Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Serena no better than man ranked #700?

349 views
Skip to first unread message

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 2:28:33 PM6/26/17
to
I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked "something like 700" if she played against men. He added that he thought he still had a chance against her now at age 58.

So in the last couple of days, articles have sprung up everywhere about it. Most of them seem to be one-sided commentary written by rabid feminists launching ad hominim attacks upon McEnroe without effectively countering what he said.

The ranking thing is a no-brainer, though the general public and even a lot of casual tennis viewers don't realize it. In an otherwise sensible response to an article in the Washington Post, a person said that of course Serena would beat the #700 man or even the #100 man but maybe not top 20. I stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks she'd beat #100 is an idiot as far as tennis is concerned.

The feminist writers were quick to cite the 1973 "Battle of the Sexes" as proof that Serena would beat Old McEnroe. They conveniently forget (always) that Old Riggs beat Court before the BJK match. That said, I really don't believe Old Mac would have much chance of beating Serena. I think he could trade shots with her and deal with her serve, but he'd have the same problem Riggs did. BJK decided to run him to death for 3 sets instead of playing serve-and-volley as she normally would. It worked.

Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.

TT

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 2:35:36 PM6/26/17
to
Does this mean that Mac thinks he'd be ranked around 700 on men's tour...

PeteWasLucky

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 2:46:39 PM6/26/17
to
Is McEnroe suggesting to combine the wta and ATP?

Carey

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 2:52:53 PM6/26/17
to
I'd love to see Mac play Serena. I think he'd beat her easily. How's she gonna
get his serve back, for starters? Number 700? Hell, I've known guys ranked
under 1000 that I'd bet on over S in a heartbeat.

grif

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 2:53:07 PM6/26/17
to

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 3:23:32 PM6/26/17
to
I haven't seen Mac's serve recently. Is it really more of a bomb than the best women's serves these days? If she can return it consistently, he'd have problems, because movement would be an issue for him. I agree with you that it would be worth seeing to find out how it would really unfold. But Serena would never agree to play him because she wouldn't gain much by winning and a loss would be devastating.

With the top 1000 as a measuring stick, one has to think back to the infamous Williams-Braasch matches of 1998. Now to be fair, Serena's game has improved since then and she's won a bunch of slams along the way. But still...by Braasch's account, he was only serving about half-speed (to keep it fun) and still beat both sisters easily. When asked about their chances against men in the top 1000, he said, "Anyone in the top 500, no way...because I was playing like number 600 today." Probably an accurate assessment then and now.

Carey

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 3:47:35 PM6/26/17
to
I think SW probably serves harder now than Mac, but he was/is a spot server, as you know. I think he'd mainly serve her wide-and-wide, throwing in a few up the middle to keep her honest. As for movement, that can't be disputed... 58 is 58.
Again, i'd love to see it, but yeah, she'd never do it. Mac is wacky enough
to, though. 3 and 4 for him at 58 is my call.

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 4:03:39 PM6/26/17
to
McEnroe told a story once of playing against Venus in a mixed-doubles match. She was standing up near the service line to return, apparently assuming that with him being an "old guy," she could eat his serve up. This understandably pissed Mac off somewhat, so in his words, "I still had enough confidence in my serve to show her a few things." He was right, and told her on the next break, "Keep standing up there to return, Venus. I like you there." And that remark she didn't appreciate. :) He's even older now, but the wide serve and kick might still give Serena some problems, yes. As I said, I haven't seen his recent form. Interesting that you feel he'd win. In his 40s, he'd have taken her apart easily. But 58 is getting up there for an athlete.

Carey

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 4:10:50 PM6/26/17
to
Yeah, it is, and I can't pretend to be unbiased... I like(d) his game a whole lot, and try to keep up with his stuff on the Seniors. He still just *hates* to
lose, heh.

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 5:52:48 PM6/26/17
to
I agree. If for no other reason than the matchup. Serena loves pace and Mac would drive her crazy with all his variety. I think he has her beat in other departments as well.

stephenJ

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 5:56:22 PM6/26/17
to
> On 6/26/2017 1:28 PM, Gracchus wrote:

> I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked >"something like 700" if she played against men.

If anything, Mac was being generous to Serena. I've seen guys ranked
around #700 play, and IMO they would easily defeat any female player.






---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Whisper

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 9:58:39 PM6/26/17
to
Everyone knows this. This is just Mac trying to flog his new book.

No other sport directly compares women to men, so why tennis? Is it
because they think tennis is a sissy sport?

I still comfortably beat 19 yr old girls who were borderline considering
turning pro a couple of yrs ago, & were beating some of the girls who
qualified for AO main draw this yr.

Having said that I'd love to see Mac at 58 playing Serena. My instincts
tell me he'd have too many options & beat her 62 62, but I could be
wrong & she rams home her serve/power & edges him 64 64? Be fun to watch.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Whisper

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:03:35 PM6/26/17
to
Yes, guys can make girls look great by hitting into their zones, but it
doesn't take much to completely dominate if they played to win every point.

Having said that there is curiosity value in aging greats like Mac
playing the best current girls. The tennis would be a lot more
interesting than most of the regular tour imo. Somebody (Tiriac?)
should set up a little side tour with interesting matches like this.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:07:40 PM6/26/17
to
Serena has enough money to not be enticed, but as you say it's a shame
as it would boost tennis. Sure the hecklers will mock the women for
losing to 'old farts', but it's the tennis aspect that would be
fascinating to watch.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:10:29 PM6/26/17
to
Yes I'm not convinced Mac could do it at 58 - maybe her power could keep
him on the backfoot?

Come on we all wanna see matches like this! Look at the TV rights $$
they make from boxing - surely there would be a lot of interest & big $$
to be made from these young women/old men contests?

jdeluise

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:11:03 PM6/26/17
to
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:10:22 +1000, Whisper wrote:

> Yes I'm not convinced Mac could do it at 58 - maybe her power could keep
> him on the backfoot?

Maybe he'd have a chance against a pregnant Serena?

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:20:48 PM6/26/17
to
On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 9:58:39 PM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> On 27/06/2017 4:28 AM, Gracchus wrote:
> > I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked "something like 700" if she played against men. He added that he thought he still had a chance against her now at age 58.
> >
> > So in the last couple of days, articles have sprung up everywhere about it. Most of them seem to be one-sided commentary written by rabid feminists launching ad hominim attacks upon McEnroe without effectively countering what he said.
> >
> > The ranking thing is a no-brainer, though the general public and even a lot of casual tennis viewers don't realize it. In an otherwise sensible response to an article in the Washington Post, a person said that of course Serena would beat the #700 man or even the #100 man but maybe not top 20. I stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks she'd beat #100 is an idiot as far as tennis is concerned.
> >
> > The feminist writers were quick to cite the 1973 "Battle of the Sexes" as proof that Serena would beat Old McEnroe. They conveniently forget (always) that Old Riggs beat Court before the BJK match. That said, I really don't believe Old Mac would have much chance of beating Serena. I think he could trade shots with her and deal with her serve, but he'd have the same problem Riggs did. BJK decided to run him to death for 3 sets instead of playing serve-and-volley as she normally would. It worked.
> >
> > Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
> >
>
> Everyone knows this. This is just Mac trying to flog his new book.
>
> No other sport directly compares women to men, so why tennis? Is it
> because they think tennis is a sissy sport?
>

I think all these debates for women having the same prize money as men are primarily responsible for these comparisons?

