Future of the WTA

This blog is predominantly about women's tennis. It is usually about the lack of respect shown to women's tennis by the media in terms of how women's tennis is covered. However, today, I am going to talk about the diversity of women's tennis.

A few weeks ago the WTA took time out to celebrate the commencement of the WTA. Players from all over the world paid their respect to the 9 women who sacrificed their careers and their future in establishing the Women's Tennis Association by signing a contract for $1.00 and starting what would become one of the most successful and viable franchises in sports history.

Since that time, we have seen the growth of women's tennis on a par with most sports that are more focused on men. Why then does the growth of women's tennis is not tied to the performance of the athletes but rather tied to how they look. Even worse, why is that it is only a certain demographic of women's tennis is represented by advertisers.

We are constantly being told that Hispanics and African Americans are the biggest growing markets in North America. We are told that Asia is the fastest growing region for the sport of tennis. Yet, when we look at the players who are getting the multi-million dollar contract, there is hardly a Na Li or a Serena Williams out there raking in the big bucks.

Even worse, a look at the top 100 rankings of women's tennis and the paucity of minorities who are embracing this sport leaves people like me, who are a minority, and who were drawn to the sport by two of the biggest stars to ever play the game, Venus and Serena, feeling quite disconsolate.

I listen and I watch lots of women's tennis. The feedback I get from commentators is that tennis needs people like Ivanovic, Wozniacki, Sharapova, Clijsters, Azarenka and the list goes on and on, not because they are great players, but because of their looks and personality and what they bring to women's tennis. In the same breath, the strength of character, the will to fight, the competitiveness and drive of a Serena Williams, the longevity of a Venus Williams, the artistry of a Justine Henin are laid by the wayside.

These veterans of the Tour may not have the looks that the Ivanovic's and Wozniacki's of the tennis world, but they are 3 of the most accomplished players in this generation of tennis players.

What really galls me more than anything else is that the 9 women who were recently celebrated for having the initiative and drive to buck the system are not what we would call celebrated beauties. In their own way they are beautiful women, but would Madison Avenue consider them women who could sell phones or tennis clothes, handbags, shoes etc. I don't think so.

Sania Mirza is one of the few women of ethnic origin who has garnered a great deal of sponsorships based on her looks. If you have never seen Sania Mirza, here is a picture of her.

This is a call for minority women from all over the world to go out there and let your face be seen. Let your racquets start doing the talking. Give us the next Serena and Venus Williams. Let us see the next Na Li. The next Sania Mirza.

Injuries, Injuries and More Injuries

It is that time of the year when the injury roll gets called in women's tennis. Already we have seen numerous withdrawals and the list of those players who have called it a season is a virtual list of who's who in women's tennis.

Since Wimbledon, we have multi-slam champions like Justine Henin and Serena Williams nary hitting a ball in competition. Justine due to hurting her elbow in her match against Clijsters and Serena after cutting her foot on glass in a restaurant, which required her to have surgery.

Since the USO Clijsters has not played a tournament, tweeting a picture of her foot showing that she had had work done to remove a mole. Safina, Kuznetsova, Sharapova and Venus Williams have all called it a season for various reasons. Safina due to her back, Kuznetsova cited an undisclosed illness, Sharapova to rehab her shoulder and Venus because of her knee.

Serena was slated to play Linz but has had to withdraw as a scan of her foot determined that her injured foot had not fully healed.

The news of so many withdrawals of marquee players at this time of the year has been met with some amount of commisserations for some and raised eyebrows for one withdrawal. The only player whose absence drew howls of protest or was met with sceptcism was that of Serena.

Now a case could be made that people love to see Serena play or it could be that she is the face of women's tennis, contrary to what others have been saying for years. However, this post is about the injury situation that seems to befall the women's tour at this time of the year.

For most of this year Serena has been on the benched list more than she has been on court. She has only played 6 tournaments this year and even those tournaments that she played she came in with some form of bandage on various parts of her body.

The tennis season is long and gruelling and it is up to the players to maintain a schedule that is compatible with what they can physically manage. However, there is also this issue of the Roadmap which compels players to play premier tournaments in order to either maintain a ranking or indeed to partake in a year end bonus. At the end of the day a player needs to determine whether it is worth it to play tournaments while injured in order to get a bonus at the end of the year which may just end of up playing doctor's bills in any event.

