logo

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

2 Pages12>
Women's Tennis - TV
midaso
#1 Posted : Monday, November 13, 2006 9:29:07 PM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
I've been frustrated lately at the lack of women's tennis shown on TV here even though they show all the men's tournaments - just wondering if it is the same in other countries?
MyMaria
#15 Posted : Tuesday, November 14, 2006 1:37:41 AM(UTC)
MyMaria

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 587

it really isnt much better in USA unless you have the tennis channel. ESPN2 pisses me off. they show the Grand Slams as they should, it would be an outcry if they didnt show that, and all the other US tournaments (Indian Wells, Miami, and the US Open Series). thats all though. versus showed the YEC but thats not a very common channel. you have to be in a big city to get it.
Siiri
#21 Posted : Tuesday, November 14, 2006 8:17:33 AM(UTC)
Siiri

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,411

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
In Germany, on eurosport, there´s a lot of tennis....mainly WTA, they showed every match in Madrid but nothing of Shanghai! Sometimes at smaller tourneys they even only show the final!
zayos_10
#22 Posted : Tuesday, November 14, 2006 11:01:09 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 443

Here in Latin America it‘s worst. I mean, all i get to see are the Grand Slam, and sometimes not even that it depends: if a women‘s match is on at the same time as one where a Latin player is playing, forget about it, there is no way they (ESPN) are going to show women‘s tennis. It pisses me off so much, I mean, Latin players are so bad (sorry) and they always take like 5 sets to lose, not win, lose, and that usually takes like 3 to 4 hours... Anyway, other than that, ESPN, ESPN2 dont show any other tournament and I dont understan why, I mean, they show all this other lame shows like poker (sorry if somebody likes poker) or the strongest men in the world, or something stupid, but God forbids they show women‘s tennis. I hate that, it seems as if ESPN was a sexist or something, they only show the ATP Tour. I wish there was another channel that would broadcast women‘s tennis, but there isnt. You cant imagine how much that SUCKS!!! :evil:
midaso
#9 Posted : Wednesday, November 15, 2006 1:33:46 AM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
Well we don't have ESPN2 here, just ESPN - so I guess that might eliminate some of the tennis but we do have other sports channels that show the men's masters series events and grand slams but nothing much else as far as tennis goes. I think they may have shown Indian Wells or one of those women's tournaments earlier in the year. Do people putting these sports on TV not realize that the women's game has one of THE superstars of world sport, Maria Sharapova and of course it would get more viewers than some of the other things they show: women's golf, beach soccer, poker, ten pin bowling, etc.
kris
#6 Posted : Wednesday, November 22, 2006 11:35:57 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 3,997

Here where I live, ESPN and ESPN2 cover some tennis. Not much. It seems as though they televise about the same mens as womens tennis. However, I was tired of this shortage of tennis, so I got the tennis channel. It is much better, they show a lot of the 2nd and 3rd tier events that you usually don't hear much about otherwise.
midaso
#10 Posted : Thursday, November 23, 2006 5:28:16 AM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
Yeah I could probably get the tennis channel here except would have to get a satellite dish the size of an army tank up on the roof and a bill of $12987676
Imnumber2
#2 Posted : Saturday, November 25, 2006 11:25:28 AM(UTC)
Imnumber2

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,240

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 136 time(s) in 87 post(s)
midaso]I
I've been frustrated lately at the lack of women's tennis shown on TV here even though they show all the men's tournaments - just wondering if it is the same in other countries?



I am as fustrated as you are!!! and even if you have access to espn or espn2. They will air only if there is a US women player in the competition.

That's why we need the williams sister to come back. ortherwise we will end up watching a rerun via youtube.com

THANK GOD!! there is enough nice people to upload non-air matches !!

Also, I find EuroSports air more than ESPN when it comes to Tennis!!!!
Don't Give Up - Peter Gabriel
scottish
#17 Posted : Sunday, December 03, 2006 6:44:55 PM(UTC)
scottish

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 113

In the UK its pretty good as long as you have Sky Digital (Satellite TV).

Wimbledon is always shown on BBC (terrestrial UK channel) so everyone can watch it. They literally have it on from 11am untill about 10pm everyday of the championships, with no ad breaks - amazing! And they have digital interactive which means they have cameras on every court and you can choose from multiscreen which court you want to watch!! So you never miss a match!

US Open, Australian and the French are all on Sky Sports - which is fine as long as you subscribe to Sky Digital. Luckily we do!! :D

All WTA events are shown on Eurosport - generally pretty reliable coverage

All the ATP Masters Series events are on Sky Sports, and then any other ATP tour tournaments are shown on Eurosport!