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:22:35 PM6/26/17
to
Serena is no spring chicken either. Besides, I think Mac has kept himself in pretty good shape.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 26, 2017, 10:22:42 PM6/26/17
to
Yes, very good point. Men earn more than women in all other sports.

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 12:41:49 AM6/27/17
to
The tennis viewing public would love to see it and I'll bet a lot of the old guys would be willing. But a couple of major impediments: (1) female pros that don't want to risk getting shown up (2) the governing bodies of women's tennis, which don't want to risk lasting harm and subsequent loss of money on their side. Just imagine if a number of these matches were set up and the old men consistently made mincemeat of top-ranking women pros.

ahonkan

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:40:38 AM6/27/17
to
On Monday, 26 June 2017 23:58:33 UTC+5:30, Gracchus wrote:

> Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.

If women are so much worse, won't you find only the women getting attacked
and broken all the time in Mixed Doubles matches? That doesn't happen.

Murray's second serve is usually slower than Serena's. Agreed it's just one
part of the game, but powerful players like Serena, Azarenka & Kvitova won't
exactly be pushovers for men ranked below, say, 500.

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 2:29:59 AM6/27/17
to
On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 10:40:38 PM UTC-7, ahonkan wrote:
> On Monday, 26 June 2017 23:58:33 UTC+5:30, Gracchus wrote:
>
> > Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
>
> If women are so much worse, won't you find only the women getting attacked
> and broken all the time in Mixed Doubles matches? That doesn't happen.

Perhaps because of unspoken rules of conduct in mixed doubles? Male players going at the women with all they've got is considered very bad form.

> Murray's second serve is usually slower than Serena's. Agreed it's just one
> part of the game, but powerful players like Serena, Azarenka & Kvitova won't
> exactly be pushovers for men ranked below, say, 500.

Speed of serve of course isn't all that makes a serve. Murray is putting loads of power into those second serves with the emphasis on ball "action" more than mph. Can Serena possibly kick a serve up higher than a 6'4" man like Murray? I think not. As far as players ranked in the 600-1000 range, well I don't know what the cutoff point would be or if there is one. It would be interesting to see such matches and how they play out. Some people say the difference in serve is most important, but I've also heard it said that it's male vs. female lung capacity.

calim...@gmx.de

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 2:33:20 AM6/27/17
to
Yeah, all those 19-year-old girls in the Australian backwoods who are considering turning pro ...

Lol


Max

The Iceberg

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 3:03:13 AM6/27/17
to
On Monday, 26 June 2017 22:56:22 UTC+1, StephenJ wrote:
> > On 6/26/2017 1:28 PM, Gracchus wrote:
>
> > I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked >"something like 700" if she played against men.
>
> If anything, Mac was being generous to Serena. I've seen guys ranked
> around #700 play, and IMO they would easily defeat any female player.

yeah 700 is being very kind, I expect most men in the top 5000 hit 120mph serves like she does, it's just a physical fact.

MBDunc

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 4:27:58 AM6/27/17
to
While there is always power handicap - the biggest issues are movement and consistency. Technically someone like Serera "zoning" neutral groundies can provide shot-to-shot competency to even challenger level male players - but when movement, running shots and sustainability are applied then the gap widens exponentially ... - maybe this (arguably generous) #700 is pretty spot on?

.mikko

Whisper

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 4:58:04 AM6/27/17
to
Yes, valid points but imo the benefits outweigh the snarky criticism
from some quarters. Rod Laver for eg would lose 60 60 to Serena or any
of the top 100 girls. At what age would the top women be clear faves?
That's the sweet spot we need to find to make these matches real contests.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:02:54 AM6/27/17
to
Add another zero.

Doubles is different as the players have a much smaller court to cover -
very hard to get doubles players out of position like you can in singles.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:15:20 AM6/27/17
to
The couple I play with lack the killer instinct to succeed in the pro
game, but technically they are great ball strikers, lots of power, good
serves & net game. Don't look too different from lower ranked pros
superficially. Let down by poor movement & not being the best fighters
when going gets tough.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:20:11 AM6/27/17
to
On 27/06/2017 6:27 PM, MBDunc wrote:
> While there is always power handicap - the biggest issues are movement and consistency. Technically someone like Serera "zoning" neutral groundies can provide shot-to-shot competency to even challenger level male players - but when movement, running shots and sustainability are applied then the gap widens exponentially ... - maybe this (arguably generous) #700 is pretty spot on?
>
> .mikko
>


Serena in full flight looks great on the court, but the important thing
to keep in mind is the shots she is returning are coming from female
players. She wouldn't get the same kind of balls coming from the guys.

ahonkan

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 6:04:06 AM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, 27 June 2017 14:50:11 UTC+5:30, Whisper wrote:

> Serena in full flight looks great on the court, but the important thing
> to keep in mind is the shots she is returning are coming from female
> players. She wouldn't get the same kind of balls coming from the guys.

Extrapolating, what you are saying is that the 'finesse' players like
Evert, Hingis, Henin would have even less of a chance against the men than
the power players like Seles, MaSha, Kvitova, Azarenka & the Sistahs.

The Iceberg

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 6:08:27 AM6/27/17
to
Yeah I seen top men club players beat national level women, as you say it generally movement, speed and angles.

The Iceberg

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 6:17:49 AM6/27/17
to
Exactly, Serena is known for her 124mph fastest serve, but be surprised if the top 5000 men aren't regularly hitting 120mph. Not taking anything away from her, would be great to watch her and other women play men.
When I've seen top women play good male club players you get some really good matches.

The Iceberg

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 6:24:30 AM6/27/17
to
Just looked up fastest woman in the world during 2017 in 100m's for comparison - 10.71seconds - picked the UK as we not bad at 100m's - you gotta go to 77th man in the UK before the time is equal. That's just running 100m's, there's a lot more going on physically with tennis.

kaennorsing

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 7:05:24 AM6/27/17
to
Op dinsdag 27 juni 2017 08:29:59 UTC+2 schreef Gracchus:
What's often overlooked is how much more explosive men are off the ground than women. They're capable of reaching so many more balls than women. That's also the reason why doubles isn't that big of a difference, as there's less emphasis on movement. It's much more about technique and tactics, which are pretty equal.

