Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Tennis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tennis. Show all posts

June 24, 2018

The Decline Of Tennis - Why isn't tennis as popular as it was in the '70s, '80s and '90s? - SportingNews

While tennis definitely experienced a "boom" in the 1970s and remained very popular through the mid 1980s, its U.S. popularity had subsided a bit by the late '80s, and numbers started tailing off. However, they've been fairly stable now since the mid-'90s. It's actually primarily the '70s and part of the '80s that had elevated popularity, and if anything, some happenings in the late '80s and '90s may have contributed to the sport's decline in the U.S.

As for the causes of the original tennis boom in the '70s and into the early '80s, there was a perfect storm of factors at play in tennis that has not since been replicated, and may never be able to be. To understand the rise of professional tennis, we actually have to go back to 1968, when two huge things happened that changed the face of tennis in the U.S. and worldwide:

The first is that 1968 was year the "Open Era" started. Prior to that, professional players were not allowed to compete in any of the four Grand Slam tournaments, nor in Davis Cup play. This meant that, unlike in other professional sports, tennis' top titles did not feature all of tennis's top players. Once the Open Era came about, it made it possible for a player to make a living competing at tennis, and ushered in a level of professionalism and interest that hadn't existed before. Until then, tennis was a cloistered rich-man's country club sport that had only niche interest. But the Open Era allowed it to become a proper professional sport, like other major sports had been for decades. While Grand Slam titles had been contested for almost a century at that point, many of the best players in the world hadn't been competing, because the pros were out "barnstorming" in exhibitions.

The second thing that happened in 1968 is that the US Open was broadcast on television for the first time (by CBS). It would soon be followed in 1969 by the first Wimbledon broadcast on NBC, and eventually by the French Open on NBC in 1975. So the mid-'70s was the first time that the sport's most prestigious competitions were all available to be seen by the American public, sparking a new wave of interest among the general population rather than just among the country club set. Keep in mind that at this time, there were really only a few channels available on most poeple's TVs, so just being chosen for broadcast meant that millions of people would be exposed to the sport when they turned on their sets. Since that time, many other sports have achieved professional status, and essentially become competitors for tennis among U.S. audiences.

So now that we have touched on the tennis boom, and those two big happenings as its catalysts, we should consider a number of other factors that contributed to tennis's huge popularity, and its eventual decline.

1. A Cast of Characters: For a sport to be hugely popular, and appeal to audiences beyond the sport's active participants and avid fans, it usually needs recognizable stars with distinctive personalities. Characters whom the public can latch on to and remember in the absence of a nuanced understanding of the game. Someone to cheer for. Someone to cheer against. And tennis was lucky enough to have those in spades at the time of the boom. There was Bjorn Borg's icy mechanical demeanor in the face of incredible pressure, and his unprecedented athleticism. There was McEnroe's bratty mercurial brilliance and deft touch. There was Connors's competitive fire, and brash Americanness. There was Nastase's bad boy attitude and incredible hand skills. On the women's side, there was wholesome American sweetheart Chris Evert, feminist symbol Billie Jean King, and communist turncoat Martina Navratilova who redefined athleticism for women, as well as many others. Heroes and villains galore. Capitalizing on this newfound popularity, the media seized the chance to talk about tennis constantly, and tennis's stars were featured all the time in general interest newspapers, magazines and tv shows. Tennis players became celebrities, and were encouraged to express themselves openly and without fear of reprisal, making people want to tune in just to see what they'd do. Fans felt they knew the players and their different personalities. And that's what makes people pick a side. When the late 80s and early 90s rolled around, those characters were replaced at the top of the game with a dour quiet Czech, a German kid who let his racquet do the talking, and a bland Swede with no major weapons and a personality that lacked any real fire. It wasn't until Andre Agassi reached his potential in the mid-90s that tennis found another prominent character. And by then the damage had been done, and many casual viewers already lost. Agassi alone was responsible for some renewed interest in tennis in the 90s, but he wasn't a consistent enough contender to make Grand Slam finals consistently. Pete Sampras and Jim Courier, for all their great qualities, just weren't very interesting characters, nor were any of the players who followed them until Roddick, Federer, and Nadal came along years later.

2. Hometown Heroes: Many of the game's top stars and defining characters in the '70s and '80s were American. So Americans had skin in the game (and a reasonable chance that their favorite players would win the major titles). In fact, the year that tennis's television ratings started dropping consistently in the U.S. was 1985, the year that Ivan Lendl took over the top world ranking from John McEnroe, who never won another Grand Slam title again. If the guy you're interested in doesn't even make it to the final Sunday telecast, why watch? Americans are known to care mainly about sports in which they are competitive. We only need to look at the Olympics to see that the whole country will cheer for someone in an obscure sport if we have a chance to win it. But even the most popular world sports are slow to draw loyal fans in the U.S. if we don't have a chance to dominate the game (see soccer). By the time Agassi, Courier, and Sampras came along in the mid-'90s, the ratings had already fallen to about the current levels. Further, since the U.S. market drives tennis worldwide more than any other market, when the sport is popular here, it means greater success for the sport everywhere else.**

3. A Variety of Playing Styles: Not only were the personalities in tennis varied, but so were the playing styles that were employed effectively. Bjorn Borg used his incredible foot speed and endurance, combined with unprecedented topspin to wear down opponents like a tennis machine. McEnroe used the racquet like a giant hand to deftly drop volleys in seemingly inaccessible parts of the court, coming in behind every serve. Connors bashed the ball dead flat from all parts of the court. Lendl created howitzer-like modern topspin drives that overwhelmed everyone on both wings. Chris Evert won by hitting deep flat balls with precise placement, while Martina Navratlova and Billie Jean King served and volleyed their ways to the net whenever possible. Meanwhile, Andrea Jaeger and a host of other players moonballed their way to hundreds of victories. As a fan, you would choose to root for the player whose game you most admired or enjoyed watching, and each player had a distinctive style. Some would say that tennis became much less interesting to watch when Becker started winning with just his serve. Or that the power serving era of the 90s was bad for tennis, because points became so short, and long rallies so rare. Those things are true, but are made even more so when there's no contrast to them. And sure enough, we now find ourselves in an era where there is really only one playing style on each tour. Even the stroke production is limited now. A one-handed backhand is considered almost a novelty these days, and the backhand slice almost a relic apart from the occasional bailout or change of pace. Aside from a few players, volleys are only used to end points that have already been won strategically. This homogenization of playing styles makes the game much less interesting for the casual fan to watch, since they are less able to grasp the differences and nuances inherent to different players' games. Gone are the days when one player was much more fun to watch than another on a physical level.