I have no idea what the solution is to the chronic injury situation that now besets the Tour. Many of the players who are now on injured list and who have shut down for the season are players who have played a pretty limited schedule this year or who have been knocked out of tournaments at the early stage. Players like Safina need to think long and hard as to whether it is the right thing for her to be playing tournaments with her back being the way it is. Perhaps a sabbatical to allow her injury to heal may be the best thing for her to do.

One issue that keeps coming up amongst fans is the issue of the equipment that is being used by most of the players.

I will be doing some research on this during the off season and scouring the internet to see whether I can find any relevant articles to support a theory that I have had and which has been posited by John McEnroe regarding the string and racquets now being used on the pro tour.

Until then I can only hope that the players who are now on the injured list take the necessary time to heal the various aches and pains in their bodies and come back stronger in 2011.

ESPNW and Women's Tennis in General

So ESPN has decided that they will be starting a new version of ESPN. This version will be dedicated to women's sports and all of a sudden advocates of equality etc are up in arms and have taken over twitter.

Jessica Wakeman, of women’s pop culture blog The Frisky, is quoted as saying that “If they were truly inclusive of women, they would try to integrate women into their programming, rather than secluding them off in a ‘pink ghetto.’”

Now I must be missing the point or something but what is wrong about women having their own. Is that not a sign of our independence and a step forward in the great race for equality. I grew up in a culture and environment where the man was king and there was no doubt about who was the head of the household. Even though things have changed, and the reality is that women have most of the responsibility in relation to being head of households etc men are still considered king of the hill.

For years I have been advocating that the women of the WTA and indeed the WTA itself should seriously think about establishing its own network to broadcast women's tennis. Whenever a Masters Series event is being aired, you get coverage on Tennis Channel and ESPNI from the first ball is played until the finals. In some cases you even get doubles coverage. In terms of coverage for the women, you will be lucky if you get coverage from the quarter finals onwards.

In terms of cost cutting, many of the premier events for the women are now being combined with the men's events. In these situations women's tennis gets short shrift. A case in point is this year at Indian Wells and Miami. Both events are premier/mandatories for the women and MS 1000 for the men. I saw every ball that was struck in the men's events but marquee names such as Henin, Sharapova and Clijsters who played these events, especially Indian Wells, their matches were never aired.

It gets even worse. During this year's US Open Series, we saw matches from early on in Washington and lesser events, yet established big draw events featuring the big marquee names in women's tennis, we only saw matches from the quarters on. This was not only for tv but for live streaming as well. It took bloggers on the ground to provide us with updates via twitter and their blogs as to what was happening on the ground.

If ESPN, the world leader in sports marketing can establish a channel dedicated to women's tennis, and it proves profitable, as I think it will, then perhaps they will then get the message that women's sports is a very valuable commodity.

Women cannot be considered equal until and unless they can show that they can perform with men on an equal footing. That means that while it is all well and good for people to shout equality from the rooftops if a channel that is dedicated to women's sports fail, then that would give credence that we are not all equal.

The proof of any pudding is in the eating. I saw bring on the women's sports channel. Feature every kind of women's sports. Offer it at a reasonable price to women and let us see where advertisers put their money.

USO Women's Competition

So another USO has come and gone, or at least the women's portion of the event is over.

Kim Clijsters defeated Vera Zvonreva 6-2, 6-1 in a manner reminiscent of another player defeating a Russian almost 3 years ago in Australia. I watched the match in between changing channels. It took 1 hour exactly. Clijsters' family had numerous watches in the stands. I guess the whole point of that was to set a record for the fastest women's final in US Open history. I wonder if she got it?

It is funny to see how the Tennis Establishment has embraced Kim Clijsters' return to tournament play. In her first career she was known as a head case. A player who could never give it up to the better players. 2 years, a baby and a husband later, she now has 3 Grand Slams, a chance to become No.1 and finally she will perhaps get into the Hall of Fame. I guess she will get there. I wonder though when the questions will be asked as to Clijsters' penchant for only winning majors at one event in the same way that Venus Williams is being written as only being able to win on grass. Somehow I will not hold my breath for that one.