Also, women may hit close to the same speeds, though not with nearly the same spin and control. So Mac would probably still beat Serena imo, though perhaps not on clay.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 7:27:43 AM6/27/17
to
Also men accelerate more easily (in all facets - movement, swinging
racket etc) than women.

At what age would Mac's 'maleness' stop being the deciding factor v peak
Serena? 60? 65? 70?

Darkfalz

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:04:10 AM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 4:53:07 AM UTC+10, grif wrote:
> On 26/06/2017 19:28, Gracchus wrote:
> > I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked "something like 700" if she played against men. He added that he thought he still had a chance against her now at age 58.
> >
> > So in the last couple of days, articles have sprung up everywhere about it. Most of them seem to be one-sided commentary written by rabid feminists launching ad hominim attacks upon McEnroe without effectively countering what he said.
> >
> > The ranking thing is a no-brainer, though the general public and even a lot of casual tennis viewers don't realize it. In an otherwise sensible response to an article in the Washington Post, a person said that of course Serena would beat the #700 man or even the #100 man but maybe not top 20. I stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks she'd beat #100 is an idiot as far as tennis is concerned.
> >
> > The feminist writers were quick to cite the 1973 "Battle of the Sexes" as proof that Serena would beat Old McEnroe. They conveniently forget (always) that Old Riggs beat Court before the BJK match. That said, I really don't believe Old Mac would have much chance of beating Serena. I think he could trade shots with her and deal with her serve, but he'd have the same problem Riggs did. BJK decided to run him to death for 3 sets instead of playing serve-and-volley as she normally would. It worked.
> >
> > Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
> >
>
> Speaking of which:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AWP1K7FaFI

Saw the trailer ages ago. Looks like garbage. Most likely will gloss over Riggs beating BJK, and they sure didn't hire an actor who looks 58.

Darkfalz

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:07:51 AM6/27/17
to
You don't think that a men's player isn't putting WAY more "work" on the second serve ball at the same speed than the hardest serving women?

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:37:24 AM6/27/17
to
The women I play with, for example, mostly have great technique, movement and power but their shots do not have the same level of spin as male players at a comparable level. This makes returning their shots easier and I also see that they struggle with my spin. I suspect this is true at the pro level as well.

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 9:55:22 AM6/27/17
to
James Blake was recently asked about hitting with Serena. He said the groundstrokes are generally equivalent to male players, but that it's the speed/movement that is the difference.

Along with the physical differences, the other main reason why the topic of women beating men at tennis is stupid is because women train their whole careers and optimize their games to beat other women, not men. No woman practices returning only 120+mph serves because they rarely face them (even from Serena), so it would be a waste of their time/focus. They optimize their games to return women's serves. That's doesn't mean that certain women players throughout history couldn't have become proficient at returning men's serves if they trained from the start to do it. I think it was at Hopman cup this past year that some male player said Bacsinszky drove him crazy in mixed doubles because she was better at returning his serve than most men.

I mean, if there was a guy who only played women pros his whole life and designed his game to beat them you think he would be able to then step on the court and beat a male pro? lol

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:16:49 AM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 9:55:22 AM UTC-4, heyg...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 1:40:38 AM UTC-4, ahonkan wrote:
> > On Monday, 26 June 2017 23:58:33 UTC+5:30, Gracchus wrote:
> >
> > > Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
> >
> > If women are so much worse, won't you find only the women getting attacked
> > and broken all the time in Mixed Doubles matches? That doesn't happen.
> >
> > Murray's second serve is usually slower than Serena's. Agreed it's just one
> > part of the game, but powerful players like Serena, Azarenka & Kvitova won't
> > exactly be pushovers for men ranked below, say, 500.
>
> James Blake was recently asked about hitting with Serena. He said the groundstrokes are generally equivalent to male players, but that it's the speed/movement that is the difference.
>
> Along with the physical differences, the other main reason why the topic of women beating men at tennis is stupid is because women train their whole careers and optimize their games to beat other women, not men. No woman practices returning only 120+mph serves because they rarely face them (even from Serena), so it would be a waste of their time/focus.

But if you are suggesting that women could play at the same level as men if they were trained to do so, then the average level of the women should be the same as the men. Why would the women deliberately play at an inferior level? Unless you are suggesting that Serena is the only woman who can play at the men's level? I remember she initially wanted to play on the men's tour when she was younger and then changed her mind.

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:30:04 AM6/27/17
to
SliceAndDice <vish...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
How do you mean changed her mind?
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:30:04 AM6/27/17
to
heyg...@gmail.com Wrote in message:
What kind of bizarre argument?

So according to you, women generally suck therefore aren't being
tested to the very limits among themselves, which makes their
game inferior to men? But if they played among men...they'd be
even better?

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:30:04 AM6/27/17
to
Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked "something like 700" if she played against men. He added that he thought he still had a chance against her now at age 58.
>
> So in the last couple of days, articles have sprung up everywhere about it. Most of them seem to be one-sided commentary written by rabid feminists launching ad hominim attacks upon McEnroe without effectively countering what he said.
>
> The ranking thing is a no-brainer, though the general public and even a lot of casual tennis viewers don't realize it. In an otherwise sensible response to an article in the Washington Post, a person said that of course Serena would beat the #700 man or even the #100 man but maybe not top 20. I stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks she'd beat #100 is an idiot as far as tennis is concerned.
>
> The feminist writers were quick to cite the 1973 "Battle of the Sexes" as proof that Serena would beat Old McEnroe. They conveniently forget (always) that Old Riggs beat Court before the BJK match. That said, I really don't believe Old Mac would have much chance of beating Serena. I think he could trade shots with her and deal with her serve, but he'd have the same problem Riggs did. BJK decided to run him to death for 3 sets instead of playing serve-and-volley as she normally would. It worked.
>
> Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
>


What's that with Serena or feminists being angry when told she'd
be ranked 700th, but when told she'd lose to #20 that makes it
somewhat ok? Why? Ego issues? But if she really thinks she's *as
good as any man* she'd have to compare herself to Nadal, not
Bautista e.g., no?


I don't really understand the whole battle of the sexes concept?
Didn't people have anything smarter to do post-Woodstock but to
defy the laws of nature?

Of course the men are physically superior. Just as strong young
female might be, or is physically superior to an old man.


I don't need to watch Serena vs McEnroe or Riggs vs BJK to know
any of that.


Really, as soon as you (talking about men) accept these kind of
challenges or start giving it a thought, you've accommodated them
way too much.

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:43:22 AM6/27/17
to
I believe she realized she cannot compete with the top men?

soccerfan777

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:49:07 AM6/27/17
to
What no one mentioned in this thread is how mentally weaker women are compared to the men. The number of times they get broken is probably twice more. Their second serves are significantly slower. They also have great trouble getting in positions for good return of serve. So basically they have a more trouble converting offense to defense. And not to mention they dont play 5 sets, so they dont have the stamina to play best of 5 either.

