Support NeoGAF

[SolidSnakex]

I hear the commentators talking about the sorry state of women's tennis all the time.

Why is that? Is it a lack of training or conditioning?

Injuries have had a major impact on women's tennis. Jankovic, Sharapova and Ivanovic have all been injured recently. Then throw in that the Williams sisters only seem to care about majors (as unomas said) and you open up a window where a player like Safina can become #1.

 

[Future PhaZe]

Wow @ Safina if she fails here.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Awesome point by Rogowska!

 

[Speevy]

This is painful to watch, for both players.

 

[avaya]

Lisicki threw away a 4-0 lead in the 2nd set breaker to lose it to Rezai...typical

 

[Peru]

It's a lack of an kind of mental capacity. The women just bash the ball with very little thought, the women's game comes down to who makes less errors each match. They have parity because they're all terrible, that's why you have Safina down to a player ranked 163 in the world. Because Safina is is so incosistent at times she is susceptible to losing against a player ranked that low. When was the last time Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray lost a set to someone not ranked in the top 100?

Fuck right off with that sexist shit. Personal preferences is one thing, but seriously, "lack of mental capacity".. are you for real? It's funny: People complain about women's tennis because it's predictable, then because it's unpredictable, then because it's predictable again. Meanwhile, Nadal and Federer have won the grand slams for the last five years, but that's just somehow a strength, while the Williams sisters dominance was a weakness at the same time. Invented excuses to keep on spewing discriminatory nonsense based on pure ignorance.

 

[Speevy]

Fuck right off with that sexist shit. Personal preferences is one thing, but seriously, "lack of mental capacity".. are you for real? It's funny: People complain about women's tennis because it's predictable, then because it's unpredictable, then because it's predictable again. Meanwhile, Nadal and Federer have won the grand slams for the last five years, but that's just somehow a strength, while the Williams sisters dominance was a weakness at the same time. Invented excuses to keep on spewing discriminatory nonsense based on pure ignorance.

Well I don't watch a whole lot of tennis, much less women's tennis, but something needs to be done about this inconsistency in the women's game.

It's downright amateurish, and embarrassing.

 

[John Dunbar]

Well I don't watch a whole lot of tennis, much less women's tennis, but something needs to be done about this inconsistency in the women's game.

other than letting men play in drag, what can be done about it?

 

[Peru]

Pathetic complaints from people who don't know tennis history. That's all it is. They know Federer and think there's been a shining hero and deserved god forever in the men's game. Watch some old Grand Slams. The women's game has lacked a consistent number one because of a transition period where early retirements and injuries plagued the top players.

The idiotic idea of a lack of strategic elements in the women's game shows how few of the female greats they've watched play, and just turn in randomly to watch some shitty no name play an out-of-form Safina. Hey, all it shows is you judge stuff on tiny extremes and have no idea what's going on. OUT OF MY THREAD.

 

[Speevy]

Again, I was referencing the commentators, who FREQUENTLY talk about how crappy the women are playing.

Are you saying they're out of touch as well?

 

[d+pad]

Is the Safina match over yet? I can't watch it anymore - sooooooo painful.

The poor thing puts such pressure on herself. She always looks like she's on the verge of tears - if not a mental breakdown. To top it off she has an asshole of a coach who seems to have an ability to be positive for his player. Ugh.

To the person wondering what the hell is wrong with the women's tour right now: I think it's basically going through a transition. The old guard - the Williamses, Dementieva, Kuznetsova, etc. - will be on their way out in the next few years (I imagine) and the younger players who will replace them just haven't improved to the point where that can happen. Somewhere in the middle are players like Safina (who should be the next big thing but can't seem to handle the pressure) and the oft-injured trio of Sharapova, Jankovic and Ivanovic.

For all of the wailing about the women's game, I'm not sure how the men's game is much better right now. Sure, Federer and Nadal tend to be consistent (though even they have had their ups and downs this year), but the rest of the pack seems just as lost as most of the women. Murray, Djockovic (sp?) and Roddick all seem like headcases to me (i.e., can't handle the pressure most of the time) and those below them tend to be even worse.