This USO has been a bit of a disappointment for me. Neither of my faves will be lifting a trophy at the final major of the year and for that I am truly sad. Life will go on once again and all I can do is hope that as their careers wind down they will find that last little step to be able to get one more major. I am rooting for that one player, Venus Williams to be able to do it one more time, but alas I am thinking that her time is surely passing her by, but I do believe in miracles and I am hopeful that one day it will happen.

Stanford

So here we are again, the beginning of the USO Series. The time of the year when fans of tennis in North America and elsewhere suffer at the hands of tournament directors and television networks by being deprived of watching live tennis on the internet, or indeed on the expensive cable channels for which they pay. All for the privilege of not getting any tennis on tv.

This is especially so for the women.

This week we have a number of tournaments being played. For the men we have Gstaad and Umag, both on clay and Los Angeles on hard courts. For the women we have Stanford and Istanbul. Both tournaments are being played on hard courts.

Stanford has a bigger and stronger field than Istanbul. The field in Stanford includes Stosur, Dementieva, Sharapova, Ivanovic, Radwanska, Peer and many other notables in the field of women's tennis. In Istanbul we have Larsson, Schynder, Kvitova, Petkovic and a whole host of other players ranked outside the top 20. The difference between both fields is not in the fact that there big name players at one event and not so much big names in Istanbul. It is the coverage.

From the first ball was struck in Istanbul, fans of women's tennis could actually get to watch ball by ball play. There was also excellent commentary from the first ball was struck until close of play. We even got to see doubles. Doubles at what is really a Tier IV event.

Stanford on the other hand. Not even radio tennis. Not even radio coverage. This is the beginning of the Olympus USO Series and not even as much as radio tennis coverage you can get. Why you ask? Well, bloggers who are on the ground have informed us that there is actually live streaming of the event, but it would seem as if the organisers have decided that fans who live in Timbuktu, or even closer Russia, or even Serbia or Poland and who are fans of the players who are playing in Stanford may not actually want to see their players play.

What the organisers have done is provide a live stream of the event to the media personnel who are currently on the ground providing coverage. Apart from Forty Deuce and Global Village Tennis News, I have not read any news accounts about what is happening in Stanford. Chris Oddo from On the Baseline has provided some blogging but they have been centered around individual players.

Forty Deuce and Global Village have been doing a terrific job in providing live match scoring commentary via twitter. Is this the level to which the WTA has allowed women's tennis to wallow. Fans should check out twitter or look at the scoreboard to see who is winning and who is losing.

For years Stanford had a live stream that was 300 feet from the court, had no commentary and barely any sound but fans appreciated it every year until we got tv coverage. This year nothing. Stanford is a well attended event as Californians love their tennis. There is no reason why the event should not be livestreamed until it is available on television. As it is by the time Friday rolls around, we would be lucky if most of the marquee names have not already been sent home and all we are left with would be a list of players similar to those playing in Istanbul. That might not be a bad thing.

US Open Series

Hello fans of tennis. It is that time of year again when the women of the WTA begin competing in the US Open Series, culminating in the last major of the year, the US Open.

To those who do not know, the USO Series is a series of events during the US hard court season which traverses the United States. There are usually 4 events, Stanford, Los Angeles, Cincinatti and Toronto/Montreal. The winner of the USO Series gets US$1M and if said winner wins both the USO Series and the US Open, they are guaranteed to double their prize money. Financially it is an incentive to players to play these events. The problem though is that these events happen at the tough end of the tennis season and it usually finds the top players all banged up and bruised. Withdrawals are a part of this time of the season.

In checking the preliminary tv schedules for both Tennis Channel and ESPN, we find that most of the events that feature the women will start airing at the quarter final stage. I believe the same will obtain for the men, save and except for their Masters Series events in Montreal and Cincinatti.

I am aware that there is not a lot of sponsorship going on right now in tennis, and usually when tennis gets to the States for some reason that is when all live streams on the internet go dark. Someone needs to tell tournament directors that whether they live stream their events or not, if people want to come to these events they will come regardless. Nobody likes sitting in front of a computer screen watching tennis, but for those of us who do not reside in the US, would it kill these people to provide live streams for those of us outside the US?

This week, (16 July) I have been fortunate to watch some matches in places like Portoroz (Slovenia Open) and Bad Gastein. Bad Gastein is a clay court event and while I was quite happy to watch the live stream, my experience was not pleasant as the camera angles were set in such a way that it made for poor viewing. Portoroz was a very good event and I now have a new fave in Polono Hercog.

