That phone commercial is the first documented example of the "Nerd D-Bag." Never thought that would be something I would consider a possibility...

I view commentators as necessary evil.
They are usually opinionated, frustrating and wrong.

As for pundits, the more successful as players, the better as they have nothing to prove.

Also, there is no substitute for brains.

In short, I don't remember last time I listened to commentary. The annoying bit is you don't know whether the second serve is second serve or repeated first.

They can be reasonable on the BBC, but only once Murray gets knocked out.

We don't get that much choice when listening to commentary..but dislike the ESPN crew drama element. It sometimes is not factually correct..sometimes its stretched a bit.

I like Jim Courier's oncourt interviews..he manages to make the players smile. Never heard his commentary though.

Some of the ESPN3 streams featured the Channel 7 Aussie commentators.

I did not see any of the Tennis Channel coverage, I'm curious to see their replay of the men's final. Mainly for Navratilova's comments. Surely I'll find a replay next week when I visit a friend who does have TTC....

Steve, you missed in Melbourne - I think - the best commentary of all. The night matches - the only ones I saw - were broadcast with ball by ball descriptions and detailed "At the Net" discussion segments beforehand with Linda Pearce (excellent Melbourne Age journo), Barbara Schett, Paul MacNamee, sometimes Pat Cash, and in my opinion, the best commentator of all, anywhere, Josh Eagle, on ABC Local Radio - in Melbourne on 774.

Until this year they had Bud Collins too - is he getting too old to come over? And some nights too, the BBC guys - naturally, waxing lyrical about Murray.

I can't stand Jim Courier talking non stop and so pompously, so I can watch the TV with the sound turned off, and listen to Josh Eagle et al, or else go for a walk and listen.

My take on coverage is not just America vs Australia but ESPN in general. They seem to be clueless as to what tennis fans want. For some reason they think we want to look at and listen to Chris McKendry than live tennis. It burns me that quality matches are going on and they show commentators babbling on about nothing. As I said before, I'm not looking forward to their Wimbledon coverage.

Thank goddess I have TC. I always watch their replays. Martina may talk a lot but she gives great technical insight. They don't over indulge in fluff, just tennis when they have live play.

ESPN makes me feel stupid just listening to them.
I'd rather watch on mute.

Thank goodness for Eurosport livestream.

I wish I could have listened to the Aussie Channel 7 coverage esp Lleyton's commentary. Would have been insightful for sure esp since he's still there in the locker room as an active player.

And I actually quite like Courier, a bit of cheesy funny interviewing at the end of those tough matches is a nice little relief I thought.

I HATE when channels cut out to studio between sets and games, after commercial. Absolutely idiotic thing to do, watching players' body language during breaks as as much part of the game as watching them rallying. Also, get rid of idiotic loud music, tournament logo video and highlights, we just witnessed the damn thing thank you, now we want to see the players' mindset while sitting.

The perfect broadcast is 100% commercial free with option to no commentary, and if with experts, I prefer the short burst type, speaking little but passionately. As a matter of fact I feel less and less necessary to listen to other ppl's opinion, watched tennis the other day and took me an hour to realize there was no gibberish between points, and I didn't miss it.

The purer the broadcast the better.

ESPN's coverage, particularly in the early rounds, strongly focuses on US players, and spends an inordinate amount of time on desk bound presenters and interviewees while whole games of live matches are going on. Very little use is made of split screen to allow viewers to keep watching a show court match while ESPN switches to Sloane Stevens vs Elena Rodionoskova at 4-4 on court 15. Then there are pre-taped vignettes, slo-mo, fragments of press conferences, and Australia travel porn (Sydney Opera House! Ayers Rock! Beaches!!)

During matches, ESPN commentators frequently fall into "we're just buds watching a game in a sports bar" mode. Ah, the merry banter, the joshing, the "Pammy and Cliffie and Chrissie and...."

Games are frequently joined (after commercial break, mini-vignette, then talking head) at 0-30.

I could go on, but what's the point? It's tennis as reality show, rather than televising a sporting event. As for match analysis.... Cahill aside, it's the thinnest of gruel, although credit Chris Fowler for improving measurably as a tennis lead commentator over the last four years.

