HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wut@acf3.NYU.EDU (Tom Wu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: 2 Questions...
Date: 2 Jan 93 03:41:00 GMT
Organization: New York University


 


	The manufacturers could do better by stating:

"Higher tensions give more control and Lower tension give more
power. (Within a specific tension range.)"

	The amount of power provided in relation to string tension
is not a linear function. There could be local max and mins.




				---Tom
.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: donna@attic.bae.bellcore.com (Donna Feliciano)
Subject: Re: More Tennis Player's Education
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 22:18:34 GMT

In article <15043@cis.rand.org>, Rodger_Madison@rand.ORG (Rodger Madison) writes:
|> I remember McEnroe playing a season of singles (at Stanford?), which I guess is
|> going to college.  I know he didn't play four years on NCAA tennis.  Does anyone
|> know if he graduated?

No, he did not graduate. But I assume he must be reasonably smart to
have gotten into Stanford in the first place.  His brothers Patrick
and Mark did both graduate from Stanford, though.

Donna
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donna V. Feliciano                 email: donna@bae.bellcore.com
Bellcore                           Phone: (908) 699-2161
444 Hoes Lane Room RRC 4A741       FAX:   (908) 336-2828
Piscataway, NJ 08854
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gaf5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Gail A. Fullman)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Latest Issue Tennis Magazine
Date: 26 Dec 92 16:42:37 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

The latest issue of Tennis magazine has a very good article on Boris Becker.
To resolve a discussion I started bout the nickname "Boom Boom";  it is
mentioned in the article that at the time Becker won Wimbledon at the age of
17, he did not wish to be called "Boom Boom" or anything that could be
construed as militaristic.

The article portrays Becker as introspective and his desire to play for the
love of the sport and not for rankings or the German media.
-- 

------------------------
|   Gail A. Fullman    |
|   Manager - ADMO     |
|   Ext. 83113         |
------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung)
Subject: Re: Pro-tennis Not Well-Served in the U.S.
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 15:03:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan01.090854.29122@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> mliu@garden.csc.calpoly.edu (Mei-Ling L. Liu) writes:

>but noticed just how little attention pro-tennis gets.

The fact of the matter is that tennis is NOT among the major
professional sports here in the US. Football, baseball and
basketball get the spotlight. Part of the reason is simply
"tradition." And IMO, *part* of the problem is that there is
a shortage of American champions who have "character" or
"image" or whatever you call it. Cannors and McEnroe are way
past their prime. Courier, Sampras, and Chang have relatively
quiet personality. Agassi is the only exception, but his success,
at least in 1992, is spotty. On the women's side, there really
has been no native born Americans at the very top since Evert
retired in 1989.

>Also, while there are three to four golf magazines on display at
>bookstores, Tennis magazine is the only entry for pro-tennis.  
>I am not impressed with the quality of this publication, IMHO 
>it lacks style as well as substance. 

As complained by a reader's letter published in its January 1993
issue, the main problem with Tennis is that it didn't put Edberg's
picture on its cover when he won the US Open again in 1992. :-)
Actually, in the US, there is also Tennis Week, but that is available
mainly to subscribers. Until last year, there was World Tennis. 
Unfortunately, it was shut down because of readership/financial
problems. I guess the number of tennis magazines simply reflects
the popularity of professional tennis here in the US. :-(
-- 
-- Shun Cheung,    electronic: shun.cheung@att.com    voice: (908) 615-5135
     AT&T, 480 Red Hill Road, Middletown, NJ,  07748  USA
From: AS.TLK@forsythe.stanford.edu (Timmer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: Pro-tennis Not Well-Served in the U.S.
Date: 1 Jan 1993 13:48:09 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

mliu@garden.csc.calpoly.edu (Mei-Ling L. Liu) writes:
>Happy New Year to all.
>Over the holidays, I looked at some of the year-end review type of
>news articles in the sports pages of various papers, and I can't help
>but noticed just how little attention pro-tennis gets.  Among the 92 (or some
>such number) memorable images in sports quoted in USA Today, for example,
>only 3 were related to tennis: Arthur Ashe's AIDS story, Martina
>N's stand against Colorado's anti-gay measures, and
>Agassi winning Wimbledon.