If Serena were to play on men's tour her record would be like 1-59 or 2-58 for the year.

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 10:55:29 AM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 10:30:04 AM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
I'm saying women players don't practice the shots that it would take to beat a male pro, so of course they're never going to beat them (even if they were equally matched physically, which of course they're not). If a woman's ROS is optimized to face 115mph serves because that's best for beating women, why would it be a surprise they're not that great at returning 125mph serves? I'm saying is there is another factor at play along with a mismatch of physical abilities.

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 11:29:04 AM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 7:49:07 AM UTC-7, soccerfan777 wrote:

> What no one mentioned in this thread is how mentally weaker women are compared to the men. The number of times they get broken is probably twice more. Their second serves are significantly slower. They also have great trouble getting in positions for good return of serve. So basically they have a more trouble converting offense to defense. And not to mention they dont play 5 sets, so they dont have the stamina to play best of 5 either.

> If Serena were to play on men's tour her record would be like 1-59 or 2-58 for the year.

Maybe even worse, because no male pro would want to be the one that loses to her. They'd never hear the end of it in the locker room.

Carey

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 11:34:10 AM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 7:55:29 AM UTC-7, heyg...@gmail.com wrote:

> I'm saying women players don't practice the shots that it would take to beat a male pro, so of course they're never going to beat them (even if they were equally matched physically, which of course they're not). If a woman's ROS is optimized to face 115mph serves because that's best for beating women, why would it be a surprise they're not that great at returning 125mph serves? I'm saying is there is another factor at play along with a mismatch of physical abilities.

I think your reasoning is unsound here. Also, women do often (luckily, get to) practice with men. Surely you know that..

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 12:30:03 PM6/27/17
to
Looks like an excuse in the making?

When did Federer have a chance to optimize his game for vicious
lefty topspin?

Or people facing Karlovic serve (angles, more than the sheer speed)?

ahonkan

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:25:29 PM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, 27 June 2017 20:19:07 UTC+5:30, soccerfan777 wrote:
> What no one mentioned in this thread is how mentally weaker women are compared to the men. The number of times they get broken is probably twice more. Their second serves are significantly slower. They also have great trouble getting in positions for good return of serve. So basically they have a more trouble converting offense to defense. And not to mention they dont play 5 sets, so they dont have the stamina to play best of 5 either.
>

So you think Serena is mentally weaker than the current men's #1 Murray?
Even Murray will disagree!

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:27:42 PM6/27/17
to
Uh, that's exactly why Nadal's lefty spin is trouble for Fed... Thanks for making my point. ;-)

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:32:45 PM6/27/17
to
You think male hitting partners play the same hitting against a woman pro as a male pro?

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:34:46 PM6/27/17
to
Just saw this article:

http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/19747505/tennis-world-no-701-dmitry-tursunov-weighs-john-mcenroe-serena-williams-controversy

Dmitry Tursunov, ranked No. 701, weighs in on McEnroe-Williams debate

Men's world No. 701 Dmitry Tursunov has weighed in on the John McEnroe-Serena Williams controversy, saying he would expect to beat women's No. 3 Williams.

McEnroe said Williams would be ranked "like No. 700 in the world" in the men's game, with Williams responding to tell McEnroe to "keep me out of your statements that are not factually based."

Now 34-year-old Tursunov has added in on the debate.

"I would hope that I would win against Serena," Tursunov told the BBC. "It would be a similar argument to: who would run faster, the fastest woman or the fastest man? Tennis is becoming more and more a physical sport, so it's going to be hard for a woman to beat the men.

"It's not black and white. There are lots of factors to take into account. Physically I might not be in the best shape of my life, but as an overall package, I'm much better than my ranking would suggest. She is pregnant, and I'm not.

"I've never heard John say anything absolutely stupid. He knows his stuff. What he said about her being an incredible player is correct -- explosive, powerful and she puts in a lot of work. But I would hope that I would win.

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:49:07 PM6/27/17
to
Tarango once put the cut off at 350. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/10148431/Wimbledon-2013-Serena-Williams-could-only-beat-men-ranked-in-the-300s-not-Andy-Murray-says-Jeff-Tarango.html

Forget Serena, I'd rather see Mac play Ostapenko on red clay. He'd get killed if he couldn't ace her.

krisr...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:53:52 PM6/27/17
to
Mentally weak as in being able to hold one serve and not choke mid match. Serena chokes a lot but eventually pulls out.

krisr...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 1:55:14 PM6/27/17
to
You are joking right. Ostapenko wont be able to return a single McEnroe serve.

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 2:01:04 PM6/27/17
to
If you want excuses, fine. ;)

arahim

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 3:04:53 PM6/27/17
to
On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 11:28:33 AM UTC-7, Gracchus wrote:
> I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked "something like 700" if she played against men. He added that he thought he still had a chance against her now at age 58.
>
> So in the last couple of days, articles have sprung up everywhere about it. Most of them seem to be one-sided commentary written by rabid feminists launching ad hominim attacks upon McEnroe without effectively countering what he said.
>
> The ranking thing is a no-brainer, though the general public and even a lot of casual tennis viewers don't realize it. In an otherwise sensible response to an article in the Washington Post, a person said that of course Serena would beat the #700 man or even the #100 man but maybe not top 20. I stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks she'd beat #100 is an idiot as far as tennis is concerned.
>
> The feminist writers were quick to cite the 1973 "Battle of the Sexes" as proof that Serena would beat Old McEnroe. They conveniently forget (always) that Old Riggs beat Court before the BJK match. That said, I really don't believe Old Mac would have much chance of beating Serena. I think he could trade shots with her and deal with her serve, but he'd have the same problem Riggs did. BJK decided to run him to death for 3 sets instead of playing serve-and-volley as she normally would. It worked.
>
> Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.

Almost all sports were initially played by men and were optimized for male physical characteristics. Women picked up these same sports but the problem is the sport is still optimized for some male physical attributes. So it is unsurprising that men will win these contests more often than not.

Some events where the male physical attributes (and it's not just power) are not as important the women do compete in the same events like equestrian where the horse's physical attributes are more important than the riders. Or car racing where the car's physical attributes are more important the drivers.

Perhaps in the time to come they will develop new sports that will focus more on the female physical attributes. Gymnastics is an example where some of the men's events are simply different from women's (for example women will have uneven bars and men will have pommel horse and rings).

Or take the example of the women's softball pitcher who was bamboozling the major league players who were unable to get bat on ball partly because they had not optimized themselves for that sort of pitch.