Switch between Stolle and friends and ESPN commentary and you'd think you weren't watching the same event. And in many ways, you aren't.

Good article! I think sometimes the networks understimate the contribution of commentators to fans enjoyment (or otherwise) of the match. As an Aussie/Brit I definitely refer our more sedate and analytical style of commentary, although I do get very tired of some of the older commentators incessantly harking back to tennis as it was in the old days. Unfortunately Stolle is one of the worst offenders. The game has moved on. Talk about it as it is now. Focus on the matches that are being played and leave the history lessons for some other time. And don't talk over all the points! Sometimes a couple of games can pass without a single comment on what's just transpired!

Having said I enjoy the more sedate commentary it's also great to hear genuine enthusiasm for the game and the players. Robbie Koenig and Jason Goodall always excel. And Lleyton Hewitt is a very pleasant surprise! I've never liked Lleyton much at all, but his commentary is excellent - insightful, respectful, and well-timed. And as for Courier... his on-court interviews are second to none! Call them cheesy if you like, but he seems to connect with players and find the right things to ask to move them beyond the usual bland on-court sentiments as few others can.

I just can't stand Fowler constantly trying to manufacture drama, and always trying to prod his color guy into commenting on said manufactured drama.

It can be 6-0, 6-0, 5-0, and Fowler will be asking Pat McEnroe if nerves are starting to creep into Djokovic's service game because he's missed two straight first serves against Paolo Lorenzi. It's insane.

Yes, although I don't like Courier's pontificating commentary, his interviews are FANTASTIC.

And Hewitt is a very good commentator. It's not surprising, because he's steeped in the game and even in the old days, when he was being his most in your face, cussed competitor, not to mention offended litigator, he was always an extremely pleasant and articulate speaker.

I've only heard Brad Gilber once, though now we're stuck with ESPN for the Masters I might have to hear him more. I didn't like him.

Fred Stolle can be quite insightful but also says the obvious and sounds quite doddery at times.

Steve is right that the glorification of the past is overdone in Australia. I get tired of the endless parading of the now long gone glory days of Australian tennis. How many more years do these ancient champs keep gettting wheeled out? Most young people neither know nor care who they are.

drysdale, stolle and newcombe are probably the better aussie commentators, but newcombe has stepped it down and drysdale now does american tele, so stolle is the only one left... he is like an australian john barrett but even more deadpan, and after all these yrs hes still very very good

as far as american commentary goes, pam shriver has to go... theres no delicate way to make this pt... she is an atrociously mixed bag of inconsistent analysis, strangely acidic remarks, trite observations, and all delivered w/ a shrill voice intonation behind frumpy summer dresses and floppy hats that have no business being aired for our bleeding eyes and ears

is that too harsh ?

@Corrie

Wow, did you even think before you typed something like that? It's called showing respect.

Not to be melodramatic here but it's like how the veteran war heroes get "wheeled out" every year during the memorial days to show that people still appreciate what they have done in the past to make today a better place even though "young people neither know nor care who they are".

The same applies to the great players in the past, without them there wouldn't be the tennis you see today.

I found your comment there completely rude and offensive to be quite honest.

I hope not all young people are so disrespectful.

When I was at the French Open last year I ran into BG and Darren Cahill in the elevator! I had just gotten back from the Federer-Monfils QF and politely asked their opinions.

BG was very nice and went out of his way to tell my father and I to 'enjoy the rest of the tournament" before he stepped off, but Cahill acted like I was some little brat not worth his time.

I'll never like Cahill.

I'm not crazy about contrived narratives on ESPN, like still claiming that Djokovic sees Murray as his "greatest rival" (something borne of AO 2011) or that Fed and Nadal is the most compelling rivalry in tennis. But a little drama can be fun - their behind-the-scenes montages and Tom Rinaldi's occasional pieces - especially when they sap the natural drama of a tennis match by yammering over play the entire time. Watching BBC's hushed commentary of Wimbledon was a revelation.