4. A Variety of Playing Speeds: This is a bit of a circular problem, but the fact that the difference in court speed at the four majors is now much less than it was during tennis's heyday means that it's no longer possible to be a surface specialist or successfully employ a unique style of play. Even though McEnroe never won Roland Garros and Lendl never won Wimbledon, their different styles were both considered viable options on tour because of the different courts one had to succeed on. And because of these differences, the points looked different at each tournament and were fun to watch for different reasons, emphasizing the uniqueness of the characters and playing styles involved. Furthermore, there are those who would say that the value of winning a Grand Slam has now been diminished because it's not quite as complete a test of tennis mastery.

5. Increased Professionalism and Oversight: Tennis in the 1970s and early 1980s was really a bit like the wild west. Things were new, and tournaments, players, and officials were all still figuring out what professional tennis's standards would be. Although it's an unavoidable symptom of the increased money in the game, the added professionalism in tennis has arguably made it less compelling for the average fan. In the '70s and '80s, it was common to see Borg, Gerulaitis, or McEnroe out partying at a nightclub like Studio 54. Tabloids were rife with rumors of drug use and romantic intrigue among players. This all contributed to their popularity as characters (see #1) even if it risked hampering their performance the next day. As athletes became more mono-focused and professional, and top results became dependent on a much more ascetic lifestyle, players became less visible and their lives less interesting to outside observers. This meant that a lot of casual fans lost interest, because they no longer were being entertained as much and weren't as exposed to the players' lives except in controlled PR situations and photo ops. Furthermore, with the advent of athletic professionalism and the institution of the ATP as the tour's governing body, much greater pains were taken to control the images of the sport's participants. Whether it meant the tour covering up Agassi's drug use, or players at press conferences being discouraged from being candid with the press, the public lost access to the real personalities of the players. And rule changes in the Code of Conduct meant that a lot of the most entertaining and colorful behavior was forced out of the game. The new rules meant that players could no longer get away with the colorful behavior that made the sport's headlines until the mid 80s. While many would say that the tantrums thrown by McEnroe, or the fiery tirades of Connors, or the antics of Nastase were unseemly, they were big draws for the game. If you showed up, you never knew what you might see. Players made no bones about not liking each other, and this added to the rivalries on the court. Now, they're discouraged from saying anything negative about each other at all, and risk being censured if they're honest about each other or the tour's organization. In addition, many players self-edit for fear of risking lucrative sponsorship opportunities, many of which pay them more than their tour winnings. They're no longer real people or characters, but one-dimensional tennis-playing robots in the public's eyes, and the distinguishing differences are tiny subtleties apparent only to devoted fans.

6. The Societal Roles of Tennis: When tennis hit its boom, it wasn't just a sport, it was a symbol. It was the only major professional sport in the public eye in which both men and women competed (and even against each other in the case of mixed doubles). At a time when tennis was popular anyway, and women's liberation was a huge cultural phenomenon in the U.S., tennis was like a symbol of the era. Not only were women playing sports, but they were being paid for it. At a time of women's lib, the press latched on to this, and even made it viable to stage publicity stunts like the Battle of the Sexes (still one of the highest rated tennis events ever). Nowadays, women compete professionally in many sports, and the novelty has worn off.

7. The Changing Role of the Press: When tennis was booming, so was sports reporting. Most major newspapers had large sports departments, with pages devoted to each sport. As the internet took over and newspapers downsized, they eliminated secondary sports coverage. And in the U.S., tennis was still a secondary sport compared to football, baseball, and basketball. Many major newspapers that had a dedicated tennis writer, and featured tennis coverage in the daily paper were forced to cut them. A casual reader leafing through the sports section in the 70s and 80s was likely to come across tennis coverage at some point. But when papers started downsizing, they laid off many reporters and no longer sent anyone to tennis tournaments in order to have unique coverage. Instead, they just picked up syndicated coverage that was largely the same in every paper. Further, people started getting their news from the internet, where they would just seek out the specific sports they were following rather than reading through the sports pages in sequential/analog fashion. So the non-devoted tennis fans were coming across tennis writing and tennis scores much less often in the U.S. It was no longer top of mind.

8. Sports Life Cycles and Competition: Although it's not talked about much, many major spectator sports go through life cycles of popularity. With so many sports available now compared to the '70s and '80s, people pick up and drop sports of interest much more often. When a sport is newly popular, it gains a lot of casual viewers, who eventually stop watching it when something else more interesting comes along. After that happens, only the sport's devoted fans remain. Boxing was huge in the 70s, but it seemed to run its course, and dropped greatly in prominence. In boxing's case, the absence of compelling characters probably also contributed, like it did in tennis, as did the rise of MMA. Similarly, hockey in the U.S. was more popular then than it currently is. The sports with momentum get stronger, and the ones on the way down get dropped, eventually left with just the core audience (at least until another compelling character comes along). With tennis already weakened by many of the factors above, it lost momentum in the U.S. And while participation and spectatorship are separate factors, they do affect each other. One of the original barriers to tennis's acceptance was its perception as an elitist country club sport. While the popularization of the game during the 70s and 80s did a lot to combat this, sports associated with the wealthy took a hit after the 1980s.

9. Available Choices: It was mentioned above that just being on T V in the 70s and 80s meant that millions of Americans would watch tennis. But now, with hundreds of channels available in the U.S. as well as online options, people have a huge number of choices of what to watch. In addition, the U.S. has more major sports than many other countries. While baseball, football, basketball, hockey, soccer, and a host of other sports all provide considerable competition for tennis in the U.S., many other countries only have a few major pro sports. And many also don't have the infrastructure or population to support large team sports leagues. In the countries where people have far fewer channels, and far fewer team sports leagues, tennis is still quite popular, and (along with soccer and auto racing) is one of the most televised sports on general networks.

June 27, 2017

"Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"

  1. Boards
  2. Current Events
  3. McEnroe: "Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"
toyota 1 day ago#1
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jun/26/serena-williams-would-be-700-in-the-world-on-mens-tour-says-mcenroe

Why has this been causing such uproar when there is probably some truth behind it. 

In mens tennis there is no way she is in the top 10.

From what i heard low rank pros could probably beat her and even college players can too. Its just physical differences and the reason why sports are seperated by the genders.

Because if all was made equal, no split gender leagues and everything was based on athleticism and talent then very few....if any, women would make it to a pro level.
lilORANG 1 day ago#2
hasn't she lost to people ranked around there?

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)#1998:_Karsten_Braasch_vs._the_Williams_sisters
it wasn't 700, but she lost to a guy ranked 203 very badly, and he claimed he was holding back so that he was playing about a rank 600 level.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
Axiom 1 day ago#3
Lol McEnroe also blamed Andy Warhol for ruining his sex life
Lmao the speed of the balls they hit alone pretty much singlehandedly proves why women can't compete against men in Tennis.
"Iwata was awesome" - Mr. Nintendo
dinglebutt
DrizztLink 1 day ago#5
Axiom posted...
Lol McEnroe also blamed Andy Warhol for ruining his sex life

Warhol ruined a lot of sex lives.
Its true whats the problemm?