One may hold up chess as an example (some may not consider it a sport) which has less to do with physical (as in haw the body can and needs to move) attributes where women have still not played at the very top level. It could be that just not as many women have yet tried the sport seriously. But again it may be that chess was optimized for the kind of spatial non-verbal thinking that men are better at which by itself has been a controversial topic ( This does not mean they are better at all kinds of thinking).

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 3:30:04 PM6/27/17
to
arahim <arahim...@hotmail.com> Wrote in message:
Most horses run faster than humans, but no, it doesn't mean
they're better at it.

:)

grif

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 3:30:58 PM6/27/17
to
On 27/06/2017 06:40, ahonkan wrote:
> On Monday, 26 June 2017 23:58:33 UTC+5:30, Gracchus wrote:
>
>> Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
>
> If women are so much worse, won't you find only the women getting attacked
> and broken all the time in Mixed Doubles matches? That doesn't happen.
>
> Murray's second serve is usually slower than Serena's. Agreed it's just one
> part of the game, but powerful players like Serena, Azarenka & Kvitova won't
> exactly be pushovers for men ranked below, say, 500.
>

http://thebiglead.com/2017/06/27/serena-williams-to-david-letterman-in-2013-andy-murray-would-beat-me-6-0-6-0-in-five-to-six-minutes/

calim...@gmx.de

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 4:14:07 PM6/27/17
to
I don't know where the myth comes from that Serena is mentally strong. Just because she screams furiously now and then? Has a mean stare?

Come on, she has had a ton of surprising losses, especially in slams, against journeywomen. How many great come-from-behind wins has she had?


Max

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 4:35:52 PM6/27/17
to
Qualifying and quantifying 'clutch'

Meet Benjamin Tom.

He's a complicated fellow, who played on Cal-Berkeley's national championship club tennis team. He also graduated with a degree in Business Administration -- and in Molecular & Cellular Biology. He was wafting along at the Georgetown University School of Medicine when he suddenly wondered if he really wanted to be a doctor. He asked the school's administration for a leave of absence, which was granted. Now, he's pursuing his dream -- sports analytics.

His parents, naturally, are very proud.

Tom happened to be coaching ESPN analyst Pam Shriver's son, George, on a Southern California under-10 team, when the two got to talking.

"Pam and I were brainstorming," Tom explained, "about how to look at the numbers differently in tennis."

He was aware of how some analytics people quantified NBA clutch play, measuring a player's contributions in the last two minutes of a game and when the score differential was five or less. Could the two come up with a similar model for tennis?

Here is what Tom and Shriver settled on for defining clutch moments in tennis:

• All break points

• All set points

• All tiebreaker points

• All deuce or advantage points when a total of eight or more games have been played, including 30-all and 40-30.

• All points played in the deciding set, when the game differential is no greater than three -- the third set for women and the deciding set for men, either three or five.

So while you've been enjoying Serena's march through the Grand Slams, Tom has been busy breaking down that trek -- in excruciating detail.

And here's what he's discovered:

In winning all seven matches at Wimbledon, Serena outperformed the field in 9 of 10 statistically comparable categories, many by a substantial margin. While the other 127 players average 67 percent of first-serve points won, Serena won 80.3 percent. The field averages winners 15.3 percent of the time, while Serena was at a robust 24.4. Her edge in ace percentage was 18.3 to 5.

But that is reasonably predictable stuff.

Tom also calculated how Serena did measured against herself, comparing her total points to "clutch" points. Of the 962 points she played at the All England Club, 695 were defined as non-clutch points, with 267 deemed to be "clutch."

Serena's already extraordinary play elevated to a higher level in the crucible of clutch. She was better in 8 of 10 categories, including dramatic improvements in winners versus unforced errors, first-serve percentage and aces.

Looking at Serena's 26 matches Grand Slam matches, Tom isolated her third-set statistics versus the overall stats for all those matches. As you might expect, Serena plays markedly better in the third set.

Serena surpasses herself in 7 of 8 categories and is even (60 percent) in first-serve percentage. Of particular note, the ratio of winners to unforced errors (which goes from 1.4 to 1.67) and percentage of total points won (56 to 60) improve appreciably.

"It would be the equivalent of having an NBA or major league player, who already leads the league in nearly every statistic, get even better if we only measure their stats in overtime or extra innings," Tom said.

And then there is the ultimate comparison -- the third-set numbers versus the overall numbers of those 11 three-set matches.y.

Across the board, the margins increase and, in some cases, double or more.

The critical category of break-point conversions, for instance, improves from a 1 percent increase to 6 percent. Likewise, second-serve winning percentage, receiving points won and winner/unforced error ratios all soared when it mattered most.

"We have always felt that Serena has been the greatest of clutch players," Shriver concluded. "With Ben Tom's analytics, we can put more value and context to her amazing levels under at the biggest stages, especially in final sets."

arahim

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 4:57:54 PM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 4:27:43 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> On 27/06/2017 9:05 PM, kaennorsing wrote:
> > Op dinsdag 27 juni 2017 08:29:59 UTC+2 schreef Gracchus:
> >> On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 10:40:38 PM UTC-7, ahonkan wrote:
> >>> On Monday, 26 June 2017 23:58:33 UTC+5:30, Gracchus wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.
> >>>
> >>> If women are so much worse, won't you find only the women getting attacked
> >>> and broken all the time in Mixed Doubles matches? That doesn't happen.
> >>
> >> Perhaps because of unspoken rules of conduct in mixed doubles? Male players going at the women with all they've got is considered very bad form.
> >>
> >>> Murray's second serve is usually slower than Serena's. Agreed it's just one
> >>> part of the game, but powerful players like Serena, Azarenka & Kvitova won't
> >>> exactly be pushovers for men ranked below, say, 500.
> >>
> >> Speed of serve of course isn't all that makes a serve. Murray is putting loads of power into those second serves with the emphasis on ball "action" more than mph. Can Serena possibly kick a serve up higher than a 6'4" man like Murray? I think not. As far as players ranked in the 600-1000 range, well I don't know what the cutoff point would be or if there is one. It would be interesting to see such matches and how they play out. Some people say the difference in serve is most important, but I've also heard it said that it's male vs. female lung capacity.
> >
> > What's often overlooked is how much more explosive men are off the ground than women. They're capable of reaching so many more balls than women. That's also the reason why doubles isn't that big of a difference, as there's less emphasis on movement. It's much more about technique and tactics, which are pretty equal.
> >
> > Also, women may hit close to the same speeds, though not with nearly the same spin and control. So Mac would probably still beat Serena imo, though perhaps not on clay.
> >
>
>
> Also men accelerate more easily (in all facets - movement, swinging
> racket etc) than women.
>
> At what age would Mac's 'maleness' stop being the deciding factor v peak
> Serena? 60? 65? 70?
>

Last year Mcenroe took at out Wilander, nine years his junior (then 48), 62 62 at the ATP Champion's Tour event. Now champions tour is not as rigorous but it does have a lot of variability in age; perhaps late 30s to forever. Mcenroe's (or for that matter anyone else's) matches against different players can give some indication of how he lines up against players 10 to 15 years is juniors. Of course not everyone keeps to same fitness levels so some younger players may be way out of shape.

arahim

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:01:12 PM6/27/17
to
Correction: It should read Muster (not Wilander). Wilander is only 6 years younger and ended up in the third spot in the same tournament.

arahim

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:15:45 PM6/27/17
to
Have you looked at the field? The women's field has not been that great since the time of Dinara Safina at number one and pretty much everyone will say that accept for Serena the number ones have been exceptionally weak. As they say among the blind the one eyed is king.

