PDA

View Full Version : I don't mean to beat a dead horse


supergrunt
Jul 2nd, 2008, 05:02 PM
or however the saying goes, but it seems at this Wimbledon especially, the commentators are attributing the Williamses' talent to their natural athleticism. :(

Expat
Jul 2nd, 2008, 05:42 PM
then stop beating it
on topic their height matters a lot on grass because it helps them to generate power on their serves and wimbledon is basically a fast surface where serve is the most important factor

its not just the williams sisters but all power players who will do well here like maria lindsay etc the grass favors the power players

the same case holds for the french open
movement is the key on clay and the ability to run after the shots and stay in points
thats why henin dominated clay

height is not that big a factor
i think ana ivanovic is the only player above 6 ft tall to have ever won the french open

its all about surfaces
the points I made above are not the only reason but height and athleticism plays a factor

kiwifan
Jul 2nd, 2008, 06:40 PM
I heard a rumor that Venus and Serena are excellent tennis players, as well. :angel:

Kart
Jul 2nd, 2008, 06:49 PM
or however the saying goes, but it seems at this Wimbledon especially, the commentators are attributed the Williamses' talent to their natural athleticism. :(
So what would you attribute it to ?

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:01 PM
Their ability to play tennis duh.

But you cannot separate that from their athleticism, especially on grass. There's a reason why they are excellent on grass but lose to Pennetta and Srebotnik on clay. Richard Williams himself said to Pam Shriver Venus' best strenght is to run fast.

Kart
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:01 PM
Their ability to play tennis duh.
Which has nothing to do with how good an athelete they both are ?

calabar
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:37 PM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.

LCS
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:40 PM
clearly someone doesn't have anything else to worry about...

supergrunt
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:41 PM
clearly someone doesn't have anything else to worry about...

Just an observation.

Destiny
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:42 PM
I think i get what supergrunt is trying to say

Every time they talk about the way the play they never say "oh they are great tacticians" or "oh that was a smart shot". Always to do with their power and stuff

It's NOT FAIR!!

Kart
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:43 PM
I think i get what supergrunt is trying to say

Every time they talk about the way the play they never say "oh they are great tacticians" or "oh that was a smart shot". Always to do with their power and stuff

It's NOT FAIR!!
Are you serious ?

DA FOREHAND
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:48 PM
Lisa Raymond is a jock, Alicia Molik et al , where are there singles Grand Slam titles? Semifinals? Finals?

And oh lest I forget to mention.

Mr Obama is so articulate, and clean cut, and his wife is quite charming.Until now I'd never seen a black couple speak so well.










yes leave it to me to take it too far....

Destiny
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:52 PM
Are you serious ?

ok
maybe i wasn't that clear but i know what am trying to say i just have to say it better :lol::tape:

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:54 PM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.

This is very speculative. Unless a commentator specifically mentions that athleticism and "cerebral prowess" are mutually exclusive, there isn't anything wrong to point out the Williams' athleticism is what contribute to their success on grass. It's kinda hard to deny it when you see Venus serve or run.

What's funny is that Richard probably would have no problem to acknowledge it... So it's really a non-issue.

In case some people aren't aware, tennis is a sport. Being a great athlete is the aim.

DA FOREHAND
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:57 PM
This is very speculative. Unless a commentator specifically mentions that athleticism and "cerebral prowess" are mutually exclusive, there isn't anything wrong to point out the Williams' athleticism is what contribute to their success on grass. It's kinda hard to deny it when you see Venus serve or run.

What's funny is that Richard probably would have no problem to acknowledge it... So it's really a non-issue.

In case some people aren't aware, tennis is a sport. Being a great athlete is the aim.

It's a black thing you wouldn't understand.:help::tape:

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:58 PM
It's a black thing you wouldn't understand.:help::tape:

do you have anything substantive to say?

DA FOREHAND
Jul 2nd, 2008, 07:59 PM
do you have anything substantive to say?

if you can wrap your brain around the post you quoted, then there's nothing more to add.

Bijoux0021
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:03 PM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.
:worship::worship::worship:

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:03 PM
The answer is "no", as expected.

Kart
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:09 PM
ok
maybe i wasn't that clear but i know what am trying to say i just have to say it better :lol::tape:
I think you said it just fine :). I don't agree but I'm not going to pick on you.

DA FOREHAND
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:10 PM
The answer is "no", as expected.

