Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Putting the brakes on technology...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • gzhpcu
    replied
    I've been watching tennis for ages, and I like today's tennis. Yes, different from the days of wooden rackets, but much more athletic and longer rallies. (excluding the long, boring rallies between Borg and Vilas...) Watching Federer, Nishikori, Nadal, Wawrinka is always entertaining. I think our memories are imperfect, and we often look back at "the good old days" and forget that people at that time were probably also complaining about the same thing. Today's tennis has evolved, but I like it.

    Leave a comment:


  • hockeyscout
    replied
    Fan bases generally are not so traditionally emersed in the sports traditions and roots like tennis is with all the technical aspects and constructing of an intelligent thinking man's play, since well, maybe basketball in the 1960s.

    In the old days basketball the NBA was a bit like tennis with it's layups, thinking mans approach, point construction and fundamental chess passes. Then Magic, Shaq, Kemp, Jordan, Hakeem, Ewing, Kobe, Jordan all came along, it became a game of truly once in a lifetime athletic freaks with size, speed and mobility, and interest skyrocketed in the sport. Then, the game got way to fast, and coaches came in an automized these free wheeling freak of natures into well though out zone defenses and offensive schemes, and well, basketball is not basketball anymore, and I see it dying a bit with this new and improved coaching paradigm. Finally, the coaches have caught up to the science, and the speed, and 100 percent of the players are all good, no weak links anymore or players with holes to their games, and its not looking good.

    Every sport does through this cycle, and tennis will next. Some say it's happened in tennis, however, I don't think we are quite their just yet. The sport is simular to basketball just before it exploded right now. I think we are done with the Larry Bird, Wayne Gretzky's, Muhammed Ali, Rod Laver's and John McEnroe paradym of touch, feel and game IQ.

    Tennis has a really unique opportunity here, in the age of concussions a lot of parents are getting aprhensive about hockey, boxing football, and this is where tennis could somehow come in if they were willing to sell themselves as an explosive, agresssive, tough and physical game. I think their is a chance better athletes may slip into the game.

    I wonder how much the world of tennis will change when an athlete comes along who can compete with NFL, NBA and Olympic runners across the board on a SPARQ test.

    Brian Clay is exceptional, I have heard second hand he did the football test, and scored higher than any NFL player. His NBA score was higher than Kobe Bryant and Lebron James. His total assesment, I believe was the best any athlete has every scored on the test at the time. Obviously a vertical jump tells you a lot, and it will be interesting to see what happens in tennis when you get someone who can generate power like Jordan (48 inches), Spud Webb (46) or Vince Carter (43), and it'd be interesting to see how that raw athletic skill and control could correlate into the world of this sport which hasn't quit had it's Bo Jackson, Mike Tyson, Bruce Lee, Lebron James, Usain Bolt and Micheal Vick type of athletism just yet (well, maybe Serena in the womans game).

    Today's athletes are bigger, faster and stronger.

    5'11 used to be idea height, then it was 6'1" and now it is 6'3", which is coincidentally about the same as the progression of a NFL quarterback, and a NHL defenseman. Tennis interestingly enough is following in this path.

    Every sport has had manufacturing new equipment, lighter pads, better shoes, sticks, you name it, so it is just not a phenomenon of just tennis. The game is getting faster, and all sports are speeding up. Speed and power is the rule of thumb. Tennis people are naturally resistant to this (as you are by reading your post), however, the veil will be continually peeled away as players seek to become more athletic (see Serena Williams). Raw Size, Superman Power and Total Athletism. I don't think we will get away from it.

    And, I am not sure the sport will build up moving forward if it doesn't keep getting faster as you always need to infuse in a new, young fan base, to replace the old ones.

    Somewhere out this the WTA and ATP world tour have statistics like this one:

    Free Market Research Resources for the Marketing Research Industry available from the Market Research World. Qualitative and Quantitative research explained.


    They may like their old demographic like say my arch rival here don_budge and thank him for his years of patronage, however, they understand, and the sponsors understand they already have his money, and their is no value in addressing concerns from his generation of purists (which may be valid) as to how the game should be shaped in the future as his market demographic is maybe 15 percent, and will always fall in value no matter what they do.

    In terms of the don_budge demographic they have done a hell of a good job at retention, are pleased with the end results, and hope to do better on the next wave of people in terms of marketshare, sponsors and bottom line cash.

    Players are making more cash (1) and (2) brands are increasing their net worth with this affilation - and it's a bottom line game.

    Now, they will not change anything because they likely know what will make them money, and what won't.

    How do I know this? The players are making more money.

    Happy players, happy agents and obviously sponsors who are increasing their net worth by being affiliated with the current tennis brand.

    If that means losing purists, that means losing purists.

    The dollar speaks volumes.

    Maybe, tennis has peaked. Maybe not.

    All I know is if I had interests in the NBA, NFL and maybe even the NHL, I'd be getting out right here, and right now.

    Prices are at an all time high for tickets, high definition and streaming is up, people love to multi task and sitting in one place that is not in front of the computer is a real challenge (tennis is not football where their is a lot of stuff going on if you know what I mean, beer, girls, fans, dancing, chanks, acting out ect), games are now posted on youtube right after they happen and you can fast - forward, rewind and watch them quicker, illegal blogs let you watch day - night, weather is getting real finnicky with global warming, economies are rising and falling at an unpredecidented pace, gas is more expensive, traffic patterns are bad and cripes, some people will dye if they are in a stadium without go wifi connections.

