Tennis - the Emperor's New Clothes?

[Farmduck]

I don't follow tennis and I don't think I've ever watched an entire match. I know all the big names and I know there is a shipload of money floating around in prizes and endorsements. Most of the OZ tennis media focus lately has been on Nick Kyrgios - an apparently developmentally-disabled human being who is lucky enough to own a tennis racket and some sportswear. After Kyrgios's most recent performance in Indian Wells, where he played the role of a retarded tool who couldn't be bothered, I wondered how damaging this must be to his standing in the ATP.

 

Shock! Horror! Kyrgios is still ranked #26 in the World! see Live Rankings. How useless are the rest of these tennis players? I suppose we all know the story of the Emperor's New Clothes, behind all the hype, there's nothing. Is this the real state of Tennis? A small gang of megastar gazillionaires surrounded by whoever turns up that day?

[tim2]

I don't follow tennis and I don't think I've ever watched an entire match. I know all the big names and I know there is a shipload of money floating around in prizes and endorsements. Most of the OZ tennis media focus lately has been on Nick Kyrgios - an apparently developmentally-disabled human being who is lucky enough to own a tennis racket and some sportswear. After Kyrgios's most recent performance in Indian Wells, where he played the role of a retarded tool who couldn't be bothered, I wondered how damaging this must be to his standing in the ATP.

 

Shock! Horror! Kyrgios is still ranked #26 in the World! see Live Rankings. How useless are the rest of these tennis players? I suppose we all know the story of the Emperor's New Clothes, behind all the hype, there's nothing. Is this the real state of Tennis? A small gang of megastar gazillionaires surrounded by whoever turns up that day?

 

The rankings are based over a long period and it takes a while to slide down.

 

Tennis has worse things to worry about than its ranking system - drugs and match fixing for starters.

[Farmduck]

The rankings are based over a long period and it takes a while to slide down.

 

Tennis has worse things to worry about than its ranking system - drugs and match fixing for starters.

I was thinking more about the apparent lack of depth. I would have thought, given the popularity of tennis that you would need to win a couple of tournaments every year just to stay in the top 50.

[tim2]

I was thinking more about the apparent lack of depth. I would have thought, given the popularity of tennis that you would need to win a couple of tournaments every year just to stay in the top 50.

 

It's hard to win the "big money" tournaments because the top 6-8 players play in them and they are better than the rest, perhaps by 5% but that's enough.

 

In fact, it's nearly impossible to get past Djokovic most of the time. Djokovic is arguably the best player to have played the game but could be a close second to Roger Federer who is still playing and still winning.

 

If we look at one of the "best of the rest" - Kai Nishikori of Japan. Age 26 and still to reach his prime. Currently ranked #6.

 

In 8 years he has reached 16 finals on the ATP tour and won 11 - none are Grand Slams where has reached just one final and mostly bowed out in the quarters. He has a career win-loss ratio of 67% but for the last year this is 82%. His win-loss against the best 5 players is about 25%. However against those around or just below him it's 75%. He is a very good player indeed as he proved against Murray in the Davis Cup and is a potential top 2 player. His career prize money so far is $11M - not shabby at all, but small compared to Djokovic who has $96M dollars and is just 2 years older.

 

Now let's go down to position 50 or below. Aljaz Bedene is the British #2 - placed at #51, also age 26 he has has $1.2M in total prize money or about $150,000 per year. This may seem like a lot but he has to pay for a coach and all his travel. He has no ATP titles but did win 11 on the Challenger circuit (the next level down) in order to reach the top 100 and play in the ATP tournaments.

 

Go down to #500 and you'll find players on the Futures and Challenger tournaments who play without a coach in tournaments in far-flung places in front of few fans who will get about $500 if they lose their first game, which could be against a top seed. They still have to pay for planes and hotels. Most will never make it.

 

So yes, the drop off is quite steep but some of these players are very good indeed and if the player ranked above them is not at their sharpest they can beat them. And the pros outside the top 100 have a very hard life indeed. Kyrgios has done all the hard work to get where he is now and he seems intent on blowing it - maybe because he can't hack it with the big boys and realises now that he isn't God's gift to tennis.

[Farmduck]

Kyrgios's antics get a lot media in OZ and it's seems very sad to me. He's only 20 and he's already beaten Federer and about 5 other guys in the top 10. If he could just get a personality transplant he could possibly have a long, very well-paid career.

[MikeW]

I was thinking more about the apparent lack of depth. I would have thought, given the popularity of tennis that you would need to win a couple of tournaments every year just to stay in the top 50.

There's only 66 qualifying tournaments per season so that's unlikely to happen.