How bout this...

When you've had decades of people trying to discredit your sports idols as merely superior athletes who were bred to run fast and jump high, then maybe you could begin to understand.:wavey:

MAYBE:help:

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:18 PM
How bout this...

When you've had decades of people trying to discredit your sports idols as merely superior athletes who were bred to run fast and jump high, then maybe you could begin to understand.:wavey:

MAYBE:help:

There is nothing to begin to understand because your posts are without substance.

Matt01
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:21 PM
There is nothing to begin to understand because your posts are without substance.


Indeed. You better just ignore him ;)

bandabou
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:22 PM
tjaa..

DA FOREHAND
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:28 PM
There is nothing to begin to understand because your posts are without substance.

A.B.T.Y.W.U.

just as I thought.:cool:

serenus_2k8
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:31 PM
Serena & Venus are naturally very athletic, which is why when there awesome technique is on they are unbeatable. I see no problem here.

pancake
Jul 2nd, 2008, 08:32 PM
There is nothing to begin to understand because your posts are without substance.

:worship::worship::worship:
So TRUE!

Ryan
Jul 2nd, 2008, 09:00 PM
People seem to forget that not every single white player is praised for being smart. Vaidisova anyone? Venus and Serena just get overly praised for their athleticism because they're two of the MOST athletic players on tour - they're mental game is more subtle than someone like Hingis, Mauresmo and justine. :shrug:

Serenita
Jul 2nd, 2008, 09:40 PM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.

:worship::worship::worship:

supergrunt
Jul 2nd, 2008, 10:10 PM
People seem to forget that not every single white player is praised for being smart. Vaidisova anyone? Venus and Serena just get overly praised for their athleticism because they're two of the MOST athletic players on tour - they're mental game is more subtle than someone like Hingis, Mauresmo and justine. :shrug:

But why is Justine, a VERY agressive player labled as a brilliant tactician and not a person who relies on her athletic ability?

Ryan
Jul 2nd, 2008, 10:53 PM
But why is Justine, a VERY agressive player labled as a brilliant tactician and not a person who relies on her athletic ability?


Uh, you ALWAYS hear about how Justine is a great mover and has bulked up considerably to compete with the taller, more physical players. Are you saying you NEVER hear commentators mention her intense physical training and how that probably caused her rash of injuries pre-2006?? She gets a lot of credit for her tactical game because it was extremely impressive and she employed slices, chips, volleys etc into her game more than the other top players.

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 2nd, 2008, 11:48 PM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.

well said :yeah:

Melly Flew Us
Jul 3rd, 2008, 12:45 AM
There is nothing to begin to understand because your posts are without substance.
no, this is the crux of the matter; the fact that you've side-stepped the issue even when it is has been clarified in very clear language is telling.

instead of attacking the poster, why don't you rebut the argument?

start with the assumption that the social constatnt in western society that black equates athleteic prowess with no brains and white equals the opposite is still as true today as it was 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 400 years ago (when the native american indians of the west indies were driven to extinction by slavery and were replaced with the sturdier africans)?

trivfun
Jul 3rd, 2008, 12:47 AM
The key is maintaining rhythm regardless of what you have.

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:27 AM
no, this is the crux of the matter; the fact that you've side-stepped the issue even when it is has been clarified in very clear language is telling.

instead of attacking the poster, why don't you rebut the argument?

start with the assumption that the social constatnt in western society that black equates athleteic prowess with no brains and white equals the opposite is still as true today as it was 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 400 years ago (when the native american indians of the west indies were driven to extinction by slavery and were replaced with the sturdier africans)?

This I'm afraid does not address what I've said in post 17 as well. Commentators are entitled to point out that it is Williams' stellar athleticism that makes them so effective on grass. I'm sorry but commentators are not going to stop doing their job because of how the western society see black athletes.

Unless you show that what allows the Williams to be so successful on grass is NOT their athleticism, your point and "daforehand" point is moot. What is it in the last years that makes Venus so successful on grass, but average or mediocre on other surfaces? If it's only about the "tennis", why did Venus lose to Pennetta at the French, it's all just a coincidence?

Donny
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:33 AM
This I'm afraid does not address what I've said in post 17 as well. Commentators are entitled to point out that it is Williams' stellar athleticism that makes them so effective on grass. I'm sorry but commentators are not going to stop doing their job because of how the western society see black athletes.

