps growing year after year. Just because it’s not on ESPN or major networks every day, there is tennis channel which broadcasts tons of matches all year round.
Thoughts on World Team Tennis? That aimed to tackle one of the major drawbacks of tennis you address by having teams for fans to root for, but it never really took off like organizers hoped. I only ever see it covered occasionally on the tennis channel.
Tennis is the fourth most popular sport globally and is doing better than ever when you compare viewership with that of other sports. Yeah there are problems with earnings disparity that I think need to be addressed, but I take issue with a lot of things you say. First of all, pickleball is a passing fad as a professional sport. Secondly, rooting for a team may be more enticing, but one of the beautiful things about tennis is that you don't tend to nail your colours to the mast and only support one player. You watch a handful of players who play the kind of tennis you like. You say the surfaces and styles are all the same, but you're wrong. You can't say that grass plays the same as clay or hard court, and there are about as many variations of hard court surface as there are hard court tournaments. As for play being homogenous, idk maybe you are just watching a the wrong players or something. Yes there are lots of baseline rallies, but you act like that's all that happens. If you watch a Dan Evans you will see an artist at the net, and many of the top players use a good amount of variation. Even Rublev comes to the net sometimes, and he is kinda an extreme when it comes to baseline play. I do think there could be more surfaces, such as bringing back the carpets of Australia which would certainly add more justification for its existence, but I think you've been unfair to the sport. How much variation do you see in soccer or baseball? Finally, you say the sport lacks star power, but have you not heard of Djokovic or Nadal or it's future legends Rune, Sinner, Alcaraz or Swiatek?
Courts overall have slowed down and gotten more of a similar style. Someone who finds success on Clay courts still able to find success with other courts (especially hardcourts), Due to this, throughout the years, baseline players have found thr most success on tour with serve and volley playstyle being almost Null. The exceptions don't make the rule. I do agree that the Big 3's star power is most likely on par with the most popular athletes (especially Federer and Nadal for their 'rivalry')
The 80s and the 90s was the golden age of tennis. Players were consistent of their rankings unlike today. Don't follow the game that much unlike during the 80s
I've been playing tennis for over 30 years and it is my main sport now. I did a lot of sports in my school and university days: tennis, basketball, badminton, table tennis and a bit squash and snooker (if you count that as a sport 😉) The problem with tennis is the long learning curve before you can make any decent rally even at basic level, let alone serve properly. In this age of internet (or AI?), the teens simply lose interest and venture into other sports well before they can find the fun in tennis.
I started playing tennis as a kid in 1973. Touring pros weren’t millionaires on private jets traveling with their own chefs, coaches, physios, etc. Those big prizes have to be paid for. I no longer go to watch tennis. It’s too expensive and glittery. And its now 2 guys with 2-handed backhands trying to out hit each other. Yawn.
What americans want in tennis: - Cheerleaders - 10x more stats than what we currently have - Match points and sets to be removed completely. At the end of 2 hours, the players with most won games win. Then they can go away and eat 3 hot dogs and won't miss anything when they come back. - Kiss cams - A repetitive song in between points. - Physical danger to the players. For example making the tennis ball 5x heavier so it can severly injure or kill players and fans. But the players are allowed to have helmets and protective gear, either that or a padded cap. - USA's national anthem is played before every match even if that doesn't make sense. - Some longer intermission in the middle of the match so the audience doesn't get bored (and so viewers at home can drive to mcdonalds and back). This is also a good time for a concert with some of the most famous artists in the world. - The players being sponsored by mountain dew instead of sports companies. - Controversial players that they can love to hate. Also cheating. - Drama between players. Also literal fights between players where the umpire have to run down his elevated chair to break up. There would be 20 pages of rules on how much time a player has to remain in the penalty box if they hit the other player. During that time the other player can continuously hit aces until the player in the box can come out. I'm all out. But this was fun.
I can't answer the question, but I grew up in the 70s and 80s playing and watching tennis. Although I didn't play in HS competitively, I tried to play recreationally, but found few interested in playing with me. That included friends who played for their HS teams. It seems they either didn't really like tennis (I found out later one of my best friends only played because he was forced to by his dad) or they played so much during the week that they wanted to do other things with friends. Thus, it wasn't until college when I could actually play a lot as I finally found others that actually wanted to play. Almost nobody I knew liked tennis in their early teens and younger. If they played, it was because their parents got them in the game and they felt obligated or worse. I don't think any of that has changed but there are so many more things to do now than there was back then. You can play virtually any sport year round. I played basketball and baseball at a high level growing up but in season only. Select leagues were either just starting or way out of my price range. At any rate, they didn't play anywhere near the amount they do now -- maybe summer for basketball and fall for baseball. Most of my friends did one or more of the following: played a sport (usually not tennis), involved in another activity (music, etc.), had some sort of hobby, did something productive like boy scouts, and worked, starting at least by age 12. This doesn't include things like church. Today, that isn't necessarily true. To the extent that the sport's popularity has faded, it is possibly due to being crowded out by other things when it wasn't high on too many young people's radar to begin with.
2 reasons. 1, tennis is a gentlemen sport, todays mericans r anything but gentle, they find tennis players boring. 2, they r selfish n unappriciative, n american winning a slam might've changed things, they dont like a sport which they aint dominating
The popularity of pickleball in the US has had a huge impact on tennis. Public tennis courts where I live have been overtaken by pickleball. A person can become competent in pickleball in a fraction of the time it takes to do the same in tennis. I’m 60 and have played tennis since childhood. Some friends who had been playing pickleball for a few years asked me to play with them once. It took about 10 minutes after we started playing for me to adjust my tennis swing to pickleball and compete with them. I was shocked how quickly it took. There’s no way a pickleball player who never played tennis could do the same with tennis. The ease of learning how to play pickleball is a big part of the reason tennis interest is diminishing in the US.
I don’t know the answer, but I was an avid tennis nut, and I checked out when Lendl became dominant. I could not watch that zombie play. Now the seven foot servebots are ruining tennis.
Individual sports are tough for an overall players to make a living Unlike a team sport where thousands of players can make a living professional In a Individual sports its only the 100-200 player can make a living playing professionally In a team sports more than 100 players earn millions Whereas in individual sports only about 10 players ears the same amount
well, so is f1 but theres a strong audience for that sport as well, I'm not talking about the USA but I heard its picking up there too. As the dude below me in the comments said, its obuiusly down to having someone from your own country to cheer for help a lot.
It's not an elitist sport at all. I mean sure if you wanna become pro you gotta have the cash but for the avarage Joe who just wants to have fun tennis can be pretty affordable
What makes you say it's "elitist"? I only just found tennis in my 30s, grew up broke, and see absolutely no elitism in it. "Not for common people"? What does that mean specifically? I'm a common af person myself, so are the people I play with. A lefty, hippie, stoner guy coaches my tennis team and works for the local tennis club. The opposite of elitist imho, you can find him at Phish concerts.
The prime reason for the decline of tennis in the US (and by consequence worldwide) is due to the fact that no American men have had any real success/presence in the sport. And by success, I mean winning Grand Slams and being ranked #1. America is a highly ethnocentric and patriarchal society and until its men start having real success in tennis don't expect the downward trend in tennis' popularity to change.
Tennis is too expensive in the US and it is inaccessible. American tennis lacks diversity largely, most players are rich and white, so there’s is no real marketability to most of the US which are not rich. Tennis racquets used to be relatively inexpensive and it was easier to find good programs, but the USTA has divested from public infrastructure that would actually help.
I dont think tennis is less accessible than say baseball, and the diversity shouldnt be a problem either, it provably reflects the country, since most americans are white most american tennis players are white
@@JonathanGarza16 Baseball actually has a diversity problem. There's a lack of African Americans in MLB. There are cities such as New Orleans that has wonderful city tennis program, so access may or might not be a problem. Tennis is a difficult game to master which in my opinion makes the game a tough sell. Pickleball has a short ramp up period to be adequate and you're having fun immediately. I also see tremendous diversity in PB which is refreshing.