So really its very good coverage here! :D Sometimes you can overdose on all the tennis and maybe get a bit fed of it, like the pro's do playing it all the time!! Its like alcohol, you gotta have it in moderation! But then when ever listens to that advice!! :D
zayos_10
#23 Posted : Sunday, December 03, 2006 7:47:54 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 443

scottish]I
In the UK its pretty good as long as you have Sky Digital (Satellite TV).

Wimbledon is always shown on BBC (terrestrial UK channel) so everyone can watch it. They literally have it on from 11am untill about 10pm everyday of the championships, with no ad breaks - amazing! And they have digital interactive which means they have cameras on every court and you can choose from multiscreen which court you want to watch!! So you never miss a match!

US Open, Australian and the French are all on Sky Sports - which is fine as long as you subscribe to Sky Digital. Luckily we do!! :D

All WTA events are shown on Eurosport - generally pretty reliable coverage

All the ATP Masters Series events are on Sky Sports, and then any other ATP tour tournaments are shown on Eurosport!

So really its very good coverage here! :D Sometimes you can overdose on all the tennis and maybe get a bit fed of it, like the pro's do playing it all the time!! Its like alcohol, you gotta have it in moderation! But then when ever listens to that advice!! :D


Wow!!! you are very lucky!!! If I had the chance to get all those channels, I would pay anything for them. But unfortunately, they are not available here:lol: there used to be a channel that broacasted the WTA , but it isnt anymore :cry:
midaso
#11 Posted : Monday, December 04, 2006 2:06:31 AM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
Yeah I would give anything to see those WTA tournaments as well - we just don't have the population base here - I get the feeling that if those tournaments were on, I'd be one of the only ones in the whole country watching it - all anyone here cares about is rugby,rugby,rugby.....
scottish
#18 Posted : Monday, December 04, 2006 12:38:14 PM(UTC)
scottish

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 113

Midaso wrote


yeah but NZ is so good at it!! :D I loved when they just hammered England in the Autumn Internationals, that was funny :lol:

I think it helps in the UK the fact that we had Henman, who always did well at Wimbledon and got to semi's a few times, and now we have Murray who looks like he is going to be even better than Henman, a genuinely good prospect for winning slams in the future!! So there's a lot of interest in the men's game over here which means they show it on TV more.

Also Tennis generates quite a lot of interest in the UK anyway because we host the most prestigious tennis tournament of them all, Wimbledon!! So I think because of that people here know alot more about tennis because you grow up watching Wimbledon over here and its more in the public consciousness than it is in other countries which never host a top flight tournament.
midaso
#12 Posted : Monday, December 04, 2006 8:19:41 PM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
Henman - the Greg Norman of tennis - he always choked when it cam down to it - they used to always call mauresmo the Tim Henman of the women's game...
scottish
#19 Posted : Tuesday, December 05, 2006 5:50:00 PM(UTC)
scottish

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 113

Well maybe Henman did choke a few times, but you cant forget that he always lost in Wimbledon to the best players! Sampras and then later Federer once he started to get really good! I,ll tell you one thing though, Ivanisivic should be mighty thankful of that rain delay in the Wimbledon semi-final in 2001, because he was about to go out of that tournament if the rain hadn't started!! No question, Henman would have made the final if it wasn't for the rain delay and after that who knows? I,m not saying he would have beaten Rafter in the final and won, but who can say!!

Not that I would want to deny Ivanisivic that win, that final has to be one of the all time great wimbledon finals! Ivanisivic finally won after being so close in the final all those other times and then losing it! Maybe Henman will do an Ivanisivic and win wimbledon at end of his career too! :wink:
midaso
#13 Posted : Tuesday, December 05, 2006 9:57:07 PM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
Federer
Imnumber2
#3 Posted : Wednesday, December 06, 2006 12:12:49 AM(UTC)
Imnumber2

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,240

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 136 time(s) in 87 post(s)
scottish]W
Well maybe Henman did choke a few times, but you cant forget that he always lost in Wimbledon to the best players! Sampras and then later Federer once he started to get really good! I,ll tell you one thing though, Ivanisivic should be mighty thankful of that rain delay in the Wimbledon semi-final in 2001, because he was about to go out of that tournament if the rain hadn't started!! No question, Henman would have made the final if it wasn't for the rain delay and after that who knows? I,m not saying he would have beaten Rafter in the final and won, but who can say!!

