PDA

View Full Version : White washes are bad for women's tennis!!


Greenout
May 31st, 2003, 01:32 PM
I hated the past days of women's tennis. Routes,
white washes, bagels, maru-maru, whatever you
want to name it is awful for women's tennis. I'm
sick of hearing, and reading about how horrendous
the standard of the women's tour is because nobody
can seem to break the top players.

It's bad television; and a poor representation of
the WTA. It's sad because in the usual Tier 1's
alot of these players perform so much better, yet
put them in a grand slam and they play like kooks.

I go along with the theory that the reason there's
such poor matches in grand slams is that the pressure
to perform in a best of 3 sets, as oppose to a best
of 5 setters is greater. The male players are under less
pressure in the first set than female players. The best
of 3 sets match puts so much pressure on winning
the first set that it can ruin a players confidence. There's
no time to grow into confidence or play your way into
form and rhythm like in the men's best of 5 matches.



Any comments?

Gowza
May 31st, 2003, 01:38 PM
i think that the top players take the slams more seriously and can go up a notch in the grand slams. i think because they don't take the other events quite so seriously then they are more beatable but it is a different story in a grand slam. i don't see many events but grand slams so i may be wrong but the top players do seem to say that the grand slams are the events they want so naturally they would take them more seriously.

and the 3 set as oppose to 5 sets i agree with. the men do have time to play their way in but in 3 sets it is a bit hard although some of the top players seem to do it for example justine do start badly quite often but i think that is more on hardcourts.

Greenout
May 31st, 2003, 01:42 PM
Gowza,

Interesting thought; but in that case how
do we place Iva Majoli's career in the
history books of tennis? She won a grand
slam once- is she greater than say a Kimiko
Date or a Mary Jo Fernandez?

Gowza
May 31st, 2003, 01:46 PM
aren't we talking about the top players beating the lower ranked players so easily and not being challenged in grand slams?

Greenout
May 31st, 2003, 01:56 PM
Yeah sort of- but the tv commentators
were making such a big deal about how
Barbara Schett, Suarez, and Farina were
top 16 players etc...they went on to say
the someone ranked 3 vs 18 in the men's
tour doesn't lead to white washes.

I guess when you mentioned that grand slams
mean more than regular tour events such as
the Tier 1's my mind went back Kimiko, and Mary
Jo who never won a grand slam; but in my humble
opinion greater than Iva Majoli despite winning
a grand slam. Mary Jo, and Kimiko had so many
3 setters against the eventual grand slam winners
that it's kind of heartbreaking.

Anyway I guess I'm just trying to say that tv
critics, and sport writers make too much of
a big deal about grand slams that they don't
even seem to give anybody besides the
actual winners of grand slams any respect
nor acknowledgement of their careers.

ToeTag
May 31st, 2003, 03:38 PM
I hated the past days of women's tennis. Routes,
white washes, bagels, maru-maru, whatever you
want to name it is awful for women's tennis. I'm
sick of hearing, and reading about how horrendous
the standard of the women's tour is because nobody
can seem to break the top players.

It's bad television; and a poor representation of
the WTA. It's sad because in the usual Tier 1's
alot of these players perform so much better, yet
put them in a grand slam and they play like kooks.

I go along with the theory that the reason there's
such poor matches in grand slams is that the pressure
to perform in a best of 3 sets, as oppose to a best
of 5 setters is greater. The male players are under less
pressure in the first set than female players. The best
of 3 sets match puts so much pressure on winning
the first set that it can ruin a players confidence. There's
no time to grow into confidence or play your way into
form and rhythm like in the men's best of 5 matches.



Any comments?
I absolutely agree with you.How many times do you see a guy get his ass kicked in the first two sets than be able to come back and get it to a 5 set match,,it happens alot....well if the women stink the joint out for two sets their out ...there is not enough room for error in best of three,I also think if the guys played best of 3 you would see similar scores...even if were a variation of best of 5,like 4 games instead of 6,that were be better than silly best of 3.

gopher
May 31st, 2003, 03:43 PM
the real problem for women's tennis is the arrogant Williams domination

Chance
May 31st, 2003, 04:39 PM
the real problem gopher, is that you are thick as a brick !

Getting back to thread, Greenout you have a point- I found last years Wimbly not that interesting because of the routine victories. However considering how suxy my coverage is right now, I would prefer to se a white wash involving a top player instead of a 3 1/2 hour battle between 2 men who I don't give a toss about.

