Chris

I haven’t seen the FT article but I cannot see how the complexities of the situation could be summed up in less than 50 pages. It could also be suggested that no other sport has exploited its commercial potential as well as F1 (maybe soccer, but a great deal of funds come from wealthy individuals which can skew the analysis).

Given the nature of tennis, one really must find some like comparisons for a start point – some features: Individual Competitors, Royal patronage, Export via UK plc during the torrid days of Empire. Horse racing and Show jumping spring to mind and I think a comparison between the revenue gained through the chosen field for an individual jockey vs. individual tennis players may prove that tennis has done quite well. Even that comparison is difficult due to cost of participation having to taken into account for in the pocket monies.

Let’s compare squash, badminton, fencing, or shooting perhaps in terms of commercial exploitation to measure the merits for tennis’ achievements.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20020612/ai_n12612595

Firstly, I obviously didn’t get what a big event it was. As I say I work in Wimbledon and frankly I just think of it as an inconvenience – nowhere to sit on the train, people everywhere… I have watched tennis (on TV, not live) and it just leaves me cold. When I lived at home my mum was a big fan but it just bored me rigid (sorry Fer No 65!)

The comments from Nico, Daniel, Greg, Alex and several others of you have made it easier for me to appreciate why it was such an important and interesting match.

I do like some non-motor racing sports by the way. For example I can take football in small doses but it’s so overexposed here I tend to only see it when one of my friends comes round to watch Manchester United on Sky.

Jean – “I think some of our top drivers may lack character in comparison to Federer and Nadal.” Agreed.

Green Flag – “By the way, Keith, you missed an outstanding match. Don’t miss it next year.” I wouldn’t know one if it punched me on the nose. Don’t waste a ticket on me!

Chunter – Those ads are context-based, so they should show ads depending on what the content of this page is, hence tennis ads here.

Milos – “Why is British GP on the same day as Wimbledon final?” – It is clearly poor timing. Does the provisional date for next year’s British Grand Prix clash with Wimbledon? Is that why it’s been swapped with the French race?

Oliver – “I will simply just put it down the the fact that Tennis, is like a boxing match between two opponents, and you can see the blows being struck, and then sometimes you have a knockout, which is spectacular. A visually physical sport. Formula 1 on the other hand is a bit obscure, yes you do see the drivers in action working at the wheels, you an initial mad scramble for the lead, then it settles down for a while. While the drivers themselves under go as much or even more physical fitness as tennis players, this is often goes oblivious to the crowd, because much of F1 happens behind the scenes until the races.” – I think this is closest to what I meant. I’ll return to this idea in a later, hopefully better focused article.

Finally, I was reading about the commercial structure of tennis in the Financial Times before the tournament began and I got the impression that as a sport it has not exploited its commercial potential as effectively as, say, F1 has. Perhaps each could learn something from the other?

It is a question of audience. F1 is “important” in Europe, mainly Italy, UK, France, Germany and Spain. I do not really know in Japan although I suppose it is followed.

Tennis is much more “important” in the rest of the world. Only in Russia (The new strong nation in tennis) and The USA are much more million of spectators than the F1.

The British press knows that, and also had a great match at their most important tourn (I mean in tennis) by large. Also there is a sense that the old traditions of this big tournament (sometingh very British) are in clear touch with modernity represented by two young fellows wich they represent with their behavior (stamina, power, sportmanship, honesty, humility….)the very best that the British want to sell to the world.

Unfortunately, this not always match with F1. That is why.

Formula1 on the other hand is a bit obscure, yes you do see the drivers in action working at the wheels, you an initial mad scramble for the lead, then it settles down for a while. While the drivers themselves under go as much or even more physical fitness as tennis players, this is often goes oblivious to the crowd, because much of F1 happens behind the scenes until the races.

Finally a knockout in F1 terms isn’t just overtaking a fellow driver, rather its a total demolition of your opponent with a superior pace and car control that you leave them far behind. But when that happens in F1, the race is said to be boring.

Now, I’ve played tennis. . . and I can easily say for myself I despise the game. However, watching pros play there was so much tension and excitement. To be honest, I know as much about tennis as I do about football – literally nada. Federer and Nadal were just two names…and in fact I didn’t even know I was watching the final! (I do watch a bit of tennis every year too)

But from most of my friends perspective, I have things the wrong way round (F1 over any sport). Some of them are petrolheads, but just can’t stand F1…or watching any motorsport for more than a few minutes. There is just nothing which grabs their attention because it’s not completely transparent when you tune in what has gone on. Say you tune in mid race, you need to rely on commentators, and numerous data tables to figure out who’s where, what’s gone on, and you can still miss a lot….or miss nothing at all, which would probably be the the most likely given todays dry races. With tennis, football etc, it’s instant gratification – you tune in, you see who’s winning and you’re already amidst the action.

I suppose it’s a bit different to other sports as well, where you only really have two sides competing at the same time…but I see this as a plus – it’s any teams game in F1 (well, not really in practice).

I think the accessibility of F1 compared to other sports is a good point made earlier by someone else is that people can relate to the other sports … people have kicked a ball, picked up a tennis racket, etc. Most people haven’t been near an F1 car let alone drive one (nor are they likely to ever get that chance). F1 is a bit exclusive, and given it’s processional races, it can be interpreted as paying for the pleasure of watching a “few rich guys going round in circles” as an Irish woman once told me.

F1′s big, but it’s almost like one of those things you can either hate or love. Whereas I love watching teams and drivers adapting to rule changes and the evolution of technology in the cars, as well as the racing itself, most people do not find F1 a competing sport because for the most part they’re not seeing the driver doing anything other than driving (which most probably don’t know is much of a physical demand in itself).

I think you do have to follow F1 to enjoy it as a spectacle, whereas there are plenty of sports which are not so much the same case – tennis and football being two major examples.