This also shows to what extent "image is everything" in our society.
The poster boy finally wins one grand slam event and it's one of the
year's top sports stories, and yet the dominance of Monica Seles is
overlooked on this list.

-Tim Kaufman
From: cs30@prism.gatech.EDU (Christopher Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: News, Dec 30 (Upcoming Tournaments)
Keywords: News, Tournaments
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:52:14 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology



The new tennis season begins in earnest in a few days as the warm-ups to
the Australian Open get under way.  There are at least eight sanctioned
tournaments for the men and women that will take place in the two weeks
leading up to the Australian Open.  Supposedly there is also a small
women's tournament currently being held in Hong Kong this week, plus
the Hopman Cup will get under way very shortly in Australia.

Information on these tournaments may be found in either Tennis or Tennis
Week in the USA.  For those without access to the information, here is
a summary of the upcoming New Year's tournaments:

Dates      Place                     Last Year
-----      -----                     ---------------
Jan 4-10   Adelaide, Australia       Ivanisevic d. Bergstrom   1-6 7-6 6-4
           Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia    (new - men)
           Doha, Qatar               (new - men)
           Brisbane                  Provis d. McQuillan       6-3 6-2

Jan 11-17  Sydney (NSW Open)         E. Sanchez d. Forget      6-3 6-4
                                     Sabatini d. Sanchez Vic.  6-1 6-1
           Auckland                  Yzaga d. Washington       7-6 6-4
           Jakarta, Indonesia        (new - men)
           Melbourne                 (new - women)
           

Both the men's and women's tour for 1993 feature a significant increase
in prize money over last year.  On the WTA tour, 6 tournaments outside
of the Grand Slam events and the Lipton will feature a $750,000 purse:
Tokyo (Pan Pacific Open), Hilton Head, Rome, Berlin, Toronto, and Zurich.
On the ATP tour, 18 events (excluding the Grand Slam events, Grand Slam
Cup, and ATP World Team Cup) will offer at least $1 million total in
prize money.


Other news:

  + The top entrants at the Pan Pacific Open, to be played in Tokyo right
    after the Australia Open, are Graf, Sabatini, Navratilova, Maleeva-
    Fragniere, and Novotna.  The defending champion is Sabatini.

  + There was a report this morning on Australian radio that Steffi Graf
    had announced she would retire after another 4 years of competition.
    I can't verify the report, so maybe it should be labeled as a "rumor."
    Graf is apparently Down Under to play in the Hopman Cup.  (Someone
    with the Hopman Cup lineup can verify this).


..Chris

-- 
Christopher Smith                        csmith@cc.gatech.edu
College of Computing, Georgia Tech       404/853-0937
From: mliu@garden.csc.calpoly.edu (Mei-Ling L. Liu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: Pro-tennis Not Well-Served in the U.S.
Date: 3 Jan 93 19:06:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Computer Science Department, UCSB

In article <1993Jan2.131559.18370@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung) writes:
>
>Well, I don't exactly like the fact that people are so crazy about
>players with "character" and the "image is everything" society either,
>but that is the way things seem to be, especially for the male players.
>As someone else already pointed out, that is precisely why Agassi
>winning his first Grand Slam title is such as big deal, and Seles
>winning three in a year for the second year in a row is ignored.
>Well, Seles isn't American, but Courier, winning both the Australian
>and French Open, is also ignored. Think about which players have
>a lot of TV commercials. Those are the ones who have appeal to the
>general public. In the final year of the "World Tennis" magazine,
>its readership dropped by some 30% or so (can't remember the exact
>number), and it just couldn't get enough advertisers. That pretty
>much reflects the popularity of professional tennis in the US. :-(
>
Just a little more on the subject.  I urge you to not to
succumb to the media's deliberately misleading confusion about
tennis players as athletes and as celebrities.  Agassi became a
celebrity because of a very good promotional job that his agent(s)
did.  If Becker or Edberg wanted that kind of publicity, each could
have hired a razzle-dazzle PR firm to accomplish just that.  The
media craves that kind of personalities because they sell copies,
so they denigrate guys like Lendl and Edberg who do not, in their
view, cooperate to make their lives easier.  The truth, as you know, is
that tabloid news do not necessarily raise ticket sales; they only
serve to get the celebrities more promotional deals, if they so
desire.  A common deception is the assumption that a guy who
appears in lots of advertisemens also draws in tournaments. 
The sad thing is, tennis patronage is hurt by this kind of 
reporting because it deters people from learning to enjoy the
game and become loyal fans.  How many of the screaming Agassi
fans will watch or show up at tournaments regularily?

