Joined
·
394 Posts
Just because there aren't enough Masha threads here.... 
This is from Jon Wertheim's column this week at SI. Do you all agree or disagree that Maria is the best thing to happen to women's tennis in a long time?
I don't think she's THE best thing but her win over Serena at Wimby was very encouraging for women's tennis; I just hope she doesn't turn out to be a one-hit wonder.
And also, the fact that Maria was "made in the USA" might have something to do with the fact that she's on Sports Illustrated.
Re: Myskina; the women's FO this year is something we should all just strike from our memory banks. :ras:
Martina Navratilova stated last week that Sharapova's Wimbledon victory was the best thing that could*have*happened to women's tennis. Why? Where was all the hoopla when Anastasia Myskina became the first Russian woman to win a Grand Slam title?*Why weren't*Justine Henin-Hardenne's victories in the previous three Grand Slams considered great for women's tennis?
-- Nikki, Cincinnati
We got several questions making the same point, and it's one worth discussing. Playing devil's advocate, one could point out that Sharapova is young (17), completely bilingual and doesn't mind the spotlight. Playing in her first Grand Slam final, she stared down Serena, the dominant force in women's tennis. That is grounds not just for "hoopla" but for justified "hoopla." But yes, you're right. There's a faintly icky feeling that a lot of the attention is*owed to the fact she looks like (and is) a model. If she achieves the identical feat but stands 5-foot-3 and has braces, is she "the best thing that could have happened to women's tennis?" Is the WTA turning cartwheels? For that matter, is she on the cover of Sports Illustrated? Some of this -- perhaps sadly -- is the "reality of the marketplace." Women's sports have yet to get to the point where athletes are judged solely on their merits. That's been made clear time and again. For Navratilova to be among those perpetuating the cycle is, at the very least, ironic.
This is from Jon Wertheim's column this week at SI. Do you all agree or disagree that Maria is the best thing to happen to women's tennis in a long time?
I don't think she's THE best thing but her win over Serena at Wimby was very encouraging for women's tennis; I just hope she doesn't turn out to be a one-hit wonder.
And also, the fact that Maria was "made in the USA" might have something to do with the fact that she's on Sports Illustrated.
Re: Myskina; the women's FO this year is something we should all just strike from our memory banks. :ras:
Martina Navratilova stated last week that Sharapova's Wimbledon victory was the best thing that could*have*happened to women's tennis. Why? Where was all the hoopla when Anastasia Myskina became the first Russian woman to win a Grand Slam title?*Why weren't*Justine Henin-Hardenne's victories in the previous three Grand Slams considered great for women's tennis?
-- Nikki, Cincinnati
We got several questions making the same point, and it's one worth discussing. Playing devil's advocate, one could point out that Sharapova is young (17), completely bilingual and doesn't mind the spotlight. Playing in her first Grand Slam final, she stared down Serena, the dominant force in women's tennis. That is grounds not just for "hoopla" but for justified "hoopla." But yes, you're right. There's a faintly icky feeling that a lot of the attention is*owed to the fact she looks like (and is) a model. If she achieves the identical feat but stands 5-foot-3 and has braces, is she "the best thing that could have happened to women's tennis?" Is the WTA turning cartwheels? For that matter, is she on the cover of Sports Illustrated? Some of this -- perhaps sadly -- is the "reality of the marketplace." Women's sports have yet to get to the point where athletes are judged solely on their merits. That's been made clear time and again. For Navratilova to be among those perpetuating the cycle is, at the very least, ironic.