I came across an old video of a 1991 Masters Final match Pete Sampras vs Jim Courier in Germany.
The most striking part of the presentation is how the match did not need any extra gimmicks like bad music, bells and whistles, flashing lights and annoying announcers. This match featured the PLAYERS and nothing else was needed.
The players Sampras and Courier entered the court in silence, all focus was on the players, not the distractions like announcers and music and lights. All eyes were on the players. And that was enough.
With no distractions, you can see details such as Courier waiting the coin toss by swinging lefty serve motion, something I had never seen another player do. Also the players facial expressions are so stoic and locked in, so focused, they always have the same face.
I think the players get distracted today in the modern game with all the music and announcer chattering on changeovers, it has to have some kind of effect on their concentration and quality of tennis. I think players will perform better today if they eliminated all the mumbo jumbo – and let the presentation be all about the players. The pure tennis speaks for itself and it sells itself and no extra decoration is needed.
Jim Courier · Masters · Pete Sampras
Steve · September 28, 2025 at 12:29 pm
Interestingly, I’ve been watching a lot of early 90s Sarmpras/Courier recently as well. Courier was definitely one of Pete’s main rivals in that period and a nice contrast of styles. Even though Courier’s bh was fugly it is wrongly maligned, it was very effective.
Scoop Malinowski · September 28, 2025 at 12:51 pm
Courier’s backhand was unique. But it won four GS titles and it earned the no. 1 ranking. Funny how the critics who mocked that backhand never won anything.
Scoop Malinowski · September 28, 2025 at 12:57 pm
The underrated part of the match is how it feels almost like an opera or ballet, it’s all about the tennis, no gimmicks no bs no circus sideshow acts. Pure tennis. Wish modern tennis presentation would go back to that. And realize tennis does not need any loud music, loud mouth announcers, fancy light shows and scoreboard wizardry. All that’s needed is high level tennis, that’s enough.
Steve · September 29, 2025 at 3:46 pm
Totally agree!
Scoop Malinowski · September 29, 2025 at 4:32 pm
Even the absence of TV broadcasters works, the tennis is enough. Today most commentators do not enhance the match on TV but Jimmy Arias does it the best IMO. Most of them are just doing it to be there and be seen it seems. Let the match speak for itself, a tourn does not need 12 commentators yapping away.
Sam · October 23, 2025 at 5:15 am
These comments are a few weeks old, but I must’ve missed them the first time around.
And realize tennis does not need any loud music, loud mouth announcers, fancy light shows and scoreboard wizardry. All that’s needed is high level tennis, that’s enough.
Watch your language! 🤣
Most of them are just doing it to be there and be seen it seems. Let the match speak for itself, a tourn does not need 12 commentators yapping away.
This reminds me of music reviews. Do you ever read any of those? Well, it seems that the sole purpose of most music reviews is not to inform readers about what new music is worth listening to, but instead to demonstrate how smart the reviewers are. Typically, they use the world’s most pretentious language, and must spend hours with thesauruses in hand trying desperately to pick out words that 99.9% of the public has never heard before. 🧐 Anyway, in the same vein, the tennis commentators probably just want to “be seen,” as you said. It’s all about them, not the action on the court. 🤡
Scoop Malinowski · October 23, 2025 at 8:28 am
I don’t read any reviews of movies or music of books. I’d say the majority of tennis commentators are word wasters. Did you notice Paul Annacone has created a new BS term? When asked what changes he’s made in Taylor Fritz, he said he’s winning a lot of matches now and would only mention some malarky about “micro adjustments” without any detail.