Sania Mirza - Why the hype?

[Peeved HP]

I fail to understand the hype behind Sania Mirza. As I've said many times earlier, she might be the best woman tennis player to have come out of India, she just doesn't deserve the pedestal she's been put on. The amount of media coverage she gets makes me think again and again whether she's going to end up as the next Kournikova - atleast Kournikova reached the top 10. Something I don't expect coming from Sania.



People will see this as a biased opinion perhaps. But there is a certain reason for me to think so. First, there is a slight flaw in the WTA ranking points system, due to which every player's first good run gets her a huge leap in the rankings which she'll always find difficult to maintain in the years to come unless she's made of harder material. What happens is that in the first good year for a player - 2005 in Sania's case - they gain in every tournament they play. But from the next year onwards, they need to keep winning with the same momentum to keep up their ranking. From this year, Sania will lose the points she made in the corresponding week last year and gain whatever she makes this year. So, in order to get higher up in the rankings, she'll have to consistently improve upon her performances last year. A difficult ask.



Secondly, to break into the top 20, you need to consistently beat players ranked in the top-20. For this, you have to enter more tournaments with top-20 players in them - something that Sania didn't do last year. She made most of her points from Tier-II events.



And in the light of all this, let's put her performance in the ongoing Australian Open into perspective. What I have here is a comparison between Sania and a former world no. 1 who's back after a 3 year hiatus as a wildcard. To be very fair to Sania, I'm comparing her with Hingis as she has the class but is not in top nick - making her like a normal top-10 player.



Sania had a first serve % of 58% in the first round and 54% in the second. Compare this with 67% and 85% for Hingis. Sania had 39 winners and 65 unforced errors in the two matches compared with 31 and 20 respectively for Hingis. Other parameters show similar disparities between the two players.



Now, its clear where Sania stands when compared with the top echelons of the game. Is it fair to give her the kind of adulation she's getting? I just can't come to terms with the fact that sports fans in India have started celebrating mediocrity.

[DSOTM]

Nice analysis there. I agree with you.



I watched the US Open game where she played with Maria Sharapova and I was quite shocked at the way she lost the game. She played a pretty mediocre game despite Maria being not at her best.



Instead of giving her various monetary awards it would be better if it is invested in nurturing her into becoming top-class.



But currently she isn't worth all the hoopla, and who happened to have come from a country where a woman playing a grand-slam itself is a record.

[CtrlAltDel]

as i see it there are 2 reasons for the hype surrounding sania in india. one, as someone said, she has broken into the top 100 and then into top 50 of women's tennis - something that hasnt happened before. i cant recollect any indian woman or man getting thru to 2nd or 3rd round of grand slams in recent times. she has become a hero in a country with a lack of heros and role models.

second reason i feel is tht she has become a symbol of indian women and youth with whatever achievements she has attained - and more importantly a symbol of a community that is generally considered by others as being repressive towards women.



the hype and adulation she is getting is certainly excessive, but can be excused as heroworship by masses starved of real heros and rolemodels.



i am really scared of the day she loses her touch and the public n media villifies or ignores her....let her enjoy the adulation as long as it lasts and make hay while the sun shines. kal ka kya bharosa? i hope she works hard at her game and tries to improve herself with every passing year...

[Portuguese Man-Of-War]

We have to look at the media as a set of competing entities. I am sure that individually each of them realizes that she's not worth it, but when others publications/channels are talking about her and you aren't, you don't seem in with it.



At the level of individual cameramen and reporters, she is just a must-be-there story - they do not have the big picture or the judgement of impartial and balanced chief editors. In the hierarchy of importance of cameramen and reporters, she figures up there since she's seen everywhere, and so they need to show her too.



And chief editors also have to keep their sense of balance aside and see what others are doing, I guess.



The herd always changes direction slowly, and nobody in a herd has great judgement. We all know that the media isn't what it used to be - there is too much competition and too little user loyalty now for any individual entity to exercise balance. That's why papers like DC and TOI overtake ones like The Hindu.

[Peeved HP]

CAD:



I wouldn't really buy the argument about lack of heroes. If you take tennis, even today, we have heroes in the form of Leander Paes & Mahesh Bhupathy who are not getting the adulation they deserve. In other sports too, we have numerous heroes. Koneru Humpy, Pankaj Advani, Joshna Chinnappa & Mary Kom are all young stars who are considered among the top bracket of their respective sports/disciplines. Why not any of them?