Not that I would want to deny Ivanisivic that win, that final has to be one of the all time great wimbledon finals! Ivanisivic finally won after being so close in the final all those other times and then losing it! Maybe Henman will do an Ivanisivic and win wimbledon at end of his career too! :wink:


Sorry! I hate to disappoint you! As much as I would like to see him winning I think his chance is not very good. On the other hand, Andy Murray has a better chance though. Now that Gilbert is his coach....
Don't Give Up - Peter Gabriel
MyMaria
#16 Posted : Wednesday, December 06, 2006 2:05:21 AM(UTC)
MyMaria

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 587

Imnumber2][
scottish]W
Well maybe Henman did choke a few times, but you cant forget that he always lost in Wimbledon to the best players! Sampras and then later Federer once he started to get really good! I,ll tell you one thing though, Ivanisivic should be mighty thankful of that rain delay in the Wimbledon semi-final in 2001, because he was about to go out of that tournament if the rain hadn't started!! No question, Henman would have made the final if it wasn't for the rain delay and after that who knows? I,m not saying he would have beaten Rafter in the final and won, but who can say!!

Not that I would want to deny Ivanisivic that win, that final has to be one of the all time great wimbledon finals! Ivanisivic finally won after being so close in the final all those other times and then losing it! Maybe Henman will do an Ivanisivic and win wimbledon at end of his career too! :wink:


Sorry! I hate to disappoint you! As much as I would like to see him winning I think his chance is not very good. On the other hand, Andy Murray has a better chance though. Now that Gilbert is his coach....
yeah I think Andy Murray will finally break the curse for British men at Wimbledon and win it sometime in his career. he's only 19, and he's got great potential, and as you mentioned, he now has Brad Gilbert. look how much better the other Andy (who some people in this forum probably want me to call \"he-who-must-not-be-named\") did after he got Connors as a coach. he had a streak of like 18-1. and Murray did fairly well last year making it to the 4th round, give him a few years and he should be playing in the semi-finals or beyond, and since Federer is 6 years oder than him, he should have atleast 3 prime years without having to worry about Federer because he'll get older and lose his touch, it happens to the best of 'em. i wouldnt be surpised to see Murray in the semi-finals next year as long as he is on opposite halves of the Draw as Federer. Tim Henman, i'm sorry to say, has no chance.
scottish
#20 Posted : Wednesday, December 06, 2006 6:40:49 PM(UTC)
scottish

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 113

Yeah I,m really hopeful for Murray, and I want him to win more than I want Henman to because he's from Scotland and Henman is from England (even though technically they both represent Great Britain!)

I don't think Murray has anything to fear from Federer, in fact I think he could beat him in grand slam final!! Maybe not next year, but the year after that I think he will have the experience to do it. He has the type of game that can get Federer rattled because he is a great returner and also is very patient and willing to hit balls back all day until he gets an opening!

If you look at the stats then Murray's ranking now is already far higher than Federer's was after the same length of time on the tour! Murray is ranked 17 now and Federer was only ranked at 65 at the same stage in his career, in fact Federer didn't get to where Murray is ranked now for about another 2 years!! So the signs are all good for Murray at the moment! I think next year he could well break into the top 10. :D
Imnumber2
#4 Posted : Wednesday, December 06, 2006 6:58:38 PM(UTC)
Imnumber2

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,240

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 136 time(s) in 87 post(s)
scottish]Y
Yeah I,m really hopeful for Murray, and I want him to win more than I want Henman to because he's from Scotland and Henman is from England (even though technically they both represent Great Britain!)

I don't think Murray has anything to fear from Federer, in fact I think he could beat him in grand slam final!! Maybe not next year, but the year after that I think he will have the experience to do it. He has the type of game that can get Federer rattled because he is a great returner and also is very patient and willing to hit balls back all day until he gets an opening!

If you look at the stats then Murray's ranking now is already far higher than Federer's was after the same length of time on the tour! Murray is ranked 17 now and Federer was only ranked at 65 at the same stage in his career, in fact Federer didn't get to where Murray is ranked now for about another 2 years!! So the signs are all good for Murray at the moment! I think next year he could well break into the top 10. :D


WOW!! that's good to know!!! so I guess hiring Gilbert was the right move for him and his team!!!

I also think that most young player such us Nadal and/or Murray have to fear when they play against Federer or any legend.

In fact I think they love playing against top players or in this case the best player in the world!!!
Don't Give Up - Peter Gabriel
midaso
#14 Posted : Wednesday, December 06, 2006 9:26:23 PM(UTC)
midaso

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: everyone, registered users, Registered
Joined: 1/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 7,591

Was thanked: 78 time(s) in 46 post(s)
The Heineken Open in NZ is a good breeding ground for great players - it seems so many of them that come here soon after go on to great things. Murray came here this year,then had a great year,Baghdatis,then got into the final of AO,Federer came before the slams,also Nadal,Blake - all these players came here when they were up and coming players and then they went on to great things...
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.