@@rteitel1974 I dont know about diverdity being a problem, if it has more to do with culture then I wiuldnt see it as a problem. For example theres more black people playing basketball in the nba compared to their percentage in the population. I would think that it is just because they like basketball more than other groups, which sounds fine by me.
I've never thought of tennis as just a sport where a ball gets hit back and forth over a net. I understand the strategy and nuances. However, especially in the men's game, matches that go the distance can really try my patience. 3 1/2 hour matches get a bit tiring after a while. And yes, there are no really great rivalries anymore.
Paddel is more expensive to play than tennis. Many tennis courts are free to play on. Paddle (in UK) costs minimum £25 per hour (or even 30 min) to book.
In the 70s, wasn’t tennis more popular than NBA basketball in the US? The golden age was clearly when Connors, McEnroe and Evert were around. Tennis already lost popularity in the US in the 90s. As great as Sampras was, he clearly wasn’t a big draw in his own country unless he was playing Agassi.
Perhaps changing the size of the racket's head was not a good idea; it allows for hitting harder at the expense of finesse and the skill of perfectly centering the ball with a good eye.
Tennis in US is not popular because because US tennis players are not on the top any more, but in the rest of the world is more popular than ever. On the other hand, baseball or carryball will never be that popular outside of North America. Also, most casual audience in US just like spectacle. That's why that wrestling circus is so popular there and the rest of the world doesn't care about it.
It’s a few things for me. For one it not a good TV product anymore. Polyester strings have changed everything- everyone plays the same and there’s less reason to come to the net. At the amateur level, once clubs had full control of the game in the 90’s in most communities, public tennis died. Areas need both, but the late 70’s -80’s were fueled by a great TV product, a less competitive TV landscape for sport, and then you could go out and play at the park assuming you could even get an open court. Those people who lived for public tennis are the ones fueling pickleball now. Some places are still “tennis towns”, but not if clubs run the show.
The main reason is failure of promoting the sport. Is rarely seen in ESPN and other companies for the masses. New generations of sports fan never watched tennis because they never had the opportunity and they don’t watch tv. Today there is more promotion diversification and new platforms are more important, Facebook, Instagram, tiktok, TH-cam, etc…. Who are the top college players and team, who are the top juniors, there is huge possibilities for marketing untapped. The top USA players are there, Fritz, Tiafoe, Paul, Korda, Shelton, cressy, etc. And we just end the GOAT reign of the Williams sister that dominated the woman side for years !!! If is by the quality of the players the USA players tennis popularity should be rising. Maybe there is no dominant usa male player like Agassi or Sampras but Boston Red Sox did not have a winning team for decades and their fans never left. The game of tennis is faster and harder more than ever, the quality of matches is better than ever. Colorful characters like in any sports are still there. Better journalism and promotion is missing.
Just think about it? You got football basketball baseball and the NHL. The people behind these 4 or , perhaps, 2 of them are doing what they will within their means to tame the audience of tennis. Or to prevent new viewership which will mean less time for the other sports. Just follow the money and you’ll find all you need to know to get down to the bottom of anything in the USA.
Outside of financial resources, I'll say for USA players, from what I've observed- they're too soft. If there is to be a new star from the USA that can stay, they'd have to come from a background where they earn a lot of what they have and some strong values. Handing things for free has a tendency to weaken the mind and spirit.
Dude, most of the European players are as or more financially privileged than the American ones, so if that's a factor that makes them softer, it would make soft every player in the world. The fact is that tennis is, by nature, a quite "elitist" sport since it demands a lot of money and time investment from parents since young ages and its not a sport that can be played in the street in the way football or baskeball are, so it kinda takes out people from more marginalized backgrounds. It's not a given, but there's a big correlation between being "weaker" and less hard-working and being economically privileged, so that's the main reason I guess
@Javi Hernandez I'm listing the financial part as a separate factor to a player that's up and coming. Even if finance is a part, what would you mean by economic privilege? Do you mean rich? Do you mean above average income?
@@JiraiyaSama86 hmm I'd say at least above average, like middle-high class (i.e. a family that has no economic problems, well-paid jobs and can afford stuff like vacation every year and some luxuries from time to time), although it is not uncommon to see tennis players coming from straight up rich backgrounds
@Javi Hernandez well, I say this. Those who have that mindset where your economic background limits you are wrong. Your economic status only remains static if you allow it to. Even if your parents are the ones financing you, they can move up the economic ladder provided they figure out how to and are willing to earn more. And even if so, that's a positive message for their children. You don't have to stay at the bottom. If you figure out how to move up, you just set your child up to do the same. The "economic barrier" is not all bad. Think of it this way, if you really want something, but you lack the resources to get it, the question becomes - what are you willing to sacrifice? What are you willing to do? If you're not willing to pay, then you never really wanted it in the first place. Tennis is a hard game already, and players are working to move up. If you're not willing to put in the work, then what was the point? Many people keep whining about the economic barrier and seem to only be able to see it as a negative. For me, it's simple. If you're not willing to sacrifice and move up, you never wanted it.
This is wrong-headed. The issue is not the personalities, of which we've had many. There are "on air" broadcasts of golf, soccer, Nascar, odd trail bike racing, etc. But in the USA, there is no broadcast coverage of tennis. I blame the Tennis Channel. Coverage is sequestered to streaming. The US currently has some great players. But, yes, fans would rather watch team sports. Coverage exacerbates the problem. Let's not bring up the Pickleball/ageing demographics bit, OK?
I think that a certain group of americans just like their own sports better. American Football, while not that interesting too the rest of the world, they like it because it is theirs. Even if actual football is the biggest sports event for almost every country, olympics comes close in terms of interest, but not in fanatiscism. They seemingly move more away from what the rest of the world likes, in a sort of rebellious way. Tennis is the same. Tennis players are arguably some of the most complete athletes in sports. But since the rest of the world cares about it and they are not producing anything exceptional since Sampras. It seems they will double down on the sports that, again, the rest of the world really don't care about, but is uniquely common American. The problem here is that talented and gifted young athletes are drawn to baseball, basketball or american football. While they might be better suited to football, tennis or any other sport that is not as celebrated in the US. Remember, many top tennis players are also better then average in any sport involving a ball, even if it is not round. They are exceptional athletes. Nadal could've been a football player, Sinner could have been a pro skier and so on. It is too bad, because with the system in place in the US, they could produce some of the best players in the world. But the talent pool is distorted because of public perception and immidiate environment of these young prospects. So someone who doesn't make the NFL, could've easily been more fitted to the ATP. But by the time you fail the NFL, it's to late for any other sport...
Obviously there are other factors but it's mostly just down to the lack of American tennis players. You think English people would care nearly as much over the last 10 years if Murray wasn't around
From England and that’s not really true about Murray. Tennis has had a pretty well cemented level of popularity for a long time because of Wimbledon. He increased its profile a little sure but a fair level of interest would have remained with or without him.
@@SeanJepson7 I agree for tennis in England itself, however outside of England (most of the tour) and everybody's favourite of the big3, there wouldn't be much interest in tennis for the average person from england
I think tennis in US is much more popular, than baseball is outside of US. Just look at the stadiums. New York, Cincinnati, Miami, etc.. all of them were full even with lack of American players. On the other hand, if they would bring the best baseball team anywhere else outside of NA, I bet that those stadiums would be empty.
I think it is a big reason. The rest of the world began producing top players, and Americans no longer dominated. If the United States could get the next Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic that would be fantastic, but I haven't seen any sign of that. Some top 20 players, and occasional top 10 players, but I haven't seen anyone I would consider a real slam threat since Roddick, and his career of being a real contender wasn't long-lived. It would be for another video, but there are a lot of reasons as to why the united states isn't producing many top players anymore compared to other countries.