 

[unomas]

Fuck right off with that sexist shit. Personal preferences is one thing, but seriously, "lack of mental capacity".. are you for real? It's funny: People complain about women's tennis because it's predictable, then because it's unpredictable, then because it's predictable again. Meanwhile, Nadal and Federer have won the grand slams for the last five years, but that's just somehow a strength, while the Williams sisters dominance was a weakness at the same time. Invented excuses to keep on spewing discriminatory nonsense based on pure ignorance.

Yeah, you're right! I've played guys ranked as high as 500 in the world in the ATP rankings in the last couple of years, yes, your keyboard warrior opinion is much more valid than mine.

 

[unomas]

Pathetic complaints from people who don't know tennis history. That's all it is. They know Federer and think there's been a shining hero and deserved god forever in the men's game. Watch some old Grand Slams. The women's game has lacked a consistent number one because of a transition period where early retirements and injuries plagued the top players.

The idiotic idea of a lack of strategic elements in the women's game shows how few of the female greats they've watched play, and just turn in randomly to watch some shitty no name play an out-of-form Safina. Hey, all it shows is you judge stuff on tiny extremes and have no idea what's going on. OUT OF MY THREAD.

Educate yourself.

http://www.observer.com/2009/what-ails-womens-tennis-kim-clijsters

 

[Manics]

Pathetic complaints from people who don't know tennis history. That's all it is. They know Federer and think there's been a shining hero and deserved god forever in the men's game. Watch some old Grand Slams. The women's game has lacked a consistent number one because of a transition period where early retirements and injuries plagued the top players.

The idiotic idea of a lack of strategic elements in the women's game shows how few of the female greats they've watched play, and just turn in randomly to watch some shitty no name play an out-of-form Safina. Hey, all it shows is you judge stuff on tiny extremes and have no idea what's going on. OUT OF MY THREAD.

Women's tennis was great back in the days of Graf / Navratilova and then Seles (before the stabbing). I was a huge fan back then. It sucks ass now.

 

[Peru]

Again, I was referencing the commentators, who FREQUENTLY talk about how crappy the women are playing.

Are you saying they're out of touch as well?

I don't know which commentators you're referring to. I read a lot of tennis journalism / magazines, and while there's an agreement Safina is not the shining star a #1 ranking might lead one to believe, and that there has indeed been trouble finding new ground after a generation got injured/retired too early (on their way back now), all of them see it as temporary hiccups rather than anything else. If your commentators think it's an inherent problem with women and a "lack of mental capacities" which the lunatic poster attempted to claim earlier in this thread, then yes, they're unequivocally wrong.

 

[Feathers]

Well Safina just managed to pull it out the bag, but she's not going to get away with about 50 unforced errors in the later matches.

 

[Peru]

Educate yourself.

http://www.observer.com/2009/what-ails-womens-tennis-kim-clijsters

What she says proves my point, not yours. There are hiccups where the old heroes went away too early, and the upcoming stars weren't ready to take over. That's what I've said. You say there's something dorment in the women's game which makes it impossible to succeed. Which is lunacy and sexism at its worst.

Yeah, you're right! I've played guys ranked as high as 500 in the world in the ATP rankings in the last couple of years, yes, your keyboard warrior opinion is much more valid than mine.

I've fucked girls in the top 100, what does it matter?

 

[Speevy]

I don't know which commentators you're referring to. I read a lot of tennis journalism / magazines, and while there's an agreement Safina is not the shining star a #1 ranking might lead one to believe, and that there has indeed been trouble finding new ground after a generation got injured/retired too early (on their way back now), all of them see it as temporary hiccups rather than anything else. If your commentators think it's an inherent problem with women and a "lack of mental capacities" which the lunatic poster attempted to claim earlier in this thread, then yes, they're unequivocally wrong.