As for her being a youth icon, there are many others who deserve this status much more than Sania. And when you talk about a youth icon, you leave the realms of sport and come into a domain much more generic. I bet you'll find a lot of young ladies out there in different walks of life who can be much more inspiring role models than someone who is plain mediocre.



I do agree to an extent with the fact that she comes from a community generally percieved as being regressive in its outlook towards women. But does that merit being glorified as the best thing to have happened to Indian sport?



PMOW:



You're on the dot when you point out to the herd mentality existent in the media. But is there a solution to it? There has to be a fullstop to it as this kind of mentality, and the ever increasing competition has opened a Pandora's box. Among newspapers and television news channels, more than 75% of the content nowadays is sensationalist and doesn't serve any good purpose to the public. Infact, in many cases, it even creates a negative sentiment among the public, leading to a whole lo of unwanted things ranging from silly controversies to loss of public and private property. Somebody has to be held accountable for this.



There is a newspaper ombudsman in place but I wonder whether the post is really strong or just a rubber stamp. Shouldn't the position be made more powerful and accountable? Something on the lines of the CVC or CEC? Just a thought.

[Sachin]

CAD:
I wouldn't really buy the argument about lack of heroes. If you take tennis, even today, we have heroes in the form of Leander Paes & Mahesh Bhupathy who are not getting the adulation they deserve. In other sports too, we have numerous heroes. Koneru Humpy, Pankaj Advani, Joshna Chinnappa & Mary Kom are all young stars who are considered among the top bracket of their respective sports/disciplines. Why not any of them?

Fair enough HP. I think Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi never got this kind of adulation. Sania Mirza is not special in anyway, she is just an average tennis player. You will find players like these dime a dozen, in europe,usa.... just that she is the first women tennis player in the country to do well.

Leander Paes won the Wimbledon Juniors title in 1990 and was ranked number one in the world at that time in the juniors category, maybe we missed an extraordinary player just because india lacked in infrastructure and he did not have good sponsors at time. The period when you are graduating from junior level to senior level is the most important one because that is what makes or wipes your name from the record books. Still Leander has won an olympic gold medal, a few grand slams( Doubles and Mixed ).... hasnt he done the country proud? Sania hasnt even done 1/100 th of what leander has done. He has a 21/12 (W/L) record in Davis Cup singles, playing for a team like India. I can go on writing abt Leander....



For gods sake dont tell me that Sania Mirza is the best Tennis player in India to date.... I hate to hear that. She has miles to go and I fear that she might not break into the big league. We have had a few greats like Amritraj, RameshKrishnan, Leander, Mahesh....

I fear that the false admiration may create an aura around her that makes her think that she has achieved enough. I dont like her attitude either on or off the field. She says she is an agressive player and will go for down the line winners thereby make many unforced errors rather than playing long rallies, hope she will realise someday that winners are not everything in tennis there is something called a rally and also serve and volley game.

[Sachin]

i m sorry its olympic bronze medal and not gold

[FT]

Agree with most about unwarranted publicity for S Mirza. In all probability, it is bound to hurt her game than do much good. Unless she has the maturity to overlook it all and focus on her game.



There are a few sports, we Indians are crazy about. There's certain pizzazz, glamour associated with the same. Cricket is one, sort of the black hole of our sporting talents. So many of us get into the hole of cricket, and so few get the opportunity to get to the pinnacle. Sheer numbers are numbing.



Then there are other sports, where a lone star beckons attention to the point, that the budding star get's flummoxed with all the glare and the hype. By the time, that is sorted out, world has sped by. Take Karthikeyan, he was a and probably still is a promising F1 racer. But he hasn't really won anything of much significance since the initial promise. He's was last a paying driver with Jordan Formula One, not based on his talent. But then he probably has another decade of ability left to come out on top.



All in all. Sania mania is not about lack of heroes, there are heroes. But there are no heroines for mass consumption. Koneru Humpy's ilk have limited appeal, Kalpana Chawlas and Indira Gandhis are passe. Movie stars are more glamour than talent. Sania's perceived as more talent, but sans glamour that would be hard pill to swallow for the masses.



You and me, may not need mass hyped mediocre heroes. But the mases still need them.



Let them have their set of inspiration.

[FT]

Agree with most about unwarranted publicity for S Mirza. In all probability, it is bound to hurt her game than do much good. Unless she has the maturity to overlook it all and focus on her game.