Remember that time thr womens usa world champion soccer team lost to the usa boys under 16 team...yea...
Living is naturally hell, you have to work to put a smile on.
http://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/7_ugmpjq.gif
lilORANG posted...
hasn't she lost to people ranked around there?

I don't think it was someone quite ranked that low, but it was still a pretty low ranked person.
just tell them all your base doesn't belong to us because we were getting stoned...they'll understand-Ken156
Omega Hunter posted...
Its true whats the problemm?

Remember that time thr womens usa world champion soccer team lost to the usa boys under 16 team...yea...


When did this happen? You have a link?
just tell them all your base doesn't belong to us because we were getting stoned...they'll understand-Ken156
The Admiral 1 day ago#9
He's not wrong.
- The Admiral
lilORANG 1 day ago#10
TommyG663513 posted...
Omega Hunter posted...
Its true whats the problemm?

Remember that time thr womens usa world champion soccer team lost to the usa boys under 16 team...yea...


When did this happen? You have a link?

http://usatodayhss.com/2017/the-fc-dallas-u-15-academy-team-beat-the-u-s-women-s-national-team-5-2

the lady teams regularly play mens teams to practice. When they play college teams they lose by hilarious numbers.
Axiom 1 day ago#11
DrizztLink posted...
Axiom posted...
Lol McEnroe also blamed Andy Warhol for ruining his sex life

Warhol ruined a lot of sex lives.

Heh I'm kind of tempted to read his book. It's probably pretty entertaining
TommyG663513 posted...
Omega Hunter posted...
Its true whats the problemm?

Remember that time thr womens usa world champion soccer team lost to the usa boys under 16 team...yea...


When did this happen? You have a link?

I'm pretty sure he's confusing them with the Australian team.
Delirious_Beard  attack on sight1 day ago#13
men's tennis is completely in another league compared to women's
http://i.imgur.com/5UL2v5u.gif
"Does our ruin benefit the earth? Does it help the grass to grow, the sun to shine? Is this darkness in you, too?"
He's not wrong.
Start me, bench Forte
I4NRulez 1 day ago#15
lilORANG posted...
hasn't she lost to people ranked around there?

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)#1998:_Karsten_Braasch_vs._the_Williams_sisters
it wasn't 700, but she lost to a guy ranked 203 very badly, and he claimed he was holding back so that he was playing about a rank 600 level.


She was like 18. Serena in her prime would probably have done a lot better
The night brims with defiled scum,and is permeated by their rotten stench.
Just think. Now you're all set to hunt and kill to your heart's content.
Dathrowed1 1 day ago#16
NinjaWarrior455 posted...
TommyG663513 posted...
Omega Hunter posted...
Its true whats the problemm?

Remember that time thr womens usa world champion soccer team lost to the usa boys under 16 team...yea...


When did this happen? You have a link?

I'm pretty sure he's confusing them with the Australian team.

Nah, the US women's team regularly loses to JV teams. I don't see the problem here, the more lean and muscular sex is surprise the better athlete
sig
lilORANG posted...
hasn't she lost to people ranked around there?

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)#1998:_Karsten_Braasch_vs._the_Williams_sisters
it wasn't 700, but she lost to a guy ranked 203 very badly, and he claimed he was holding back so that he was playing about a rank 600 level.

Keep in mind they were in their prime too.
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
DrizztLink 1 day ago#18
NinjaWarrior455 posted...
TommyG663513 posted...
Omega Hunter posted...
Its true whats the problemm?

Remember that time thr womens usa world champion soccer team lost to the usa boys under 16 team...yea...


When did this happen? You have a link?

I'm pretty sure he's confusing them with the Australian team.

http://usatodayhss.com/2017/the-fc-dallas-u-15-academy-team-beat-the-u-s-women-s-national-team-5-2
Darkman124 1 day ago#19
my question is 'why did he bring this up'

it is widely understood among actual tennis fans of both genders, and a subject of much wailing and gnashing of teeth by non-fans looking for something stupid to tweet about

there's no reason or benefit to talk about it. nobody is claiming she'd do well among mens' leagues (except the morons who feel the need to get upset over his comments)
And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
Isn't she basically a man anyway?
Darkman124 posted...
my question is 'why did he bring this up'

it is widely understood among actual tennis fans of both genders, and a subject of much wailing and gnashing of teeth by non-fans looking for something stupid to tweet about

there's no reason or benefit to talk about it. nobody is claiming she'd do well among mens' leagues (except the morons who feel the need to get upset over his comments)


He said this because the NPR interviewer got on his case when he qualified her as being the best "female" tennis player. This was a fairly stupid line of questioning designed to sound politically correct, and I'm not surprised the clickbait articles ignore this context leading up to it. Here is the interview exchange.

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.


http://www.npr.org/2017/06/25/534149646/but-seriously-tennis-great-john-mcenroe-says-hes-seeking-inner-peace
- The Admiral
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
#22
(message deleted)
Terra-enforcer posted...
Isn't she basically a man anyway?


...no?

But McEnroe is correct.
CableZL 1 day ago#24
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant tennis player of all time.
E32005 1 day ago#25
the interviewer was bulls*** and had an agenda.

she asked how great he thought Serena was and he said shes the greatest women's tennis player.

then the interviewer pressed "why do you have to classify it"

So he explained.

Keep in mine Serena herself already admitted as much on Letterman.
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
bevan306 1 day ago#27
shouldn't be controversial, and blame the interviewer for baiting this story btw. She's still probably the goat tennis player
WhinyZach 1 day ago#28
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.

lol stfu
WhinyZach 1 day ago#30
sktgamer_13dude posted...
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.

lol stfu


what?
I4NRulez 1 day ago#31
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.


You mean like every star athlete
The night brims with defiled scum,and is permeated by their rotten stench.
Just think. Now you're all set to hunt and kill to your heart's content.
CableZL 1 day ago#32
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.
WhinyZach 1 day ago#33
I4NRulez posted...
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.


You mean like every star athlete


In certain sports it's more common. Messi and Ronaldo probably aren't on anything banned by the sport. NFL I wouldn't be surprised if steroid use is rampant.

People know tennis/biking are full of people using PED's, if you read into the sharapova fiasco she was on a crazy cocktail of stuff since she was 18. Thing is, if they took the users out of the game, there'd be no one left. So occasionally the higher powers in the sport make someone a scapegoat, someone who's either pissed off the higher ups, or are now useless too them (see lance armstrong).
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.

Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
CableZL 1 day ago#35
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.

Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?


No, but it does make them the most dominant team.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.

Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?


No, but it does make them the most dominant team.

Of female college basketball.
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
tiornys 1 day ago#37
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

Eh, this varies with the sport, depending on how relevant strength/mass is and how much the sport's equipment helps to compensate. Target shooting, for example, can actually favor women (a bit of googling suggests women are more accurate but men can shoot faster).

For a sport where there's definitely a bias towards males but where it's small enough to let the top females be competitive with the pros, look at bowling. Three women have made TV appearances on the PBA and one has actually won a PBA title. It's also fairly common to see the top females cashing in PBA events.
CableZL 1 day ago#38
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.

Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?


No, but it does make them the most dominant team.

Of female college basketball.


Of college basketball in general since no one dominated their competition like they did.

If no one dominated like person or team A, then person or team A is the most dominant.
lilORANG 1 day ago#39
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.

Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?


No, but it does make them the most dominant team.

Of female college basketball.


Of college basketball in general since no one dominated their competition like they did.

If no one dominated like person or team A, then person or team A is the most dominant.


By that logic I'm the most dominant mma fighter because I regularly deck my 8 year old nephew when he tries to blind side me.
#FeelTheBernieSanders
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
CableZL posted...
He's right, but it's a pointless statement. She's still the most dominant female tennis player of all time.

If you agree the men and women are a class apart then you agree the most dominant players of each need to be distinguished as such.


Not necessarily, since men and women don't play against each other professionally unless it's mixed doubles. No one dominated against their competition like Serena Williams.

Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?


No, but it does make them the most dominant team.

Of female college basketball.


Of college basketball in general since no one dominated their competition like they did.

If no one dominated like person or team A, then person or team A is the most dominant.

But how can they be the most dominant in all of basketball or all of tennis when it's universally agreed a division 3 mens team would crush UConn or a middling mens tennis player would crush the Williams sisters?

By that logic I'm the most dominant mma fighter because I regularly deck my 8 year old nephew when he tries to blind side me.

Also this
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
CableZL 1 day ago#41
lilORANG posted...
By that logic I'm the most dominant mma fighter because I regularly deck my 8 year old nephew when he tries to blind side me.


That's a terrible analogy. Serena Williams wasn't out there playing against 8 year olds and neither was UConn.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
CableZL 1 day ago#42
voldothegr8 posted...
But how can they be the most dominant in all of basketball or all of tennis when it's universally agreed a division 3 mens team would crush UConn or a middling mens tennis player would crush the Williams sisters?


"Most dominant" doesn't mean UConn would beat a men's college basketball team, nor does it mean Serena Williams would beat a male tennis player. It means they dominated their competition more than anyone else.
WhinyZach 1 day ago#43
tiornys posted...
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

Eh, this varies with the sport, depending on how relevant strength/mass is and how much the sport's equipment helps to compensate. Target shooting, for example, can actually favor women (a bit of googling suggests women are more accurate but men can shoot faster).

For a sport where there's definitely a bias towards males but where it's small enough to let the top females be competitive with the pros, look at bowling. Three women have made TV appearances on the PBA and one has actually won a PBA title. It's also fairly common to see the top females cashing in PBA events.


Ya, i wasn't thinking in terms of target shooting and bowling. Didn't even come to mind. You're right though.
lilORANG 1 day ago#44
CableZL posted...
lilORANG posted...
By that logic I'm the most dominant mma fighter because I regularly deck my 8 year old nephew when he tries to blind side me.


That's a terrible analogy. Serena Williams wasn't out there playing against 8 year olds and neither was UConn.

But if she was you'd say she was dominant.
Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids.
CableZL 1 day ago#45
lilORANG posted...
But if she was you'd say she was dominant.


Except we aren't talking about grown people "competing" against children. Like I said, that's a terrible analogy.
WhinyZach posted...
sktgamer_13dude posted...
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.

lol stfu


what?

If she was on PEDs, they'd catch her. 

Sharapova got caught cause she was using a legal substance that became illegal and she didn't know it became illegal cause her trainers didn't tell her. 

Just because she dominates a sport doesn't mean she's on PEDs. 

Get over yourself.
The Admiral posted...
Darkman124 posted...
my question is 'why did he bring this up'

it is widely understood among actual tennis fans of both genders, and a subject of much wailing and gnashing of teeth by non-fans looking for something stupid to tweet about

there's no reason or benefit to talk about it. nobody is claiming she'd do well among mens' leagues (except the morons who feel the need to get upset over his comments)


He said this because the NPR interviewer got on his case when he qualified her as being the best "female" tennis player. This was a fairly stupid line of questioning designed to sound politically correct, and I'm not surprised the clickbait articles ignore this context leading up to it. Here is the interview exchange.

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.


http://www.npr.org/2017/06/25/534149646/but-seriously-tennis-great-john-mcenroe-says-hes-seeking-inner-peace

He's right. Seems like a stupid question to ask, since it's just going to rile people up who have an agenda about this sort of thing. Serena Williams might be the most dominant player ever within her own relevant sphere, but female participants are not relevant as far as male sports are concerned.
CableZL posted...
voldothegr8 posted...
But how can they be the most dominant in all of basketball or all of tennis when it's universally agreed a division 3 mens team would crush UConn or a middling mens tennis player would crush the Williams sisters?


"Most dominant" doesn't mean UConn would beat a men's college basketball team, nor does it mean Serena Williams would beat a male tennis player. It means they dominated their competition more than anyone else.

You said she's probably the most dominant tennis player of all time. That statement to me, and I'm not alone, is saying that she's lumped in with the men. Again, you agree men and women tennis players are a class apart so that statement to me is false, she's the most dominant female tennis player of all time.
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
CableZL 1 day ago#49
voldothegr8 posted...
You said she's probably the most dominant tennis player of all time. That statement to me, and I'm not alone, is saying that she's lumped in with the men. Again, you agree men and women tennis players are a class apart so that statement to me is false, she's the most dominant female tennis player of all time.


Being the most dominant doesn't necessarily mean you're the best. No male tennis player has dominated like Serena Williams has, so they aren't as dominant. That doesn't mean Serena Williams would beat said male tennis players. It just means she was more dominant. Because as you agreed, no one has dominated like she has.

Again, if no one has dominated like she has, then she is the most dominant. It's essentially a statement of how much better she is than her competition over the years.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
WhinyZach 1 day ago#50
sktgamer_13dude posted...
WhinyZach posted...
sktgamer_13dude posted...
WhinyZach posted...
Some people just don't understand that men dominate in athletics, and the top tier of female athletes couldn't even play semi pro mens leagues.

You can call her the most dominant female tennis player, but I mean she's blatantly on PED's so really it's nothing impressive.

lol stfu


what?