I think this country's tennis reporting is hurt by a
group of reporters who stress "personalities", preferably U.S.-born; this
group includes John Feinstein, Tony Kornheiser of the 
Washington Post, and some other editors of Tennis magazine.
On the other hand, Robin Finn, who wrote for the New York Times,
Bruce Jenkins, who wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle,
and Thomas Bonk, LA Times, are far more cosmopolitan and write
with equal enthusiasm about Edberg as about Sampras.  I believe
Finn won some kind of best tennis writer award for last year.

M. Liu
From: ponamgi@dali.cs.unc.edu (ponamgi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Funny Becker Observation
Date: 23 Dec 92 21:29:21 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


  Is it me, or are Boris Becker and Axl Rose of Guns 'n' Roses
  starting to look alike?


---------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Tennis games
From: hempel_j@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Date: 26 Dec 1992 11:58:10 GMT
Reply-To: hempel_j@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Organization: Wellington City Council (Public Access), Wgtn, Nz
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz

Does anyone know of any good tennis games for the IBM PC?  I'd be interested
to know any.  Please let me know by e-mail.

Thanks,
	 John.
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 25 Dec 1992 23:45:55 CST
From: <U28765@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Rec.Sport.Tennis Drought

This group resembles the Rec.Sport.Olympics compatriot a month after the
Olympics ended, they went from 1000+ to I think 3 postings!
From: kleng@terapin.com (K. Leng)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: College Tennis News
Date: 29 Dec 92 17:46:02 PST
Organization: BBS

In article <78869@hydra.gatech.EDU>, cs30@prism.gatech.EDU (Christopher Smith)
writes:
>  15. Tom Phano           California
>College of Computing, Georgia Tech       404/853-0937

    I think his name is Tom Phanco.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: ssubrama@dante.nmsu.edu (SUBRAMANIAM)
Subject: Re: 2 Questions...
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 23:42:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.212549.26509@fuug.fi> an1060@anon.penet.fi writes:
>X-Anon-To: rec.sport.tennis
>
>
>2. Perhaps a person knowledgable about physics can explain why it is that
>   as tennis racquet string tension decreases, the power transmitted to the
>   ball increases!!!!   This seems contrary to common sense, but most/all new
>   tennis racquets have this printed on them!!!  A physics Ph.D. friend of
>   mine explained the reason as follows:  the looser is the tension, the
>   longer the ball stays on the racquet strings...and since it is the impulse
>   (force)x[delta(t)] that determines the speed off the racquet, the delta(t)
>   increases, thus increasing the impulse.  
>   Well, this makes sense from a physics standpoint, but still defies my (and
>   many others) common sense!!!!   Imagine a very, very loosely strung racquet..
>   it would be almost useless for play....whereas a very tightly strung racquet
>   would (seemingly) be far more useful and impart more power to the shots!!!
>   Where is the flaw in the "common sense" appoach???   Where is the "common
>   sense" to the physics explanation????
>
>Many thanks in advance...
>
>Abe
>
>mantell@ams.sunysb.edu

As my Physics Professor says common sense is often wrong.  

There is a critical tension at which there is maximum change in momentum for
the same force exerted.  One should be careful when saying that by increasing
the time of contact with the ball one can increase the momentum of the ball
considerably.  But often times loosely strung rackets give more power when
the returning a slow shot but tightly strung rackets seem to give more power
when blocking a fast ball.  This is because the fast ball bounces back from
the racket with almost the same speed.  But slow balls have small momentum
and you need to exert enough force to increase its momentum and this force
needs to be large since the ball is in contact with the racket for a short
interval of time.  But by increasing the time of contact between the ball and
the racket you can increase the momentum of the ball.  But if you strung your
racket very loose, the decrease in momentum during the contact outweighs the
increase in momentum due to your shot.  This is because when the ball hits
the racket it slows down due to the loose tension in the strings.  I may not
be very clear in my explanation but I don't believe in common sense at all.
I might have made some blunder in my explanation. If any physicists read this
please correct me.  I am just a sophomore.