Any one who is a dominant player in the field will be likely to lead these stats.


of the number ones from her onwards
the other 127 players average 67 percent of first-serve points won, Serena won 80.3 percent. The field averages winners 15.3 percent of the time, while Serena was at a robust 24.4. Her edge in ace percentage was 18.3 to 5.
>
> But that is reasonably predictable stuff.
>
> Tom also calculated how Serena did measured against herself, comparing her total points to "clutch" points. Of the 962 points she played at the All England Club, 695 were defined as non-clutch points, with 267 deemed to be "clutch."
>

Yes but why is her "non-clutch" play not as good.

> Serena's already extraordinary play elevated to a higher level in the crucible of clutch. She was better in 8 of 10 categories, including dramatic improvements in winners versus unforced errors, first-serve percentage and aces.
>
> Looking at Serena's 26 matches Grand Slam matches, Tom isolated her third-set statistics versus the overall stats for all those matches. As you might expect, Serena plays markedly better in the third set.
>

this is as to be expected from a great player. If the match goes to a 5th set for Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray (when they are not playing among each other) they are usually expected to win it more often than not. Serena in the second half of her career just did not have to deal with players equivalent to Nadal and Djokovic, Murray.

> Serena surpasses herself in 7 of 8 categories and is even (60 percent) in first-serve percentage. Of particular note, the ratio of winners to unforced errors (which goes from 1.4 to 1.67) and percentage of total points won (56 to 60) improve appreciably.
>
> "It would be the equivalent of having an NBA or major league player, who already leads the league in nearly every statistic, get even better if we only measure their stats in overtime or extra innings," Tom said.
>
> And then there is the ultimate comparison -- the third-set numbers versus the overall numbers of those 11 three-set matches.y.
>
> Across the board, the margins increase and, in some cases, double or more.
>
> The critical category of break-point conversions, for instance, improves from a 1 percent increase to 6 percent. Likewise, second-serve winning percentage, receiving points won and winner/unforced error ratios all soared when it mattered most.
>
> "We have always felt that Serena has been the greatest of clutch players," Shriver concluded. "With Ben Tom's analytics, we can put more value and context to her amazing levels under at the biggest stages, especially in final sets."

This looks like Whisper's analysis where first you decide what is great and then devise a system to fit.

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:35:37 PM6/27/17
to
You're welcomed to post some independent evidence of your viewpoints.

arahim

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 5:54:19 PM6/27/17
to
If you take the comparing against oneself argument above how many players did the analytics team look at let's say all the top hundred and see how each performed in "clutch" play against their own non-clutch points.

A nerveless "clutch" player, all else being equal, should have the exact same numbers during the "clutch" points as at any other time when nerves are not supposed to be in play. If not it needs to be explained why this clutch player gets into these situations and not play a straight forward same percentage (whether due to her or the extremely weak top players who at times seem to compete to see who can lose). As an example: with the differential in Serena's serve to the rest of the field she should be on average broken a lot less percentage wise than the men do.

bob

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:38:55 PM6/27/17
to
On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:28:26 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
<grac...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned this latest firestorm yet where McEnroe said Serena would be ranked "something like 700" if she played against men. He added that he thought he still had a chance against her now at age 58.
>
>So in the last couple of days, articles have sprung up everywhere about it. Most of them seem to be one-sided commentary written by rabid feminists launching ad hominim attacks upon McEnroe without effectively countering what he said.
>
>The ranking thing is a no-brainer, though the general public and even a lot of casual tennis viewers don't realize it. In an otherwise sensible response to an article in the Washington Post, a person said that of course Serena would beat the #700 man or even the #100 man but maybe not top 20. I stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks she'd beat #100 is an idiot as far as tennis is concerned.
>
>The feminist writers were quick to cite the 1973 "Battle of the Sexes" as proof that Serena would beat Old McEnroe. They conveniently forget (always) that Old Riggs beat Court before the BJK match. That said, I really don't believe Old Mac would have much chance of beating Serena. I think he could trade shots with her and deal with her serve, but he'd have the same problem Riggs did. BJK decided to run him to death for 3 sets instead of playing serve-and-volley as she normally would. It worked.
>
>Anyway, what struck me most of all is the hostility some of these women have towards someone who just pointed out the obvious. The men's & women's game is hugely different. IMO it's not disparaging Serena's achievements as an athlete, competitor, or champion to do that. It's just a plain truth.

but it's not a PC truth. there's "truth" and then there's "PC truth"
you know.

bob

bob

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:43:13 PM6/27/17
to
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:58:31 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com>
wrote:
>Everyone knows this. This is just Mac trying to flog his new book.
>
>No other sport directly compares women to men, so why tennis? Is it
>because they think tennis is a sissy sport?
>
>I still comfortably beat 19 yr old girls who were borderline considering
>turning pro a couple of yrs ago, & were beating some of the girls who
>qualified for AO main draw this yr.
>
>Having said that I'd love to see Mac at 58 playing Serena. My instincts
>tell me he'd have too many options & beat her 62 62, but I could be
>wrong & she rams home her serve/power & edges him 64 64? Be fun to watch.

if he beat her it'd be his volleying that would make the difference.

bob

bob

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:47:09 PM6/27/17
to
unless you're a very low ranked guy needing some $$.

bob

arahim

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:47:46 PM6/27/17
to
:)
Rifle shooting is one sport in which there seems to be no advantage for men.