Cybelle Darkholme
May 31st, 2003, 04:55 PM
The rest of the players are lazy unfit pathetic non achievers compared to the top players. Period. Thats why the tour lags behind the mens tour. On the atp you have to be fit and you have to have the shots if you want to be a contender. There are a lot of contenders on the atp tour.

I love the wta but the players outside the top twenty and sometimes even in the top twenty do not have the work ethic of their male counterparts. Maybe if more women would go into sports as men do we would have more of a chance to see greater and greater skilled women players.

I dont think the three set versus five set has anything to do with it and I think that if there were five sets that the lower ranked players would really suffer because they would not have the endurance to last that long.

Cybelle Darkholme
May 31st, 2003, 05:15 PM
the real problem for women's tennis is the arrogant Williams domination

Thanks for reinforcing the popular notion that you are indeed mentally deficient.

maccardel
May 31st, 2003, 05:20 PM
I was thinking the same thing also. These players are talking about they are up to the challenge and when the challenge comes, they fade away.

I look at Schett's previous matches and see competition with close sets, the same goes with Meghan Shaughnessy and Ai Sugiyama.....

I wanted entertainment and yet I got a boring match. The only players who have entertained me so far are Venus, Ashley, and Chanda( several times have presented great tennis against Black and Granville).

The other top players with the exception of Seles, have not produced grand slam tennis. You could get grand slam tennis without ur fav having to lose also...it's just the tennis, as in last year's USopen when the matches were entertaining to the fullest. I guess we have to wait for the quarters...

I hope Chanda doesn't fade if she comes up on Justine........I want to see a tight three setter with the final score being 15-13..whoever wins....

maccardel
May 31st, 2003, 05:26 PM
Also I think that there should be five sets after the 4th round.....every match should then be five sets......or every match five sets up to the round of 16

harloo
May 31st, 2003, 05:27 PM
I have to sort of agree about the level that some of these players outside the top 20 displays. I mean I feel like I can put my sister out on the court and she would fare better.

IMO, I don't mind some top players having easy rounds, but every early round? We would occasionally get a nail biter every once and awhile. Now we only see low ranked players just showing up to get beat.

I love my faves and all but it's the truth. Alot of top players are just cruising especially the favorites. In 99 their was more of a competition, but now it's like whatever. I still love the women more than the men, because the men are boring. Sorry but that's just the truth.

What I think the men should do is only do 3 sets in slams, then you won't see that many injuries on their side. Also, since their level is so high it would be dramatic especially with the French having no tiebreaks.

BigTennisFan
May 31st, 2003, 06:27 PM
I don't see how anyone can pooh-pooh the notion that playing the best of 3 as opposed to the best of 5 is MUCH more pressure laden. If you lose the first set, unless you are one of the top 5 or 6, your ass is usually grass.

On the other hand, the point that Cybelle made about the lack of fitness on the women's tours is a very good one. :mad:

maccardel
May 31st, 2003, 06:39 PM
I don't see how anyone can pooh-pooh the notion that playing the best of 3 as opposed to the best of 5 is MUCH more pressure laden. If you lose the first set, unless you are one of the top 5 or 6, your ass is usually grass.

On the other hand, the point that Cybelle made about the lack of fitness on the women's tours is a very good one. :mad:

I agree with Cybelle also, but seeing a player leaving the courts after 40 minutes, is good if it's my fav but overall I want to see the player challenge. I know that 5 sets doesn't make a match but at least it gives the newbie like Harkleroad time to find their game and to get over the nerves of playing on bigger stages.....I really believe that most of the newbies who advance far into a grand slam for the first time are nervous and need time to put up a challenge. Someone like in Ashley's case ( even though she was tired at some point) need to rise to the occasion especially after the big win she had in the second round. I think the lower ranked players should indeed be more focus and motivated on winning over the top players.

ToeTag
May 31st, 2003, 06:45 PM
I don't see how anyone can pooh-pooh the notion that playing the best of 3 as opposed to the best of 5 is MUCH more pressure laden. If you lose the first set, unless you are one of the top 5 or 6, your ass is usually grass.

On the other hand, the point that Cybelle made about the lack of fitness on the women's tours is a very good one. :mad:
Well I think b/3 is more of a pressure match,in a b/5 you can lose the first two sets and still be in the match...b/3 if you lose the first set the match is half over,IMO there is more of an opportunity for a player to play themselves into a match with b/5....Also I don't agree that there is this wide spread [no pun intended] lack of fitness,most of them look pretty fit to me.When I watch some of these lower ranked players its' like they don't have a clue as to what to do or when to do it....there is no real stragady in their games,I don't think alot of these players are very well coached. :)