Just watched an interview on tv today re the abuse she faces on media related platforms not even her own . 40% of abusers are believed tom be gamblers who have lots money on bets placed. One said hope you get cancer up your fY and that hes bought candles for your and familys coffins.

What is wrong with these people , if you cant afford to lose dont bet .
An easy answer is dont go on social media! but apparently it appears on people she knows and on tennis web sites so that does not work.

Nobody who is not doing anything wrong, just trying to do their job /sport should get abuse and the level of abuse is beyond belief

Who ?

Whoever she is, and whatever she's done or not done, abuse is out of order.

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 9:33 am

Just watched an interview on tv today re the abuse she faces on media related platforms not even her own . 40% of abusers are believed tom be gamblers who have lots money on bets placed. One said hope you get cancer up your fY and that hes bought candles for your and familys coffins.

What is wrong with these people , if you cant afford to lose dont bet .
An easy answer is dont go on social media! but apparently it appears on people she knows and on tennis web sites so that does not work.

Nobody who is not doing anything wrong, just trying to do their job /sport should get abuse and the level of abuse is beyond belief

Similar sort of abuse to wishing death on people’s family members because they’ve sung a song you don’t like.

I've read she 's been getting a lot of abuse when her future husband loses, the Ozzy De Minaur. Idiots blaming his form on her.
It's time these sad wankers were brought to justice. It's not just words folks are killing themselves over the abuse dished out.

Funkydrummer wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 10:04 am

Who ?

Whoever she is, and whatever she's done or not done, abuse is out of order.

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Katie+Boulter

I guess that nowadays any sportsman/woman/person, will need to have a publicly accessible social media presence to keep their sponsors happy; a major downside of that being that any twonk who has an issue with their performance, has an easy route to vent their spleen.
It's- not even necessarily a result of their performing badly - such as we've seen with football players missing penalties - as one of the vile insults/threats in this morning's item stemmed from KB winning a game which the punter had bet she'd lose.

Twilight zone for me, no idea what this is about.

Guess not everyone is a British tennis fan, or tennis fan in general.

Absolutely appalling abuse
Punters placed bets on her winning matches and awful abuse if their bets go down

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 9:33 am

Just watched an interview on tv today re the abuse she faces on media related platforms not even her own . 40% of abusers are believed tom be gamblers who have lots money on bets placed. One said hope you get cancer up your fY and that hes bought candles for your and familys coffins.

What is wrong with these people , if you cant afford to lose dont bet .
An easy answer is dont go on social media! but apparently it appears on people she knows and on tennis web sites so that does not work.

Nobody who is not doing anything wrong, just trying to do their job /sport should get abuse and the level of abuse is beyond belief

Where did the 40% number come from?

dandeclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:20 pm

Where did the 40% number come from?

From the investigating into her accounts and tracing back to who had put the comments up on these platforms . Some of the comments been taken down but only after complaints made to the media accounts providers, not taken down by them as being abusive , and yes it is difficult to manage with freedom of speech etc

Hapag Lloyd wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 10:08 am

Similar sort of abuse to wishing death on people’s family members because they’ve sung a song you don’t like.

in my correctly valued opinion its totally different if people sing an abusive song with the one aim is to hurt or upset others ,than to abuse people, just doing there job/sport of entertainment, because they did not get the result you want !!

Any sort of abuse is unacceptable end of. That said it's difficult to have any sympathy for people that experience the abuse & still continue to be on social media. It's not about letting the abusers win or letting them dictate peoples lifestyle choices it's about being in control & doing what you can to avoid trouble in this day & age you have the appropriate settings to decide who you interact with.