Unless you show that what allows the Williams to be so successful on grass is NOT their athleticism, your point and "daforehand" point is moot. What is it in the last years that makes Venus so successful on grass, but average or mediocre on other surfaces? If it's only about the "tennis", why did Venus lose to Pennetta at the French, it's all just a coincidence?

You're falling into the trap that the OP is getting at. Tennis is a SPORT- by definition, an athletic competition. Almost every aspect of the sport is athletic in nature. Tactics are nothing without the physical prowess to back it up. If Henin or Hingis did not have the muscle memory and hand eye coordination required to hit their strokes, they would never have won a match. They relied on their athletic ability. Yet Venus and Serena are called "athletic", "great athletes" etc. far more than Henin or Hingis were. It's subtle, but the implication is there.

Whitehead's Boy
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:47 AM
Tennis is a SPORT- by definition, an athletic competition.

That's exactly what I've said in a previous post. Which is why it is silly to complain when people say the Williams are great athletes. To see a subtle racist charge instead of what is probably nothing more than a compliment is called paranoia. There is a reason you call it subtle, it is because it is an interpolation.

Yet Venus and Serena are called "athletic", "great athletes" etc. far more than Henin or Hingis were.

Have you compiled statistics? People mention a lot of things about what commentators say about the Williams and I often found that it is not true. It is called confirmation bias. When "you" (a general "you") hear something you perceive as negative concerning the Williams sister, you remember it. When it's not, you forget about it. Some Williams fans tend to do so because they have a massive persecution complex.

But of course Venus and Serena are called "great athletes" more than Hingis. I hope you realize why. I think they are better athletes than Henin too, so I don't really see a problem.

And what is the reason why Venus sucks in the last years in tournaments not on grass?

Apoleb
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:53 AM
Just watch the Tanasugarn/Venus match. Off the ground, Tammy is just as good if not better than Venus when it comes to the quality of hitting. What really made the difference in the match was the humongous difference in the service quality (not even speed or reach, which Venus definitely had an advantage in). Venus' height was certainly a huge factor in the match.

supergrunt
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:57 AM
Just watch the Tanasugarn/Venus match. Off the ground, Tammy is just as good if not better than Venus when it comes to the quality of hitting. What really made the difference in the match was the humongous difference in the service quality (not even speed or reach, which Venus definitely had an advantage in). Venus' height was certainly a huge factor in the match.

Tammy hits the ball as well as Venus. Are you serious? Then again, you do dislike them (the Williams Sisters) very much so this does not suprise me.

Apoleb
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:00 AM
Tammy hits the ball as well as Venus. Are you serious? Then again, you do dislike them (the Williams Sisters) very much so this does not suprise me.

You making a "point" with nothing to back it up also doesn't surprise me. Pretty much anybody with two nerve cells can tell you that the serve made the difference in the match. One girl was hitting 120+ mph, the other one was struggling to put the serve beyond the middle of the service box. Still, she had like 10 bps and won 7 games. Get real.

matthieu_tennis
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:01 AM
Tammy hits the ball as well as Venus. Are you serious? Then again, you do dislike them (the Williams Sisters) very much so this does not suprise me.
The groundstrokes of tammy are very impressive on grass, her backhand is almost a top 10 or top 5 shots !

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:01 AM
This I'm afraid does not address what I've said in post 17 as well. Commentators are entitled to point out that it is Williams' stellar athleticism that makes them so effective on grass. I'm sorry but commentators are not going to stop doing their job because of how the western society see black athletes.

Unless you show that what allows the Williams to be so successful on grass is NOT their athleticism, your point and "daforehand" point is moot. What is it in the last years that makes Venus so successful on grass, but average or mediocre on other surfaces? If it's only about the "tennis", why did Venus lose to Pennetta at the French, it's all just a coincidence?

serena and venus have been successful on all surfaces :shrug: the reason why venus is successful on grass is because:

1. unlike on other surfaces, her slice serve doesn't break down because it actually becomes a weapon....she grooves her serve on the grass...on hard courts and clay the slice serve isn't as effective and she doesn't groove it, and she gives you a flurry of dfs on every other surface...she's easier to break in that respect...once venus isn't confident on serve then she's not gonna be that confident on return and in rallies in general...her game therefore breaks down much quicker on other surfaces...her poor service technique has nothing to do with height...if her height was an advantage she'd have the best serve in tennis eh?? what about karlovic on the ATP??? serves out of a tree but isn't exactly ripping through the wimbledon draw....

