PDA

View Full Version : Todays women much bigger than 70s men.


kiwifan
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:09 PM
I'm watching the tennis channel and at first I thought it was a mixed doubles match but it was all men. :lol:

Today's female player has more muscle tone, bigger shoulders and legs and a bigger swing than many of the guys had back in the 70s.

The guys have better hustle (reaction, move, new reaction, etc...) and probably aren't the "mental cases in the clutch" we seemed to have bred in the 2010s WTA.

Human evolution is something else. :cool:

moby
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:11 PM
Modern equipment selects for a different breed of players. You take an enormous swing with a wooden racket and you'll probably mistime your shot and the ball will fly into the stands. Tennis these days tilts the balance towards raw athletic skill.

TheHangover
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:14 PM
please don't embarrass yourself

Apoleb
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:20 PM
It seems buffing up and building muscle isn't a very hard thing to do for the players of nowadays. Stosur, Jankovic, Henin and many others transformed their body make up almost overnight.

I'm not suggesting that they are doping, but the science of buffing up through a specific training requirement and nutrition has certainly moved on from the 1970s.

Chrissie-fan
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:21 PM
Modern equipment selects for a different breed of players. You take an enormous swing with a wooden racket and you'll probably mistime your shot and the ball will fly into the stands. Tennis these days tilts the balance towards raw athletic skill.
I agree 100%

pov
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:31 PM
If you're talking only about pro tennis then maybe. I think a more athletic set of people go pro nowadays and many certainly spend more time on their strength conditioning.

oomph
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:36 PM
I'm watching the tennis channel and at first I thought it was a mixed doubles match but it was all men. :lol:

Today's female player has more muscle tone, bigger shoulders and legs and a bigger swing than many of the guys had back in the 70s.

The guys have better hustle (reaction, move, new reaction, etc...) and probably aren't the "mental cases in the clutch" we seemed to have bred in the 2010s WTA.

Human evolution is something else. :cool:

Me thinks, you don't know what evolution means.

Kworb
Jun 15th, 2011, 07:38 PM
Calling this human evolution :facepalm:

kiwifan
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:29 PM
I feel sorry for the few of you who just have to hang on every word and hate on every friggin' post...

...go outside and try to make a friend. :devil:

For those of you who know what I meant and get what I'm saying...

...thank you for your participation. :wavey:

edificio
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:31 PM
I'm watching the tennis channel and at first I thought it was a mixed doubles match but it was all men. :lol:

Today's female player has more muscle tone, bigger shoulders and legs and a bigger swing than many of the guys had back in the 70s.

The guys have better hustle (reaction, move, new reaction, etc...) and probably aren't the "mental cases in the clutch" we seemed to have bred in the 2010s WTA.

Human evolution is something else. :cool:

So your whole point was to denigrate the women? :rolleyes:

kiwifan
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:33 PM
So your whole point was to denigrate the women? :rolleyes:

Those who look to be offended tend to be offended, not my problem. ;)

starin
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:38 PM
Those who look to be offended tend to be offended, not my problem. ;)

classic defense of the guilty.

And :shrug: at this thread. Tennis was a pansy upper class sport for a long time. There were plenty of athletic sports stars back then, they just weren't playing tennis. Those players back then are the reason why tennis is still stuck with the reputation of not being a "real" sport.

edificio
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:43 PM
Those who look to be offended tend to be offended, not my problem. ;)

I'm not offended. Try harder.:rolleyes:

I'm just highlighting what seems to be your point.

liuxuan
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:45 PM
fair enough but as has been said its probably due to requirements of making shots with todays racquets - if you look at jarmila kratochvilova and marita koch compared to the top female sprinters nowadays they ar much more muscular and masculine - obv because they wee on the roids!

Timariot
Jun 15th, 2011, 10:52 PM
Modern equipment selects for a different breed of players. You take an enormous swing with a wooden racket and you'll probably mistime your shot and the ball will fly into the stands. Tennis these days tilts the balance towards raw athletic skill.

Exactly. Another factor are the courts. In the past, few big guys or gals were successful in tennis, because the game did just not favour being tall and strong.