Siva

******************************************************************************
I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of all
that exists, not in the God who concerns himself with fates and actions of
human beings
		-- Albert Einstein
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: ssubrama@dante.nmsu.edu (SUBRAMANIAM)
Subject: Re: News: Year-End Doubles Rankings
Keywords: News, Rankings, Doubles
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:22:55 GMT

In article <78870@hydra.gatech.EDU> cs30@prism.gatech.EDU (Christopher Smith) writes:
>
>[Source: Tennis Week / ATP / WTA]
>
>Year-ending doubles rankings:
>
>
>  Men                              Women
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>  1.  Mark Woodforde               1.  Helena Sukova
>  2.  Todd Woodbridge              2.  Natalia Zvereva
>  3.  Jim Grabb                    3.  A. Sanchez Vicario
>  4.  Richey Reneberg              4.  Jana Novotna
>  5.  Kelly Jones                  5.  L. (Savchenko) Neiland
>  6.  Rick Leach                   6.  Gigi Fernandez
>  7.  Patrick McEnroe              7.  Pam Shriver
>  8.  Jakob Hlasek                 8.  Conchita Martinez
>  9.  John McEnroe                 9.  Martina Navratilova
>  10. Anders Jarryd                10. Z. Garrison-Jackson
>  11. John Fitgerald               11. Mary Joe Fernandez
>  12. Marc Rosset                  12. Stephanie Rehe
>  13. Patrick Galbraith            13. Rennae Stubbs
>  14. Mark Kratzmann               14. Lori McNeil
>  15. David MacPherson             15. Kathy Rinaldi
>  16. Michael Stich                16. Patty Fendick
>  17. Cyril Suk                    17. Jill Hetherington
>  18. Tom Nijssen                  18. Katrina Adams
>  19. Wally Masur                  19. Manon Bollegraf
>  20. Danie Visser                 20. Rachel McQuillan

If these are doubles rankings why only one name against each ranking.

Siva
From: roberto@dcs.gla.ac.uk (roberto)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Seles x GRaf (Was Re: Monica's Prime??)
Date: 22 Dec 92 11:57:22 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.
Return-Path: <roberto@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: mail-news 2.0.5

Sorry, I did NOT keep the record of who said what. 
Anyway, let me join this discussion about Seles and Graf.

 
| One thing perhaps you have forgotten is that Steffi Graf beats Seles
| USUALLY unlike Capriati's "occassional."  Steffi is 6-3 against Monica. 

Sorry to disappoint you but I think this statement is hardly acceptable 
as a comparison of these players. 
Three of these Graf's 6 victories were in 89 when Seles was a 15 year old 
girl in her first year as a professional tennis player. She was NOT the 
top player she is now. That's why I think this comparison in unfair. 

A better comparison (fair if you like) is from 90, when both of them were 
already top players. Then the result is 3-3 (Even). 

Still, Graf has won 3 of the last 4 matches. 
However, I don't think this means Graf will repeat this performance. 
I would say chances are that, from now on, the record is going to be even. 


| Another point. The main reason that Graf still has the positive
| record against Seles is that the first usually doesn't get to the
| final when they do play in the same event. Just consider the fact
| that Seles has taken 6 of the 7 Grand Slams she participated in
| in the last 2 years. Plus 2 VS Championships.
| And she is still 3-6 against Graf... This pretty much tells the story.

Here I disagree with you. Your reason simply shows why Graf is not #1. 
Graf might very well keep forever a positive record against Seles without 
regaining the #1. 
To support my thesis I suggest you look into the Graf/Sabatini head to 
head record in 91 and 92. Sabatini has beaten Graf far more times but 
never got close of taking Graf's #2!

I think many reasons contribute to Graf being quite far of being #1 again, 
but I believe the single reason that contributes more to this state of 
affairs is her poor record against Sabatini. 
Apart from the 2 Wimbledons (I believe grass suits Graf's game), how many 
times has Graf beaten Sabatini in the last 2 years???


| > well, I agree to some extent. However:
| > Capriati beats Seles occasionally rather than consistently, so
| > this doesn't seem to be the way to go.

| Actually, Capriati has given Seles lots of trouble more than occasionally.
| If I remember it correctly, Capriati was 1-2 vs. Seles last year and
| 1-1 this year. Both of last year's losses were close, especially the
| one at the US Open. Given that Capriati is still very erratic, her game
| obviously matches up very well against Seles. In other words, one can
| beat Seles with power.