2. grass (and the US Open courts) keeps the bounce low and it falls right there in venus' strike zone...venus handles balls at her feet to hip region excellently so you never find her giving you outrageous errors on grass (and the US Open)....get the ball above her hip and in between that waist to shoulder region and she's not as clean a player....mama davenport commented on this point in particular saying that it was always hardest for her on grass to get down to those low balls that shoot through the court because she is so tall...so venus' height isn't an advantage in that respect....

and i'd like to point out...that masha has the height as well, and even davenport...but they are not remotely athletic but are good on grass....what's the explanation there???

supergrunt
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:03 AM
You making a "point" with nothing to back it up also doesn't surprise me.

What "back up" do you need? You cannot win six grand slams with just a serve and height:weirdo:. Furthermore, Venus' shots have greater length and MUCH more power. I guess the only way to prove this to you is to find an archive containing the average speed o the groundstrokes of both players. Unfortunatley no such thing exists :p.

Apoleb
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:07 AM
You cannot win six grand slams with just a serve and height:weirdo:

Like, who said that? I certainly didn't.

Furthermore, Venus' shots have greater length and MUCH more power.

Watch the match again. Tammy's strokes had tremendous precision and depth. Power isn't everything. She was matching Venus in the rallys. Like I said (and again), she managed to get 10 bps, win 7 games while her opponent was serving 120 mph bombs and she struggling to put a decent serve in.

I don't know why I'm arguing with supertard, but anyway. :unsure:

supergrunt
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:10 AM
Like, who said that?



Watch the match again. Tammy's strokes had tremendous precision and depth. Power isn't everything. She was matching Venus in the rallys. Like I said (and again), she managed to get 10 bps, win 7 games while her opponent was serving 120 mph bombs and she struggling to put a decent serve in.

I don't know why I'm arguing with supertard, but anyway. :unsure:

So are you saying that he ONLY reason Venus has a 6-0 lifetime record agaisnt Tammy WITHOUT EVER LOOSING A SET is because of her serve. I am implying this yes but that seems to be the gist of what you are saying.

skanky~skanketta
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:11 AM
Well, I really don't see anything wrong with it. It's not like the commentators say that players like Vaidisova and Sharapova play a smart game. That goes more fore the softer hitters who have high rankings. And to a certain extent they NEED to use their brains more. If they don't hit hard, the only way for them to get to the top is to outsmart their harder hitting opponents by playing a more brainy game.

For the hard hitters, they can easily rely on their pace and weight of shot. For Venus and Serena, even better, they can rely on their speed as well as their power.

Before you start hating on me, I'm not saying that both girls are dumb as fuck and only rely on what I mentioned. They play a smart game when it calls for it. When they're down, they employ differet tactics. This is what I attribute their fighting spirit to, their brains. It's not like your forehand and backhand which has been off the whole match can suddenly click when you're down 6-1 5-1. You clearly change your tactics. Serve differently, use different spins.

Wth the sisters, their often in a commanding position. Their strength is running fast and hitting hard. If they're winning with it, why change a winning tactic?

Players like Justine, Hingis and Mauresmo can hit hard shots true, but they cannot sustain them which is why they need to think more of what they're gonna do.

Apoleb
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:12 AM
So are you saying that he ONLY reason Venus has a 6-0 lifetime record agaisnt Tammy WITHOUT EVER LOOSING A SET is because of her serve. I am implying this yes but that seems to be the gist of what you are saying.

I was talking about their Wimbledon match. I didn't watch the previous ones. What I do believe is that the serve made the difference in that match, yes. And we all know that height is crucial for the serve (it's not everything, but the normal trend is that the taller you are, the better serve you'll have. And by all means, Venus is huge).

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:15 AM
I was talking about their Wimbledon match. I didn't watch the previous ones. What I do believe is that the serve made the difference in that match, yes. And we all know that height is crucial for the serve (it's not everything, but the normal trend is that the taller you are, the better serve you'll have).

venus' height does nothing for her serve...she has poor technique :shrug:

supergrunt
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:21 AM
That's exactly what I've said in a previous post. Which is why it is silly to complain when people say the Williams are great athletes. To see a subtle racist charge instead of what is probably nothing more than a compliment is called paranoia. There is a reason you call it subtle, it is because it is an interpolation.



