Okay…this post required the most amount of effort from my side in terms of compiling information. And it has to rank right up there in terms of satisfaction of the output too. Hate this, but one is actually more satisfied about any result that comes out of an excel sheet and fancy charts rather than a word doc alone!
The idea, (besides trying to a prove a point thru charts) is to draw an inference for the reason behind women’s tennis having generated lesser interest than the male version during most of years post the open era (I mean another reason besides the slow pace of the game as compared to men’s tennis) and the reason for the hike in interest levels in recent years for the female version.
The chart below depicts that amount/intensity of competition at a half-decade level post the Open-Era in 1968, with the intensity of competition defined as number of unique players that won grand slams (close to 20 every five years) in these 5 year periods.
You will notice that the trend line for men (unique grand slam winners for each 5 year period) has mostly been above the line for women. The last two 5 year periods have marked a quantum shift in the women tennis scene, especially after the exit of Graf and Hingis. This is also the period where the number of equally matched opponents has grown for the female version. Let me get into the detail of how numbers can at times paint a completely wrong picture…look at the last bar point in trend line for males – a number of 11 means that so many different guys have won a grand slam or more in the last 5 years!...but the truth becomes apparent in the chart below.
The idea, (besides trying to a prove a point thru charts) is to draw an inference for the reason behind women’s tennis having generated lesser interest than the male version during most of years post the open era (I mean another reason besides the slow pace of the game as compared to men’s tennis) and the reason for the hike in interest levels in recent years for the female version.
The chart below depicts that amount/intensity of competition at a half-decade level post the Open-Era in 1968, with the intensity of competition defined as number of unique players that won grand slams (close to 20 every five years) in these 5 year periods.
You will notice that the trend line for men (unique grand slam winners for each 5 year period) has mostly been above the line for women. The last two 5 year periods have marked a quantum shift in the women tennis scene, especially after the exit of Graf and Hingis. This is also the period where the number of equally matched opponents has grown for the female version. Let me get into the detail of how numbers can at times paint a completely wrong picture…look at the last bar point in trend line for males – a number of 11 means that so many different guys have won a grand slam or more in the last 5 years!...but the truth becomes apparent in the chart below.
Federer has won 9 out of the 19 grand slams played in the period. The next guy with the most slams is Nadal with just 2! The rest of the unique winner list includes names such as Costa, Ferrero, Gaudio, Johansson, Hewitt, Roddick and Safin – all probably one-time wonders apart from the last three who might be restricted to 3 or 4 time wonders at most, courtesy Federer!The point again centres around my earlier blog on the extent of competition in the sport – We would all agree that the best times for Men’s tennis were the ones featuring McEnroe, Borg and Connors battling it out and the period where you could place your bet on anyone amongst Becker, Edberg, Lendl or Wilander to emerge triumphant in a grand slam. While it is a tennis lover’s dream to watch Federer play like god, it takes away from the sport the very emotion that fuels it – thrill, suspense & anti-climax and till the time that the men's game is fortunate enough to get two or three players that can rival the Swiss Mister, the sport will always lack on this count!
Just compare this with the female version of the sport, where the average number of unique winners per five years has been around 7, much lower than the average of 9 for men. A possible explanation for the women tennis inviting lesser viewer interest that the male version?
The escalation in interest for women’s tennis is clearly evident from the above chart. Just have a look at the bars for 97-01 and 02-06. About 10 unique winners per five year interval with near equal competition from worthy adversaries like the Williams sisters, Henin, Clijsters and the new Russian brigade of Sharapova, Myskina, Kuznetsova and the likes. Another example of near equal competition leading to a hike in spectator interest! No wonder why the women’s tennis scene was so boring immediately after the open era were Margaret Court and Billie Jean King smashed every other pedestrian opponent that came their way and a similar phenomenon ensued with Christ Evert and Navratilova taking their place in their next decade. The memory of decade post has been filled with Graf smashing Sanchez, Capriati losing it, Novotna crying & many others just wilting away under some severe Steffi style serve & volley! I hope this comparison would go some way in explaining the reason behind the surge in spectator interest for women's tennis (besides the entry of a slew of Russian Glam-dolls) and the catching up, so to say, with the male version in the recent times!
4 comments:
I think the Battle of Sexes in Tennis was lost when Sabatini & Graf Retd.
It took a numbers of years post that tragedy to actually put Anna & Sharapova in place.
The Interim period is when Men dominated interest in Tennis.
FUNDOO! been a long time for me away from your blog...next few days will have to catch up with your writing
You are fucking crazy, you TAM whore. This sort of deconstruction is what leads to sport losing its purpose. Fucking number driven maniac.
good shit, bob. also, you can try this concept called the herfindal hirschman index here to see level of competition... if you can email the excel sheet to me, will be glad to try it out for you.
Post a Comment