There are a few sports, we Indians are crazy about. There's certain pizzazz, glamour associated with the same. Cricket is one, sort of the black hole of our sporting talents. So many of us get into the hole of cricket, and so few get the opportunity to get to the pinnacle. Sheer numbers are numbing.



Then there are other sports, where a lone star beckons attention to the point, that the budding star get's flummoxed with all the glare and the hype. By the time, that is sorted out, world has sped by. Take Karthikeyan, he was a and probably still is a promising F1 racer. But he hasn't really won anything of much significance since the initial promise. He's was last a paying driver with Jordan Formula One, not based on his talent. But then he probably has another decade of ability left to come out on top.



All in all. Sania mania is not about lack of heroes, there are heroes. But there are no heroines for mass consumption. Koneru Humpy's ilk have limited appeal, Kalpana Chawlas and Indira Gandhis are passe. Movie stars are more glamour than talent. Sania's perceived as more talent, but sans glamour that would be hard pill to swallow for the masses.



You and me, may not need mass hyped mediocre heroes. But the mases still need them.



Let them have their set of inspiration.

[Clarifying HP]

Let me clarify here that I meant the best female tennis player India has produced when I referred to Sania and not the best ever. My bad.



And FT...there isn't a lack of heroines either. Sadly, while men's cricket is making waves on the spectator front, women's cricket is still an ignored domain. Women's cricket gives us heroines galore. Mithali Raj is a name that comes to my mind instantly. And since the Indian team is doing fairly well, though inconsistently, there are bound to be other heroines as well. Move over to track & field & you have Anju George. Mary Kom is a double Gold medallist at the world championships and ranked among the top 3 women boxers in her category consistently over the last couple of years.



My grudge here is not as much against the common fan as against the media. Case in point - Times of India does a story at the end of 2005 on the top sportspersons of the year. No marks for guessing who comes out on top. Sachin Tendulkar is second and Anju George a distant third. The name of Mary Kom gets a passing mention akin to a consolation prize. I doubt if any other publication save Sportstar even mentioned it when she won her Gold medals. Another case in point - Major news channels conduct an SMS poll on the sportsperson of the year award. Anju George and Mary Kom don't figure in the options. I would really love to know the media's excuse for this feigned ignorance.

[Ustaad]

I fail to understand the hype behind Sania Mirza.

wearing mini skirts goes a long way + she could play too (and thats a real plus!)





i remember PT Usha used to be a popular female athlete before the media buried her. I hope they spare sania , atleast for her ..you know what!

[Miffed HP]

I fail to understand the hype behind Sania Mirza.

wearing mini skirts goes a long way + she could play too (and thats a real plus!)


i remember PT Usha used to be a popular female athlete before the media buried her. I hope they spare sania , atleast for her ..you know what!

The very fact that wearing mini skirts does go a long way is what prompted me to start this thread in the first place. I've seen instances of sportspersons being adulated for their sex appeal but then they've never been glorified as good players because of that. And those sportspersons who were adored due to their game too proved it with consistent performances in the top echelons of the game.



Cases in point :



1. Anna Kournikova : She would probably rank up there among the 5 most popular tennis players ever. But she was never considered a worthy player in any circle. Even the most ardent of her fans knew that her game was inadequate for the top levels and never expected much from her.



2. Gabriela Sabatini : She is my favourite tennis babe. Kournikova can't hold a candle to her even in the looks department. And her game matched her features point for point.



Sania's case is different. She has hardly proved herself on the courts. Her performance this year has been inconsistent, touching mediocrity in its heights and getting purely pathetic at the depths. Inspite of this, its a shame that she's considered a tennis great.



I have no problems with her being signed up for brand promotions, advertising etc. But whats bad is that she is getting adulations in fora meant specifically for good performers in the field - Award functions, sports pages of newspapers etc. And that's wrong.

[Ustaad]

2. Gabriela Sabatini : She is my favourite tennis babe. Kournikova can't hold a candle to her even in the looks department. And her game matched her features point for point.

Sania's case is different. She has hardly proved herself on the courts. Her performance this year has been inconsistent, touching mediocrity in its heights and getting purely pathetic at the depths. Inspite of this, its a shame that she's considered a tennis great.

I have no problems with her being signed up for brand promotions, advertising etc. But whats bad is that she is getting adulations in fora meant specifically for good performers in the field - Award functions, sports pages of newspapers etc. And that's wrong.

True dat^.