But I'll take any of the ESPN regulars over the new addition of Chris Evert. What a pompous know-nothing. At least Chris Fowler tries to learn and keep up with the sport. Chris just rests on her laurels and spouts the worst cliches. See #shitchrissiesays on Twitter for some of her gems...wish I had found it during the tournament to vent.

To bad there is no mention of the Eurosport commentators; Simon Reed, Jo Durie, Chris Bradnam, Sam Smith etc. And of course Mats Willander - I think he is a fantastic commentator and he also has the show on Eurosport "Game, set and Mats" with Annabelle Croft.

Being in Iceland the only way for me to watch the Australian Open was on Eurosport from 12 AM to 1 PM the next day.

I think they did a great job at this Australian Open.

Dadi Sveinsson
Reykjavik, Iceland

Casual observer, I've got to laugh at your self righteous indignation. I'm old enough to have vague memories of seeing Emerson, Rosewall, et al, play. I was too young to be impressed but I'm sure tennis as well as being a different game today, is at a greater level.

But more to the point, I surveyed my students in Summer School during the AO as to who knew anything at all about the old Aussie greats . The general reaction was no, and for heavens sake, who cares? And why should they?

I think the nostalgia pushed and pushed by the tennis establishment is way overdone. It's desperate for new success, but also can't let go of a fast receding past. Those days will never come back and it doesn't help the new young aspiring kids to keep on pushing forward really old guys they're not going to relate to. The parade of AO champs before the start of the AO was a parade of very old champs. It said more about recent failure than anything else.

Here's a bit of international commentating flavour for you, Steve....priceless!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nTsaoYGlqY

No one mentioned how Chris Evert continuously disagreed with other commentators and always brought the discussion back to herself.

@reckoner

No you are not too harsh at all. Agree completely about Shriver.

Courier is ok except sometimes he is too patronizing to the player, like with Nadal on his English!

@noleisthebest

That was hilarious. "Bad sportsmanship from Hawkeye and Andy Murray" haha

I get as outraged and bemused over the ESPN2 coverage as any girl, but I think it's also important to keep in mind the kind of pressure they are under.

They have committed considerable airtime and resources to covering a sport that has been declining in popularity in America; that currently has few viable American stars (and even fewer at this Aussie O than usual!); and that challenges the notoriously flickering American attention-span (even though there are many dull American sports, few have contests that last, say, six hours.)

So if they go over-the-top in their drama and try to craft epic stories out of molehills, it's somewhat forgivable, even as one winces and moans at the spectacle. Hardcore tennis fans will only benefit if they are able to build a larger viewing audience for the sport. That's a big if, anyway, but I'll take it over the spotty, edited, non-live coverage that U.S. networks offered. And hey, at least they don't have Justin Gimelstob . . .

I was so happy with the tournament itself, I can't bring myself to find fault with the announcers. Plus, imagine for a minute how hard it is covering hundreds of hours of live play, tournament after tournament, all year long. It's called slack. Cut them some.

Interesting take on the cultural differences, though. And impressed you found the motivation to write it.

John Barrett was the best.

I'm pretty content with the rest except at times John McEnroe and Justin Gimelstob. Actually Justin has improved a lot but I heard him curse out a ball girl once and he will be forever on my bad list.

None of the commentators approach the shrieking in annoyance value.

Channel 7 was two weeks of tennis heaven. For nearly 2 weeks, basically up to the semi-finals, we had tennis on from 11-6 pm, with an hour break for the obligatory news before heading right back to the action from 7 until ???? It was glorious, and I can't believe that whomever was in charge at the network had the sense enough to do....nothing. Just show the tennis, free to any household that had a TV.

Since we only get the free stations in our household (being a combination of cheap, stubborn, and wary of TV), we didn't get to see any of the ESPN coverage, so I can't compare the commentary, but the 7 commentators were very understated (as you mentioned), and had a habit of doing something that was very respectful and went possibly unnoticed by many people: while a point was being played they were largely silent. If they were in the middle of a sentence they would pause, and not resume talking until the point, and any umpire or on-court issues, were complete. It was very subtle, but very smart, and for the most part they let the tennis do the talking.