Jakubclaret , I think most of what you just said is correct, but part of the package sports people get is dependant on being hi visibility on these media platforms ( could be an argument that they get paid enough to put up with it) , but then why should they. personally if you pay me enough you can say what you want ill just laugh in your face, but how it affects my family may be different

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:48 pm

Jakubclaret , I think most of what you just said is correct, but part of the package sports people get is dependant on being hi visibility on these media platforms ( could be an argument that they get paid enough to put up with it) , but then why should they. personally if you pay me enough you can say what you want ill just laugh in your face, but how it affects my family may be different

If you are good enough at any chosen sport it shouldn't matter. Ronnie O'Sullivan is an excellent snooker player as long as he keeps qualifying for all these events he'll keep appearing at snooker regardless of social media. People aren't being forced onto social media. You won't be excluded on that basis the only exclusion which will apply is if you drop down the rankings I'm guessing the same will apply for most sports. People are willingly allowing themselves to be abused not that it should be happening in any circumstances.

Unfortunatley this is everything that's wrong with the internet. Horrible disgusting people posting abuse hiding behind a keyboard.

I saw an interview with Stephen Fry about the internet. He was originally asked to help setting up platforms for actors and the arts. At the time he thought it would be wonderful but when asked years later he said he's sorry he ever did it and called it a Pandora's Box. Pretty good description really, while there is a lot of good on the internet like this forum, there are just as many bad things which have got out of control.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:55 pm

If you are good enough at any chosen sport it shouldn't matter. Ronnie O'Sullivan is an excellent snooker player as long as he keeps qualifying for all these events he'll keep appearing at snooker regardless of social media. People aren't being forced onto social media. You won't be excluded on that basis the only exclusion which will apply is if you drop down the rankings I'm guessing the same will apply for most sports. People are willingly allowing themselves to be abused not that it should be happening in any circumstances.

But does Nike pay him to show his trainers on social media or his watch from Rolex or each arena insisting that a certain water bottle is used and shown . Unfortunately in Tennis , F1,Football ,golf and lots of other sports you get endorsement, money or allowed to take part if you do so. And whist we could discuss how much these stars are paid compared to other jobs ,these are part of the contractual agreements.

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:27 pm

From the investigating into her accounts and tracing back to who had put the comments up on these platforms . Some of the comments been taken down but only after complaints made to the media accounts providers, not taken down by them as being abusive , and yes it is difficult to manage with freedom of speech etc

They're covering this story on the BBC now, with a big chunk of the conversation centred around how much of this vile abuse was directly linked back to gambling.

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 2:54 pm

But does Nike pay him to show his trainers on social media or his watch from Rolex or each arena insisting that a certain water bottle is used and shown . Unfortunately in Tennis , F1,Football ,golf and lots of other sports you get endorsement, money or allowed to take part if you do so. And whist we could discuss how much these stars are paid compared to other jobs ,these are part of the contractual agreements.

I dare say you will be right they will get perks for endorsing products on their social media feeds but it's something they are choosing to do willingly & run that risk. Like I said before mechanisms are there to filter & restrict content so the abuse floodgates are minimised or even stopped. They are choosing to continue on social media & not even safeguarding themselves.

Anybody who has never heard of Britain's No 1 woman tennis star could perhaps try Google?


Any abuse online to her is horrendous and I hope the authorities find out who they are. They must have left "digital fingerprints".

I think of someone had bet on me to lose and lost their money i could quite easily reply with a huge laughing emoji or a gif of somebody laughing hysterically and then not give it another thought.

dandeclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:20 pm

Where did the 40% number come from?

The figures - provided by data science firm Signify, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and Women's Tennis Association (WTA) - show that in 2024, about 8,000 abusive, violent or threatening messages were sent publicly to 458 tennis players through their social media accounts.

A significant proportion of abuse stems from betting, according to Signify, which has been working with tennis authorities on detecting abuse through an artificial intelligence-led detection system called Threat Matrix.

More than a quarter of all abuse (26%) was targeted at five players.

The most prolific account sent 263 abusive messages, and 15 accounts were escalated to law enforcement.

Nine of the 10 most prolific accounts - the majority of which were related to angry gamblers - were either suspended or had content removed.