I'm just watching ESPN2, where I've seen them carry on three separate discussions on the subject. It's day 2.

Please calm down. I can think of nothing less sexist than questioning why the women aren't playing better, rather than simply accepting the inconsistency of the matches.

 

[unomas]

What she says proves my point, not yours. There are hiccups where the old heroes went away too early, and the upcoming stars weren't ready to take over. That's what I've said. You say there's something dorment in the women's game which makes it impossible to succeed. Which is lunacy and sexism at its worst.

You're crazy and don't know the game, but again, we'll pretend that you actually fully understand and play the game at anywhere near a high level. We'll pretend that you've coached the game at a high level, and we'll pretend that material you've written regarding the game has appeared in both the New York Times and USA today during the 2008 US Open. Wow.

 

[Peru]

I'm just watching ESPN2, where I've seen them carry on three separate discussions on the subject. It's day 2.

Please calm down. I can think of nothing less sexist than questioning why the women aren't playing better, rather than simply accepting the inconsistency of the matches.

Look, me and everyone have agreed upon the fact that the WTA is looking for a new superstar to take over when the Williamses fade away. But how can anyone even defend someone stating that the women "lack certain mental capacities". What if that was said about a black player? It's not acceptable to degrade a sex based on wild personal assumptions and say that women aren't smart enough to think when they're on the court. That went away in the fifties. I have no objection to people who think the wta tour is in a slump in regards to top players taking lead now.

 

[Speevy]

I'm out of this thread. Good grief.

 

[unomas]

Look, me and everyone have agreed upon the fact that the WTA is looking for a new superstar to take over when the Williamses fade away. But how can anyone even defend someone stating that the women "lack certain mental capacities". What if that was said about a black player? It's not acceptable to degrade a sex based on wild personal assumptions and say that women aren't smart enough to think when they're on the court. That went away in the fifties. I have no objection to people who think the wta tour is in a slump in regards to top players taking lead now.

I'm not degrading a sex, I coach women every single day. Something you've probably never done, and the women's game in it's current state is attrocious, and having a mental midget like Safina as the #1 ranked player is a joke. The days of Graf, Vicario, Navratilova, Evert, Sabatini, Henin, and Hingis are long gone. It also says quite a bit when the number 2 ranked player only seems to give a full effort at 4 tournaments a year.

 

[Peru]

I'm not degrading a sex, I coach women every single day. Something you've probably never done, and the women's game in it's current state is attrocious, and having a mental midget like Safina as the #1 ranked player is a joke. The days of Graf, Vicario, Navratilova, Evert, Sabatini, Henin, and Hingis are long gone. It also says quite a bit when the number 2 ranked player only seems to give a full effort at 4 tournaments a year.

Yeah, it says something about the Williamses having aimed for a long career and take it easy outside of the Grand Slams. Choices. You're backpedalling. You said women lack certain mental capacities, period, not that Safina is a nervewreck at big moments. I get it, you play tennis, you write about tennis. I play tennis, I write about tennis. That makes neither of us the defining authority. All my raging hyperbole is to underline that point: People, all sorts of random posters, drop in, throw off an assuming, definitive judgement on the entire WTA tour after a random snippet of a first round match. That never, ever happens with the men's game, no matter how many lackluster matches happen, with the top seeds or unseeded randoms, in early rounds of any tournament. It's the definition of prejudice.

 

[avaya]

You dont have to be a genius to work out that the majority of the players on the WTA tour are psychologically weak. To see players throw away huge leads and the number of double faults is evidence enough. It makes it very unpredictable and at the moment its more interesting than the mens game which is a foregone conclusion outside the top 6.

 

[bionic77]

It's a lack of an kind of mental capacity. The women just bash the ball with very little thought, the women's game comes down to who makes less errors each match. They have parity because they're all terrible, that's why you have Safina down to a player ranked 163 in the world. Because Safina is is so incosistent at times she is susceptible to losing against a player ranked that low. When was the last time Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray lost a set to someone not ranked in the top 100?