I think for young men particularly in Europe the fantasy of getting a contract with a big soccer team and having guaranteed money 6 figure money coming in every week, which happens more frequently than you would imagine across the Premiership, German League, French ect ect you get the idea the same thing happening in the NBA, MLB, Hockey League star players with multi year contracts regardless of dips in form, all that kind of puts their respective sports in the forefront of young peoples minds in ways that tennis doesn't. Yes Djokovic, Nadal Federer have obscene earnings but it seems like just a few guys taking everything compared to entire teams and leagues.
sportsbetting is big in tennis, because that's the only way to care about the result of an individual sport, so the extra leverage you get from a bet is much greater. That is, you want to watch because the sport itself is exciting (that is, the skills and high energy are exciting to watch), but you need to care about the result, and the excitement of the play does not create that interest - that's where betting comes in. But the main problem at the moment is, the sport is growing - more people playing, but increasingly, club players are the only ones who follow the pro circuit.
Where do you even watch tennis besides the majors? It doesn’t help that the tennis channel is now hidden in higher priced tv packages no one is paying for these days. It also doesn’t help that there are multiple governing bodies. I think this a great time for some one or a group of people with a bunch of money to start a LIV Golf type league, and actually run it well and pay its players. It would take over very quickly.
It's a cultural problem. While playing tennis at a public court, a father who was watching on the other side of the fence told his son that tennis is an "uppity" sport. Can't blame the cost of learning to play or attending an event. Other sports are just as expensive.
i agree also.. after Serena retired and Venus not at her prime anymore.... i barely watch women's game.... Nadal fan also.... but well.. plenty of handsome tennis players... so, i focus on men's right now hahaha
I watched Nadal, Roddick, Federer, Hewitt and Djokovic rivalry throughout their careers and very much enjoyed it but since all but one are pretty much retired I've lost interest
In Tennis you cannot blame it to someone else - that is a No No for American mentality. It also involves serious athletics. There is no standing around or going to the bench when you feel tired like in Baseball (not really a sport IMHO), basketball or American "football". And Americans still disklike anyone from eastern Europe.
Hmm your arguments don’t hold up. MMA and boxing are individual sports that are huge in USA. Baseball not being a sport makes no sense. Basketball is full of freak athletes and American football is the same way. Tennis is my favorite sport but let’s be real here. The USTA has failed in marketing the game in a way that appeals to the American youth. That’s the entire story here.
"Thank goodness we've got Kyrgios?" Is that what it takes to make tennis more popular in the US? If that's the case, I sincerely hope tennis goes under.
1. Lack of role models like McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi, Williams sisters. 2. Demography change - more Latinos, black people who prefer basketball or football. Tennis is associated with white rich people. 3. Competiton from other areas - e.g. video games. Yong people are more focused on smartphones, Playstation. 4. Extremely bad food in USA. This causes obesity. If you want to play tennis at decent level, being obese doesn't help and makes more chances to make injury. Any other thoughts...?
I agree with the first three points. The obesiry epidemic has nothing to do with the loss of interest in tennis as a spectator sport. There are more than 330 million Americans. The only countries with larger populations are India & China. We got a lot of fatties, but we also have a lot of excellent athletes. And most of them are picking other sports to play. Tennis has become a rich kid sport. The equipment is pricey & the likelihood of success at any level is low unless you’re good enough to qualify for a scholarship at IMG or one of a handful of other elite training academies. And the sport’s leaders don’t market it well. Most young people today see tennis as a niche sport for rich schmucks.
Tennis sadly will continue to decline .. as fewer are actively playing tennis .. tennis requires too much skill and practice to become enjoyable to play and to watch such players .. pickle ball has short paddle .. so not much skill .. more reflex .. and small courts are cheaper .. and one does not have to be in great shape to cover the court . so Pickle will sadly continue to gain on tennis . tennis needs to allow rowdy fans and players
The major factor for sure is that no more US player dominate tennis…20 GS without a single GS and Americans are not usual with being losers…pickeball seems to be nice but not require the skills and physical requirements to be a sussesful professional tennis player wich way more dificult than picklebal and can attract some popular names to the sport
Good video! I think the reason for the decline in interest has a lot to do with the lack of American players at the top of the game and the tendency for the press to only focus on the Big 3 or "controversial players" like Nick Kyrgios and Naomi Osaka, who are not popular amongst the many conservative people who play the game.
1) Ban polyester strings so more nuanced tennis playing styles return. Will stop cookie cutter baseline-to-baseline bashing! 2) Surface should stay the same -slower & homogenous-ish so servebots don't rule! I lived thru the Sampras & Ivanesivic era & they made tennis unwatchable! 3) Experiment with different formats & TV angles such UTS. Court level viewing is more engaging! 4) Maybe have a multi-speed surface. A court with different speed/bounce zones. Players would need to change their tactics each turn & side change.
You give a list of reasons why tennis is in decline, then follow it with a list of countries where tennis is growing! The reason for the decline in the US is simple: Americans aren't interested in watching other nations win things, same as why men's soccer can't get more than a foothold there.
11 minutes that could be summed up in 10 seconds, the fact is simple: Americans only watch US players, nowadays the level of US players is very low and that's why they don't watch tennis
there are a lot of good points in the video and great comments why, but there are some more imho. younger generations got attention disorder because all they watch is short form, even when they "watch" sport its because some flashy plays, they care less on if their team win or loose (example in basketball they watch for big dung or nasty block more than the team play). tennis match, especially in GS are too long for them, and boring. it's not contact sport, it's all finesse and it's harder to understand for wider audience. except if they are playing tennis and understand everything you need to put in one match to win it at the end.
The sport can't grow because matches are only broadcast on the Tennis Chamnel.
Real ones remember when Wimbledon used to be on NBC and US Open used to be on CBS. Not putting grand slams on mainstream channels did hinder exposure to tennis in US
In the 80s and 90s, tennis was on espn every weekend. Now you can only see tennis by buying a membership to tennis tv. No tennis on tv unless you pay. Also there are no rivalries in tennis. With so many great players retiring (Serena, Federer) the sport has definitely taken a hit.
well there are definitely some rivalries forming on the horizon, or actually already long in play - see sinner and alcaraz these two beasts been going at each other since challenger level 4 years ago and to be honest, almost everytime they meet, they produce unprecedented rallies, which are reallly up at the big 3 level. (see miami, see us open)
But I agree, we will have to see if they can hold their place and can stay consistent (alcaraz seems the most promising, sinner also on the horizon however with his occasional hiccups). If the can, then I think we got some worthy contenders to continue the legacy of the big 3. But its gonna be hard, the competition is big and the margins seemingly become smaller and smaller.
This is actually the main issue and even when Espn shows the US open their coverage is awful, if even the grand slams were treating like March Madness where every game is on a channel somewhere, people would obviously be more included fo watch and want to learn more about the sport. espn is killing tennis and they don’t value it so it needs to find another Avenue
Tennis has always been personality driven. You need substance AND style to drive interest in tennis. It’s almost like boxing that way. Problem right now is there aren’t a lot of up & coming stars who have either quality in abundance.
You haven't watched Alcaraz then..
I never played tennis growing up, but I remember watching tennis in the 90’s. Andre, Pete, and the Williams sisters. I never thought I’d play. Until I signed my son up for JTT and became the team mom. I started taking lessons so I could hit with my son. I’ve played for the last 9 years. I’ve captained teams, gone to districts, added playing mixed. Play all year long. I’ve never watched so much tennis on tv in my life. I wish I could go to watch tournaments at their venues, but they are so very expensive, in addition to travel. I can just watch at home.
^
You make so much sense. I played growing up, I had a UK ranking growing up, which isn't much compared to most, but it's still better than the 'average' player. . I won lots of tournaments and captained teams also. The expense should be stopped as it still is this middle-class game. I moved from working class Glasgow to the tennis club and my parent couldn't afford to pay for things so much. These things happened though
That’s pretty cool!
To quote Nick Bollettieri, “I used to be able to watch a junior and say ‘I’ve got another Agassi or Seles’ but I can’t anymore because you’ve got the WHOLE WORLD out there playing tennis.”
It’s no longer just 5 countries.
which isn't a bad a thing
Not sure what you’re talking about. Tennis has never drawn most of its talent from “5 countries.” It’s very much an international sport.