Details of 39 account holders were shared with the tennis authorities and betting industry for further action.

Across the year, angry gamblers sent 40% of all detected abuse, with messages clearly related to betting activity because of the timing or content of the abuse.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 3:29 pm

I dare say you will be right they will get perks for endorsing products on their social media feeds but it's something they are choosing to do willingly & run that risk. Like I said before mechanisms are there to filter & restrict content so the abuse floodgates are minimised or even stopped. They are choosing to continue on social media & not even safeguarding themselves.

You may be quite right but last week Radacanu was told to use a bottle supplied for water or lose a point . And they have to have pictures taken with sponsorship products and to be shown on social media . They don't have much choice. Either do it or don't play .

turfytopper wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 4:37 pm

Anybody who has never heard of Britain's No 1 woman tennis star could perhaps try Google?


Any abuse online to her is horrendous and I hope the authorities find out who they are. They must have left "digital fingerprints".

I just did and apparently it's Emma Raducanu.

Someone earning £2.5 million a year really needs to show a bit more imagination in their dealings with the cesspit that is social media than opening their feeds to all comers and managing the accounts themselves.

Sproggy wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 5:15 pm

I just did and apparently it's Emma Raducanu.

Someone earning £2.5 million a year really needs to show a bit more imagination in their dealings with the cesspit that is social media than opening their feeds to all comers and managing the accounts themselves.

2 points you are missing 2/3rds of that income is from sponsorship/and brand with commitment to social media and match day .
The other thing is why is it up to her to deal with the ''cesspit'' to earn her income.

Just a thought, not sure if you work or not but imagine if your employer said that you have to be photoed every day going into work with a ruck sac that has the company logo on or you cant work and that make up 60% of your earnings. ( when I first worked I had to pay union fees to NGA union or not work.)

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 5:03 pm

You may be quite right but last week Radacanu was told to use a bottle supplied for water or lose a point . And they have to have pictures taken with sponsorship products and to be shown on social media . They don't have much choice. Either do it or don't play .

People are responsibly signing themselves up for it &: inviting trouble when it's avoidable. If you ask for trouble it will come. You have choices whether to accept problems or rum off into the opposite direction to avoid trouble. People are/should be in comtrol.
.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 12:17 am

People are responsibly signing themselves up for it &: inviting trouble when it's avoidable. If you ask for trouble it will come. You have choices whether to accept problems or rum off into the opposite direction to avoid trouble. People are/should be in comtrol.
.

for most people totally agree with you, but when the job you really want , then the choice is do the job you want and are better than a lot of others are or do a job you hate and get no satisfaction doing . Then the point is the control should be that freedom of normal speech is fine but abusive is not and is not your fault its the one doing the abuse end of this thread

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 1:55 pm

If you are good enough at any chosen sport it shouldn't matter. Ronnie O'Sullivan is an excellent snooker player as long as he keeps qualifying for all these events he'll keep appearing at snooker regardless of social media. People aren't being forced onto social media. You won't be excluded on that basis the only exclusion which will apply is if you drop down the rankings I'm guessing the same will apply for most sports. People are willingly allowing themselves to be abused not that it should be happening in any circumstances.

Yep she’s definitely “willingly allowing herself to be abused”. All she needs to is just be the greatest of all time at her chosen profession, then she wouldn’t have to worry about sponsorship etc.

Jakub to the rescue with all the answers once again. Your intellect is wasted on here - you should get to work solving the problems in the Middle East.

Greenmile wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 9:37 am

Yep she’s definitely “willingly allowing herself to be abused”. All she needs to is just be the greatest of all time at her chosen profession, then she wouldn’t have to worry about sponsorship etc.

Jakub to the rescue with all the answers once again. Your intellect is wasted on here - you should get to work solving the problems in the Middle East.