Have you compiled statistics? People mention a lot of things about what commentators say about the Williams and I often found that it is not true. It is called confirmation bias. When "you" (a general "you") hear something you perceive as negative concerning the Williams sister, you remember it. When it's not, you forget about it. Some Williams fans tend to do so because they have a massive persecution complex.
But of course Venus and Serena are called "great athletes" more than Hingis. I hope you realize why. I think they are better athletes than Henin too, so I don't really see a problem.

And what is the reason why Venus sucks in the last years in tournaments not on grass?


Oh no. The commentators don't say anything negatvie about the Williams sisters when they're winning. Only positive comments like, "Venus has great twitch muscle fibers, Venus and Serena have great foot speed but bad footwork, unlike Henin and Jankovic" or "Serena was able to muscle that one cross-court with her amazing strength." It's annoying because all you hear about is how hard Sharapova and Henin work, and other players' great footwork, great technique, w/e.. but when it comes to a Williams sister hitting a good shot or doing something amazing, it's not hard work, it's not technique, it's natural athleticism. The commentators make it seem as if they don't have to work as hard, and that they're no skill hacks with a nack for whacking a ball- the wrong way.

supergrunt
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:23 AM
Watch tommorow and see how they say, "Zheng is a light-weight" blah blah blah, "Venus's lanky arms and legs."

Apoleb
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:23 AM
venus' height does nothing for her serve...she has poor technique :shrug:

Well, the fact that she has poor technique and still clock 120+ mph shows the importance of her height. Someone shorter with a similar technique would've struggled a lot with the serve. And to clear myself, I don't think that's an unfair advantage or anything. Tennis after all is a sport than involves a great deal of athleticism, and some people will have different talents that help them. "height" (especially when you're 190cm) is a legitimate talent as any other one.

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:28 AM
so explain maria and davenport???

as tall as venus but davenport is better at the serve but neither hit as hard as venus true...

venus davenport and masha are all good on grass but venus has the best movement...is it her athleticism or is she just an all around better player??? if poor movers like masha and davenport and a great mover like venus can have success on the same surface then it must be something more than athleticism

Infiniti2001
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:39 AM
so explain maria and davenport???

as tall as venus but davenport is better at the serve but neither hit as hard as venus true...

venus davenport and masha are all good on grass but venus has the best movement...is it her athleticism or is she just an all around better player??? if poor movers like masha and davenport and a great mover like venus can have success on the same surface then it must be something more than athleticism

I honestly don't know why the OP even bothered starting this thread . This shit started with Venus when she made her mark in 2000. I mean , when Martina and Lindsay were kicking her ass early on in her career, her body wasn't a problem--- once she started beating them it was her wingspan and long legs, and strength and power :shrug:

skanky~skanketta
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:48 AM
Oh no. The commentators don't say anything negatvie about the Williams sisters when they're winning. Only positive comments like, "Venus has great twitch muscle fibers, Venus and Serena have great foot speed but bad footwork, unlike Henin and Jankovic" or "Serena was able to muscle that one cross-court with her amazing strength." It's annoying because all you hear about is how hard Sharapova and Henin work, and other players' great footwork, great technique, w/e.. but when it comes to a Williams sister hitting a good shot or doing something amazing, it's not hard work, it's not technique, it's natural athleticism. The commentators make it seem as if they don't have to work as hard, and that they're no skill hacks with a nack for whacking a ball- the wrong way.

Why are you offended by it? It's true. The sisters have horrendous footwork and Venus bad technique. The reason they do well is because of their natural athleticism! They're definitely not the most skilled players, but they're the best. It's a testament to their athletic ability. Hitting powerful and accurate shots with an open stance, only they can do it well. Oh, and I always hear commentators rave about Serena's serve technique. It's excellent, first AND second serve. Players like Peer and Cibulkova are the hardworkers. Lindsay, good technique. The Williamses, natural athleticism. Just because they're your faves, does not mean they have everything.

supergrunt
Jul 3rd, 2008, 02:51 AM
Why are you offended by it? It's true. The sisters have horrendous footwork and Venus bad technique. The reason they do well is because of their natural athleticism! They're definitely not the most skilled players, but they're the best. It's a testament to their athletic ability. Hitting powerful and accurate shots with an open stance, only they can do it well. Oh, and I always hear commentators rave about Serena's serve technique. It's excellent, first AND second serve. Players like Peer and Cibulkova are the hardworkers. Lindsay, good technique. The Williamses, natural athleticism. Just because they're your faves, does not mean they have everything.