The real issue is the TV coverage in America. ESPN puts out baseball coverage like it’s the only sport when a tennis matches are inherently more exciting and a quick paced sport. Grand slams should be on all channels like March Madness games, if that was the case there would be exponentially more tennis fans, but currently the access to the sport is difficult
Frrr you literally have to pay for a billion different subscriptions to watch anything but grand slams. It’s genuinely so irritating
Yes, but TV networks play more baseball games because that is what gets viewers. If tennis would get more viewership than baseball than more networks would cover tennis.
It's a bit of a circular argument from ESPN and other sports channels. They don't see tennis as having much of a market so they don't air much of the sport despite part of the reason being because it isn't aired much. When they do air tennis it is on ESPN 3 or something. The grand slams generate good coverage. I'm watching Wimbledon on ESPN right now, but those are 2 week tournaments 4 times a year. I think this video makes a good point that outside of the top 5 or so players in the world there aren't really players that generate wide interest in the fans following their career. Part of what makes team sports popular is the rivalries and fans getting to watch their team play one or more times a week during the season depending on the sport. Tennis doesn't have that. World Team Tennis aimed to address this, but it never really took off the way people had hoped. I find for many fans such as myself we watch cause we love the sport, and just want to see high quality tennis despite who the players are. Though, there is no social atmosphere surrounding the fans, which is a shame. I have no one to share it with. If I enjoyed any of the major team sports I could have plenty of people to watch with, and that would be fun.
here in italy the situation isn't bad we have Supertennis which is a tennis broadcasting channel made by the italian national tennis federation you can see every tournament except for Atp finals, atp masters and men's AO open, Roland Garros and Wimbledon if you want to see on live these men's prestigeous tournaments you have to pay by watching them on sky, dazn or Now Tv
Here in Australia, it's pretty much dead locally, I would say participation rates are on the rapid decline worldwide. Grand Slams are putting out record prize-money but that doesn't show the full story in less your in the top 50 in the world you are not making good money, also the marketing component has drastically decreased the big sponsors no longer seem as interested in players.
A lot of TV stations/PayTV are showing less & less tournaments around the world, it's getting hard to follow tennis seriously if your a diehard fan.
I play tennis since I can remember and I always found it hard to explain how the game works for people who don't know the sport. It's an individual sport, the scoring system is unconventional and hard to relate for most people.
One of the things that put people away is that to fully appreciate the strategy and variations in game style you must be a little more into the sport, 'cause for someone who just picked up watching it, it feels like two dudes or women smacking the life out of a yellow ball, but even if players hit hard, there are an infinite amout of subtleties in the way the game is played, the angles, depth of shot, consistency and so on.
It saddens me to see that the organizations running the show can't addapt. I mean, Formula 1 is an even more elitist sport that is literally made for rich people, but has been able to grow a lot since Liberty Media came around. Why can't tennis follow a similar path?
I wonder if they will ever come together under one big organization and not multiple separate organizations, instead of being separate
First of Liberty Media's best move was DTS. If it wasn't for that F1 wouldn't be nearly as popular as it's becoming right now. Also I've been playing for years and I've never had any problem explaining the game, most people know the scoring system and are aware of the way games and sets are won. Sure the subtleties are difficult to explain but so are they in any other sport. For me tennis isn't more popular because until recently it was only reserved for the rich so not as many people could take an interest in the sport, which lead less screen time.on TVs, which in turn means more fans for the sports shown on said TV and less for tennis. Also it's probably not as flashy as some other sports so it's harder for people who don't know much to get hooked
It’s taken ages to
To explain to my girlfriend how the rules work
Tennis is harder to understand than all the rules in NFL or NBA or futbol? Understanding tennis scoring system is harder than understanding American football scoring system or what the hell a point guard is for in the NBA?
Having names as Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi helped a little.
I'm sorry but blaming the problem on anything other than the fact that there are no Americans competing for the slams is just ignorant. We all know how much Americans love their own so when you haven't had someone consistently fighting for slams since Roddick it's obvious that the American crowd has lost interest. In the 80s and 90s they had the biggest names in the sport and now their best talent is Fritz, who is a fantastic player but nowhere near the top (I'm aware he is top 5, I'm talking in terms of his game here). Also, the big three slowly fading away is going to be a big problem for tennis since there isn't as much hype anymore. As someone who's been watching tennis for years now these are the main reasons tennis is in a decline
But why are there no men competing for slams? A multitude of factors that must be analyzed if things are to change. I would argue one major reason is tennis is just not a popular sport, it's very niche - and thus doesn't attract the best US athletes. Tennis fell out of popularity before the drought of men's contenders. Sports landscape got extremely crowded and attention spans shortened
@@gaudiofan The cost to be ready to compete when you are 18 years old is just astronomical as well
It is absolutely not a regular person sport ... So few Americans grow up playing it competitively
Like in San Diego, well over half of the city's High Schools don't have tennis courts, where the rich parts of course do... But just in that right there the pool of players coming out of a pretty big city is already so small.
@@thecarter8700 Is the cost not also high in Serbia?
@@gaudiofan Im sure its crazy expensive there .. But I cant speak on Serbia
But I was just agreeing that it is already niche, and then its super expensive to go along with it
Which hurts USA tennis' ability to get the best athletes from a young age
Another resentful Connors widow… O. M. G. 5:20
Here in Italy things have changed in recent years (3/4 years) people also started to talk and bet on tennis matches while before it was only about soccer
makes sense, yall have some amazing players rn
Italy is a successful Olympic nation which india isn't 😢
The problem with tennis is its marketing . If you create a promo and event with dancers , singers , local stars and promote local products such as food and local sponsors for opening and closing every different tournament in the atp giving a distinctive feel , increase at least by 5% all court speeds resulting in less grueling defensive plays and make ticket prices more affordable for the common man while also bringing back more team events such as hopman cup , team world cup alongside the davis and united cup and bring back the grand slam cup and many charity and exhibitional events with different concepts (for example wood rackets , the senior tour , the UTS etc..) and start huge ads and promotions in the cities and culture that the tournament will take place a month before it starts the sport will start booming and crowds will start coming even on the 1st day of a 250 event .
I agree with this! Living here in the US I rarely see good marketing/promo for events, compared to the other sports in the area
UTS was a cool change up from the regular game. Looks like we might see some in 2023.
I think they understand this, but I think tennis wants to retain its sense of tradition and culture (exclusivity). Im guessing it "doesnt want to be like all the other sports" and wants to be able to survive the world of sports without introducing anything else like performances and such. (Superbowl game vs Superbowl half-time show for example). F1 has obvi taken a different route and it has worked for them-ish, aside from all the grand prix in the US, the tradition remains at every track/circuit. Like Monaco which is always has a celebrity/influencer-filled paddock
@@Courtside_TennisIt’s hard to market boring players…
I am a football , basketball and tennis player. This is my opinion on why tennis isn’t as popular as before:
1) weather : too windy, rainy u can’t play outside. But the indoor courts are three times as expensive as the outdoor courts (where I live). If u live in a place where it rains 200+ plus days a year, that alone restricts your playability. Football and basketball, as long as it’s not massive pouring rain, u can still play outside. Even if u hire indoor courts, because more people are playing, the cost per person is much less.
3) equipment costs are very expensive now days. A flagship premium racket can easily cost around $250 usd. Plus tennis shoes and other things as well. Basketball and football are cheaper to be ready to play.
3) The modern tennis game is lonnnnnnnnnng rally game. A lot of ppl who don’t play tennis find it very boring to watch. If u find boring to watch, how can they have the interest to play themselves? 😅
For me in the US, it’s frustrating how few tournaments are actually available to watch, Wimbledon, us, Aus open, (not the French) are on common stream platforms or channels unless you get very expensive select services, not to mention the time differences of worldwide events
I think making the different surfaces play actually differently would be huge. An actual clash of styles was part of the driving force that made the big 3. Most elegant one handed player meets his nemesis in topspin lefty master and they both have to face off against a baseline wall with unreal psychological resilience. Great triangle. I love Alcaraz v. Sinner but their game (along with FAA, Rune and others) is essentially the same. Aggressive baseliners. More grass tournaments (M1000 and more) and sped up hardcourt would be a great start. The huge difference would be a surface where serve and volleyers had a real chance. That would change the game. Don't really know what that looks like though.