:lol

Women's tennis is not as fun to watch as Men's tennis because they are not as athletic, nothing more and nothing less. You don't usually have a lot of time to think and plan things out when a tennis ball is flying around the court at over 100 mph. And I actually think most tennis players sound pretty intelligent off the court when compared to other sports, but as I said I don't think you need tremendous brain power to excel at tennis.

And I actually think women's tennis has improved a lot. There used to be zero depth in the days of Graf and Martina. There used to be a lot of double bagles back then in the first few rounds. Now it is not a guarnateed thing that a top player is going to even make it to the quarters. That to me speaks of greater depth. I would say that the opposite seems to be occurring in the Men's game, but really Federer is the only constant.

You dont have to be a genius to work out that the majority of the players on the WTA tour are psychologically weak. To see players throw away huge leads and the number of double faults is evidence enough. It makes it very unpredictable and at the moment its more interesting than the mens game which is a foregone conclusion outside the top 6.

WTF? Men choke all the time in tennis as well. Tennis is a very demanding game and there is no one to bail you out when things go wrong.

 

[unomas]

Yeah, it says something about the Williamses having aimed for a long career and take it easy outside of the Grand Slams. Choices. You're backpedalling. You said women lack certain mental capacities, period, not that Safina is a nervewreck at big moments. I get it, you play tennis, you write about tennis. I play tennis, I write about tennis. That makes neither of us the defining authority. All my raging hyperbole is to underline that point: People, all sorts of random posters, drop in, throw off an assuming, definitive judgement on the entire WTA tour after a random snippet of a first round match. That never, ever happens with the men's game, no matter how many lackluster matches happen, with the top seeds or unseeded randoms, in early rounds of any tournament. It's the definition of prejudice.

It's because women's matches are typically won or lost via errors, and men's matches are typically won or lost by construction of points and winners. Not always, but typically it's skewed that way. That's reality, and that's why the womens game is getting so much heat right now. I never said I was the defining authority on tennis, but in tennis circles, and on my accomplishments in the industry, I'd say my opinion matters just as much as yours

 

[avaya]

WTF? Men choke all the time in tennis as well. Tennis is a very demanding game and there is no one to bail you out when things go wrong.

Not to the same epic degree. The number of double faluts and breaks of serve in the womens game far outnumber the average you'll see on the ATP tour. Its not a disparaging remark, I'm all for it, it makes the betting very interesting.

 

[Peru]

It's because women's matches are typically won or lost via errors, and men's matches are typically won or lost by construction of points and winners. Not always, but typically it's skewed that way. That's reality, and that's why the womens game is getting so much heat right now. I never said I was the defining authority on tennis, but in tennis circles, and on my accomplishments in the industry, I'd say my opinion matters just as much as yours

Of course they do, which makes it twice as troubling when you're loose with how you word yourself -- But if you're going back on the comment about women's mental capacities I'm all the happier for it.

I'll work on comparing stats when it comes to UE's and winners in this US Open, for the men and the women, and then we'll get back to that point of yours. I'm fairly sure that's incorrect.

 

[unomas]

Of course they do, which makes it twice as troubling when you're loose with how you word yourself -- But if you're going back on the comment about women's mental capacities I'm all the happier for it.

I'll work on comparing stats when it comes to UE's and winners in this US Open, for the men and the women, and then we'll get back to that point of yours. I'm fairly sure that's incorrect.

I'm not going back on the mental capacity because the current top 10 is horrible. You have to understand the X's and O's of the game to understand when Safina makes a boneheaded low percentage play time after time during her points. Prior generations were much more mentally capable and strategically sound. Clijsters basically says that the players of the past had much more of an ability to mix it up and play intelligently. She does mention both Venus and Serena, and they deserve praise in that aspect at times.

The winners to unforced errors ratio has always gone that way for men versus women, you can look that up as much as you want, but that's what you'll find.