If she was on PEDs, they'd catch her. 

Sharapova got caught cause she was using a legal substance that became illegal and she didn't know it became illegal cause her trainers didn't tell her. 

Just because she dominates a sport doesn't mean she's on PEDs. 

Get over yourself.


I dunno why you'd say get over yourself as if I have an inflated ego over this. You seem really upset, and also ignorant. Terrible combination, you should work on that. I'll even help educate you.

bPinpmc

No woman has this kind of muscle mass naturally. The only other female to come close to her physique is known, deep voiced, juicer Samantha Stosur
xlhupkC

When a random drug tester came to her house, she locked herself inside her panic room
http://nypost.com/2011/11/02/serena-williams-locks-herself-in-panic-room-in-drug-test-mix-up/

She has a HUGE list of injuries. I mean, that alone doesn't really point to PED's but she came back from everything quickly, and got stronger. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serena_Williams#2004.E2.80.9307:_Injuries_and_the_comeback

Politics play the biggest role here, that's why Serena hasn't been caught.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
  1. Boards
  2. Current Events 
  3. McEnroe: "Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"
    1. Boards
    2. Current Events
    3. McEnroe: "Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"
    lilORANG 1 day ago#51
    CableZL posted...
    lilORANG posted...
    But if she was you'd say she was dominant.


    Except we aren't talking about grown people "competing" against children. Like I said, that's a terrible analogy.

    You can't call someone most dominant of all time if you don't factor in everyone in the game. That includes 8 year olds. She dominates the women's league.
    #FeelTheBernieSanders
    tiornys 1 day ago#52
    CableZL posted...
    Being the most dominant doesn't necessarily mean you're the best. No male tennis player has dominated like Serena Williams has, so they aren't as dominant. That doesn't mean Serena Williams would beat said male tennis players. It just means she was more dominant. Because as you agreed, no one has dominated like she has.

    Again, if no one has dominated like she has, then she is the most dominant. It's essentially a statement of how much better she is than her competition over the years.

    I see your point, but I think there's an inherent problem with this line of argument. If we're going to define dominance as relative to the competition, then we need to consider all tiers of organized competition (restricting to "organized" to rule out the "I beat my nephew" scenarios). Since we don't have easy access to data on all the tiers of organized competition, we can't actually claim to know whether or not some tennis player might have been even more dominant at their tier of competition (possibly because they didn't move up a tier) than Serena was on the women's pro circuit.
    CableZL 1 day ago#53
    lilORANG posted...
    You can't call someone most dominant of all time if you don't factor in everyone in the game. That includes 8 year olds. She dominates the women's league.


    1. 8 year olds aren't "in the game" of professional tennis. Stop using this terrible analogy. 
    2. If person/team A has dominated like no one else, then person/team A is the most dominant.
    Iodine 1 day ago#54
    The Admiral posted...
    Darkman124 posted...
    my question is 'why did he bring this up'

    it is widely understood among actual tennis fans of both genders, and a subject of much wailing and gnashing of teeth by non-fans looking for something stupid to tweet about

    there's no reason or benefit to talk about it. nobody is claiming she'd do well among mens' leagues (except the morons who feel the need to get upset over his comments)


    He said this because the NPR interviewer got on his case when he qualified her as being the best "female" tennis player. This was a fairly stupid line of questioning designed to sound politically correct, and I'm not surprised the clickbait articles ignore this context leading up to it. Here is the interview exchange.

    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.


    http://www.npr.org/2017/06/25/534149646/but-seriously-tennis-great-john-mcenroe-says-hes-seeking-inner-peace

    Well ok then.
    In Belichick we Trust
    WhinyZach posted...

    Politics play the biggest role here, that's why Serena hasn't been caught.

    lol no.

    Literally the first sentence of your article:

    Serena Williams fled to the panic room in her Los Angeles mansion when she mistook a sports association drug tester for a dangerous intruder.


    You're trying to make it look like she locked herself in a panic room SOLELY because of the random drug test when in fact, it was because she thought it was an intruder. Considering Sean Taylor literally died 4 years before that because of a home invasion, it's kind of an appropriate response to a random person at your house.

    Again; get over yourself. Athletes in all sports have quick injury comeback times. They have the worlds best doctors and trainers at their disposal and keep their bodies in better condition than literally anyone here ever will.
    I don't know why some people aren't getting this dominance argument. You can argue dominance cross sports, gender, even time periods if you want.

    "The Chicago Bulls were more dominant than the Patriots are" is a claim that has nothing to do with which of the two would win in a head to head competition in either sport.
    Iodine posted...
    The Admiral posted...
    Darkman124 posted...
    my question is 'why did he bring this up'

    it is widely understood among actual tennis fans of both genders, and a subject of much wailing and gnashing of teeth by non-fans looking for something stupid to tweet about

    there's no reason or benefit to talk about it. nobody is claiming she'd do well among mens' leagues (except the morons who feel the need to get upset over his comments)


    He said this because the NPR interviewer got on his case when he qualified her as being the best "female" tennis player. This was a fairly stupid line of questioning designed to sound politically correct, and I'm not surprised the clickbait articles ignore this context leading up to it. Here is the interview exchange.

    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.


    http://www.npr.org/2017/06/25/534149646/but-seriously-tennis-great-john-mcenroe-says-hes-seeking-inner-peace

    Well ok then.

    Yeah, holy s***. That interviewer tried to bait the f*** out of him. What a pile of s***.
    FFRK: BRKB - Eiko - Guardian Mog
    FFBE: 885,063,087 - Orlandeau - 931 ATK
    You can't call yourself dominant if you don't play against the best competition at your league (professional in this case)
    Anteaterking posted...
    I don't know why some people aren't getting this dominance argument. You can argue dominance cross sports, gender, even time periods if you want.

    "The Chicago Bulls were more dominant than the Patriots are" is a claim that has nothing to do with which of the two would win in a head to head competition in either sport.

    I mean you can, but when someone says most dominant tennis player ever I instantly think Federer.
    Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
    Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
    To be 700th in the world as a woman in a sport with men is crazy high. 

    Like, the womans sprinting record for 100m is still 8% too slow to even qualify for the men's Olympics 100m
    "All I have is my balls and my word, and I don't break them for anyone!"-Tony Montana
    Callixtus 1 day ago#61
    Isnt the real question whether she is the best, not whether she is the most dominant? She certainly is not the best.
    KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
    WhinyZach 1 day ago#62
    sktgamer_13dude posted...
    WhinyZach posted...

    Politics play the biggest role here, that's why Serena hasn't been caught.

    lol no.

    Literally the first sentence of your article:

    Serena Williams fled to the panic room in her Los Angeles mansion when she mistook a sports association drug tester for a dangerous intruder.