Serve & volley is the most boring tennis. Thanks, but no.
Couldn’t agree more.
Grass needs more representation
Serve and volley is killed more by modern equipment than surface speeds. It is simply too easy to hit returns right at the servers feet with modern string technology because of the amount of topspin you can easily create. Though faster surfaces would in general make net approaches more effective and would certainly promote more net play.
@@cobra7282 Concur. Poly strings created middle-tier play styles and put paid to serve volley. Faster surfaces are the way to go.
I am fairly new to tennis fandom. I tried to get my siblings and parents to watch matches with me and I deliberately picked some big events like Wimbledon and the US Open, hoping the grandeur of the occasions would intrigue them 😂
I guess my father summed it up best when we watched Alcaraz against Djokovic in the final at Wimbledon. He said: I am German, this a tournament in England, starring men from Spain and Serbia. Who am I rooting for? Plus, he mentioned that commentary does not go out of its way to help new people understand the tactics and strategies of the sport. When the first set clocked in at around an hour, he turned to me and said: if this game goes the distance of five sets, we could tune back in in three hours to see the end of the game.
Long story short:
1) the issue of who to root for is a real problem.
2) commentary (at least on German TV) hardly does anything to help new fans understand the sport.
3) games can be too long (especially five set matches) for casual sports fans since they consider most rallies to be samy.
4) there are too many breaks in the game. According to the British Journal of Sports Medicine, the effective playing time in tennis is 10-15% on fast courts and 20-30% on clay.
I feel like the "who to root for" quandary is just solved by personality or play-style. I will always root for a player with a more graceful and agile playstyle, no matter what country they are from. For example, I always rooted for Hsieh Su-Wei even though I have no connection with or thoughts about Taiwan. Maybe that's just me though. That said, your dad is dead-on about the commentary. It's quite odd how quiet and unexpressive they are, hardly ever describing what is happening unlike in football or basketball. That alone is a huge roadblock for new fans and a great point! Watching the French Open with my gf who is new to tennis she kept wondering why they aren't telling us what's going on!
People from non base ball countries always get lost by the American enthusiasm towards baseball due to probably 5% effective play of the prolonged game😂
@@steven_abdApples to oranges
On #4 this is part of why I've been so down on Nadal for years, despite everyone else loves him. I think his matches were for the most part intensely boring with all his time wasting and tics. Because he was so popular the sport took way too long to legislate a serve clock.
I watched Wimbledon with my friends this summer and found it a borefest compared to the Roddick/Federer. The interviews after every match is annoying and Carlos Alcaraz/Jannik Sinner just aren’t engaging personalities to keep watching. When the friends weren’t around to WNBA or MLB Baseball as those are more exciting. Carlos Alcaraz can barely give an interview or talk straight and they expect to grow the sport on a new generation that isn’t trained like Shohei Ohtani or Nikola Jokic from other sports.
I just read between 1982 and 1986, esp 83/84/85 in US tennis their were a grand total of 41 mens players in the top 10, phenomenal for 1 country, that's 40% of the players, now in 2023 only 7. It's mad, I guess tennis now is such a niche sport whereas back then it wasnt.
According to the video , negativity and players tantrum were the reason tennis was popularity in the 80s and 90s and because most tennis players are behaving professionally now, tennis popularity declined. But the same people criticize Djokovic for him being competitive and occasionally showing attitude during play. I think the only reason tennis in decline in US is because there is no American grand slam men’s champion in last 20+ years and no women champion after Serena. Americans were dominating in the 90’s and game has changed since Federer and shifted the power to Europe. Andy Roddick is the last American grand slam champion. If there is one American grand slam champion, then the game will come back in America.
Tantrums, and drama queens bring popularity to the sport from people who otherwise weren't so interested. Someone like Kyrigos has this kind of fanbase from what I observe on social media, but a lot of the established fanbase are turned off by that kind of behavior and see it as threatening to the purity of the game. I would like to see America producing more champion level players, but I haven't seen any sign of this yet. Tiafoe, Fritz, Cressy, Korda, Tommy Paul, but no one I could see as a real slam contender yet.
No women's champions after Serena? Sloane Stephens? Sofia Kenin? Coco Gauff?
Comparing tennis to F1, or even team sports, is missing the commercial aspects behind them. In F1, you had Bernie Ecclestone, who was a single decision maker, for a global sport. In many US team sports, they have a single body representing the players, who have come together with stakeholders to provide a 50/50 revenue split with the teams (not counting individual sponsorship deals).
In tennis, you have 7 different organisations (ATP, WTA, ITF, and 4 grand slams), all doing separate deals. They cant have one voice to negotiate with media companies, to produce a single, united front, for the betterment of the players. Mainly because, sadly, they're not interested in the betterment of players at all. All they're interested in, is lining their own pockets with as much revenue as possible. This is why, in tennis, players dont get 50/50, but instead, get 7% of the revenue generated.
And this is deplorable. When did a fan ever say they went to a tournament to see how well the administrators administered? Never. Without the players, there is no tennis. And yet, I can play tennis at any one of thousands of facilities, without having to worry about supporting an administrators lifestyle, pay their mortgage, or put their kids through college. Players dont need administrators taking 93% of all the revenues that players generate. That is just theft.
I think the first step is to get the 7 organisations to put aside their selfish interests, and come together behind a single united front to negotiate with media interests, to generate a much bigger pie for the PLAYERS, and to ALSO take a smaller percentage of the pie as well. For far too long have the players been treated as second class citizens.
Pickleball isn’t even on the US sporting radar, mate. As for the decline in boxing’s popularity, a lot of that comes down to increasing public awareness of the fact that head trauma is really, really bad for you. American football is still very popular but the pool of future players is drying up. Youth football in the US is in steep decline & kids aren’t into the game the way older generations are.
It’s easy. The things that have been constant are not to blame. It’s always been an individual sport. So what has changed? The lack of variety in play styles, caused by lack of variety in court characteristics. Yes the surfaces are different, but they’ve become more similar than before. Different styles of play attract different player personalities, and that allows for suspense in points. Suspense of a serve and volleyer against a great returner was like a duel, for each point. I fall asleep once a point takes over twenty strokes.
I agree.
Many good things are in decay, tennis popularity being just one of them.
Soccer isn't?
spoken like yoda
Others are?
@@rape_andrew_tate music, movies, dating - need I continue?
@@ArkadyItkin not exactly
What was Agassi without Sampras? The contrast of Pete's cool demeanor, big serve and attacking net game provided an interesting contrast Agassi's baseline style and amazing returns.
IMHO the bad boy personas were overblown. Nick is fun to watch... when he decides to play.
The broadcast has made it difficult to reach the majority fans , you need multiple subscriptions to watch the matches , courts/costs/availability of courts are a concern too but still fixing the broadcast to me is 1st .
nice analysis! I agree with most, and it saddens me to see my favorite sport on the decline. Especially the threat of padel makes me nervous, since you can cram about twice the amount of courts on the same surface area, and you don't need to be particularly skilled to be able to play...that's a dangerous mix in these overcapitalistic and plug-and-play times. One thing I don't agree with though is the characters. Yes there was more drama back in the 80s and 90s, but if you watch the game for that go and watch love island or something 😊
Totally agree that the money in the sport has taken away the incentive for players to be who they really are. The players of today are driven by corporate sponsorship. It’s a snooze fest out there. The homogeneity of styles doesn’t help either. Winning Wimbledon from the baseline… pathetic. Attacking play is no longer rewarded.
100% correct.
Roger Federer will always be my favourite player, but I already have new players that I follow closely and want to see succeed. If I'm in the minority of RF fans, so be it, but I loved watching Roger because he made tennis so beautiful. Alcaraz has the all court game to do the same in his generation.
same here I miss Roger but Al is looking good
I could see myself rooting for Carlitos, but as a Djokovic fan he will probably have to retire before that could happen.
