Talk:US Open (tennis)/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Vandalism

While Dean's role in the US Open is invaluable, I must say that "HI DEAN" seem POVish at best, and am removing this addition.

Eeblet 22:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Attendance ?

I am looking for the attendance history for this event. --Rulesfan 01:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Article renaming

There seems to be a disagreement over the article's title, on whether it should be US Open versus U.S. Open. The article was originally at the latter, and then moved to US Open. A disagreement emerged and it ended up mistakenly in U.S .Open (tennis). I have fixed this mistake, since this article receives significant exposure and should not have an error in its title. I believe US Open and U.S. Open are both acceptable titles, but the involved users should decide which is ultimately best. The move fix is not an endorsement of the current title, just an effort to maintain it under the two most appropriate titles. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 11:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

So the U.S. Open tournament is U.S. Open, not US Open. It's an acronym with periods, unlike NASA for example. There was mix up and typos, but not it looks like this page can be moved to U.S. Open (tennis). This is my request, or whatever wikipedia calls it :) p.s. also - under the templates on this page, there is a post that just says add pictures please. Can that be removed or placed somewhere more proper on this talk page please? GoldenGoose100 12:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Well I disagree with your proposal and object to the page being moved to U.S. Open (tennis) due to the simple fact that the organisation and its official site(s) do not use stops in its acronym. If the organisation and its official site(s) did then I wouldn't have any objection, but they don't. The USTA and the US Open organisers both call it US Open, hense this is its proper name (without the stops). --203.94.135.134 23:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yup, that seems about right. Looking at the website, the USTA (USTA.com) and the US Open (USopen.org) along with the news writers on those sites all seem to use US Open and not U.S. Open. Though one writer did write U.S. for the U.S. Championships before the Open Era, US seems to be correct and/or agreed written form for the US Open. So I guess that's that! And it's good that U.S. Open redirects to the article, so everyone is still happy. ~ GoldenGoose100 04:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Despite an extensive discussion of this issue, there was never a consensus among tennis editors to rename this page to "US Open" in the first place. The mere fact that a commercial website, even one representing a tournament of the U.S.T.A., uses "US Open" does not necessarily mean that the legal name of the tournament is "US Open." In fact, the New York Times, for example, continues to refer to the tournament as the "U.S. Open." For both of these reasons, the name of this page should be changed back to "U.S. Open," at least until a consensus to change it is apparent. Tennis expert (talk) 14:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

What the NY times prints is irrelevant to what should be used as a title in Wikipedia. For example, here in Australia there are no stops present in the name when printed in our newspapers (Note: All publications follow their own style guide). We should follow what the USTA has called the tournament, as they run the show, put up the prize money for it, etc. You may notice that on their website they and their writers don't use stops in "US Open", but do use stops in "U.S. Championships". And don't fob off the official website as "commercial" (I didn't see much commercialism in it), because it goes against your personal views (wrt stops). Your argument seems pretty weak.

Please contact your fellow tennis participants on the WP:TENNIS project page to try and reach a consensus on this issue. --203.220.170.250 (talk) 14:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps in Australia, it is an insult to call something "commercial." That was not my intention. I was merely saying that the website is a business website, aimed at customers and fans and, therefore, it's possible that the website is simply being artistic when it uses "US Open" instead of "U.S. Open." It should not be assumed that the website represents anything "official" about the name of the tournament. What we need before changing hundreds of Wikipedia articles and thousands of "U.S. Open" references is something "official," perhaps from a trademark application filed by the U.S.T.A. or some other "legal" document. By the way, the New York Times is much more influential on this issue than, say, the Sydney Morning Herald as the former is the leading newspaper in the city in which the tournament is held. CNN, Reuters UK, Encyclopedia Britannica, Associated Press, and Tennis magazine (among many others) use "U.S. Open" too. Tennis expert (talk) 21:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course the website is a "business website", the whole tournament is a business. It's a stretch to assume it's an "artistic" move not to have stops in the name, when they use the name "US Open" throughout the site in articles using just plain text. When mentioning the U.S. Championships they use stops. Here's a link to the NYC Sports Commission where they clearly use "US Open" (no stops). Now can you honestly say the NYCSC is a business? Perhaps we should ask the US Open what they prefer rather than assume it? (Even though their preference is clearly shown on their website!)