:yawn:

rjd1111
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:03 AM
This is very speculative. Unless a commentator specifically mentions that athleticism and "cerebral prowess" are mutually exclusive, there isn't anything wrong to point out the Williams' athleticism is what contribute to their success on grass. It's kinda hard to deny it when you see Venus serve or run.

What's funny is that Richard probably would have no problem to acknowledge it... So it's really a non-issue.

In case some people aren't aware, tennis is a sport. Being a great athlete is the aim.

An Announcer did say it a few years ago which sparked a lively

discussion on this board. I thing it was Dick Endberg.


He said now we have the cerebral prowess of Hingis verses

the brute power of Williams, or something close to that

woosey
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:10 AM
But why is Justine, a VERY agressive player labled as a brilliant tactician and not a person who relies on her athletic ability?

and, i would argue that she would never had succeeded without developing that very aggressive, athletic side of her game. she needed it to compete with venus and serena. contrast her rise with hingis' fall - one of the main differences is that henin was willing to put time into physical conditioning so that she could play more athletically. hello? this is a sport.

but come on super...you know the answer to this.

woosey
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:12 AM
or however the saying goes, but it seems at this Wimbledon especially, the commentators are attributing the Williamses' talent to their natural athleticism. :(


good lord super..you know folk don't get it. :rolleyes::lol:

woosey
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:19 AM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.


basically.

this complaint is not new. white commentators were accused of this stuff with basketball players and football players, baseball players, etc.

i've noticed that they don't do this as much in basketball anymore. i've noticed white commentators crediting black players as intelligent. i also think that black players, etc. have pushed for blacks to be in management positions and their victories, once in those positions, has challenged people who want to attribute certain kinds of success to raw talent, aka fast twitch muscles or some crap like that.

i mean, when doc rivers coaches the nearly all black team to the nba championship in boston, what can you attribute it to?

tennis still isn't an every man's sport. so it continues to suffer from dumb, ignorant, boring on racist comments. there's nobody around to really call them on it in the same way there are people in sports where blacks are heavy participants.

Infiniti2001
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:21 AM
An Announcer did say it a few years ago which sparked a lively

discussion on this board. I thing it was Dick Endberg.


He said now we have the cerebral prowess of Hingis verses

the brute power of Williams, or something close to that

chris stuck up everet would say this about Venus every time she called a match :rolleyes: It was a great day when she and NBC parted ways :tape:

Apoleb
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:26 AM
I haven't heard anyone diminish Justine's athletic abilities. She's regularly mentioned as a great athelete and one of the best in her generation (along with the WS sisters and Clijsters). Plus, very few attribute her success to "cerebral prowess." That would be Hingis, and it's absolutely correct, because she completely relied on court sense, anticipation and shot selection. Justine has been known for her shotmaking abilities (especially on the backhand), her variety AND athleticism.

Plus, as the skank mentioned, Serena's serve technique is regularly lauded.

Seems to me many people in this thread make things the way they want them and are basically full of shit.

Ryan
Jul 3rd, 2008, 03:53 AM
supergrunt has taken his retard troll status to a whole new level in this thread. :lol: Maybe its because of his lanky, athletic fingers that type so nimbly. If only he could post a real cerebral or crafty insult like some of the white posters here.

skanky~skanketta
Jul 3rd, 2008, 04:58 AM
:yawn:
You can :yawn: all you want, because deep down you know what I said is true. And just because I'm not agreeing with you, does not make me a Williams hater. They're my top 5 faves. I'm not like you, I like to keep an open mind. You're way to obssessed and narrow-minded to understand. Even a positive thing, if you don't like the way it sounds, will become a pesimistic remark to you.

hingisGOAT
Jul 3rd, 2008, 05:23 AM
What commentators have you been listening to? They're constantly praising Serena's "smart" shots :confused: As for Venus... well...

homogenius
Jul 3rd, 2008, 10:01 AM
Commentators also praise Nadal mostly for his unreal physical abilities (as opposed to Federer's "ballet tennis")and it's not because he's black.
I understand why somse interpret these kind of comments the way they do but all the commentators are not obsessed by downgrading the sisters.
Besides that, one of their advantages against a lot of others players was athleticism (it changed a bit the past few years).Nothing wrong with that and it doesn't mean that they're just that.
When you see a player like Hingis for example, it was clear that she had different weapons than power or athleticism.Speaking about her I always saw the majority of Williams's fans saying that the first time she retired it was because she was overpowered (and had not the same athletic qualities than the sisters).I never saw them talking about Hingis being outsmarted...