Archery is another in which the advantage if men have some seems to be small.

bob

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 8:48:50 PM6/27/17
to
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:34:44 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
<grac...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Just saw this article:
>
>http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/19747505/tennis-world-no-701-dmitry-tursunov-weighs-john-mcenroe-serena-williams-controversy
>
>Dmitry Tursunov, ranked No. 701, weighs in on McEnroe-Williams debate
>
>Men's world No. 701 Dmitry Tursunov has weighed in on the John McEnroe-Serena Williams controversy, saying he would expect to beat women's No. 3 Williams.
>
>McEnroe said Williams would be ranked "like No. 700 in the world" in the men's game, with Williams responding to tell McEnroe to "keep me out of your statements that are not factually based."
>
>Now 34-year-old Tursunov has added in on the debate.
>
>"I would hope that I would win against Serena," Tursunov told the BBC. "It would be a similar argument to: who would run faster, the fastest woman or the fastest man? Tennis is becoming more and more a physical sport, so it's going to be hard for a woman to beat the men.
>
>"It's not black and white.

black and white? wtf? bringing race into it? :-)

>There are lots of factors to take into account. Physically I might not be in the best shape of my life, but as an overall package, I'm much better than my ranking would suggest. She is pregnant, and I'm not.
>"I've never heard John say anything absolutely stupid. He knows his stuff. What he said about her being an incredible player is correct -- explosive, powerful and she puts in a lot of work. But I would hope that I would win.

serena hasn't been a great mover past few yrs, that would be a huge
detriment to her chances VS any top 1000 male.

bob

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 9:17:42 PM6/27/17
to
On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 5:48:50 PM UTC-7, bob wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:34:44 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus

> >"I would hope that I would win against Serena," Tursunov told the BBC. "It would be a similar argument to: who would run faster, the fastest woman or the fastest man? Tennis is becoming more and more a physical sport, so it's going to be hard for a woman to beat the men.

> >"It's not black and white.

> black and white? wtf? bringing race into it? :-)

Good thing he didn't mention the "chocolate milk" baby.

> >There are lots of factors to take into account. Physically I might not be in the best shape of my life, but as an overall package, I'm much better than my ranking would suggest. She is pregnant, and I'm not.

> >"I've never heard John say anything absolutely stupid. He knows his stuff. What he said about her being an incredible player is correct -- explosive, powerful and she puts in a lot of work. But I would hope that I would win.

> serena hasn't been a great mover past few yrs, that would be a huge
> detriment to her chances VS any top 1000 male.

Good point.

bob

unread,
Jun 27, 2017, 9:21:49 PM6/27/17
to
in fact even some of the other girls have exposed her movement at
times. take away her huge power advantge (mac's seen lendl, etc) and
he'd take her down IMO. even at 58.

bob

Pelle Svanslos

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 3:51:18 AM6/28/17
to
She's always been a Hippo.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:10:41 AM6/28/17
to
She saved mp in 3 of her AO wins, including 3 against Sharapova in a semi.

Whisper

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:14:09 AM6/28/17
to
Good point. Which leads me to another question - is McEnroe the best
ever 58+ player?

Whisper

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:26:16 AM6/28/17
to
That would be a big headache for Serena - he could put the volley in any
corner, any angle, dropshot etc

Carey

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 10:52:08 AM6/28/17
to
Mac could beat SW just with the drop shot and lob. She's a fat-a$$, and it'd be
hilarious to watch.

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 11:17:27 AM6/28/17
to
On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 7:52:08 AM UTC-7, Carey wrote:

> Mac could beat SW just with the drop shot and lob. She's a fat-a$$, and it'd be
> hilarious to watch.

So now Whisper's given you back full confidence that Mac would crush her, hmm?
If it were just a matter of tennis skills, I'd agree. Serena doesn't *look* like she should be able to get to any ball, but somehow she does it well enough. Then there's Mac's age presenting mobility and fitness issues for him too. Would McEnroe's serve stymie Serena? Would Mac be gasping for breath after a few games? Nobody knows. Neither Serena's results against the women or McEnroe's on the senior tour are enough of an indication. Making Serena look like whale out of water with the drop shot & lob is a delicious fantasy, but really...

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 1:36:25 PM6/28/17
to
Mac can add a little more info to help settle all this himself. If he thinks Serena could maybe beat 700 and thinks he can beat Serena, then he should challenge Turnsunov or another 700s ranked player to a match. If he can beat #700 then we'll have a better sense of the level of the tour at that ranking level (eg, comparable to the seniors tour) rather than speculating.

Carey

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 1:39:14 PM6/28/17
to
On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 10:36:25 AM UTC-7, heyg...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> Mac can add a little more info to help settle all this himself. If he thinks Serena could maybe beat 700 and thinks he can beat Serena, then he should challenge Turnsunov or another 700s ranked player to a match. If he can beat #700 then we'll have a better sense of the level of the tour at that ranking level (eg, comparable to the seniors tour) rather than speculating.


We wouldn't want to speculate here on RST, would we? That would be wrong.

arahim

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 1:58:20 PM6/28/17
to

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 2:11:58 PM6/28/17
to
On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 10:58:20 AM UTC-7, arahim wrote:


> Apparently Mcenroe ranks himself around 1200.
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-entertainment-news-updates-june-on-the-late-show-john-mcenroe-sets-1498664314-htmlstory.html

Reminds me of that exchange in the movie "Cobb," based on something Ty Cobb really said:

------------------------------------------------

Louis Prima: With all the great players playing ball right now, how well do you think you would do against today's pitchers?

Ty Cobb: Well, I figure against today's pitchers I'd only probably hit about .290

Louis Prima: .290? Well that's amazing, because you batted over .400 a... a whole bunch of times. Now tell us all, we'd all like to know, why do you think you'd only hit .290?

Ty Cobb: Well, I'm 72 fucking years old you ignorant son of a bitch.
-------------------------------------------------

Anyway, McEnroe said he had a chance of beating Serena, which is true. He never said he was confident of wiping her out.

arahim

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 3:46:29 PM6/28/17
to
“My girls don’t think I can beat her now. I thought I could beat her. She’s pregnant, so maybe I should play her now, I’d have a better chance. But either way, I wish her the absolute best. She’s the best thing that’s happened to American tennis in the last 10, 15 years.”
Mcenroe


This was more Garcia-Navaro than anything Mcenroe said. Below is the conversation. Notice Garcia-Navaro makes the distinction herself first by saying we have been talking about male player but there are wonderful female players and let's talk about Serena. Mcenroe actually praises Serena more than even Garcia-Navaro asks for then she turns it around and says why call her the best female player (when Garcia-Navaro herself predicated the conversation and put it in context of female tennis players)

Garcia-Navarro: We’re talking about male players but there is of course wonderful female players. Let’s talk about Serena Williams. You say she is the best female player in the world in the book.

McEnroe: Best female player ever — no question.

Garcia-Navarro: Some wouldn’t qualify it, some would say she’s the best player in the world. Why qualify it?

McEnroe: Oh! Uh, she’s not, you mean, the best player in the world, period?

Garcia-Navarro: Yeah, the best tennis player in the world. You know, why say female player?

McEnroe: Well because if she was in, if she played the men’s circuit she’d be like 700 in the world.

Garcia-Navarro: You think so?

