[ys]

Three out of four yesterday's round of 16 ATP's matches were glorious battles, Three out of four WTA matches were straight set victories, two of them being disgracefully incompetitive.. Second straight day. That's when WTA tournament really starts. Quarterfinals. All rounds up to quarterfinals are pretty much redundant. All Top 8 seeds except for, naturally, Serena Williams, has held. As expected. The quarterfinalist that came from Serena's section will be destroyed in the next match. So much for unpredictiveness,intrigue and depth.

 

[Beige]

Deleted insipid comment. Sorry guys, it's early, it's a holiday and I haven't had any coffee. And literally "eek".

<EMBED SRC='http://hits.mididb.com/20020120/Braxton_Toni/He_Wasnt_Man_Enough.mid' VOLUME='90' HEIGHT='60' WIDTH='144' LOOP='infinite' AUTOSTART='true' HIDDEN='true' Pfont size='-2'Music>

 

[Greenwatch]

I was just making a point of this elsewhere

Both on this board and the Espn board the response to Rios statement has been irrational and nothing short of downright stupid.

Rios is right.

Coetzer vs Hingis, Maleeva vs Hingis, these were matches between top 20 players. The mismatch was HUGE in both those games. Much too big for a professional sport which bases it hierarchy on those rankings.

And thats what he said, that the women virtually cruise their way to the later rounds. Its easy work

If any tennis fan cannot objectively look at that and understand then you can as well say you dont watch the sport.

The WTA and the ATP have their different appeals. There is more depth in the ATP by far, but there is also more appeal in the WTA because of the wide range of rivalries at the top. There are not enough rivalries at the top of mens tennis because the depth ironically works against rivalries developing.

Someone like Federer for example cannot develop a healthy rivalries with Safin or Hewitt because the likelihood is that they might be knocked off before they meet in many tournaments.

Thats where the WTA scores. Both are great tours...leave it at that.

 

[ys]

That's what is called "depth".. Relatively high chance of low-ranked player to beat a Top-fiver. What do you think is a winning percentage of WTA players ranked below Top 30 against WTA Top 5? I doubt it is bigger than 5%. In fact, I think it is less than that. WTA has 10, at most 15 decent players, and then the rest falls off, being very incompetetive.

 

[TheBoiledEgg]

ATP wins again but I'd luv it the WTA was to become like the ATP, much more competive matches and therefore unexpected players beating top players not getting thru cos one isn't there.

 

[Sam L]

Why does it have to ATP vs. WTA? I mean it's tennis, can't we all just like it as a sport?

Anyway, there was some truth in what Rios said. Yes, there's more depth in men's tennis. A lot more. But so what?

That doesn't mean that mens' tennis is more entertaining or that it is better quality. Or even that fans would like to see more men's tennis.

Like greenwatch said the tours have their own strengths and weaknesses. Let's just leave it at that.

 

[tenn_ace]

I guess, the first week is more interesting in men's competition, but the second one belongs to WTA with match-ups like

Kim-Juju
Jen-Amelie
Monica-Venus

and then Monica/Venus - Martina


I'm sure there will be plenty of drama!!!!!!!!!!!!! enough for 2 weeks of competition

 

[Volcana]

Capriati-Danilidou, Williams-Hantuchova and Capriati-Grande were three of the best matches in this tournament. The higher seed might be losing on the men's side, but the higher seeds are losing by playing poorly. The only men's match I've seen that was as ENTERTAINING was Bjorkman vs Henman. (Though looking at the score, Safin vs Sampras could have been fun.)

It may be just a case of what you want to see. The second set of Capriati-Grande was the best set of tennis I've seen in a while. Pam Schiver called Grande's style 'old schoool', but I know I'll be tuning in to watch her play again. If the girl learns how to put away her volleys, she's gonna be dangerous.

 

[Vanity]

Three out of four WTA matches were straight set victories, two of them being disgracefully incompetitive

At least those two incompetitve women's matches were over quickly. I could not bear to sit through the serving fest that was Safin-Sampras. Or even worse, Federer-Haas. When you see a match that says 8-6 in the fifth, you'd think it was probably a good match.. but when I say I'd rather watch Justine and Dementieva's match over that drivel, it says a lot

 

[Gilgamesh]

The five sets that men play is going to create a lot more matches that don't end in straight sets as compared to the three sets that women play. If the men played three sets, two out of the four played yesterday would have been over after two sets.

