- Television commentators will talk about serve speed because the radar gun gives us that data. They fail to go a step further and talk about placement within the box. 6’6″ Marin Cilic and 6’1″ Roger Federer both might hit a serve at 125 mph. The thing is Cilic’s greater height and reach allow for him to more easily place his serves in difficult spots in the service box. When 5’9″ Serena Williams’ impressive serve speeds were compared uncritically to the serves of 6’4″ Gael Monfils, I cringed. Having played tennis speed is only one thing that makes a ball (serve or otherwise) hard to play. Speed plus a lot of spin can make a ball heavy. Serves or groundstrokes with lower speeds that hit wide angles can also be more effective than a predictable blast to the same spots on the court. Commentators could and should say more when analyzing serves.
- Beyond that, commentators Jim Courier and John McEnroe both mentioned Novak Djokovic struggling psychologically with losses in Grand Slam finals. That is a fair point, but each man was runner-up at a number of majors. Most of the viewing audience has not lost in a Grand Slam final. They could have followed up on this point without making the audience angry that they were focusing on “the good old days.” They could have added depth and texture to what we see from Djokovic or anyone else who has lost in a Grand Slam final and tries to bounce back.
- Mary Carrillo talking over points while play is in progress is not good.
- Jim Courier discussing a given player having “a below tour standard” serve or forehand or …. is the type of analysis that can help an audience member understand what is going on if that audience member is somewhat new to watching and/or playing tennis.
- Analogies to chess need to stop. I doubt any chess analysts ever say, “That move with his knight was exactly like a split step before a volley in tennis.” For some reason, many sports attempt to explain the moving parts of a play or point or strategy with chess analogies.
- The USTA live feed of the US Open is a great thing that the other Grand Slam events should also offer.
- ESPN taking over the US Open means that with the exception of NBC’s tape delayed coverage of Roland Garros, all four majors will primarily be covered in the US via cable television (ESPN). The problem I see is that a significant percentage of US households get television via digital free broadcasts and possibly a service such as Netflix. Tennis off of free television is not great for growing the sport even if there are benefits from one network being able to promote and cover all 4 majors.
Tennis Abides: Dan Martin on Tennis and Life
Dan Martin on Tennis, Life and Occassionally Other Sports
Tennis Abides: Dan Martin on Tennis and Life 