The commentators are like most tennis coaches...unqualified former tennis players. Brad Gilbert????????????????? are you kidding me!? Or how about the pretty blond with the Dracula teeth on ESPN...what's her name...Barbara Schett?

I truly enjoy http://www.fit-2-hit.com

I am in NZ and we must have got the world feed. I find it pretty good but then I like a toned down commentary. Actually Fred Stolle seems to be the commentator we get for all of the slams and I am not complaining about that, I like Fred.

I do need to complain about one of the sidekicks, I think it was Peter Donaghan (sp) he just talks too much! Also I think it is the commentators who try and create too much tension and tell us what the players are thinking that annoy me the most

In General Channel 7s coverage of the Australian open was good except for three things:
1. The camera shots either through a racket or shots with a pair of shoes or tennis balls in the foreground and players in the background. Why would I want to see the what court looks like from a shoes point of view.
2. It wasn't in HD. The contrast in quality from the foxsports broadcasts and 7 broadcasts was huge.
3. The commentator Bruce McAvaney. He talks like he's an expert of the game when you know he just spits out facts from a sheet in front of him that someone handed to him. He's the kind of commentator that trys to overhype every single moment. Starts every sentence with "Gee, you just" and is so biased towards Australian players it is sickening. And I'm an Aussie. There were many times when Bruce would say something thinking that it was smart but hoping that either Jim Courier of Darren Cahill would say something but there was radio silence. In a Tomic match Courier once said "You guys sure have a player on your hands" and Bruce's response was "Thankyou" as if he had been so deeply involved in Tomics development.
If you want an example of what I mean here's youtube clip of Bruce describing an Aussie rules player as "delicious"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RB7afmx54k

Does anyone really say "bagel" I'm tennis anymore? Hearing Chris fowler say it multiple times in the women's final made me cringe. Maybe its cuz I just cant stand espn. Nothing against patmcenroe

I miss the British eurosport commies who get the French Open - they actually comment on what's happened in the point and not try and drag every remotely relevant reference to the players on court and then some into their commentary. Keep the focus ESPN

Cliffy Drysdale and Killer Cahill FTW

Who needs to be right more, Chris Everett or Cliff Drysdale?

I find Navratilova intolerable, she sounds like a dry communist era mother criticizing her kids and that only she would have hit something perfectly. I turned off tennis channel and had to resort to espn. Couriers interviews are fine and light hearted. Interesting that a poster found Cahill unfriendly. I will never forgive shriver what she did to James Blake during his match....the egos of some of these people are unbelievable. I missed Johnny Mac. Chris fowler does try to stir up controversy by bringing up a negative of a player...even from the past. Stick to analysis. I also miss robbie koenigs team, so refreshing.

Steve,

I appreciate this blog about the different styles of broadcasting from Aussies and ESPN. You helped me to understand why ESPN's broadcasters are the way they are. I never understood their need to up the drama level. To me, tennis is tennis and doesn't need any grandstanding.

I wish that I could have heard the Aussies. I even like the tennis channel better. They keep it more low key. On ESPN it's like they are personalities on air. However, my two favorites are Brad Gilbert and Darren Cahill. They are the most knowledgeable and the ones who can appreciate the pure tennis.

I forgot to say how much I dislike Pam Shriver. She has to be the most obnoxious female broadcaster on ESPN. I can understand now why James Blake got so annoyed with her voice when she was sitting courtside doing commentary. She has a naturally loud voice and apparently, no common sense as to when to tone it down. I have to lower the volume on my tv when she is on.

I also have to agree with the comments about Chris Evert. She really has this snotty attitude going on, like she knows more than everyone else combined. I have really been disappointed in her commentary. People need to leave their egos at the door when they come to work.

One last thing to say - the comments from Corrie @4:53 pm and 5:55 pm. I am in agreement with Casual Observer. I grew up watching those so-called "ancient champs being wheeled out" and still admire and respect them all immensely. Just because they are old now, doesn't mean we need to cast them aside like old shoes. They helped shape this sport and contributed to its greatness. I hope that the slams will continue to honor them. I think it's a great gesture.

