I don’t get it. The moment it was clear the Roger Federer had been couriered out of the finals by Cilic and two relatively unknowns would face off in the US Open finals the ticket prices collapsed. I thought the idea of two young and gutsy gladiators like Cilic and Nishikori would have made for such an exciting change, regardless of who won. Here in the UAE the game began at 0100 hours. If it had been the usual Fed-Djok-Rafa trio with Andy Murray in an occasional cameo I wouldn’t really have contemplated losing shut-eye over the ‘ho hum been there, seen that’ occasion. But this duel seemed worthy of staying awake on a caffeine kick and watching something that last happened in 2005. But here was history left of stage and the clicking of the turnstiles was dramatically lowering its volume. In fact when the match started not even half the 27,771 capacity amphitheater was full.
Don’t you think that is odd? This match heralded the possible handing over of the baton to the next generation. They were not pretenders to the throne, they had fought their way up, Nishikori taking on three seeded players and coming into a semis after two 5 setters to confront the world’s No. 1. Have we become so jaded that only celebs can bring us to the game, not the grandeur and majesty of the sport itself? That the most expensive seats had the highest percentage drops says something for the so called top tier patrons of the sport. The cheapest ticket up for grabs was just $147, something not seen for years.
Okay, I concede it wasn’t a riveting match (like the 5 hour 53 minute 2012 Australian Open marathon between Djokovic and Rafa) and Cilic got his $3 million for just under two hours of largely one-sided play. Nishikori jammed up and so might you if you had to face your first Grand Slam after three gruelling matches. But the young ones are here. And there was enough drama to set the stage. The first Asian ever to make a finals. The challenger, a man who only last year had been disallowed from playing for inadvertently imbibing a banned substance was now one match away from fairy tale history. At No. 14, he became the lowest seed to take away the Cup.
I was telling some friends just that morning that the match would revive tennis, make it live again and derail the monopoly. No longer would one or two guys hold sway because with the new training schedules and the competitive coaches there was another battle within the battle. This was Chang versus Ivanizevic and the two had got the better of Becker and Edberg, so to speak. And each one has been a Grand Slam winner.
Something is wobbly in our priorities. In some way we have become victims of media hype and can only watch those with whom we have an intimate visual relationship. Strangers don’t provide the same thrill.
It was not just the absence at the stadium that made for a worrying USTA but TV stations that were officially picking up the signal were concerned of a precipitous viewership drop capable of hitting 39%. What could look worse than empty rows at a Grand Slam finals except empty couches and canceled parties? Even on the day Nishikori took Djokovic apart with clinical Japanese precision one could see the spectators had not filled the Arthur Ashe stadium. The average ticket went that day for $390, down $136 from the $526 average three days earlier and dipped even further after Cilic sent Roger off.
And if there were more furrowed brows they were in CBS who were engaging in their US Open swan song as the official broadcasters only to face the final curtain with a 35% percent viewership drop. Next year it is ESPN and their moghuls must be hoping at least one of the big boys is in because they clearly don’t mind a David and Goliath contest, it’s two Davids that are shunned.
Tennis has joined the airlines, the railways and the theater in dynamic pricing, the new tune to the turnstiles where tickets are flexible and the tag responds to the public demand.
That still doesn’t make the absence of the crowds at such a finals acceptable.