If you put someone like Sharapova against some 80s or 90s top 5 player (not even necessarily Graf/Seles etc) with contemporary racquets and balls, on fast indoor carpet, she is going to die.

In fact, anyone who watched Bali last year saw taste of that. It was hilarious to see Ivanovic struggle handling Kimiko's offensive game. She looked so clumsy and clueless, fish out of water.

Volcana
Jun 15th, 2011, 11:11 PM
Modern equipment selects for a different breed of players. You take an enormous swing with a wooden racket and you'll probably mistime your shot and the ball will fly into the stands. Tennis these days tilts the balance towards raw athletic skill.100% agree.

On top of that are two factors rarely accounted for. Sexism and Homophobia. And maybe a third, that I will call, The Rise of the Professional Athlete.

In the 1970's, sports was not a pursuit that was encouraged for girls in the USA. It was not 'feminine'. A girl's job was to find a husband to support her. So a lot of girls who might have done well as athletes never even tried.

Which leads to #2. If a girl did well in sports, the rumors started pretty fast that she was gay. Which in the 1970's meant the risk of being totally shunned. And you certainly would NOT make the ancillary money in sponsorships a straight girl might get.

So you have fewer wonen playing sports. Add to that, in the 1960's, in virtually every sport except baseball, most 'pro' athletes worked 'day' jobs. Professional athletics was NOT a multi-million dollar profession. And a lot of tennis players were, to be blunt, smugglers. Since they traveled internationally, it was easy for them to carry illicit goods without being suspected.

So you have fewer guys playing sports.

Serena Williams dwarfs Rod Laver. Yet Laver is the man who won the Grand Slam twice. (In between, he missed about 25 slams because he turned pro, and this was just before Open Tennis.

1960's- 70's equipment, and surfaces, favored finesse. Today's equipment, and surfaces, favor power. Suzanne Lenglen, trained as she was, would have faired poorly in today's game. And Serena, trained as SHE was, would have faired poorly in Lenglen's time.

bbjpa
Jun 15th, 2011, 11:20 PM
That's why I don't understand all thoses complains about WTA today. We all know that today any top 50 if not 100 player would have easilly beaten all 70 and even 80s top players :lol:

I saw recently a Borg-Lendl match that was :lol: :weirdo:

Chrissie-fan
Jun 15th, 2011, 11:37 PM
That's why I don't understand all thoses complains about WTA today. We all know that today any top 50 if not 100 player would have easilly beaten all 70 and even 80s top players :lol:

Why today? Those oldies played with different equipment. If you look at it one way you also have to look at it the other way. How would todays players have done against those oldies if they had to play with THEIR material - standard frame, heavy, wooden racquets with a tiny sweet spot that leave no room for error and with which it's impossible to generate anywhere near the same amount of power.

terjw
Jun 16th, 2011, 12:09 AM
Why today? Those oldies played with different equipment. If you look at it one way you also have to look at it the other way. How would todays players have done against those oldies if they had to play with THEIR material - standard frame, heavy, wooden racquets with a tiny sweet spot that leave no room for error and with which it's impossible to generate anywhere near the same amount of power.

Exactly.

LCS
Jun 16th, 2011, 12:14 AM
Modern equipment selects for a different breed of players. You take an enormous swing with a wooden racket and you'll probably mistime your shot and the ball will fly into the stands. Tennis these days tilts the balance towards raw athletic skill.

And maybe because as generations go by the average of heights increases?

Statistically children outgrow their parents, generally because of better living conditions (food, hygiene, pregnancy surveillance, etc)

Ally that to enhanced fitness programmes and you get today's sports' beasts compared to the midgets from 40 years ago.