Count me among those who like the drama that ESPN constructs. Sure us hardcore tennis fans groan at the things they say sometimes, how reactionary on a point-by-point basis they are ("Azarenka misses the backhand, wow the pressure must really be getting to her! Azarenka nails the cross-court winner, she's showing some amazing grit!") but I wouldn't trade all that for the more analytical but immeasurably more boring Aussie commentators. Watching some matches on ESPN3 with them I actually had to take a step back, consider the situation and realize that I was watching an exciting match.

However I know for a FACT that it can be both ways. Due to waking up at a strange house the night after a wild 4th of July, I found myself unable to watch the '09 Wimby final because said house had no working TV. However there was a computer so I listed to Wimbledon Radio. About 5 times more passionate than ESPN commentators as well as extremely insightful! Someone needs to hire those people for television, I think the only reason they haven't been discovered yet is the fact that I was probably one of four people listening in instead of watching it.

@Corrie

Not here to pick a fight but I stand by my comments earlier. Just because you're not young doesn't mean your comment was not rude. I don't think being old is an excuse for being disrespectful.

Maybe you can consider that "wheeling out" these past champions GIVES the young people a chance to learn and appreciate the history of the sport? Maybe they don't care, but maybe some of them will learn something from the exposure.

By your logic, many young people aren't interested in knowing about whatever timelines in the past whatever wars and past kingdoms, so why not ditch history lesson in school? Or mathematics, or science?
Young people don't care about boring things like financial debt and political unrest, etc etc so why don't all TV shows be trashy reality shows and get rid of all the news and documentaries?

Maybe it's because of the promotion of ignorance that people care so little these days.

What sort of example that that give if a teacher is surveying students as if a popularity poll determines what should be taught and learnt, rather than shaping the minds of young people in the right way.

Should parents do a popularity poll to determine bed-time and whether their kids should be doing drugs and not studying?

I digress but you get my point.

I know the Americanized version of almost everything is a little 'louder'.

I follow Cricket and can say that the Australians who historically have always had the best teams are as analytical, insightful and toned down as they are in tennis when it comes to commentary.

It's nothing to do with the game but the culture of popular media consumption that defines their characteristics.

Steve
You should try watching something on one of the latin networks, ESPN2 etc... it's like a soccer game with the commentator inches away from going GOOOOOOOOALLL!!!!.

That'll give you a whole other perspective.

Steve - All the pet sayings - "stick save" - and the bold predictions do get rather tiresome after a while. It is as if the product has to be sold but the announcers must realize that the watchers are tennis fans and the sport does not have to hyped or glorified - we love it or we would not be watching it. But there is nothing to match a slam - where the players are not just putting in the time but going all out - the networks are to be commended for the coverage but the ESPN announcers might want to "cool it" a little.

Fernando switched the feeds as well. Darren Cahill is by far the best. Measured, insightful and not prone to hyperbole

Brad Gilbert is intolerable. The king of hyperoble and exaggeration. He focuses on utter nonsense- who fist pumped, encouragement from the box, etc. He sounds like a bad secondary school coach.

Fernando

I mostly watched on Bet365 streams as the BBC had cut their coverage right down and showed only Murray's SF and the two finals on TV, with John Lloyd & Andrew Castle. BBC commentary teams are improved massively by having John McEnroe burst in to wake them up a bit as at Wimbledon. And in turn, they tone down his excesses a bit. :) - not a fan of the hysterical dramatic approach.

Advert breaks are my worst thing in sport-watching, though.

I think the most regular commentator I heard was Fred Stolle, who I mostly liked, but whose nostalgic touch occasionally drove me mad - had a hint of John Major's bicycling spinsters and warm beer about it. I think, generally, one can respect past greats and the past game without the distorting golden haze.

"It’s an approach that was summed up hilariously by a British reporter who mimicked the U.S. commentators’ lingo: “Be careful,” he said to a colleague who was making fun of him, “or I’ll take you to the woodshed and give you a beatdown.” Both reporters burst out laughing. "Woodshed" and "beatdown" did sound ludicrous in an English accent."