    You're trying to make it look like she locked herself in a panic room SOLELY because of the random drug test when in fact, it was because she thought it was an intruder. Considering Sean Taylor literally died 4 years before that because of a home invasion, it's kind of an appropriate response to a random person at your house.

    Again; get over yourself. Athletes in all sports have quick injury comeback times. They have the worlds best doctors and trainers at their disposal and keep their bodies in better condition than literally anyone here ever will.


    Your "lol no" rebuttal was great, I hope you didn't strain too hard coming up with that one.

    And ya, cuz someone knocking on your door is really grounds for you to run to your panic room and call the police. I also notice you don't address that physically there's no doubt she's enhanced. 

    No, athletes come back from injuries in usual times, not accelerated. Most of the time they regress, not get better. 

    You can scream "get over yourself" all you want you just look silly.
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    "oh no, girl is muscular. she must be on PEDs!"

    WhinyZach posted...
    No, athletes come back from injuries in usual times, not accelerated. Most of the time they regress, not get better.

    uh, no. And not every athlete gets worse with injury. Some pitchers have pitched better after TJS, aka one of the most serious arm surgeries ever. Older players tend to regress, but younger players are still growing into their athletic prime.

    So again, get over yourself. Not most athletes are on PEDs, especially illegal ones. This isn't the 90s/early 00s.
    WhinyZach posted...
    Your "lol no" rebuttal was great, I hope you didn't strain too hard coming up with that one.

    Considering you're believing that there's some big conspiracy keeping her playing tennis because of the politics of the sport, "lol no" is probably too much of a rebuttal.
    voldothegr8 posted...
    I mean you can, but when someone says most dominant tennis player ever I instantly think Federer.


    Yeah, but I think that argument would be made on the grounds of his number of Grand Slams, win percentage, etc. not based on whether he can beat Serena in a one on one.
    Conflict  refugee love block me1 day ago#66
    Darkman124 posted...
    my question is 'why did he bring this up'

    it is widely understood among actual tennis fans of both genders, and a subject of much wailing and gnashing of teeth by non-fans looking for something stupid to tweet about

    there's no reason or benefit to talk about it. nobody is claiming she'd do well among mens' leagues (except the morons who feel the need to get upset over his comments)


    Precisely what I was thinking

    No point in pointing out the differences. It's not going to spark positive feedback
    Do you like the way the water tastes?
    Like gunfire
    MrPeppers 1 day ago#67
    Anteaterking posted...
    I don't know why some people aren't getting this dominance argument. You can argue dominance cross sports, gender, even time periods if you want.

    "The Chicago Bulls were more dominant than the Patriots are" is a claim that has nothing to do with which of the two would win in a head to head competition in either sport.


    It just seems like splitting hairs between dominance and best is entirely pointless because the concept of dominance in which its being used with this tennis example is an entirely useless metric. So Serena was the most dominant tennis player of all time asterisk asterisk asterisk. This is nothing but a feelgood statement that serves just as much purpose as stating she'd get crushed in a men's league.
    Dathrowed1 22 hours ago#68
    voldothegr8 posted...
    Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?

    Seriously, women's sports have less parity. Male athletes are closer to one another, where the best teams are normally due to coaching vs. talent (though of course it helps to have talent). Women have a larger talent gap among themselves.
    sig
    BB mofo 22 hours ago#69
    McEnroe's argument is pretty stupid. Will we now say that Julio Cesar Chavez isn't one of the greatest boxers of the 20th century since he's a welter-weight while Buster Douglas is a heavyweight who has a higher likelihood of knocking Chavez out in a match? McEnroe is willfully ignoring context.
    "But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?"
    -Mark Twain
    BB mofo posted...
    Will we now say that Julio Cesar Chavez isn't one of the greatest boxers of the 20th century

    Best welterweight boxer, sure.
    (edited 22 hours ago)reportquote
    Omega Hunter 16 hours ago#71
    How can you call someone the best ever when they play in a league with inferior competition. Its blatantly disingenuous.

    Im gonna create a mma league with only midgets and me, then call myself the most dominant ever lol.
    Living is naturally hell, you have to work to put a smile on.
    http://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/7_ugmpjq.gif
    (edited 16 hours ago)reportquote
    Turtlebread 16 hours ago#72
    that would only make sense if you were a midget too
    Bio1590 16 hours ago#73
    Turtlebread posted...
    that would only make sense if you were a midget too

    And it was professionally sanctioned
    Link HT 16 hours ago#74
    Most people in sports are on something, specially the top 1%

    It's just naive to think otherwise
    Darkman124 15 hours ago#75
    ITT: Darkman124 and Admiral are in full agreement.

    His interviewer was clearly pushing him into this area. "Some would say she's the best tennis player in the world" 

    Who would say that?
    And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
    Lorenzo_2003 15 hours ago#76
    sktgamer_13dude posted...

    Sharapova got caught cause she was using a legal substance that became illegal and she didn't know it became illegal cause her trainers didn't tell her. 


    Lol, that might be the most naive comment I've ever heard in regards to professional sports. The UFC guys are my favorite because they just scapegoat protein powders and whatever else they can think of.
    ...
    pinky0926 15 hours ago#77
    He's not wrong, but I have to question what the context was here. What was he trying to say? Like was he just trying to stir up some unneeded s*** or did someone ask him "Do you think women could play against men?"

    Edit: looks like the interviewer was pushing towards this. 

    I've also got to laugh at Serena's statement. Like, what do you think McEnroe is? He's a pundit. It's his job to give "I reckon" statements about things that could only ever be conjecture.
    (edited 15 hours ago)reportquote
    ghettoraider81 15 hours ago#78
    pinky0926 posted...
    He's not wrong, but I have to question what the context was here. What was he trying to say? Like was he just trying to stir up some unneeded s*** or did someone ask him "Do you think women could play against men?"




    He called her the best female player in the world.

    He was then asked why he specified female and not just best in the world.

    He replied because she isn't, if she played on the men's tour she would be like 700th.


    He's not wrong and was baited.
    Win, lose, or tie Oakland Raiders til I die! WHY'S THE RUM GONE!
    S.M.O.K.E my anti sXe
    (edited 15 hours ago)reportquote
    BilalPowell 15 hours ago#79
    Prime Floyd Mayweather would get destroyed by prime Mike Tyson.
    Start me, bench Forte
    Darkman124 15 hours ago#80
    pinky0926 posted...
    I've also got to laugh at Serena's statement. Like, what do you think McEnroe is? He's a pundit. It's his job to give "I reckon" statements about things that could only ever be conjecture.


    eh, i kind of understand what's going on there, too.

    technically the person violating her privacy was the interviewer, they're the one who forced it on her

    but as the interviewer had a pro-serena agenda, she wasn't gonna respond in anger at them for starting this s***

    pretty much the interviewer did a minor bad, McEnroe did nothing wrong and was baited, and twitter was just waiting for something a man said to get angry about.
    And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
    (edited 15 hours ago)reportquote
    pinky0926 15 hours ago#81
    Darkman124 posted...
    pinky0926 posted...
    I've also got to laugh at Serena's statement. Like, what do you think McEnroe is? He's a pundit. It's his job to give "I reckon" statements about things that could only ever be conjecture.


    eh, i kind of understand what's going on there, too.

    technically the person violating her privacy was the interviewer, they're the one who forced it on her

    but as the interviewer had a pro-serena agenda, she wasn't gonna respond in anger at them for starting this s***

    pretty much the interviewer did a minor bad, McEnroe did nothing wrong and was baited, and twitter was just waiting for something a man said to get angry about.


    I just made the mistake of reading twitter to see all the stupid. I am now dumber for having read it.
    Darkman124 15 hours ago#82
    pinky0926 posted...

    I just made the mistake of reading twitter to see all the stupid. I am now dumber for having read it.


    dr. darkman proscribes the following treatment:

    read this scientific journal article in full. 

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.08503
    And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
    (edited 15 hours ago)reportquote
    pinky0926 15 hours ago#83
    CableZL 15 hours ago#84
    BilalPowell posted...
    Prime Floyd Mayweather would get destroyed by prime Mike Tyson.


    The two would never have been in a boxing match against each other, though. Tyson a heavyweight while Mayweather is a welterweight.
    Ilishe 14 hours ago#85
    Yeah I think she would be thereabouts.

    Because men are better than women at sports.
    ~Phoenix Nine~
    ~Victory needs no explanation; defeat allows none.~
    istmirechtegal 14 hours ago#86
    CableZL posted...
    voldothegr8 posted...
    You said she's probably the most dominant tennis player of all time. That statement to me, and I'm not alone, is saying that she's lumped in with the men. Again, you agree men and women tennis players are a class apart so that statement to me is false, she's the most dominant female tennis player of all time.


    Being the most dominant doesn't necessarily mean you're the best. No male tennis player has dominated like Serena Williams has, so they aren't as dominant. That doesn't mean Serena Williams would beat said male tennis players. It just means she was more dominant. Because as you agreed, no one has dominated like she has.

    Again, if no one has dominated like she has, then she is the most dominant. It's essentially a statement of how much better she is than her competition over the years.


    .....yes in her field, which is women tennis.
    I can't profess to understand God's plan, Christ promised the resurrection of the dead. I just thought he had something a little different in mind.
    Darkman124 14 hours ago#87
    pinky0926 posted...
    I'm thinking Lyle McDonald might be the more topical academic writer of choice here:


    perhaps, but Dr. Bao is at the forefront of quantum computing and i know personally that he's a dank motherf***er
    And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
    gmanthebest 14 hours ago#88
    Tag
    What do I feel when I shoot an enemy? Recoil.
    pinky0926 14 hours ago#89
    Darkman124 posted...
    pinky0926 posted...
    I'm thinking Lyle McDonald might be the more topical academic writer of choice here:


    perhaps, but Dr. Bao is at the forefront of quantum computing and i know personally that he's a dank motherf***er


    quantum computing is an intensely interesting subject! To non-physicists it seems like magic, though.
    Darkman124 14 hours ago#90
    pinky0926 posted...

    quantum computing is an intensely interesting subject! To non-physicists it seems like magic, though.


    the real magic is the algorithm writing they do

    he turned an np-hard problem into a polynomial-hard problem (essentially unsolvable->solvable in a few hours)
    And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
    pinky0926 14 hours ago#91
    Darkman124 posted...
    pinky0926 posted...

    quantum computing is an intensely interesting subject! To non-physicists it seems like magic, though.


    the real magic is the algorithm writing they do

    he turned an np-hard problem into a polynomial-hard problem (essentially unsolvable->solvable in a few hours)


    Sounds like a real smarty pants. I bet he's got a degree and everything
    shanefu22 13 hours ago#92
    Once again SJWs tearing down an innocent statement to make themselves relevant.
    Bench- 550 Squat-665 Dead- 825
    (edited 13 hours ago)reportquote
    WhinyZach 13 hours ago#93
    sktgamer_13dude posted...
    WhinyZach posted...
    Your "lol no" rebuttal was great, I hope you didn't strain too hard coming up with that one.

    Considering you're believing that there's some big conspiracy keeping her playing tennis because of the politics of the sport, "lol no" is probably too much of a rebuttal.


    You're naive, man. When you get a little older you'll learn that these athletes aren't just people who work so much harder than everyone else in their sport lol.
    pinky0926 13 hours ago#94
    WhinyZach posted...
    sktgamer_13dude posted...
    WhinyZach posted...
    Your "lol no" rebuttal was great, I hope you didn't strain too hard coming up with that one.

    Considering you're believing that there's some big conspiracy keeping her playing tennis because of the politics of the sport, "lol no" is probably too much of a rebuttal.


    You're naive, man. When you get a little older you'll learn that these athletes aren't just people who work so much harder than everyone else in their sport lol.


    I like the Bill Burr commentary on this, in regards to Lance Armstrong. "So what? Our roided up guy beat your roided up guy."
    Darkman124 13 hours ago#95
    pinky0926 posted...

    Sounds like a real smarty pants. I bet he's got a degree and everything


    yeah but he can't hold alcohol for s***
    And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
    ChromaticAngel 13 hours ago#96
    voldothegr8 posted...

    Nobody dominated female college basketball like UConn, does that make them better than all the mens teams?

    I think what a lot of people fail to realize is that being dominant at the women's league is a lot easier than dominating the men's league. Winning as many trophies as Federer did is a much bigger accomplishment than Serena's wins because he did it in the men's league.
    ktownslayer16 13 hours ago#97
    I bet she's get destroyed by a good high school player.
    Fire Bryan Murray
    Gojak_v3 13 hours ago#98
    ITT: people realize men are generally physically superior to women.
    tennisdude818 13 hours ago#99
    Top D1 college players would beat her, and when those same guys try to play pro they are often ranked 500-700 or worse. There is just no comparison, she can't move and play defense like men can. She hits hard, but when her ball pace seems similar to what men hit it's because her ball is flat(little to no spin). Comparing men's tennis to women's tennis is like comparing the NBA to the WNBA. 