Your personal view of the WTA seems a little clouded by your "love/obsession" with it. I look at the situation not as an ATP fan, but as a tennis fan viewing it in black and white.

 

[bionic77]

Not to the same epic degree. The number of double faluts and breaks of serve in the womens game far outnumber the average you'll see on the ATP tour. Its not a disparaging remark, I'm all for it, it makes the betting very interesting.

Do you have any stats to back that up? It would have to averaged of course because men will obviously have more errors over 5 sets along with more winners.

And if you guys want to diss the womens' game you are going about it the wrong way when you start bringing up their mental toughness and other things that are subjective. If I were to argue that point I would bring up that disgraceful Australian Open Championship Serena won a few years ago where she clearly came into the tournament 15 pounds overweight and "played herself into shape" by winning the whole fucking title. Anytime you can come into a sport overweight and beat the world's best then there is something seriously wrong.

 

[avaya]

Do you have any stats to back that up? It would have to averaged of course because men will obviously have more errors over 5 sets along with more winners.

Nope and I don't need to. Anyone watching some tennis will be able to see it for themselves its fairly obvious . Compare the WTA top 20 vs the ATP top 20. I prefer watching the WTA though, unless Federer is playing.

 

[bionic77]

Nope and I don't need to. Anyone watching some tennis will be able to see it for themselves its fairly obvious . Compare the WTA top 20 vs the ATP top 20. I prefer watching the WTA though, unless Federer is playing.

You will if you want to convince anyone else of what you are saying.

edit: See how convincing unomas was with just a few statistics.

 

[unomas]

Williams Glatch

18 Winners 8 Winners

19 Unforced Errors 22 Unforced Errors


Safina Ragowska

19 Winners 19 Winners

48 Unforced Erros 65 Unforced Errors


Federer Britton

31 Winners 32 Winners

18 Unforced Errors 40 Unforced Errors


Verdasco Becker

36 Winners 23 Winners

25 Unforced Errrors 37 Unforced Errors

 

[unomas]

1st Round Stats

Williams -1, Glatch -14

Federer +13, Britton -8

Safina -29, Ragowska -46

Verdasco + 13, Becker -12


I could keep grabbing these stats, but it's pointless.

 

[Peru]

I'm not going back on the mental capacity because the current top 10 is horrible. You have to understand the X's and O's of the game to understand when Safina makes a boneheaded low percentage play time after time during her points. Prior generations were much more mentally capable and strategically sound. Clijsters basically says that the players of the past had much more of an ability to mix it up and play intelligently. She does mention both Venus and Serena, and they deserve praise in that aspect at times.

The winners to unforced errors ratio has always gone that way for men versus women, you can look that up as much as you want, but that's what you'll find.

Your personal view of the WTA seems a little clouded by your "love/obsession" with it. I look at the situation not as an ATP fan, but as a tennis fan viewing it in black and white.

Well you sort of are going back on it, because there was no footnote restricting your comment to the current crop. It sounded like that's the way women inherently are. I don't particularly rate Safina or Jankovic, myself.

I will look it up, I've done a few more casual comparisons befrore, juxtaposing alleged pushers on the WTA side against Nadal, where he ended up with unfavourable stats in the winners department. What that showed, more than anything, is how those stats can mislead, because his particular counterpunching style is anything but brainless.

As for my personal bias, Federer has been my great sports idol this decade, and whether I follow the men's or women's side has varied wildly from slam to slam and season to season. I'm just at a place with the men's game now where I'm 100% relaxed about what Federer's doing, he's reached his goals and I'm content, and neither Murray or Djokovic engage me as characters, so I don't get as involved in the particular tournament trajectories of any men right now. I guess I have a thing for the promising underdog with the great potential, which is why I root wildly for Azarenka, or the great who should be greater, which is why I'm a Sharapova fan, and these storylines are what I find most captivating right now. I love both tours and follow them quite obsessively close, I'll let you know.