What is happening in the US with pickeball is what is happening here in Brazil with Beach Tennis. I have no idea why, but this sport just exploded here in the last couple of years. The amount of beach tennis players in my club already far surpassed the amount of tennis players (which only decreases), and there has been pressure to get rid of some tennis courts to build beach tennis ones.
Definitely a sport I want to try.
I think there is a novelty for those sports right now as they are just currently booming in popularity. The question is will they continue to be so popular when the novelty wears off?
@@cobra7282 Kinda like racquetball back in the 80s. And now you can barely find a racquetball racquet in any sporting goods store.
Hmmm not sure how true this is. Attendance at the US Open and Indian Wells keeps growing year after year. Just because it’s not on ESPN or major networks every day, there is tennis channel which broadcasts tons of matches all year round.
Thoughts on World Team Tennis? That aimed to tackle one of the major drawbacks of tennis you address by having teams for fans to root for, but it never really took off like organizers hoped. I only ever see it covered occasionally on the tennis channel.
Tennis is the fourth most popular sport globally and is doing better than ever when you compare viewership with that of other sports. Yeah there are problems with earnings disparity that I think need to be addressed, but I take issue with a lot of things you say. First of all, pickleball is a passing fad as a professional sport. Secondly, rooting for a team may be more enticing, but one of the beautiful things about tennis is that you don't tend to nail your colours to the mast and only support one player. You watch a handful of players who play the kind of tennis you like. You say the surfaces and styles are all the same, but you're wrong. You can't say that grass plays the same as clay or hard court, and there are about as many variations of hard court surface as there are hard court tournaments. As for play being homogenous, idk maybe you are just watching a the wrong players or something. Yes there are lots of baseline rallies, but you act like that's all that happens. If you watch a Dan Evans you will see an artist at the net, and many of the top players use a good amount of variation. Even Rublev comes to the net sometimes, and he is kinda an extreme when it comes to baseline play. I do think there could be more surfaces, such as bringing back the carpets of Australia which would certainly add more justification for its existence, but I think you've been unfair to the sport. How much variation do you see in soccer or baseball? Finally, you say the sport lacks star power, but have you not heard of Djokovic or Nadal or it's future legends Rune, Sinner, Alcaraz or Swiatek?
Courts overall have slowed down and gotten more of a similar style. Someone who finds success on Clay courts still able to find success with other courts (especially hardcourts),
Due to this, throughout the years, baseline players have found thr most success on tour with serve and volley playstyle being almost Null. The exceptions don't make the rule.
I do agree that the Big 3's star power is most likely on par with the most popular athletes (especially Federer and Nadal for their 'rivalry')
The 80s and the 90s was the golden age of tennis. Players were consistent of their rankings unlike today. Don't follow the game that much unlike during the 80s
I've been playing tennis for over 30 years and it is my main sport now.
I did a lot of sports in my school and university days: tennis, basketball, badminton, table tennis and a bit squash and snooker (if you count that as a sport 😉)
The problem with tennis is the long learning curve before you can make any decent rally even at basic level, let alone serve properly.
In this age of internet (or AI?), the teens simply lose interest and venture into other sports well before they can find the fun in tennis.
I started playing tennis as a kid in 1973. Touring pros weren’t millionaires on private jets traveling with their own chefs, coaches, physios, etc. Those big prizes have to be paid for. I no longer go to watch tennis. It’s too expensive and glittery. And its now 2 guys with 2-handed backhands trying to out hit each other. Yawn.
What americans want in tennis:
- Cheerleaders
- 10x more stats than what we currently have
- Match points and sets to be removed completely. At the end of 2 hours, the players with most won games win. Then they can go away and eat 3 hot dogs and won't miss anything when they come back.
- Kiss cams
- A repetitive song in between points.
- Physical danger to the players. For example making the tennis ball 5x heavier so it can severly injure or kill players and fans. But the players are allowed to have helmets and protective gear, either that or a padded cap.
- USA's national anthem is played before every match even if that doesn't make sense.
- Some longer intermission in the middle of the match so the audience doesn't get bored (and so viewers at home can drive to mcdonalds and back). This is also a good time for a concert with some of the most famous artists in the world.
- The players being sponsored by mountain dew instead of sports companies.
- Controversial players that they can love to hate. Also cheating.
- Drama between players. Also literal fights between players where the umpire have to run down his elevated chair to break up. There would be 20 pages of rules on how much time a player has to remain in the penalty box if they hit the other player. During that time the other player can continuously hit aces until the player in the box can come out.
I'm all out. But this was fun.
I can't answer the question, but I grew up in the 70s and 80s playing and watching tennis. Although I didn't play in HS competitively, I tried to play recreationally, but found few interested in playing with me. That included friends who played for their HS teams. It seems they either didn't really like tennis (I found out later one of my best friends only played because he was forced to by his dad) or they played so much during the week that they wanted to do other things with friends. Thus, it wasn't until college when I could actually play a lot as I finally found others that actually wanted to play. Almost nobody I knew liked tennis in their early teens and younger. If they played, it was because their parents got them in the game and they felt obligated or worse. I don't think any of that has changed but there are so many more things to do now than there was back then. You can play virtually any sport year round. I played basketball and baseball at a high level growing up but in season only. Select leagues were either just starting or way out of my price range. At any rate, they didn't play anywhere near the amount they do now -- maybe summer for basketball and fall for baseball. Most of my friends did one or more of the following: played a sport (usually not tennis), involved in another activity (music, etc.), had some sort of hobby, did something productive like boy scouts, and worked, starting at least by age 12. This doesn't include things like church. Today, that isn't necessarily true. To the extent that the sport's popularity has faded, it is possibly due to being crowded out by other things when it wasn't high on too many young people's radar to begin with.
2 reasons. 1, tennis is a gentlemen sport, todays mericans r anything but gentle, they find tennis players boring. 2, they r selfish n unappriciative, n american winning a slam might've changed things, they dont like a sport which they aint dominating
The popularity of pickleball in the US has had a huge impact on tennis. Public tennis courts where I live have been overtaken by pickleball. A person can become competent in pickleball in a fraction of the time it takes to do the same in tennis. I’m 60 and have played tennis since childhood. Some friends who had been playing pickleball for a few years asked me to play with them once. It took about 10 minutes after we started playing for me to adjust my tennis swing to pickleball and compete with them. I was shocked how quickly it took. There’s no way a pickleball player who never played tennis could do the same with tennis. The ease of learning how to play pickleball is a big part of the reason tennis interest is diminishing in the US.
I don’t know the answer, but I was an avid tennis nut, and I checked out when Lendl became dominant. I could not watch that zombie play. Now the seven foot servebots are ruining tennis.
What seven foot serve bot is in the top 10? Isner and Karlovic are out of tennis.
Individual sports are tough for an overall players to make a living
Unlike a team sport where thousands of players can make a living professional
In a Individual sports its only the 100-200 player can make a living playing professionally
In a team sports more than 100 players earn millions
Whereas in individual sports only about 10 players ears the same amount
I'm new to tennis and yeah I think it's an elitist sport not for the common people, it's really hard to get into.
well, so is f1 but theres a strong audience for that sport as well, I'm not talking about the USA but I heard its picking up there too. As the dude below me in the comments said, its obuiusly down to having someone from your own country to cheer for help a lot.
It’s less elitist than it has ever been.
There are public courts all over the US.
It's not an elitist sport at all. I mean sure if you wanna become pro you gotta have the cash but for the avarage Joe who just wants to have fun tennis can be pretty affordable
What makes you say it's "elitist"? I only just found tennis in my 30s, grew up broke, and see absolutely no elitism in it.
"Not for common people"? What does that mean specifically? I'm a common af person myself, so are the people I play with. A lefty, hippie, stoner guy coaches my tennis team and works for the local tennis club. The opposite of elitist imho, you can find him at Phish concerts.
The prime reason for the decline of tennis in the US (and by consequence worldwide) is due to the fact that no American men have had any real success/presence in the sport. And by success, I mean winning Grand Slams and being ranked #1. America is a highly ethnocentric and patriarchal society and until its men start having real success in tennis don't expect the downward trend in tennis' popularity to change.