    Back to tennis now ... the future concerns me a bit as I question the fan base, and such a heavy reliance on corporate sponsorships. You listen to the ATP - WTA people talk and they always mention the great venues and sponsors, and in the NFL - NBA and NHL it is always the fans, and sponsors are never brought up much. Its built up a bit on a house of cards, and I worry what a steroid scandal or one of the biggest names getting into major trouble might do to the sport. Its a very risky investment.

    I think the one thing they will learn is the old don_budge fan base was loyal as hell, and the new base won't be with them through thick and thin.

    Its a different generation.

    Just some random thoughts.

    Leave a comment:


  • stotty
    replied
    Originally posted by JeffMac View Post
    What to do?
    It's a tough one. We need more all court tennis and a choice of game styles. Serve and volley is dead for one. But if they lower the bounce and go back to traditional grass at Wimbledon you will see no rallies whatsoever.

    There is no appetite for change as yet. Chris Kermode the chairman of the ATP wants more of the same. He likes the fast moving one dimensional game and is convinced everyone else does too.

    But like I said, it's a tough one. The bounce has to get lower to attract net players...but at the same time if it gets faster in today's tennis god knows what the game will look like. Finding a balance looks real tricky.

    The game can get faster and definitely will if the history of tennis technology is anything to go by.
    Last edited by stotty; 01-25-2015, 03:25 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffMac
    replied
    Re: The Modern Technology

    I have an intersting experience I'd like to share: After 40 years in the deepest levels of the trenches, I retired a little over 4 years ago. I was burned out and needed a break from tennis. I haven't seen a tennis match in the interim. I got wind of the fact that there is a tournament on right now so I went searching for it in the middle of the night. As I was channel surfing I was thinking to myself that "it couldn't possibly be faster than it was the last time I watched." I was shocked but not surprised to see that the little yellow dot was moving at least a click faster than the last time. The question is: How much faster can the game become and is that such a good thing? For me the game began to reach the point when it was beginning to accelerate to much right about the time when the Agassi forehand and the Ivanesevic serve appeared on the scene. As time has moved on the game has become more and more bereft of sublety, nuance, variation, sophisticated tactics and strategies. Maybe I'm a Luddite, but it just isn't that interesting to me now, compared to the tennis of the past. I watched a few games of this contemporary brand of tennis which is all bigger than ever serves, maybe a return, and maybe a big putaway off of that return. Now certainly there were some slightly longer points, but there are fewer now than ever. It just wasn't that interesting so I tuned into the movie "Good Fellas" in which the points were longer, and there was some semblance of tactics and strategy, and some subtlety and nuance. When it was over I tuned back into the tennis, watched a little but it put me to sleep. This is sad. Tennis is cannablizing itself. Speed kills! What is the latest data on participation and viewership? Is it up or down? Maybe I'm the exception. I hope so because I love the game. And yes, these changes in the game are driven by $. That's normal and natural. The manufacturers have a right to make a living. The clock will not be turned back. What to do?

    Leave a comment:


  • hockeyscout
    replied
    Originally posted by GeoffWilliams View Post
    Extreme hunger to win/play/practice/improve/dominate makes a better player, and that cannot be coached. The abject urge to do what is necessary, even if it means 6hrs. a day of suffering. She either has it or she doesn't and there is nothing you can do about that.
    Hitting tennis balls is not really suffering. Its fun. Or, should be if the player has passion.
    Last edited by hockeyscout; 01-17-2015, 02:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GeoffWilliams
    replied
    Extreme hunger to win/play/practice/improve/dominate makes a better player, and that cannot be coached. The abject urge to do what is necessary, even if it means 6hrs. a day of suffering. She either has it or she doesn't and there is nothing you can do about that.

    Leave a comment:


  • gzhpcu
    replied
    Well, would you believe it, but we have cheapskates in the club that play with practically the same balls for the whole summer season. The balls are bald and barely bounce. Imagine the state of their rackets and strings...

    Leave a comment:


  • hockeyscout
    replied
    Originally posted by GeoffWilliams View Post
    Listen to this man. Because better players are mentored and care more: about obtaining max. spin, or max. power, or max.control, etc.
    I agree, its important to get the best you can find, and pay whatever amount. Fortunately tennis rackets and string are cheap compared to composite hockey sticks, and well, full body armor and $800 skates which need to be replaced every 3-6 months. Kind of glad in retrospect my young one picked a cheaper sport to play (tennis).

    Leave a comment:


  • GeoffWilliams
    replied
    Originally posted by gzhpcu View Post
    The mass of club players can use the same racket for years. The better you get, the more selective you get in equipment.
    Listen to this man. Because better players are mentored and care more: about obtaining max. spin, or max. power, or max.control, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • hockeyscout
    replied
    Originally posted by gzhpcu View Post
    The mass of club players can use the same racket for years. The better you get, the more selective you get in equipment.
    Never thought of that. Yes, you are right.

    Leave a comment:


  • gzhpcu
    replied
    The mass of club players can use the same racket for years. The better you get, the more selective you get in equipment.

    Leave a comment:


  • stotty
    started a topic Putting the brakes on technology...

    Putting the brakes on technology...

    Many on the forum have opposite views about technology and where it is leading. The IFT certainly have serious concerns about what could happen if things were allowed to go too far. Some might argue we passed the "too far" benchmark some time ago.

    Check this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30746221

    But with big money at stake, will the ITF really have the control to hold back the major brands. It only takes a few greased palms in the right places...

Who's Online

Collapse

There are currently 8586 users online. 5 members and 8581 guests.

Most users ever online was 183,544 at 03:22 AM on 03-17-2025.

Working...
X