It's a simple question could she put a stop to the online abuse. If you are putting yourself in a position where unpleasant things are happening you are not helping yourself. The abuse shouldn't be happening anyway full stop.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:36 am

It's a simple question could she put a stop to the online abuse. If you are putting yourself in a position where unpleasant things are happening you are not helping yourself. The abuse shouldn't be happening anyway full stop.

The simple answer is no, she couldn't.

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:44 am

The simple answer is no, she couldn't.

So somebody must be forcing her to be online then. I'm not going around in circles with 1 I'm a busy man. Have a good day.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:49 am

So somebody must be forcing her to be online then. I'm not going around in circles with 1 I'm a busy man. Have a good day.

How many people in this day and age aren't online?

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:51 am

How many people in this day and age aren't online?

Not many. It's not a question of who's online & who isn't it's a question of abuse & I'm stating it's within her control to do something about it. It's as simple as that well it should be.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:54 am

Not many. It's not a question of who's online & who isn't it's a question of abuse & I'm stating it's within her control to do something about it. It's as simple as that well it should be.

Yes. She can communicate with the public by writing letters, I guess.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:56 am

Yes. She can communicate with the public by writing letters, I guess.

Is it essential for her to communicate with the public. My erroneous misunderstanding is that she's a tennis player & not some sort of spokesperson.

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 11:22 pm

2 points you are missing 2/3rds of that income is from sponsorship/and brand with commitment to social media and match day .
The other thing is why is it up to her to deal with the ''cesspit'' to earn her income.

Just a thought, not sure if you work or not but imagine if your employer said that you have to be photoed every day going into work with a ruck sac that has the company logo on or you cant work and that make up 60% of your earnings. ( when I first worked I had to pay union fees to NGA union or not work.)

That's fine. if I was being paid 2 million quid to smile outside the office every morning carrying my branded backpack, I'd employ someone else to post it on social media for me.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:59 am

Is it essential for her to communicate with the public. My erroneous misunderstanding is that she's a tennis player & not some sort of spokesperson.

So basically, she should live like a recluse because of sad trolls?

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:04 am

So basically, she should live like a recluse because of sad trolls?

A recluse is a massive jump so people who don't engage in social media are all recluses nothing like stereotyping. For the umpteenth time I'm stating if she wanted to put a end to the online abuse she could easily do it. To be honest she could even stay online & adjust her settings to safeguard herself. Sometimes you have to help yourself.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:08 am

A recluse is a massive jump so people who don't engage in social media are all recluses nothing like stereotyping. For the umpteenth time I'm stating if she wanted to put a end to the online abuse she could easily do it. To be honest she could even stay online & adjust her settings to safeguard herself. Sometimes you have to help yourself.

The OP even mentions that a lot of the abuse is on sites she is not affiliated to.

You're very naive if you think she can just avoid it all constantly.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 10:49 am

So somebody must be forcing her to be online then. I'm not going around in circles with 1 I'm a busy man. Have a good day.

Makes no difference if she's online or not. She can't stop people who want to abuse her from abusing her.

Ps - the thought of you being a busy man is amusing.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:11 am

The OP even mentions that a lot of the abuse is on sites she is not affiliated to.

You're very naive if you think she can just avoid it all constantly.

I could spend all day naming sports people & celebrities who don't experience problems on social media.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:15 am

I could spend all day naming sports people & celebrities who don't experience problems on social media.

Go on then... But I thought you said you were a busy man?

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:14 am

Makes no difference if she's online or not. She can't stop people who want to abuse her from abusing her.

Ps - the thought of you being a busy man is amusing.

If she's not online herself she won't know a thing about it & the likelihood of that happening is remote if she distanced herself away from the social media side. I'm having far too much fun.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:18 am

If she's not online herself she won't know a thing about it & the likelihood of that happening is remote if she distanced herself away from the social media side. I'm having far too much fun.

Not knowing about it is not stopping it from happening.

Having fun doing what?