Reminds me of Colin's trip to America in Love Actually:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QbBONaR8As&feature=related

The best is when Gilbert says his sayings such as "Dr. Feel Good" or "Rafa needs to bring that FEARhand!" Also the nicknames are hilarious, "David Ferrerrrrr" "Dickie Gasquet" haha
The worst by far is Pam Shriver... she just doesn't understand tennis!

It was a pleasure listening to American commentators on ESPN for a change. The British Eurposport commies are dry and repetitive to the point of boredom - their boredom.

ESPN interviews of the tennis players were generally upbeat and friendly, and they let the players personality shine through, rather than being critical and put the players on the defensive. Aussie and British interviewers tend to be acerbic and self absorbed. We're interested in the players, not your Ch 7 or Eurosport egos.

I too would like an option to watch matches without commentary. I do enjoy Sam Smith but mots of the others are grating.

Can not stand pam shriver and mary joe...worst of worst...they have no clue what they are talking about. If Serena , venus are playing better mute the TV and watch only action.

Dutch commentators give wrong information all the time:
-wrong statistics (once last year, this commentator claimed that Roger has 13 master 1000 titles)
-wrong personal information about the players (especially on Roger).
-wrong names for the wrong people (severin Luthi turned into Pierre Paganini over here)
-wrong head 2 heads
-etc.

Apart from Jan Siemerink there are no former top players actively commentating in Holland.

Steve
Anything - ANYTHING - is OK as long as I don't have to listen to (and look at) Justin Gimelstob. Bad english, bad constructs, bad tone & intonation and bad grammar. The guy simply is a shock to one's sensibilities.

Two quick questions:

1. Does ESPN pay the commentators by the word? They just can't seem to shut up.

2. Did anyone else notice how Chris Evert will almost invariably bring her commentary around to talking about herself and what she would have done or used to do?

Who is the old Englishman who refers to good serves as "lovely"? He must be a bit light in the loafers.

While I agree with you Steve that Darren Cahill is the strongest analysts on television, for me the best analyst team is far and away Robbie Koenig and Jason Goodall. They seem to offer a hybrid of the two models you are describing here: both enthusiasm, appreciation of the game, and in-depth analysis.

Is there any way to tell ESPN that bringing in Chris Evert was a big mistake?
She is not very good, she is arrogant, and so self absorbed!!
Most people younger than me(early 60's) do not know who she is in the sport, so there is no advantage to having her.

Even more important---please tell the Tennischannel to dump Justin Gimelstob. he is dreadful, professionally and personally

The rest are all just fine. We all have our favorites among good commentators.
I do miss Mary Carillo

Steve I think you got Verdasco and Tomic's names switched in your piece. Tomic beat Verdasco in the first round of the Aussie Open.

Brad Gilbert is inssufferable. He makes us believe that he is best friends with each player ("Hey, Buddy!"), whose names he always changes into these idiotic monickers.

As for Jim Courrier, poor guy! The pressure of the on-court interview ...I heard him asking Djokovic "how come you were breathing through your nose", to which Novak replied, very decently, somthing like "I thought that is what humans are supposed to do, I believe".

Cahill is allright, except when it comes to "Bernie" [Tomic]. He cannot even prentend to be objective.

I just hate how the American commentators are always either loving on someone or hating on someone, they can go from "Federer has the sweetest backhand ever seen in this game!!" and after one miss, they are criticizing his lack of this that and the other. And it INFURIATES me when someone like Fed, Nadal, Djoker, Murray hit an amazing shot, when we all know it was incredibly mistimed and they just got lucky the ball fell on the line, and they claim it to be their amazing skills...jesus I mean i've hit some pretty awesome forehand returns, or made incredible half-volleys, albeit very rarely, completely on accident.

But I do think all the American commentators know what they are talking about, but they tend to repeat the same tag lines, over, and over, and over, and over...but I do not care for Chris Fowler, the man has no tennis experience whatsoever and he simply mimick's Patrick and Brad, because anytime he says something one of them has to corroborate his statements by saying "That's exactly right Chris (here's a cookie)!!"

I like the Wimbledon DVD's with the British commentators because they analyze the game and do not get sensationlized by one or two good, or bad, shots.

