TV coverage or lack thereof

Well, some good news somewhat - the tennis channel will be showing one men's match per night from 3/29 to 4/1 for the Sony Ericsson (see attached). Called the tennis channel to complain why it wasn't more (and why the women always get dissed), and he said their viewers love ATP and WTA so it's not on them for not showing it - it's more on the tournaments who are independently governed and called them at the last second giving them last-minute matches to show. The tennis channel guy admitted that they're really making no money on this due to the lateness of the situation - his window to get ad sales is gone really - just doing it for the tennis fans. Of course then called the Miami tournament to complain, but really no answer from them. Seems like basically these tournaments are TV contract idiots and don't seem to be able to negotiate the best contract with the best network to get maximum TV coverage - oh well :-). Probably need a more uniform voice for negotiating TV rights to get the best tennis coverage. Also, of course the tennis channel guy promoted the upcoming French Open coverage - and I asked him about the stupid situation last year when I think McEnroe made a mistake since they're not supposed to talk about the NBC matches/results - he said they could report results when the matches are over and it won't be an issue after the 1st weekend - we'll see how it goes :-); but look forward to it.

As for the tennis yesterday - basically done with Blake - just plays way too wild to ever be consistent - not really sold on Nadal (kind of like a backboard, but of course does come with some force - but plays way, way back - it's insane), but he'll keep winning as long as he keeps playing weak-minded players (e.g., Blake, Tsonga, etc.) - but of course that all stops with Djoko tomorrow :-).

Pacific Life Open

Hmm, this suicide pool for the women's side (for the Pacific Life Open) is definitely going to be tough (through www.talkabouttennis.com) - have a bunch of no names playing since the seeds all get 1st round byes so a tough choice (ended up going with Natalie Dechy - only one I had confidence in). And the men's draw is finally out - some interesting potential matchups (e.g., Murray vs. Roddick in the 4th round, Federer vs. Roddick in the qtrs., Tsonga vs. Nadal in the 4th round, Blake vs. Gasquet in the 4th round, etc.). But of course, unfortunately, the draw people screwed up again by having Ancic vs. Monfils in the 1st round - sheesh - sorry to have to lose one of those players on the 1st/2nd day of play in the men's draw (Thurs. or Fri.); guess the problem is that both player's rankings have fallen so they're both unseeded. And unfortunately probably a match we won't see on TV, but perhaps can listen to if it's one of the late matches on Thurs. or Fri. Although can probably pay to see it through the internet I believe (through the www.atptennis.com site - master series TV).

Federer and next tournament

For those lovers of exhibition tennis - it's Federer vs. Sampras tonight on the tennis channel at 7:30pm :-). Should be interesting. Of course, more interested to see if Federer can get back on the winning track this week at the Pacific Life tournament - especially since if he doesn't do well, then Nadal can perhaps get even closer to the #1 spot (he's only 350 points away right now) - would assume he has to probably go through Nadal, Roddick, Djoko, Nalbandian, and/or Ferrer to win it. Of course, I don't even pretend to understand this nonsensical point system - how can Federer be so close to losing #1 when he's been in the finals or won so many of the Grand Slams the last few years - think it was up to like 12 in a row before the Australian and has such a great record. And then there's Bartoli who did one thing (get to the finals of Wimbledon) and seems to be firmly locked into the #9 spot even she's done nothing since then. Basically, the problem is the system is based on defending points - so if you win or get to the final, then you don't get that many more points if you win or get to the finals again the next year - so even though (like Federer), you have a great record and kick everyone's butt for 3-4 years - your lead isn't that great since you're simply doing what you're supposed to do. Crazily, you'd get more points, if you start losing in the 1st round, and then win the tournament the next year - seems like a bad system to me - or needs to be combined with something else. Of course, since Federer lost early in both the Pacific Life and the Sony Ericsson last year, then he can rack up huge points this year by winning - hmm, perhaps he planned it like that :-).

And, of course, will be interesting to see if Venus or Serena can beat 4 or 5 good women in a row in 2 weeks. Think Serena only won yesterday because it was Schnyder who we all know is mental. Just don't think she has enough left in the tank to beat 4 or 5 good women in a row - just wants the point to be over in a few shots - and Ivanovic, Janko, Sharapova, and Henin are all better than that now. And some of the other players as well. Hmm, just noticed Alexandra Stevenson's name in the qualifying - nice to perhaps see her back in the mix.

Clint