Talk About Tennis 2.0

I sympathize with all these defences but ..the score is the single most important thing in a report..what do I care about the rest- his opinions and commentary mean nothing. If you can't get the score right, what does it matter what else you got right?!

I disagree. Remember the great match between Roger and Rafa? It was something to something, and somebody won, but the important things were the nuances of the match.
(I disagree slightly. My issue is that these news, to me, seem sloppy, because of a silly mistake.)

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon May 20, 2024 12:42 pm I disagree. Remember the great match between Roger and Rafa? It was something to something, and somebody won, but the important things were the nuances of the match.
(I disagree slightly. My issue is that these news, to me, seem sloppy, because of a silly mistake.)

Certainly but I don't need a sports writer to tell me the nuances, especially when I don't trust his judgement anyway

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2024 10:39 pm

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2024 8:06 pm

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2024 8:25 am Sinner has announced his withdrawal ..there is no error in the headline, just mismatch between headline And post

A production error. Someone pulled the wrong Sinjury story into the Home Page hopper. Rushing produces mistakes, just like in tennis!

Yes, I made up Sinjury.

Then copyright it

Creation is copywriting! You don't have to file anything, like you do for a trademark. But I'm not sure a single word can be copyrighted, or that I could claim any damages if someone else uses it. But thanks.

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 11:57 pm The reporter phrased the question in the negative and I think that's what ticked Iga off. If he had asked "Why are you so dominant on clay?" Instead of "Why aren't you so dominant on other surfaces?" She would've probably given a nuanced answer.

In the real world she has more wins on hard than on clay.

Percentage-wise? I wonder if this is a function of more tournaments being played on hard.

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 11:57 pm The reporter phrased the question in the negative and I think that's what ticked Iga off. If he had asked "Why are you so dominant on clay?" Instead of "Why aren't you so dominant on other surfaces?" She would've probably given a nuanced answer.

In the real world she has more wins on hard than on clay.

I might have asked it like this: "You've obviously had a lot of success on hard court, but your scorelines on clay are consistently more dominant than other surfaces. What explains your extreme dominance on clay?" This grounds the question in facts. The reporter could have even calculated her game-winning percentage on clay versus other surfaces and thrown that out there.

I wonder if the reporter speaks English as a first langauge.

I don't love having to set up the question with "You've obviously had a lot of success on hard court" - if something is obvious, why say it? And it's not insulting to ask about her dominance on clay But if it greases the wheels and sets a courteous tone, so be it.

I say it is a very good question. She is quickly becoming a truly great clay courter, but her credentials on the other surfaces are not as sterling. It was also a pretty dull final so, was there anything else to ask?

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:12 pm I say it is a very good question. She is quickly becoming a truly great clay courter, but her credentials on the other surfaces are not as sterling. It was also a pretty dull final so, was there anything else to ask?

It was a fair topic to explore, just a clumsy approach. I bet the person isn't a native English speaker. I wish people weren't so easily offended. That said, her hard court credentials are nearly HOF-worthy on their own - US Open, YEC, Indian Wells and Miami double.... they just aren't as good as her clay court resume. She's a victim of her own success in that way.

I think the timing of the question also causes an issue - it seems completely different to ask about the issue after the French Open - as in 'What adjustments do you need to make to your game to be more successful on other surfaces?'.

skatingfan wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 10:15 pm I think the timing of the question also causes an issue - it seems completely different to ask about the issue after the French Open - as in 'What adjustments do you need to make to your game to be more successful on other surfaces?'.

Someone should have asked if she can be beaten at Roland Garros. I wonder if she feels unbeatable after a run like this and going into a Slam she has dominated. I'm guessing she doesn't think about it that way but I'd love to hear how she processes this kind of dominance.

The French Open website has this graphic that appears at the bottom of the singles matches called the 'Excitement rate by Infosys'. I don't know what it means, but for the men's semifinals that have Zverev/Ruud rated at 100%, and Alcaraz/Sinner at 88%, and that just feels wrong.

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/orde ... 2024-06-07

skatingfan wrote: ↑Fri Jun 07, 2024 1:44 am The French Open website has this graphic that appears at the bottom of the singles matches called the 'Excitement rate by Infosys'. I don't know what it means, but for the men's semifinals that have Zverev/Ruud rated at 100%, and Alcaraz/Sinner at 88%, and that just feels wrong.

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/orde ... 2024-06-07

From the Infosys IG page: The new AI Excitement Rate feature in the Infosys Match Centre displays how exciting a match is likely to be pre-match and during the match. The rating is determined by a number of factors including the head to head record of the players, their track record at RG, and more.

So, in earlier rounds, some scores were apparently below 75%. As someone on MTF said: Nice way selling your product dumbasses. Also in tennis most times the exciting matches are not the ones you expected beforehand. The reverse also applies, with Swiatek - Potapova getting a full 100% prior to the double bagel.

And because I am a jerk: I know the French Open could not care less about the USO or, for that matter, all things American. But, sort of easy to remember that Zverev was in at least ONE previous slam final. Pandemic year, was up to sets to love, great match on an empty stadium. Should be easy, right?

ponchi101 wrote:And because I am a jerk:

Screenshot 2024-06-07 183413.jpg

I know the French Open could not care less about the USO or, for that matter, all things American. But, sort of easy to remember that Zverev was in at least ONE previous slam final. Pandemic year, was up to sets to love, great match on an empty stadium. Should be easy, right?

That’s awful! But not journalism. Great Tennis Marketing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.tennis.com/news/articles/to ... club-title

Just an example, probably not the worst..
Article is full of fluff, says nothing much about how the match actually went, that a tennis fan can glean some insights from..I saw the match so I can confidently say this article says nothing substantial...too many like this, just words words words ..