To me, John McEnroe is absolutely the best commentator ever. He is quick thinking, witty, understands the game better than anyone else. Nobody else comes close in commenting.

My only gripe with the comentators is Rafa's uncle. Stop calling him uncle Tony! Every time McEnroe or Gilbert calls him uncle Tony, it makes me sick. What is he, the world's uncle. It's Nadal's coach. My girlfriend knows nothing of tennis and the first thing she said was, why do the keep calling him uncle.

Stolle and Cahill by far the best. And more generally speaking Aussies Brits or any other Europeans over Americans ....simply because they talk to their audience with respect and respect for their intelligence
McEnroe is for me the only us exception that I enjoy listening to.
Luke Jensen should be prohibited from ever commentating on anything.

Years ago I used to think that having ex-players in the booth was a silly idea because they only knew their exact competitors in their era while the professional commentators had a broader overview. But now I am convinced having former players is the better idea. I dislike Justin because he was one of the brattiest juniors I ever saw but even he is improving. On a regular basis I like Robbie and Jason who rarely intrude on the flow of the game. On a Grand Slam basis get rid of Chris McEndry who clearly has had a lot of face work done, Pam Shriver who is just embarassing Chris Evert who is banal, and Chris Fowler who could easily be replaced. Like arbiter John McEnroe is my favorite because he throws in the most acerbic and amusing insights.

That Patrick McEnroe is a semi-illiterate buffoon.Everything is 'huge' for him.X serving at 0-30,so'huge point coming up',Y serving at 15-30 is another 'huge' point.Only huge misses,mistakes,forehand,serve....even no to challenge is huge.What happened to big,large,sizeable,fat?
I nominate everyone-except the players(who are not prepared to speak after playing 3,4,5 hours(mostly in ...another word to ban -'searing'- heat ban'huge'.
Get a thesaurus P. McEnroe..will go along along well with all your grand slam trophies

I am French. Tennis addict.

This AO was the first time I realized how much tennis was an anglo-saxon sport. The posts written by Tignor, Bodo (and tennis.com in general) are so ridiculously better & more insightful than anything posted on eurosport.fr or articles written in L'Equipe. French tennis-mediocrity exposed.
TV commentators? So many great English-speaking ones ! In France? Brainless Henri Leconte, that's what we have ! Mauresmo is not bad but far from the best English-speaking ones !
As a tennis addict, you NEED to be fluent in English. Compulsory.

Americans should have colonized France in 1945 !

Tough crowd here on the American commentators. Sure, some are bound to annoy more than others, but I love Brad Gilbert. I realize that professional tennis is a business, but my consumption of it is for entertainment purposes, so I do not mind his sometimes bizarre comments and predictions. In fact, one of the things I look forward to most whenever the Aussie rolls around is Brad saying, with conviction, something like "the courts are playing 18.5% faster this year." Terrific!

In fact, some of the moments from matches past I remember better than any others are those puntucated by humorous remarks from commentators. John McEnroe obsessing over a string unknowingly caught in Richard Krajcek's (sp?) hair during a US Open night match and Mary Carillo dead-panning, "I'm waiting for security to take Moya off the court for loitering" during an uninspired performance make non-epic matches fun.

I am all for respecting the game, but I don't want it to become fully serious at the same time. I have a job for that.

Miro:
Be careful with what you wish for. Have yu tried American food??

Because I watch online, I do manage to get some sort of variety. I find ESPN suitable for those late/early matches when staying awake may become an issue otherwise the excessive chatter (I would like there to be a ban on chatting when the point is in play) very annoying.

The Tennis Channel commentators are refreshingly restrained most times except for their penchant for 'Cutting To' the news desk for commentary from Elise Burgin and the other guy whose name I cannot recall, which I find jarring.

And with the World Feed and/or Channel 7, I've enjoyed listening to the likes of Fred Stolle, whom I can remember listening to as a child when he used to do commentary with Cliff Drysdale, who I also like (although I admit I found them a bit too monotone when they were together, perhaps it was the child in me). I do have to say that I agree with the volume issue, it always sounds as if the sound is somewhat lower/muted compared to ESPN 3.