It's nice that you quote and provide links to all these sites, but these sites are run by their respective business publications, which too are businesses. And as I said before "All publications follow their own style guide", which probably says, all representations of United States in its acronym form, must use stops (ie, U.S.). What the NY times, etc, prints whether in digital or print form, is irrelevant to whether the title of this article should use stops. Of which, I'm in the belief that we should follow the US Open's style, by not using stops in the name. Even at the tournament itself they don't use stops on their signage. --203.220.170.192 (talk) 01:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I searched the United States Patent and Trademark Office website to find registered trademarks for the US Open and found that the name "US Open" (no stops) is indeed a registered trademark for the competition. It was filed by the USTA on 16 August 2002 and registered on 1 July 2003. Serial No.: 78154966; Registration No.: 2732235.

I also searched the USPTO website for the US Open Series and found that the name "US Open Series" (no stops) is a registered trademark for the series. It was filed by the USTA on 6 February 2004 and registered on 20 September 2005. Serial No.: 78364021; Registration No.: 3276150.

I also searched for "U.S. Open" (with stops) and found those trademarks to be deemed "DEAD", which must indicate that they are no longer in official use as trademarks.

This certainly seems to indicate that the names "US Open" and "US Open Series" are the official and legal names of the tournament and series respectively, and the names with the stops are not legal or official names. --203.220.170.192 (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The ITF, ATP and WTA are important international tennis organisations that use the name "US Open" (no stops), particularly considering that these organisations also organise and run the professional men's and women's tours for tennis players worldwide. The ITF is also the world governing body for tennis. --203.220.171.32 (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (abbreviations) says that "US" is the preferred abbreviation (although it also says that "U.S." is more common in American English), and this is common style with other nations and organizations on that list (NATO, EU, UK, etc.) Since the official website also uses "US Open", I would say there are at least two good reasons to use "US Open". — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

The evidence given by 203.220.17... seems very convincing that "US Open" should be used and, as noted by Andrwsc, the WP:MOSABBR prefers "US", and the official website also uses "US Open". So, coupled with the evidence given by 203.220.17... and the MOS for abbr. given by Andrwsc, I think it's pretty conclusive that "US Open" should be used. – Axman (☏) 07:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

For what it is worth, consensus was reached [here. I.e., US Open for the open area.--HJensen, talk 08:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for wider input on discussion at Wikiproject tennis

Hi, there is an extremely long and muddled discussion going on at WP:Tennis about the tournament tables found on tennis player articles (i.e. this type of table). The dispute is over the "Tournament Name" column, with the options being to either use the "sponsored tournament name" - in other words, the name involving the sponsor, for example Internazionali BNL d'Italia - or the "non-sponsored tournament name" - in other words, Rome Masters. I appreciate that this conversation is very long and convoluted, so a brief summary can be found here, which is also where I request the discussion continues. Thanks, rst20xx (talk) 21:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

clarity

"During the 2006 US Open, 30.5% of men's challenges and 35.85% of women's challenges were overturned. During the 2007 US Open, 95 challenges were overturned - or 30.6%."

I think this part is poorly worded. To say that the "challenges were overturned" implies that the original call was upheld 30-ish% of the time, but I believe that the line is trying to say that the challenges were upheld 30% of the time. Maybe a better wording is "30% of challenges resulted in an overturned call." Xanthrax (talk) 05:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

US open winners

Why would only the non-us champions be listed, this seems to be unnecessary if not wrong, there is the page with all slam winners which would take the place of this entire section. I suggest either filling out the entire list of champions for the US Open or removing the list all together and referencing the page of all slam winners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.116.4 (talk) 21:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

highest-attended?