A guy told me that once Sampras retired in 2002 the casual tennis player lost a lot of interest and the courts became empty fairly quick.
Tennis is too expensive in the US and it is inaccessible. American tennis lacks diversity largely, most players are rich and white, so there’s is no real marketability to most of the US which are not rich. Tennis racquets used to be relatively inexpensive and it was easier to find good programs, but the USTA has divested from public infrastructure that would actually help.
There are public courts all over the place. I see participation down in many sports, especially baseball.
You can play tennis in the US and have all the gear for like $50. It’s not inaccessible, we just find it boring. And then comes pickleball ❤️
I dont think tennis is less accessible than say baseball, and the diversity shouldnt be a problem either, it provably reflects the country, since most americans are white most american tennis players are white
@@JonathanGarza16 Baseball actually has a diversity problem. There's a lack of African Americans in MLB. There are cities such as New Orleans that has wonderful city tennis program, so access may or might not be a problem. Tennis is a difficult game to master which in my opinion makes the game a tough sell. Pickleball has a short ramp up period to be adequate and you're having fun immediately. I also see tremendous diversity in PB which is refreshing.
@@rteitel1974 I dont know about diverdity being a problem, if it has more to do with culture then I wiuldnt see it as a problem. For example theres more black people playing basketball in the nba compared to their percentage in the population. I would think that it is just because they like basketball more than other groups, which sounds fine by me.
I've never thought of tennis as just a sport where a ball gets hit back and forth over a net. I understand the strategy and nuances. However, especially in the men's game, matches that go the distance can really try my patience. 3 1/2 hour matches get a bit tiring after a while.
And yes, there are no really great rivalries anymore.
Paddel is more expensive to play than tennis. Many tennis courts are free to play on. Paddle (in UK) costs minimum £25 per hour (or even 30 min) to book.
In the 70s, wasn’t tennis more popular than NBA basketball in the US? The golden age was clearly when Connors, McEnroe and Evert were around.
Tennis already lost popularity in the US in the 90s. As great as Sampras was, he clearly wasn’t a big draw in his own country unless he was playing Agassi.
Perhaps changing the size of the racket's head was not a good idea; it allows for hitting harder at the expense of finesse and the skill of perfectly centering the ball with a good eye.
Tennis in US is not popular because because US tennis players are not on the top any more, but in the rest of the world is more popular than ever. On the other hand, baseball or carryball will never be that popular outside of North America. Also, most casual audience in US just like spectacle. That's why that wrestling circus is so popular there and the rest of the world doesn't care about it.
It’s a few things for me. For one it not a good TV product anymore. Polyester strings have changed everything- everyone plays the same and there’s less reason to come to the net.
At the amateur level, once clubs had full control of the game in the 90’s in most communities, public tennis died. Areas need both, but the late 70’s -80’s were fueled by a great TV product, a less competitive TV landscape for sport, and then you could go out and play at the park assuming you could even get an open court. Those people who lived for public tennis are the ones fueling pickleball now. Some places are still “tennis towns”, but not if clubs run the show.
The main reason is failure of promoting the sport. Is rarely seen in ESPN and other companies for the masses. New generations of sports fan never watched tennis because they never had the opportunity and they don’t watch tv.
Today there is more promotion diversification and new platforms are more important, Facebook, Instagram, tiktok, TH-cam, etc…. Who are the top college players and team, who are the top juniors, there is huge possibilities for marketing untapped.
The top USA players are there, Fritz, Tiafoe, Paul, Korda, Shelton, cressy, etc. And we just end the GOAT reign of the Williams sister that dominated the woman side for years !!! If is by the quality of the players the USA players tennis popularity should be rising.
Maybe there is no dominant usa male player like Agassi or Sampras but Boston Red Sox did not have a winning team for decades and their fans never left.
The game of tennis is faster and harder more than ever, the quality of matches is better than ever. Colorful characters like in any sports are still there. Better journalism and promotion is missing.
Just think about it? You got football basketball baseball and the NHL. The people behind these 4 or , perhaps, 2 of them are doing what they will within their means to tame the audience of tennis. Or to prevent new viewership which will mean less time for the other sports. Just follow the money and you’ll find all you need to know to get down to the bottom of anything in the USA.
Outside of financial resources, I'll say for USA players, from what I've observed- they're too soft. If there is to be a new star from the USA that can stay, they'd have to come from a background where they earn a lot of what they have and some strong values. Handing things for free has a tendency to weaken the mind and spirit.
Dude, most of the European players are as or more financially privileged than the American ones, so if that's a factor that makes them softer, it would make soft every player in the world. The fact is that tennis is, by nature, a quite "elitist" sport since it demands a lot of money and time investment from parents since young ages and its not a sport that can be played in the street in the way football or baskeball are, so it kinda takes out people from more marginalized backgrounds. It's not a given, but there's a big correlation between being "weaker" and less hard-working and being economically privileged, so that's the main reason I guess
@Javi Hernandez I'm listing the financial part as a separate factor to a player that's up and coming.
Even if finance is a part, what would you mean by economic privilege? Do you mean rich? Do you mean above average income?
@@JiraiyaSama86 hmm I'd say at least above average, like middle-high class (i.e. a family that has no economic problems, well-paid jobs and can afford stuff like vacation every year and some luxuries from time to time), although it is not uncommon to see tennis players coming from straight up rich backgrounds
@Javi Hernandez well, I say this. Those who have that mindset where your economic background limits you are wrong. Your economic status only remains static if you allow it to. Even if your parents are the ones financing you, they can move up the economic ladder provided they figure out how to and are willing to earn more. And even if so, that's a positive message for their children. You don't have to stay at the bottom. If you figure out how to move up, you just set your child up to do the same.
The "economic barrier" is not all bad. Think of it this way, if you really want something, but you lack the resources to get it, the question becomes - what are you willing to sacrifice? What are you willing to do? If you're not willing to pay, then you never really wanted it in the first place. Tennis is a hard game already, and players are working to move up. If you're not willing to put in the work, then what was the point?
Many people keep whining about the economic barrier and seem to only be able to see it as a negative. For me, it's simple. If you're not willing to sacrifice and move up, you never wanted it.
UTS by Patrick M should be televised and put everywhere on social media.
This is wrong-headed. The issue is not the personalities, of which we've had many. There are "on air" broadcasts of golf, soccer, Nascar, odd trail bike racing, etc. But in the USA, there is no broadcast coverage of tennis. I blame the Tennis Channel. Coverage is sequestered to streaming. The US currently has some great players. But, yes, fans would rather watch team sports. Coverage exacerbates the problem. Let's not bring up the Pickleball/ageing demographics bit, OK?
I think that a certain group of americans just like their own sports better. American Football, while not that interesting too the rest of the world, they like it because it is theirs. Even if actual football is the biggest sports event for almost every country, olympics comes close in terms of interest, but not in fanatiscism. They seemingly move more away from what the rest of the world likes, in a sort of rebellious way. Tennis is the same. Tennis players are arguably some of the most complete athletes in sports. But since the rest of the world cares about it and they are not producing anything exceptional since Sampras. It seems they will double down on the sports that, again, the rest of the world really don't care about, but is uniquely common American.
The problem here is that talented and gifted young athletes are drawn to baseball, basketball or american football. While they might be better suited to football, tennis or any other sport that is not as celebrated in the US. Remember, many top tennis players are also better then average in any sport involving a ball, even if it is not round. They are exceptional athletes. Nadal could've been a football player, Sinner could have been a pro skier and so on.
It is too bad, because with the system in place in the US, they could produce some of the best players in the world. But the talent pool is distorted because of public perception and immidiate environment of these young prospects. So someone who doesn't make the NFL, could've easily been more fitted to the ATP. But by the time you fail the NFL, it's to late for any other sport...
Does the rest of the world care about tennis? Ratings are down worldwide.