McEnroe: Yeah. That doesn’t mean I don’t think Serena is an incredible player. I do, but the reality of what would happen would be I think something that perhaps it’d be a little higher, perhaps it’d be a little lower. And on a given day, Serena could beat some players. I believe because she’s so incredibly strong mentally that she could overcome some situations where players would choke ’cause she’s been in it so many times, so many situations at Wimbledon, The U.S. Open, etc. But if she had to just play the circuit — the men’s circuit — that would be an entirely different story.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/06/john-mcenroe-serena-williams-pregnant-ranked-700-comment-video-response

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 3:55:53 PM6/28/17
to
On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 12:46:29 PM UTC-7, arahim wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 11:11:58 AM UTC-7, Gracchus wrote:

> > Anyway, McEnroe said he had a chance of beating Serena, which is true. He never said he was confident of wiping her out.

> “My girls don’t think I can beat her now. I thought I could beat her. She’s pregnant, so maybe I should play her now, I’d have a better chance. But either way, I wish her the absolute best. She’s the best thing that’s happened to American tennis in the last 10, 15 years.”
> Mcenroe

He didn't say that his sons don't think he could beat her though. :) This is obviously a personal thing for some women. They consider it an affront to their womanhood to even talk about female athletes in terms of absolute ability relative to men.

arahim

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 5:09:27 PM6/28/17
to
Mcenroe is doing nothing new. Serena and Venus themselves made the claim that they could beat/play at the level of someone in the men's game ranked around 200. They then went and played a set each against the 203rd ranked player who beat them 61 62 respectively. The player they played claimed he played like a number 500 and that Serena and Venus would have no chance against the top 600. Mcenroe's guess is not even that out there in that context. If no chance against 600 maybe around 700. Someone ranked a 100 places below in the men's game still has some non negligible chance at winning. He is putting himself another 500 places below.

heyg...@gmail.com

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 5:23:09 PM6/28/17
to
I think there's a difference between best and greatest. Serena is nowhere near the best tennis player on the planet (which is what McEnroe said). But a case could be made for greatest. Most people are reacting as if he said she's not as great as #700.

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 5:41:03 PM6/28/17
to
I'll bet the Williamses rue the day they decided to play Braasch. They didn't realize it would become part of tennis mythology. :) But your point about them raising the issue first is a good one, and it wasn't the only time they did that. Probably they realized long ago that any notions about them beating men were pipe dreams. Still, no one should rake a male player over the coals for making those comparisons when the Williams sisters initiated the same conversation once with their boasts.

bob

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:05:35 PM6/28/17
to
On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 10:51:14 +0300, Pelle Svanslos <pe...@svans.los>
wrote:
true, but in her younger days a much faster hippo with more stamina.

bob

bob

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:07:00 PM6/28/17
to
true, but mac never said he could beat serena. he said #700 could.

bob

bob

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:13:55 PM6/28/17
to
On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:11:56 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
<grac...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 10:58:20 AM UTC-7, arahim wrote:
>
>
>> Apparently Mcenroe ranks himself around 1200.
>> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-entertainment-news-updates-june-on-the-late-show-john-mcenroe-sets-1498664314-htmlstory.html
>
>Reminds me of that exchange in the movie "Cobb," based on something Ty Cobb really said:
>
>------------------------------------------------
>
>Louis Prima: With all the great players playing ball right now, how well do you think you would do against today's pitchers?
>
>Ty Cobb: Well, I figure against today's pitchers I'd only probably hit about .290
>
>Louis Prima: .290? Well that's amazing, because you batted over .400 a... a whole bunch of times. Now tell us all, we'd all like to know, why do you think you'd only hit .290?
>
>Ty Cobb: Well, I'm 72 fucking years old you ignorant son of a bitch.
>-------------------------------------------------

as i grew up in detroit, great to hear ty cobb stories.

>Anyway, McEnroe said he had a chance of beating Serena, which is true. He never said he was confident of wiping her out.

bob

Shakes

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:16:39 PM6/28/17
to
BOAT and GOAT distinction ? :)

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:30:03 PM6/28/17
to
heyg...@gmail.com Wrote in message:
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 3:55:53 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 12:46:29 PM UTC-7, arahim wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 11:11:58 AM UTC-7, Gracchus wrote:
>>
>> > > Anyway, McEnroe said he had a chance of beating Serena, which is true. He never said he was confident of wiping her out.
>>
>> > ?My girls don?t think I can beat her now. I thought I could beat her. She?s pregnant, so maybe I should play her now, I?d have a better chance. But either way, I wish her the absolute best. She?s the best thing that?s happened to American tennis in the last 10, 15 years.?
>> > Mcenroe
>>
>> He didn't say that his sons don't think he could beat her though. :) This is obviously a personal thing for some women. They consider it an affront to their womanhood to even talk about female athletes in terms of absolute ability relative to men.
>
> I think there's a difference between best and greatest. Serena is nowhere near the best tennis player on the planet (which is what McEnroe said). But a case could be made for greatest. Most people are reacting as if he said she's not as great as #700.
>


So boat is e legitimate title after all?
--

arahim

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:30:44 PM6/28/17
to
In supporting Serena James Blake made the comment (when talking about comparing men's tennis to women's tennis) "different gender, different sports" (around 4:50). In essence saying what Mcenroe said. If they are to be considered separate sports how else are they to be differentiated but by saying men's tennis and women's tennis or equivalent terms. And if they are separate sports why would you be asked to say whether she is the greatest female tennis player or the greatest tennis player?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmDXf6eITM4

bob

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:38:05 PM6/28/17
to
well rhonda rousey flirted with the idea of boxing mayweather. that is
until another girl knocked her out (twice).

bob

bob

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:38:28 PM6/28/17
to
sounds like garcia-navarro - like most reporters - is just baiting
mcenroe.

but IMO no matter casue anything mcenroe says to stir the pot is good
for tennis.

bob

arahim

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 6:49:51 PM6/28/17
to
At one point Serena wanted to play on the ATP tour. Boris also made the comment of men's tennis and women's tennis being different sports (and suggesting that under that circumstance men should be allowed to play WTA tournaments). In fact ATP rejected the idea because it claimed that ATP is a men's tennis organization and Serena does not qualify for the men's part.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/serena-seeks-place-on-mens-tour-741861.html

*skriptis

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 7:01:03 PM6/28/17
to
arahim <arahim...@hotmail.com> Wrote in message:
Is this a joke?

Gracchus

unread,
Jun 28, 2017, 7:09:27 PM6/28/17
to
On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 at 3:38:05 PM UTC-7, bob wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:55:50 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus

> >He didn't say that his sons don't think he could beat her though. :) This is obviously a personal thing for some women. They consider it an affront to their womanhood to even talk about female athletes in terms of absolute ability relative to men.

> well rhonda rousey flirted with the idea of boxing mayweather. that is
> until another girl knocked her out (twice).

Or rather, two different girls knocked her out. It's hard to believe Rousey was ever deluded enough to think she'd last even a round against Mayweather.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages