Tennis Discussions > Tennis Discussions

Mertov's Tennis Desk

<< < (3/32) > >>

Babblelot:

--- Quote from: euroka1 on January 21, 2013, 05:58:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Mertov on January 20, 2013, 11:02:16 AM ---Thanks guys.  Seeing that Djokovic played more tennis in terms of time-on-court & games-played in one match than Sharapova played in all four matches, it reminded me of an article I wrote on Oct 12, 2012:
http://my.opera.com/mertov/blog/2012/10/13/best-of-five-sets-in-slams-for-women

Surely, Billie Jean King did not find the Djokovic-Wawrinka match boring, did she?!?!

Mertov

--- End quote ---


She probably did, Mert. Some of the ladies in my mixed doubles group were bored. As said elsewhere, I was not.

Regardless of equal effort for equal pay, I wonder how best of 5 for the WTA would impact the scheduling at the slams, which already seems tight. I was reminded of how some years ago, Lleyton Hewitt got into trouble with the Williams sisters by publicly voicing the wish that the ladies would hurry up so that we could get to the real business of the evening.

Having said that, I am really looking forward to the women's matches on 1/22 at the AO. They should be good ones.  :)

--- End quote ---


That's one not so insignificant factor that plays against this bad idea. They tried best of 5 at the YE event as recently as 1990 IIRC. If it was a good idea, it would have stuck. I'm sure there were many reasons and rationalizations for the WTA and ITF to come to the conclusion that it wasn't a good idea -- heck, maybe it was the networks that put the kibosh on the idea. So they dropped it. Women's matches are rarely compelling, anyway. If they're well contested, they can be on the court +2:30 and everyone is happy. If they're a mismatch, I want them off the court ASAP. 1:00-1:15 is just fine with me. Get off the court so I can watch good tennis and pick up your big, fat check. I'm not going to lose sleep over the fact that women are well paid. I don't even understand why this is a problem. In fact, there was a time not so long ago (early 2000s) when the WTA was arguably the bigger draw.

euroka1:
Could well have been the networks. Raking in the money is the overriding consideration. $$$$$$$$

Mertov:

--- Quote from: euroka1 on January 21, 2013, 05:58:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Mertov on January 20, 2013, 11:02:16 AM ---Thanks guys.  Seeing that Djokovic played more tennis in terms of time-on-court & games-played in one match than Sharapova played in all four matches, it reminded me of an article I wrote on Oct 12, 2012:
http://my.opera.com/mertov/blog/2012/10/13/best-of-five-sets-in-slams-for-women

Surely, Billie Jean King did not find the Djokovic-Wawrinka match boring, did she?!?!

Mertov

--- End quote ---


She probably did, Mert. Some of the ladies in my mixed doubles group were bored. As said elsewhere, I was not.

Regardless of equal effort for equal pay, I wonder how best of 5 for the WTA would impact the scheduling at the slams, which already seems tight. I was reminded of how some years ago, Lleyton Hewitt got into trouble with the Williams sisters by publicly voicing the wish that the ladies would hurry up so that we could get to the real business of the evening.

Having said that, I am really looking forward to the women's matches on 1/22 at the AO. They should be good ones.  :)

--- End quote ---


Hi Euroka,

As I also said in the article, my point has nothing to do with the equal pay aspect (although my proposed solution would indirectly solve that too), I think equal pay should have been in place long time ago.

On the more pertinent topic, surely even the ladies at your club would agree that 35-minute-long 6/0 6/1 matches are more boring that Djokovic vs. Wawrinka.  I personally enjoy a good tennis match whether it's played by women or men.  I don't differentiate or presuppose that one is better than the other.  If I enjoy the tennis played on the court, that's all I ask as a tennis fan.  For example, I would have loved to see more of the US Open Women's final, I was really enjoying it.  Look at how many average two set matches in men's won by the same player have turned into epic semi-finals or finals over the years on the men's side.

The scheduling would not be a problem if you play two out of three until the quarters (or semis) both in the men and women.  If that was the case, this year for example, scheduling would have been a breeze until this point. And once the number of matches to be played has decreased considerably (which is always the case once the quarterfinals are reached) then three-out-of-five scheduling could easily be done.  If they wanted to do it, they could easily do it. The real reason is that most women players don't want to give up the advantage of playing a short match, and I believe that is where the tennis fan is being shortchanged.  Many fans would love to see the women's finals on a Slam, but they don't want to risk paying the large sum of money  when the prospect of a 44-minute match looms large.

Mertov

euroka1:
Thanks Mert,

That's an interesting alternative way of scheduling. I'd be happy.

 

Mertov:
Hi guys,

The latest article is up for those interested, Q & A with Pat Cash.

http://my.opera.com/mertov/blog/q-a-with-pat-cash

Mertov

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version