Each player fight with what he/she has and clearly, the sisters's athleticism has played a great part in their success (of course it's not the only reason)just like Hingis's brilliant sense of the court (like for the sisters, she can't be reduce at JUST that imo)allowed her to be successfull against more powerfull and bigger players than her.

Ryan
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:30 PM
And anyone who has ever listened to commentators praise Kuznetsova's tree-trunk legs and athletic build would never make such a stupid comment as supertrolls.

tequila
Jul 3rd, 2008, 01:40 PM
Racism no doubt. Black athletes are always described as physical and rarely outsmarting opponents.

Williamsser
Jul 3rd, 2008, 09:13 PM
They are gifted athletically. That doesn't mean that they don't have any skills.

Melly Flew Us
Jul 4th, 2008, 12:19 AM
This I'm afraid does not address what I've said in post 17 as well. Commentators are entitled to point out that it is Williams' stellar athleticism that makes them so effective on grass. I'm sorry but commentators are not going to stop doing their job because of how the western society see black athletes.

Unless you show that what allows the Williams to be so successful on grass is NOT their athleticism, your point and "daforehand" point is moot. What is it in the last years that makes Venus so successful on grass, but average or mediocre on other surfaces? If it's only about the "tennis", why did Venus lose to Pennetta at the French, it's all just a coincidence?
sorry, i don't know if a post has been deleted but post 17 is by daforehand.

my point is not moot - you do not assume the same thing that i do; therefore the arguments will continue in a useless tangent.

i shall try to convey my meaning by accepting your assumption - that unless it is specifically stated by the commentators that athleticism and intelligence are mutally exclusive traits that both abilities can be found in any person:

1. since they are not mutally exclusive the fact that no commentators assign intelligent thought processes to williamsx2 when they win points must therefore mean that the commentators do not consider v&s intelligent.

2. the inability to win on other surfaces could be explained by issues not related to intelligence - so why do you mention it? please elaborate further.

ghost world
Jul 4th, 2008, 12:50 AM
Methinks the "unwritten" point being made is that commentators are attributing the Williamses success to athleticism, while white players like Justine, Hingis etc are generally creditied with cerebral prowess. As if to further suggest that intelligence and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Obviously to reach the highest level of any sport, one has to demonstrate BOTH.

You're falling into the trap that the OP is getting at. Tennis is a SPORT- by definition, an athletic competition. Almost every aspect of the sport is athletic in nature. Tactics are nothing without the physical prowess to back it up. If Henin or Hingis did not have the muscle memory and hand eye coordination required to hit their strokes, they would never have won a match. They relied on their athletic ability. Yet Venus and Serena are called "athletic", "great athletes" etc. far more than Henin or Hingis were. It's subtle, but the implication is there.

/thread

Basically, this is a form of "othering" (http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~ulrich/rww03/othering.htm).

Ntour
Jul 4th, 2008, 09:52 AM
Oh no. The commentators don't say anything negatvie about the Williams sisters when they're winning. Only positive comments like, "Venus has great twitch muscle fibers, Venus and Serena have great foot speed but bad footwork, unlike Henin and Jankovic" or "Serena was able to muscle that one cross-court with her amazing strength." It's annoying because all you hear about is how hard Sharapova and Henin work, and other players' great footwork, great technique, w/e.. but when it comes to a Williams sister hitting a good shot or doing something amazing, it's not hard work, it's not technique, it's natural athleticism. The commentators make it seem as if they don't have to work as hard, and that they're no skill hacks with a nack for whacking a ball- the wrong way.


all those points are true

serena and venus have terrible technique,the only reason they can pull it off is because of their strength and athletecism. its part of the reason they have so many injuries

BuTtErFrEnA
Jul 4th, 2008, 10:58 AM
all those points are true

serena and venus have terrible technique,the only reason they can pull it off is because of their strength and athletecism. its part of the reason they have so many injuries

:haha: yea ok