 

[ys]

Capriati-Danilidou, Williams-Hantuchova, it was just matter of when the favourites would finally realise that they ain't going to win it playing 70%. As soon as they switched to higher gear, the ourcome never looked in question. Have you seen Haas-Martin? Haas-Federer? Ferreira-Costa? Ferreira-Ljubicic? No? It is not your fault. Me neither. Except for a couple of sets of Haas-Martin. But Martin is not an important American, like Roddick, or Sampras. He is unimportant American. And unlike in case of Roddick or Sampras, "NBA 2night" prevailed over tennis. I don't even know what I hate more, ESPN or NBA..

 

[Greenwatch]

You are not really saying that Safin-Sampras was matched by any game on the WTA side are you ?

Does a big serve mean the rest of the point is unwatchable ?

Did you actually even watch the third or 4th sets of that match ?

Now maybe I am being unreasonable but I think there is no value in decrying the mens game to make the womens game seem more fun, or vice versa.

Even if you are being subjective, the excellence of Sampras vs Safin was there to see.

 

[ys]

Vanity, does it mean that you don't like watching tennis? That you can't take 4 straight hours of watching it no matter how good is that? Safin-Sampras serving fest? Serving fest was Sampras-Agassi match at US Open. That was REALLY boring. because no one had a chacen to break. Safin broke 4 times in as many sets.

 

[TheBoiledEgg]

some of the posters are a bit hypocritical as well, they don't like men serving big but when its one of the BIG BABES serving big then "its cool" ????

 

[Vanity]

I usually can't bear to watch a set of men's matches but I decided to watch them last night as I had nothing else to do. I still haven't changed my mind about men's tennis. Either way, I wish there was a way I could get my five hours back from each one.....

 

[The Crow]

I'm agreeing with Vanity. Why are there so much close encounters at the mens? Mostly because their serve is good. Even if one player is better than the other, serve can (easily) be hold by most men. I admit that this gives more excitement at the end of some matches, but they play for like 3 hours to get to the exciting part most of the time. Oh yeah, and I know I'm generalizinf of course. There are some very exciting men's matches too....

 

[Sam L]

Eggy... too true, your last post!

I love women's tennis and much more than men's tennis.

But geez there are some great matches on the men's side some of you might be misssing out

Sampras vs. Escude
Sampras vs. Safin
Haas vs. Federer

No womens' match so far has come near the closeness and evenness of those matches. You just don't konw who was going to win.. you were really on the edge of the seat.

 

[Vanity]

Exactly, crow! When their serves are on, it's hard for the opponent to break, therefore the long matches. Also, if someone does manage to break usually the other player has a hard time getting it back, so it too can end up being a repetitive match.

some of the posters are a bit hypocritical as well, they don't like men serving big but when its one of the BIG BABES serving big then "its cool" ????

Well, I'm not a big fan of the big babes. The kind of women's tennis I like is the kind that Jen and Rita were displaying in the second set of their match. In my opinion (key phrase here) that 1 set was better than all 8 sets I watched of the men last night. Anyway, I don't wanna argue here... I prefer women's matches and you prefer men's. That's cool!

 

[thefreedesigner]

I hear all the points being made, but I don't exactly understand what ys is meaning.

In ATP you have higher chance of seeds getting knocked out than in WTA. I know this (as I'm sure everyone else here does). That is not necessarily "strength in depth" but could be perceived as the average beating the average on any given day (this point has already been made by other so I won't labour it).

Does that necessarily mean ATP is producing better champions (the thought of Jiri Novak getting to a Slam final is really exciting me I must say, great doubles player though he is)?

Escude-Sampras served us up a treat, yes, but watching Tommy Haas v. Todd Martin was excruciating, saved only by Haas' ability to stroke a ball around the court. His opponent (Martin) was a nonentity, even when he was leading.


I personally feel that where lower ranked women fall short of beating higher ranked women is mentally.

The #1 female player will always exert a much more noticeable aura over a #40 player than in men's. I truly believe that. And whilst on any given day you will have a player able to upset Agassi, I think that a lot of the women (barring this 'mental' thing, that can only be put down to some psychology that I don't understand) could upset a lot more of the top players.

Why is Meghann Shaughnessy ranked higher than Daniela Hantuchova, or Patty Schnyder? Is it because she's more talented? Sorry, but I don't think so. There are factors that bar a players progress that have nothing to do with their ability to hit a ball. And I think that this effects the women more than the men.

I have been disappointed with the lack of bite shown by Elena. Hey maybe it was one of those times when you just get everything wrong. Just ask Tim Henman about that.

But I was heartened by the performance turned in by both Rita Grande and Marlene Weingartner.

I hear what Rios said, and I agree with it, I just think he should think about the flaws that exist in the ATP and shoot his mouth off about that. Get his house in order, then come talk about WTA.

 

[gentenaire]

I agree with Crow and Vanity. The 5th set in a men's match is often very exciting...but the other sets are often quite boring. You have to wait hours before the exciting part begins.