One thing that I noticed from those 2 events that I have been watching this week is the lack of grunting/screaming. However, would it kill the announcers to stop referring to these grown women as girls. I cannot recall hearing the men being described as boys. It kind of galls me to hear them talking about married women who are currently on Tour and playing as girls.

There are some intriguing story lines coming up during this summer hard court season and I will have a post about that showing my list contenders and floaters.

The Anti-Fan

What is an anti-fan? An Anti Fan is for one thing not a fan of tennis. An Anti Fan is for want of a better description a troll. An Anti-Fan are the ones who come out from under the bridge when the following people have won a tennis tournament:

· Roger Federer

· Rafael Nadal

· Novak Djokovic

· Juan Martin del Potro

· Andy Murray

· Serena Williams

· Venus Williams

· Kim Clijsters

· Justine Henin

· Maria Sharapova

· Caroline Wozniacki

· Victoria Azarenka, and

· Dinara Safina

· Jelena Jankovic

· Ana Ivanovic

Now you may be saying, but these are all top players, why would there be anti-fans when these players win tournaments. These are the big names in tennis. Well for starters the anti-fan will usually come out after a victory by any of the above players by stating a few things about the victory. These statements can cover a whole host of things but are usually along the following lines:

· Surface

· No top players faced

· Ugly game

· It was because so and so was not in the draw

· It was because so and so lost and so he/she did not have to face him/her

· It was a lower level event

· Schedule

· Injury

· Had no match play

I am sure that any of us reading the above excuses have at one time or another made these comments on message boards the world over. We may think we are contributing to the discussions but what we are really doing is becoming a virtual anti-fan. For each victory that we celebrate for our favourite tennis player we have to remember that some other fan somewhere is despairing over another loss. For every vamos, come on, adje, allez and fist pump that our faves celebrate, somewhere another fan is holding a towel, a flag or a piece of tissue while wiping away tears as their favourites suffer another defeat. As such, when we visit message boards sometimes to find commiserations or to celebrate with our virtual friends, we need to remember that there are those amongst us whose sole purpose in life is to come out and rain on the parade.

Today, 3 tennis professionals who have not won a title in quite awhile were successful in doing so. Rafael Nadal, won his 16^th Masters Shield today by beating Fernando Verdasco. There are stories floating around the internet that have some folks saying well “Nadal did not beat a top 10 player”, well guess what, there was a top 10 player in the draw and Verdasco took him out in straight sets. As a matter of fact the victory by Verdasco over Djokovic was what you would call an old fashioned thumping. Today, Sam Stosur got a win over Vera Zvonreva in Charleston in a Premier event. This was Stosur’s second title. She served well, kept her focus and finished the match with 36 winners. Her opponent had 4. If you think there were a lot of unforced errors, think again. Vera had 8 while Stosur had 11. The first set was over in 18 minutes.

In Barcelona, Francesca Schiavone won over Roberta Vinci, the defending champion 1 and 1. I saw that match and it was a fantastic display of clay court tennis. Schiavone played well within herself and deserved to win that match. The anti-fans were all over the place just raining on the parades of both Stosur and Nadal. The claims being made by the anti-fans were that neither player beat any top players to win the title. Does not matter. A victory is a victory. If that is the case that we are going to put asterisks against the wins or losses of every player then we would be writing articles like this every day.

Last year some alluded to Roger Federer’s wins at the French Open and Wimbledon was purely due to Rafael Nadal’s injuries. Foolishness. By the same token Rafael Nadal’s wins over Federer could be attributed to all sorts of injuries of his opponents. When we attempt to justify our arguments by belittling the accomplishments of what we consider are not our favourite players we do a disservice to this game that we all claim to love so much. A victory over any opponent, no matter where he or she is ranked is a victory. Does Federer’s Roland Garros triumph less remarkable because he did not beat Rafael Nadal? Or is Serena’s Williams victory over Justine Henin at this year’s Australian Open not significant seeing as Justine was only playing her second tournament since her return from sabbatical? We have to start ignoring the anti-fans when they come out spewing this type of nonsense because at the end of the day, when our faves win, there will be anti-fan out there somewhere ready to pounce and say “well, he/she won because …”