:)

goldenlox
Jun 16th, 2011, 12:16 AM
I dont know what it means because Henin isnt big, Zvonareva, Schiavone, Stosur.
Being tall or heavy isnt a requirement.
Navratilova had muscles, and I'm sure she wasnt the only muscular player then.
Nowadays there are plenty like Chakvetadze, Mirza, Cibulkova, Zheng, Cornet. The rank & file has plenty of average size women

oomph
Jun 16th, 2011, 12:45 AM
That's why I don't understand all thoses complains about WTA today. We all know that today any top 50 if not 100 player would have easilly beaten all 70 and even 80s top players :lol:

I saw recently a Borg-Lendl match that was :lol: :weirdo:

Genius, try doing that with those rackets. :facepalm:

Also, lol at the liberal bullshit here. :lol:

gc-spurs
Jun 16th, 2011, 12:58 AM
Same goes for many other sports. Look at your tall thin bball players of the past and compare them with your Dwight Howards and Blake Griffins. During All Star Weekend the commies were discussing this- Blake Griffin described as 'muscles having their own muscles'.

LDVTennis
Jun 16th, 2011, 01:53 AM
Modern equipment selects for a different breed of players. You take an enormous swing with a wooden racket and you'll probably mistime your shot and the ball will fly into the stands. Tennis these days tilts the balance towards raw athletic skill.

It tilts the balance to big women (BW's).

The 70's men still have more raw athletic skill than the BW's of today's WTA.

Raiden
Jun 16th, 2011, 10:54 AM
That's why I don't understand all thoses complains about WTA today. We all know that today any top 50 if not 100 player would have easilly beaten all 70 and even 80s top playersNo they wouldn't have.

Ten years ago the Williams sisters had your opinion and bragged that they could beat men... then they were blown off court by a cigarette smoking, beer drinking injured guy ranked below top-200 on the ATP tour.

kiwifan
Jun 18th, 2011, 06:04 AM
classic defense of the guilty.

And :shrug: at this thread. Tennis was a pansy upper class sport for a long time. There were plenty of athletic sports stars back then, they just weren't playing tennis. Those players back then are the reason why tennis is still stuck with the reputation of not being a "real" sport.

Guilty of what? :confused:

The funny thing is everything else you posted is pretty much what my point is...was. :cool:

Don't see why so many dork posters act like friggin' victims looking for revenge. :weirdo:

Just looking to have a nice light pre-Wimbledon chat. :angel:

But I guess that's not really possible in this place. :rolleyes:

kiwifan
Jun 18th, 2011, 06:09 AM
100% agree.

On top of that are two factors rarely accounted for. Sexism and Homophobia. And maybe a third, that I will call, The Rise of the Professional Athlete.

In the 1970's, sports was not a pursuit that was encouraged for girls in the USA. It was not 'feminine'. A girl's job was to find a husband to support her. So a lot of girls who might have done well as athletes never even tried.

Which leads to #2. If a girl did well in sports, the rumors started pretty fast that she was gay. Which in the 1970's meant the risk of being totally shunned. And you certainly would NOT make the ancillary money in sponsorships a straight girl might get.

So you have fewer wonen playing sports. Add to that, in the 1960's, in virtually every sport except baseball, most 'pro' athletes worked 'day' jobs. Professional athletics was NOT a multi-million dollar profession. And a lot of tennis players were, to be blunt, smugglers. Since they traveled internationally, it was easy for them to carry illicit goods without being suspected.

So you have fewer guys playing sports.

Serena Williams dwarfs Rod Laver. Yet Laver is the man who won the Grand Slam twice. (In between, he missed about 25 slams because he turned pro, and this was just before Open Tennis.

1960's- 70's equipment, and surfaces, favored finesse. Today's equipment, and surfaces, favor power. Suzanne Lenglen, trained as she was, would have faired poorly in today's game. And Serena, trained as SHE was, would have faired poorly in Lenglen's time.

Bravo!!! :worship:

Is it really that hard to have an intelligent conversation, here? :p

I'll keep it on facebook in the future, I guess. :tape: :tape: :tape:

And those of you who know who you are...even you J friggin' R...THANKS :hug:

KBlade
Jun 18th, 2011, 06:36 AM
No they wouldn't have.

Ten years ago the Williams sisters had your opinion and bragged that they could beat men... then they were blown off court by a cigarette smoking, beer drinking injured guy ranked below top-200 on the ATP tour.

We're talking 30 or 40 years ago here. There's no doubt that today's female players would still probably have no chance against Top Male players from the 90's.

Heck, even some of today's top female players would struggle handling top female players from the 90's.