You're spot on in this video
Obviously there are other factors but it's mostly just down to the lack of American tennis players. You think English people would care nearly as much over the last 10 years if Murray wasn't around
From England and that’s not really true about Murray. Tennis has had a pretty well cemented level of popularity for a long time because of Wimbledon. He increased its profile a little sure but a fair level of interest would have remained with or without him.
@@SeanJepson7 I agree for tennis in England itself, however outside of England (most of the tour) and everybody's favourite of the big3, there wouldn't be much interest in tennis for the average person from england
There’s a lot of good American players currently, just no amazing ones
I think tennis in US is much more popular, than baseball is outside of US. Just look at the stadiums. New York, Cincinnati, Miami, etc.. all of them were full even with lack of American players. On the other hand, if they would bring the best baseball team anywhere else outside of NA, I bet that those stadiums would be empty.
I think it is a big reason. The rest of the world began producing top players, and Americans no longer dominated. If the United States could get the next Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic that would be fantastic, but I haven't seen any sign of that. Some top 20 players, and occasional top 10 players, but I haven't seen anyone I would consider a real slam threat since Roddick, and his career of being a real contender wasn't long-lived. It would be for another video, but there are a lot of reasons as to why the united states isn't producing many top players anymore compared to other countries.
I think for young men particularly in Europe the fantasy of getting a contract with a big soccer team and having guaranteed money 6 figure money coming in every week, which happens more frequently than you would imagine across the Premiership, German League, French ect ect you get the idea the same thing happening in the NBA, MLB, Hockey League star players with multi year contracts regardless of dips in form, all that kind of puts their respective sports in the forefront of young peoples minds in ways that tennis doesn't.
Yes Djokovic, Nadal Federer have obscene earnings but it seems like just a few guys taking everything compared to entire teams and leagues.
You've kind of got to win something before you can put on baby tantrums Nick.
sportsbetting is big in tennis, because that's the only way to care about the result of an individual sport, so the extra leverage you get from a bet is much greater. That is, you want to watch because the sport itself is exciting (that is, the skills and high energy are exciting to watch), but you need to care about the result, and the excitement of the play does not create that interest - that's where betting comes in. But the main problem at the moment is, the sport is growing - more people playing, but increasingly, club players are the only ones who follow the pro circuit.
Oh come on! They have no one… simple!
I just started watching tennis at the end of 2021. It was because we bought a sports channel cable package that included tennis.
Tennis still hasn't figured out that there's this thing called the internet.
Where do you even watch tennis besides the majors? It doesn’t help that the tennis channel is now hidden in higher priced tv packages no one is paying for these days. It also doesn’t help that there are multiple governing bodies.
I think this a great time for some one or a group of people with a bunch of money to start a LIV Golf type league, and actually run it well and pay its players. It would take over very quickly.
It's a cultural problem. While playing tennis at a public court, a father who was watching on the other side of the fence told his son that tennis is an "uppity" sport. Can't blame the cost of learning to play or attending an event. Other sports are just as expensive.
21.6% Foot ball 74.5% American football. US is catching with the world :-)
i agree also.. after Serena retired and Venus not at her prime anymore.... i barely watch women's game.... Nadal fan also.... but well.. plenty of handsome tennis players... so, i focus on men's right now hahaha
Hope to tennis grow
I watched Nadal, Roddick, Federer, Hewitt and Djokovic rivalry throughout their careers and very much enjoyed it but since all but one are pretty much retired I've lost interest
Too many tournaments in the USA. There should be one masters and one grand slam. Spread the other all over the world.
You need a superstar and you need to advertise him when you find him.
The name "pickle" says it 😂
Honestly, I wish Tennis was less popular so that my AO tickets were cheaper.
I wonder if young people view tennis the way I view "Pong" (the video game).
Yes, I think it’s the lack of style diversity
In Tennis you cannot blame it to someone else - that is a No No for American mentality. It also involves serious athletics. There is no standing around or going to the bench when you feel tired like in Baseball (not really a sport IMHO), basketball or American "football". And Americans still disklike anyone from eastern Europe.
Hmm your arguments don’t hold up. MMA and boxing are individual sports that are huge in USA. Baseball not being a sport makes no sense. Basketball is full of freak athletes and American football is the same way.
Tennis is my favorite sport but let’s be real here. The USTA has failed in marketing the game in a way that appeals to the American youth. That’s the entire story here.
TL;DW: Money ruins everything.
At the grass roots and community its still pretty popular - I dont really care that the septics dont tune in.
"Thank goodness we've got Kyrgios?" Is that what it takes to make tennis more popular in the US? If that's the case, I sincerely hope tennis goes under.
1. Lack of role models like McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi, Williams sisters.
2. Demography change - more Latinos, black people who prefer basketball or football. Tennis is associated with white rich people.
3. Competiton from other areas - e.g. video games. Yong people are more focused on smartphones, Playstation.
4. Extremely bad food in USA. This causes obesity. If you want to play tennis at decent level, being obese doesn't help and makes more chances to make injury.
Any other thoughts...?
Food is a big reason people overlook for sure
I agree with the first three points. The obesiry epidemic has nothing to do with the loss of interest in tennis as a spectator sport. There are more than 330 million Americans. The only countries with larger populations are India & China. We got a lot of fatties, but we also have a lot of excellent athletes. And most of them are picking other sports to play. Tennis has become a rich kid sport. The equipment is pricey & the likelihood of success at any level is low unless you’re good enough to qualify for a scholarship at IMG or one of a handful of other elite training academies. And the sport’s leaders don’t market it well. Most young people today see tennis as a niche sport for rich schmucks.
McEnroe and Serena are considered to be role models?
This was really good with interesting and thoughtful points made, lots to think about.
Video starts 4:40
Tennis sadly will continue to decline .. as fewer are actively playing tennis .. tennis requires too much skill and practice to become enjoyable to play and to watch such players .. pickle ball has short paddle .. so not much skill .. more reflex .. and small courts are cheaper .. and one does not have to be in great shape to cover the court . so Pickle will sadly continue to gain on tennis . tennis needs to allow rowdy fans and players
plus the teenagers and 20 plus people nowadays are hooked on their cellphones....... no time for sports...
The major factor for sure is that no more US player dominate tennis…20 GS without a single GS and Americans are not usual with being losers…pickeball seems to be nice but not require the skills and physical requirements to be a sussesful professional tennis player wich way more dificult than picklebal and can attract some popular names to the sport
08:43 shame on you
tennis not the same after Fed Nadal retired.
Good video! I think the reason for the decline in interest has a lot to do with the lack of American players at the top of the game and the tendency for the press to only focus on the Big 3 or "controversial players" like Nick Kyrgios and Naomi Osaka, who are not popular amongst the many conservative people who play the game.
Technology killed it.
Because basketball is not soccer!
People played in the 80s. It's because of video games
1) Ban polyester strings so more nuanced tennis playing styles return. Will stop cookie cutter baseline-to-baseline bashing!
2) Surface should stay the same -slower & homogenous-ish so servebots don't rule! I lived thru the Sampras & Ivanesivic era & they made tennis unwatchable!
3) Experiment with different formats & TV angles such UTS. Court level viewing is more engaging!
4) Maybe have a multi-speed surface. A court with different speed/bounce zones. Players would need to change their tactics each turn & side change.
No top USA players.
Is simple like this: USA has no longer good tennis players
Over price!
You give a list of reasons why tennis is in decline, then follow it with a list of countries where tennis is growing! The reason for the decline in the US is simple: Americans aren't interested in watching other nations win things, same as why men's soccer can't get more than a foothold there.
11 minutes that could be summed up in 10 seconds, the fact is simple: Americans only watch US players, nowadays the level of US players is very low and that's why they don't watch tennis
there are a lot of good points in the video and great comments why, but there are some more imho.
younger generations got attention disorder because all they watch is short form, even when they "watch" sport its because some flashy plays, they care less on if their team win or loose (example in basketball they watch for big dung or nasty block more than the team play). tennis match, especially in GS are too long for them, and boring. it's not contact sport, it's all finesse and it's harder to understand for wider audience. except if they are playing tennis and understand everything you need to put in one match to win it at the end.
The rackets.