I have removed the claim that it is "the highest-attended annual sporting event in the world". While this was sourced, the source is not neutral and the claim as it stands is untenable. Other contenders from List of sports attendance figures would be Tour de France, FA Cup, NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship, NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship, Six Nations Championship; and from List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports leagues Major League Baseball. jnestorius^(talk) 19:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Good removal. Probably should have been highest attended "Tennis" event...but I need to check all the other events. 2008 had 720,227"US Open Attendance History". Retrieved 2009-09-14. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |pubisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)...but this might be better placed on each "year" page...? -- Mjquin_id (talk) 17:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

1967 and 1968 are missing

1967 and 1968 are missing under the list of Men's singles champions, please fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.47.18.52 (talk) 22:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Current Champions

That´s ridiculous Novak Djokovic is not of Swiss Nationality. He is of Serbia. Change that immediately. --188.23.88.91 (talk) 02:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Men's balls and women's balls

During the 2010 US open, the commentators said something about women's balls being lighter than men's balls. This is the first I've heard of it -- there's nothing in the tennis ball article, and it sounds bizarre. If true, how did it come about? Is it just the US Open? How long has it been happening? And shoudn't it be mentioned in the article? Paul Magnussen (talk) 22:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

History of Surface changes

Moving here from article. An editor thinks that there should be a paragraph on the history of surface changes in the History section (between the paragraphs starting in 1970 and Jimmy Conners). AIRcorn (talk) 05:11, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Margaret Court

Margaret Court was removed from Winner of most Championships because Margaret Osbourne duPoint won the most Championships. Margaret Osbourne duPoint won 25 Championships while Margaret Court has only won 18 Championships. Perfectamundo (talk) 22:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I see that. I've reverted back to your version. BMK (talk) 23:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Golf trademark?

My father is an avid tennis fan and has told me the the US Golf Association owns a trademark on the term "US Open", from their own tournament, and that the USTA gets their permission to use the term, either on a regular basis or just once. Is there any truth to this? (Update: the Terms of Use from the tennis tournament seem to assert "US Open" is a trademark of the USTA's.) --BDD (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm wondering if it's a limited trademark? That is the USTA owns all rights to tennis related US Open usage and the USGA owns all rights to US Open golf related usage. It almost seems that way here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

You may be right. That said, a search at the US Patent and Trademark Office gives the trademark to the USTA, not the USGA. Then again, the USGA has been using the term longer, as the tennis tournament only became an open in 1968. So it could just be a case where the use is considered specific enough as not to interfere with each other (along with the for amends being 2 1/2 months apart, too). There are other sports tournaments using the term as well, but they usually specify the sport. So it does seem like the two associations just agree to let each other use the name. oknazevad (talk) 22:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Oknazevad: & @BDD:, Maybe this is the solution. The USGA owns the trademark U.S. Open as shown here (not US Open). Plus their website seems to say U.S. Open too. So the USTA owns "US Open" while the USGA owns "U.S. Open". Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Interesting! Thanks for the information. I thought we were the only ones who got so serious about small details. ;) --BDD (talk) 01:29, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:US Open (tennis)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I think the US Open tennis article is a C article that needs reference and more content to back it up, but it is more than just a simple start class article!TennisAuthority 23:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 23:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 09:27, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

can someone add history of wheelchair, legends and junior winners

can someone add history of wheelchair, legends and junior winners the seem to be missing from this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:6001:3400:8D07:8F31:9081:299 (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

I know this is horribly old, but there is merit here. I have been trying to WP:Cleanup a number of Junior articles and their linkage back to the main tournament page is tenuous at best. Should there be some kind of section that at least lists the various events; thus providing linkages to those articles? (Champions as OP proposed are already on separate pages). Mjquinn_id (talk) 14:09, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Prize money clarification

Could someone please clarify the prize money section. Do the men and women receive the same amount for Semi-final and lower? That's how I'm reading the table but it doesn't say that specifically and since the final prize money is different it's ambiguous. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 06:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)