I'd have to say that if I only had 1 choice (which I'm relieved that I don't), ESPN 3, at least has a few channels where they use various feeds...sometimes you get TC, other times Channel 7, and other times World feed commentary. And sometimes no commentary at all, in which case you can experience the aural pleasure of the ball bouncing off the court surface (and sometimes the strings if you're really tuned in) and the squeak of tennis shoes. You also come to the realization that, while not as jarring as some of the women, the male tennis players also do a good share of grunting in a match.

Miro's comment about "Americans should have colonized France in 1945" is too funny especially after reading all the other comments.

Wonder how that would have changed history? Most significantly, the French Open would probably not be on clay and the culinary arts would have been dealt a lethal blow. Just too humorous to contemplate.

Great timing, Miro.

And, one more thing, I, too, complain about some commentators and ESPN's break from key match moments to go to the studio, but when I think about the 2 hours twice a year I got to see from Forest Hills growing up in Illinois, I feel lucky to have all these commentators and hours at my disposal. On the whole, tennis on TV is marvelous and everyone commenting seems to really care about the game.

Good choice of the photo, btw.

A penny for the linesman's thoughts...after all he's the only one not smiling.

I am a huge tennis fan and enjoy most coverage of Grand Slam Tennis. I really loved the commentarty of Wally Masur and Josh Eagle on Fox Sports. They seem to compliment each other perfectly and have a super knowledge of the game. Unfortunately i must admit, some other commentators on Fox Sports where not great. I dont know their names but seemed to lack any tennis speak at all !
The Australian Open was fantastic to watch !

Nole vs Ferrer, vs Murray and vs Rafa I was watching with sound muted on my TV and it was much better. Those guys (commentators) just build the drama even when there is no dramatic moment at all.

Simply, it's not good for my health to be 5 or 6 hours stressed! Less sound, less stress!

Few points here...

- Commentary should have its own volume level (including mute!)
- Good commentators: Robbie Koenig & Jason Goodall
- Commentators(?) that MUST GO! Chris Evert, Pam Shriver, Drysdale, Fowler, Dominic Hrbaty
- And PLEASE STOP TALKING DURING THE POINTS!! Drives me nuts...

Courier is the worst. He covered Cincinnati finals, and he would not stop babbling. You just could not hear the ball.

His post match interviews can be funny for his stupid questions. The breathing question after Djokovic/Murray match and Djokovic's answer were great.

Star Sports / ESPN (in Asia) usually has Vijay Amritraj commentating and he is absolutely brilliant. If you can try to catch his commentary at the next slam; you'll see what I mean.

the talking over points is so annoying, i agree. Chris Every is so obnoxious. its like she cant give anyone credit and asks more questions to her fellow commentators than giving insight to the players. Does she even watch tennis anymore. I liked Renee Stubbs when she works for ESPN, i guess she works for the aussies during the Australian Open. Maybe thats also why i like Cahill.

I've been watching the Sony Ericsson ... The commentary on TC is way better than ESPN. Yes, the TC guys have their issues, but they are not blatant cheerleaders like the ESPN guys. I just saw Fish get creamed. All Fowler and Patrick (who should not be allowed to announce if a US player is on court) were thinking of all the reasons that Fish lost.Monaco just played better

Worst tennis commentators:
1. Simon Reed - Makes assumptions about the result after about 2-3 games.Has an obssession with Maria Sharapova's 'noise' (despite the fact Monica Seles, Serena and others were louder). I have DVDs going back to 2004. He mentions it every match then and he still mentions it now. Simon - we get it ok ?
2. Jo Durie - Thinks that every match is lost by someone 'getting nervous', when most of the time its because a great player has 4-5 gears and has raised their game. Something Jo would not understand being British and never won a singles grand slam
3. Chris Bradnam - This guy ruins every match he commentates on with his inane comments.

Best
1. McEnroe, Davenport, Austin: These people are great champions and know what they are talking about, unlike British commentators who talk nonsense because they have the British mentality when it comes to tennis and will never understand the mindset of people who play the game at an intense level ie Seles, Sharapova, Connors, McEnroe, Williams etc