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:22 am

Not knowing about it is not stopping it from happening.

Having fun doing what?

Being a dick.

Well when I posted I wrongly thought people would think it was disgraceful that Katie was being abused on several sites including her public contractual ones.
I get that if she chose to work in a job that had know other payment structure than turning up punching in work 8 hrs punch out go home she would be able to have full control of her social media ,but she does not, and to get to the top level you can not do it on tennis fees alone unless your family are very wealthy. its only the last 10 to 15 years that these media platforms really exploded for every one Facebook started some 20 yrs ago for schools and college work.And from what I have found out the covid pandemic (for those who believe it happened) made it the main way for a lot of these company's to get there brand published.
The main point to me is regardless of what they have to do to get paid legally, they should not be abused or targeted by these trolls , and people who say that they have a choice are only helping these trolls and as making it seem that she's asked for it , the same ones who would say a woman walking home alone asks for it, but a man walking home is just a good old boy ( I am aware men do get attacked walking home too, but people usually say he was unlucky)

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 1:34 pm

Well when I posted I wrongly thought people would think it was disgraceful that Katie was being abused on several sites including her public contractual ones.

you weren't wrong; the majority of posters on this thread agree with you.

there will always be the odd cynic who finds empathy to be rather a difficult concept.

yTib wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 18, 2025 1:42 pm

you weren't wrong; the majority of posters on this thread agree with you.

there will always be the odd cynic who finds empathy to be rather a difficult concept.

Thank you for that .just watching Jack Draper playing at Queens. One of the commentator s is Pat Cash ex Tennis pro who said the pressure on tennis players so much more than his day. His quite was in my day there may have been things said about you but they were in the newspapers, none of the contractual media platforms that are forced on them by the tennis federations the tournament organisations, and don't get me started on the product placements.I do member years ago some one in the crowd saying he was playing rubbish and Pat stopped playing and said you think you can do better thence on then offering his racket to him , and totally destroyed the guy for not conning down to play , ended up the guy got up and left. Quite funny at the time. Some of the older pros were larger than life and were not afraid to call people out , given th at there were no mobile phones etc they could get away with it. Now if they say anything back it's all on phone camera and you get ridiculed all over social media for updating some one who may have issues.

aggi wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 17, 2025 4:51 pm

The figures - provided by data science firm Signify, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and Women's Tennis Association (WTA) - show that in 2024, about 8,000 abusive, violent or threatening messages were sent publicly to 458 tennis players through their social media accounts.

A significant proportion of abuse stems from betting, according to Signify, which has been working with tennis authorities on detecting abuse through an artificial intelligence-led detection system called Threat Matrix.

More than a quarter of all abuse (26%) was targeted at five players.

The most prolific account sent 263 abusive messages, and 15 accounts were escalated to law enforcement.

Nine of the 10 most prolific accounts - the majority of which were related to angry gamblers - were either suspended or had content removed.

Details of 39 account holders were shared with the tennis authorities and betting industry for further action.

Across the year, angry gamblers sent 40% of all detected abuse, with messages clearly related to betting activity because of the timing or content of the abuse.

40% of messages is much more impactful than 39 people I guess.....

Another thread ruined.
So let me get this straight.

It’s her fault she is getting abuse and people wishing she had cancer because she decides to be online ? Because she does not need to be online to play tennis ?

So if she decides to take her walk in the park on her day off and she gets attacked by someone with a knife is that her fault too ? She does not need to take a walk in the park to play tennis.

Like the vast majority of sports people today (and other people in the public eye) she has every right to have a social media presence and increase her profile, monetise this etc. Despite the claims made above I doubt there are many of these people who have not faced online abuse at some time or other. We know that in lot of cases like this one that the abuse is extreme with death threats etc and often this can materialise further into physical threats, stalking etc. To put the blame on the victims here is beyond ridiculous. To say that it “comes with the territory” is almost as bad.