 

[avaya]

You will if you want to convince anyone else of what you are saying.

I dont need to convince the majority, because anyone with objective reasoning will realise the facts pretty quickly. I haven't said anything controversial at all. Im surprised there are some who disagree with it, all you have to do is watch one or two matches and its pretty obvious.

Lisicki vs. Rezai and the Safina match today are evidence enough.

 

[Peru]

Are you comparing three-setters to two-setters?

 

[Peru]

Let's compare two first round matches with similar scorelines instead of random matches with a different amount games played.

Women: Azarenka - Dulgheru : 6-1 6-1
Winners: 18 - 5
Per set, as an average: 9 - 2,5
Unforced errors: 13 - 16
Per set, as an average: 6,5 - 8

Men: Tsonga - Buchanan : 6-0 6-2 6-1
Winners: 29 - 11
Per set, as an average: 9,6 - 3,6
Unforced errors: 12 - 36
Per set, as an average: 4 - 12


Where's the great gap you just knew I would find?

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

 

[avaya]

Let's compare two first round matches with similar scorelines instead of random matches with a different amount games played.

Women: Azarenka - Dulgheru : 6-1 6-1
Winners: 18 - 5
Per set, as an average: 9 - 2,5
Unforced errors: 13 - 16
Per set, as an average: 6,5 - 8

Men: Tsonga - Buchanan : 6-0 6-2 6-1
Winners: 29 - 11
Per set, as an average: 9,6 - 3,6
Unforced errors: 12 - 36
Per set, as an average: 4 - 12


Where's the great gap you just knew I would find?

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

Are you serious?

You just proved Azarenka made >50% more errors than Tsonga. Cherry pricking matches is not going to help you. Only relevant statistics will be the whole population of results from the first round or if you want to refine it just the seed matches from the first round.

I think you are well aware you are fighting a losing battle here, I just dont understand why you persist with it. Meanwhile this discussion is shitting up a pretty great thread you started.

 

[Peru]

What? She made far less than 50% more errors. Meanwhile, her opponent made fewer unforced errors, with a wider gap to Buchanan. It evens out. And it's precisely not cherrypicking, as I chose two matches with a similar spread of games. It'll be interesting to keep track of it further into the tournament, if it's so obviously a losing battle. Obviously a "per game" set of stats is better than a per set one, though.

Hey, it's a nice little sidetrack during quiet opening days.

Only relevant statistics will be the whole population of results from the first round or if you want to refine it just the seed matches from the first round.

Yeah, I'll get to that, maybe in the weekend.

 

[Yackie]

Sexism, in my tennis? GTFO with this. Billy Jean King would weep.

I enjoy men and women's tennis equally. (I would enjoy men's more if Fedbot-3000 would lose a little more)

 

[John Dunbar]

Sexism, in my tennis? GTFO with this. Billy Jean King would weep.

I enjoy men and women's tennis equally. (I would enjoy men's more if Fedbot-3000 would lose a little more)

if you want federer to lose, you're enjoying tennis for the wrong reasons.

 

[Yackie]

if you want federer to lose, you're enjoying tennis for the wrong reasons.

Hmm, well I guess we can agreee to disagree on that point.

 

[Speevy]

if you want federer to lose, you're enjoying tennis for the wrong reasons.

I root for the underdog, in any sport.

 

[unomas]

I root for Fed because I don't think we'll see another player like him for a long long time, I can see the underdog crowd liking the upset though.

 

[Ashhong]

stfu! sharapova is on

 

[perfectchaos007]

Taylor Dent up 2 sets to 1. It would be so nice to see him get through here

 

[zero_suit]

I root for Fed because I don't think we'll see another player like him for a long long time, I can see the underdog crowd liking the upset though.

I don't know, man. How many years was it between Sampras' arrival and Federer's?

 

[Speevy]

Bondarenko def. Ivanovic

 

[zero_suit]

Wow, Ivanovic flopped.