The US Open Experience: A Personal Reflection

I’ve been attending the US Open since I was five. Initially, I was that kid playing with a Transformers toy in a hotel room while, you know, adults watched tennis. Over the years, what started as a distraction turned into an annual pilgrimage to witness some incredible matches in the 2010s and, now, the 2020s. Now at 23, I’m old enough to appreciate a Honey Deuce, which—let’s be honest—doesn’t give me a full grasp of time’s passage but does lend me a unique perspective. To sum it up: I’m a Gen-Z sports cultural critic, navigating this experience through my own lens.

This year, the in-person vibe at the US Open has faced some criticism, especially with phrases like “weed smell” and “influencer overload” trending in media discussions. Numerous thinkpieces have claimed that the presence of influencers and, well, even one fan with a noticeable odor has fundamentally altered the refined atmosphere traditionally associated with tennis. It begs the question: is this the beginning of a downward spiral for the sport?

However, I attended the US Open this past weekend and didn’t quite experience the influencer chaos everyone seemed to be describing. It felt remarkably like the US Open I’ve known—overpriced merchandise, packed crowds, enthusiastic fans. Honestly, it was just as loud, crowded, and, I suppose, money-grabbing as in previous years. It just felt like—wait for it—sports.

The critiques about crowd behavior, in my opinion, largely stem from media buzzwords designed to stir outrage. Stories about influencers taking over the event tend to sell, capturing attention with a sense of sensationalism. But, let’s be real: the US Open granted credentials to about 100 influencers, not some overwhelming horde. If I hadn’t read the articles, I wouldn’t have even noticed their presence. Filming key moments at the Open isn’t new; I’ve done it for ages, and it’s something my grandfather, who isn’t an influencer, enjoys too.

I’ll admit I have a limited view—I only attended one session, so perhaps there’s a broader perspective. D’Arcy Maine from ESPN recently covered this topic with a headline that really stood out: “Separating fact from fiction: The US Open influencer controversy.” His article highlighted the ongoing tension between traditional tennis fans and the USTA, which is attempting to make the sport more accessible in the U.S. Yes, they stand to gain from this shift, but there’s a genuine desire to ensure tennis thrives long-term, which is an essential issue for me.

Interestingly, I wrote a piece titled “Tennis should have no crowd noise rules at the US Open” just a few weeks ago. My experience at Arthur Ashe Stadium didn’t seem to match the supposed rudeness I’ve read about. Sure, there are always a few inconsiderate attendees—like those bringing ring lights or, you know, smoking weed—but overall? It felt quite normal.

That said, I will concede one major issue: ticket prices are out of control. While there are various factors contributing to this, it’s clear the US Open is catering to a more affluent crowd, especially with the recent renovations at Arthur Ashe Stadium. The price of grounds passes has skyrocketed, and there’s no simple solution. Wealthy attendees who are willing to pay whatever it takes will keep pushing prices higher as demand remains strong.

One idea I’ve had for a while—though I haven’t really voiced it until now—is that the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center might just be too compact. The flow of people can feel chaotic, especially on busy days, almost like Times Square on New Year’s Eve. Changing the layout could be tricky, but perhaps the corridors could be expanded. I mean, do we really need those large fountains taking up space?

Right now, the biggest hurdle facing the US Open is a kind of narrative that discourages young fans like myself from feeling engaged. Contrary to some beliefs, we’re not looking to smoke weed courtside while filming an entire match with GoPro lights. We just want to be involved in the sport, which means ticket reforms and less exaggerated media coverage about supposed youth culture invasions. From my perspective, young people bring energy to the tournament, and framing that as problematic could harm both the US Open and tennis overall.

This kind of narrative has real implications. Wimbledon, for instance, seems to be taking steps to limit influencers, trying to maintain an exclusive atmosphere. But labeling influencers as inherently negative and shutting them out isn’t just bad for business; it’s also, frankly, unnecessary when I didn’t observe any of this influencer take over firsthand.