I agree with the latter. I think Capriati is the player who gives Seles the 
most trouble. 
I believe occasions when Seles beats Capriati easily are very rare!

Roberto Barros
From: Rodger_Madison@rand.ORG (Rodger Madison)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: More Tennis Player's Education
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:59:21 GMT
Organization: The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California

I remember McEnroe playing a season of singles (at Stanford?), which I guess is
going to college.  I know he didn't play four years on NCAA tennis.  Does anyone
know if he graduated?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: ssubrama@dante.nmsu.edu (SUBRAMANIAM)
Subject: Re: College Tennis News
Keywords: News, College
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:20:05 GMT

In article <78869@hydra.gatech.EDU> cs30@prism.gatech.EDU (Christopher Smith) writes:
>
>[Source: Tennis Week]
>
>The National Indoor Intercollegiate Championships will be held on 
>February 4-7 in Minneapolis (this is one of the Collegiate Grand
>Slam events).
>
>The following players have qualified for the singles competition
>in this event based on their performance in regional indoor
>competitions held earlier.  Note: the numbers do not indicate
>seedings - I don't know what the seedings will be.
>
>
>  Men's Singles:                
>  --------------
>  1.  Tom Meringoff       Harvard
>  2.  Tom Orvald          Princeton
>  3.  Rob Givone          Georgia Tech
>  4.  Chris Pressley      Duke
>  5.  Michael Kirsten     Alabama-Birmingham
>  6.  Paul Rosner         Alabama-Birmingham
>  7.  Will Forsyth        Notre Dame
>  8.  Klas Bergstrom      Iowa
>  9.  Karl Falkland       Nebraska
>  10. Mark LeClair        Colorado
>  11. Marcus Hilpert      Arkansas
>  12. Anders Eriksson     Texas
>  13. Mark Quinney        BYU
>  14. Mike Castrilli      Idaho State
>  15. Tom Phano           California
>  16. David Ekerot        USC 
>
>
>  Women's Singles:
>  ----------------
>  1.  Katrin Guenther     William and Mary
>  2.  Jana Strnadova      Syracuse
>  3.  Antonia Homolya     Campbell
>  4.  Terri Ann Zawacki   Wake Forest
>  5.  Jill Brenner        Florida
>  6.  Anna Funderburk     Auburn
>  7.  Deborah Edelman     Indiana
>  8.  Vera Vitels         Drake
>  9.  Rebecca Jensen      Kansas
>  10. Jennifer Saret      BYU
>  11. Susan Gilchrist     Texas
>  12. Kelly Pace          Texas
>  13. Cammie Foley        UCLA
>  14. Julie McKeon        San Diego
>  15. Laxmi Poruri        Stanford
>  16. Heather Willens     Stanford
>
>
>
>..Chris
>
>-- 
>Christopher Smith                        csmith@cc.gatech.edu
>College of Computing, Georgia Tech       404/853-0937

What happened to guys from Stanford?  I heard that Stanford guys are good in
Tennis.  

Siva

******************************************************************************
I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of all
that exists, not in the God who concerns himself with fates and actions of
human beings
		-- Albert Einstein
******************************************************************************
From: gt4855a@prism.gatech.EDU (David Zobel)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: common sense
Date: 1 Jan 93 22:15:26 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Just thought I'd put in my two cents worth on the question about string tension,
but I refuse to include the previous article because it takes up too much
space.  Anyway, it is my understanding that racquet tension is the reverse of
string tension.  In other words, the maximum power is achieved with a stiff
racquet and "loose" strings.  This is supposedly because the racquet does not
flex back fast enought to impart power to the tennis ball, while the strings
do.  I think the trampoline example was good, and the racquet can be applied
by having a trampoline where you would leave the surface of the trampoline 
before it bounces you back up.  After thinking about it for awhile it actually,
does make common sense.

-- 
Name           : David "Z-Man" Zobel   Call-Sign: gt4855a@prism.gatech.edu
Pre-occupation : Computer Science student at Georgia Tech
Trite Saying   : "The Vogon ships hung in the air in the same
                  way that bricks don't" -D. Adams
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis