PDA

View Full Version : that bullshit about the men having more depth


Fingon
Aug 28th, 2002, 03:30 AM
whatever, they are comparing top women players playing qualifier with average ATP players.

The only exception with two top ATP players having a close match was Safin - Kiefer, what about Agassi? Lleyton Hewitt? they didn't struggle much did they?

We did have a close match involving a top player in the women's side, Martina vs. Marissa Irvin.

oh yes, Capriati double bagels a qualifier who got a wild card into qualifying, and Igor Kunitzin vs. Noam Okum went to 4 sets!!!

give me a fucking break, Danilidou vs Nagyova went to 3 sets and many other women's matches.

They are twisting the comparissons to make women look bad and boring.

Plus, the men play 5 sets, in a five sets match is very common to drop a set, it's more difficult to win in straight sets, a 4 sets match isn't necessarily a close match.

And notice that many of the long men's matches involve a clay specialist.

It's time that Courier and co. stop talking trash, I think Courier should dedicate his life to poetry instead :( :( :(

PD: I am too lazy to bring the result, but just check the US Open site and you'll get what I mean.

Plus, 7 men's matches ended before time due to injuries, exciting isn't it?

2284
Aug 28th, 2002, 03:32 AM
Long matches can also mean that both players are playing badly and making a lot of unforced errors. Personally, I enjoy watching the top players in such good form that they barely drop a game

disposablehero
Aug 28th, 2002, 03:34 AM
Another reason why the Men's tour has more "depth". Thanks to the "Tennis Masters Series" events being compulsory to your ranking, anyone not ranked high enough to make the Main Draws of those events has a huge disadvantage in trying to build their ranking.

2284
Aug 28th, 2002, 03:46 AM
...then after that the womens game becomes more interesting because so many of the men have been injured. What's the deal with all the injuries? Phillippousis was the only one I saw (he fell, re-injuring his knee. It looked painful)

kay
Aug 28th, 2002, 04:52 AM
the men's game has no depth. Theyre all on the same level and they dont have a tremendous amount of talent. There are no young Beckers, Samprases or Agassis. They are all capable of playing really good one day and horribly the next, and the commentators try to pass it off as depth. Im not buying.

kay
Aug 28th, 2002, 04:54 AM
Btw, that marathon match that theyre all talking about should have been over in three sets, but as usual Marat is a nutcase. That match only got interesting in the 5th set, the first four was a display of Marat gone mad.

2284
Aug 28th, 2002, 04:56 AM
Do they call this depth?

In general:
If Hewitt is playing and is well, he wins.
If he's not playing or not well, Agassi or Safin win.

If a top male player plays a much lower ranked player - straight sets win, just like in the womens' tournament

disposablehero
Aug 28th, 2002, 04:59 AM
Another way to describe depth is "No matter how crappy you are you will still hold serve at least half the time because you can crank them up over 120."

2284
Aug 28th, 2002, 05:00 AM
LMAO!

Williams Rulez
Aug 28th, 2002, 08:21 AM
We should get Brian S in here... ;)

And I agree... all this bull about men's game having more depth... I don't really buy it.

gentenaire
Aug 28th, 2002, 08:45 AM
It's true that you won't see as many bagels in men's matches, but in the men's game, serve has an even bigger impact than in the women's game. Quite often in the men's game, one break of serve means the end of the set. You'll get a lot more rebreaks in the women's game and I find that a lot more exciting.

juggler
Aug 28th, 2002, 10:37 AM
mens tennis is much deeper than womens. anyone who suggests otherwise is living in a fantasy land. you only have to look at the betting odds now for the tournament winner in mens and womens draw.

in the mens draw there are 24 players rated a better than 50-1 chance of winning. in the womens draw there are 10 at better than 50-1.

this shows that once you go past the top 10 in the women it thins out very quickly.

i think alot of ppl here get confused betwen depth...and level of interest. i agree womens tennis is more interesting for me because of the rivalries and personalities...but depth it doesnt compare.

Lucie
Aug 28th, 2002, 11:52 AM
mens tennis has way more depth than women's tennis, who are you lot trying to kid??

Greenout
Aug 28th, 2002, 12:08 PM
How can you even compare Safin vs Kiefer to Jenn's
match against a WC qualifer!!

Kiefer is suppose to be in the top 10. He's Tommy's
arch rival. It's no surprise that it went to a 5 setter.

The qualifer Jenn played is 17 years old!! and ranked
in the 400's!! This girls is officially the "lowest" ranked
player to EVER play the US OPEN. There is no
comparison to the Safin match. Geez.

Nimi
Aug 28th, 2002, 12:17 PM
True. But why did you remided of the Okun/Kunitzin match? That was between two qualifiers (obviously the better one won ;)).

Men's tennis has lots of depth. Well you can call whatever you like to call it & i will just say this... THREE DOUBLE BAGELS IN ONE ROUND!!!
Venus/Mirijana? That could be a Haas/Spadea match, & i promise you that there wont be one bagle set there, not talking about two.

The point is: Some people find "Unpredictble" more attractive, like me, some people find "More predictble" more attractive, like 90% of this massage board.

Greenout
Aug 28th, 2002, 12:27 PM
I like a good match just like everyone else..
Blakey vs Paradorn was really fun a couple of
weeks ago; but not total blanket coverage
leaving women's matches with crumbs of air time.
I admit seeing a helpless qualifier get the, as
they say in Japan- the "Maru Maru" or "0,0"
isn't the highlight of the event- but I still like
to see the seeded stars...ALL of THEM.

Hulet
Aug 28th, 2002, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Niminator
True. But why did you remided of the Okun/Kunitzin match? That was between two qualifiers (obviously the better one won ;)).

Men's tennis has lots of depth. Well you can call whatever you like to call it & i will just say this... THREE DOUBLE BAGELS IN ONE ROUND!!!
Venus/Mirijana? That could be a Haas/Spadea match, & i promise you that there wont be one bagle set there, not talking about two.

The point is: Some people find "Unpredictble" more attractive, like me, some people find "More predictble" more attractive, like 90% of this massage board.

I don't like predictability either but, by the same token, I really hate unpredictability when it becomes so random that there is no pattern to it. A total chaos where unknown players win a slam and got upset/tank in the first round in the next tournament to another unknown player is also a turn off.

A fair comparison for the safin-keifer "marathon" should be the hingis-irvin match; both safin and hingis should have finished the match in straight sets if they were on top of their game or weren't tight.

Nimi
Aug 28th, 2002, 12:42 PM
No pattern? That means that Agassi's, Hewitt's & Moya's four titles this year arent a "pattern"?