    This isn't mean to insult her or stain her legacy, but some SJWs in media are pushing a narrative that she is the best PLAYER ever, not the best FEMALE player. The two tours can't be compared to each other. Federer is the best men's player, Serena is the best women's player.
    (edited 13 hours ago)reportquote
    Gojak_v3 13 hours ago#100
    This thread reminds me of all the CEmen saying they would destroy Ronda Rousey in a fight.
    1. Boards
    2. Current Events 
    3. McEnroe: "Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"
      1. Boards
      2. Current Events
      3. McEnroe: "Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"
      Darkman124 13 hours ago#101
      Gojak_v3 posted...
      This thread reminds me of all the CEmen saying they would destroy Ronda Rousey in a fight.


      how so

      0 people in here have claimed they would personally beat williams in a tennis match

      it seems more like people are realizing he was baited and the ensuing rage-fest was pretty clearly the intent of the interviewer (and the goal of the people pitching the twitter s***-storm) rather than him doing something inappropriate
      And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
      Gojak_v3 13 hours ago#102
      Darkman124 posted...
      Gojak_v3 posted...
      This thread reminds me of all the CEmen saying they would destroy Ronda Rousey in a fight.


      how so

      0 people in here have claimed they would personally beat williams in a tennis match

      it seems more like people are realizing he was baited and the ensuing rage-fest was pretty clearly the intent of the interviewer (and the goal of the people pitching the twitter s***-storm) rather than him doing something inappropriate


      I said reminds me of it not a direct comparison. And yeah you have people saying high schoolers would beat her which really reminds me when CEmen neckbeards were like I could beat up Ronda Rousy. Not that I think she could compete with men. People just take it to extremes.
      Asherlee10 13 hours ago#103
      *didn't read the replies in the thread*

      No s***. 99% of the time female athletes can't compete with male athletes. Men are literally stronger and faster. Going further, I think that men also have better spatial awareness than women in general. 

      I played on boys teams my entire life until about 16 years old when boys finally caught up and I couldn't compete at the same level I wanted to. However, that did help me play differently when I joined girls teams in soccer.
      "Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
      tennisdude818 12 hours ago#104
      Gojak_v3 posted...
      Darkman124 posted...
      Gojak_v3 posted...
      This thread reminds me of all the CEmen saying they would destroy Ronda Rousey in a fight.


      how so

      0 people in here have claimed they would personally beat williams in a tennis match

      it seems more like people are realizing he was baited and the ensuing rage-fest was pretty clearly the intent of the interviewer (and the goal of the people pitching the twitter s***-storm) rather than him doing something inappropriate


      I said reminds me of it not a direct comparison. And yeah you have people saying high schoolers would beat her which really reminds me when CEmen neckbeards were like I could beat up Ronda Rousy. Not that I think she could compete with men. People just take it to extremes.


      Well there are 17-18 year olds that could beat her but that's not really relevent anyway. 17 year old Nadal won the French Open IIRC. At 18 Jack Sock was already ready for the pros.
      ThyCorndog 12 hours ago#105
      if you read the interview you'd see McEnroe said nothing wrong. he said Serena Williams is undoubtedly the greatest female player of the sport. the interviewer asks him why he's distinguishing the sex of the player and asks if she's the best player overall. McEnroe says not overall, and that she would be like the 700th best player if you counted in male players
      Darkman124 12 hours ago#106
      Asherlee10 posted...
      I played on boys teams my entire life until about 16 years old when boys finally caught up and I couldn't compete at the same level I wanted to. However, that did help me play differently when I joined girls teams in soccer.


      the fact that you made it to 16 before having to leave the male leagues explains a lot about why you were a D-1 soccer college athlete

      that level of training gave you a huge advantage over your peers
      And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
      (edited 12 hours ago)reportquote
      700? I could buy into like, the top 150 or so, but 700 is a bit too flippant and I'm guessing he'd walk that back if he could
      Gheb 12 hours ago#108
      The Great Muta 22 posted...
      700? I could buy into like, the top 150 or so, but 700 is a bit too flippant and I'm guessing he'd walk that back if he could

      She was thoroughly beaten by a dude ranked 203 in the past. So top 150 would be a giant overstatement.
      S*** I have to stop doing that," Gheb said, as he lay back down and died again. - Forgotten Love
      Chiefs are going to win the Super Bowl
      voldothegr8 12 hours ago#109
      Gheb posted...
      The Great Muta 22 posted...
      700? I could buy into like, the top 150 or so, but 700 is a bit too flippant and I'm guessing he'd walk that back if he could

      She was thoroughly beaten by a dude ranked 203 in the past. So top 150 would be a giant overstatement.

      Not just a rank 203, a drunkard declining rank 203 who held back. They were in their prime.
      Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2) 
      Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE
      tennisdude818 12 hours ago#110
      The Great Muta 22 posted...
      700? I could buy into like, the top 150 or so, but 700 is a bit too flippant and I'm guessing he'd walk that back if he could


      Not flippant at all. The satellite tour is full of guys who were used to dominating junior and college tennis. 

      The Men's tour is a brutal grind and hardly anyone should even bother trying to pursue a pro career. Top D1 guys regularily go nowhere in the pros much less get into the top 150.
      tennisdude818 12 hours ago#111
      voldothegr8 posted...
      Gheb posted...
      The Great Muta 22 posted...
      700? I could buy into like, the top 150 or so, but 700 is a bit too flippant and I'm guessing he'd walk that back if he could

      She was thoroughly beaten by a dude ranked 203 in the past. So top 150 would be a giant overstatement.

      Not just a rank 203, a drunkard declining rank 203 who held back. They were in their prime.


      Those sisters used to brag that they should be allowed to play on the Men's tour. I think the exhibition you're referring to is the reason they quit talking about playing on the ATP.
      _OujiDoza_ 12 hours ago#112
      Darkman124 posted...
      my question is 'why did he bring this up'

      The (female) reporter is the one that raised the question...
      R.I.P. Bilbo-Swaggins: Victim of the CommunistFAQS Regime
      |Brian-Dawkins|http://i.imgtc.com/5yil6xS.jpg.
      ReignFury 12 hours ago#113
      Shes an elite and rare power athlete for a woman and probably could have done well at any sport, but theres no comparison to male athletes. She would get destroyed.
      MAKE AMERICA SMART AGAIN
      http://i.giftrunk.com/rv4b2c.gif
      Asherlee10 12 hours ago#114
      Darkman124 posted...
      Asherlee10 posted...
      I played on boys teams my entire life until about 16 years old when boys finally caught up and I couldn't compete at the same level I wanted to. However, that did help me play differently when I joined girls teams in soccer.


      the fact that you made it to 16 before having to leave the male leagues explains a lot about why you were a D-1 soccer college athlete

      that level of training gave you a huge advantage over your peers


      It definitely gave me a hefty advantage. It was easier to play on female teams after that. Also, in college, we often did pre-season with the Ole Miss football team for fitness routines. I LOVED IT! The level of competition was much more intense.
      "Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
      Darkman124 12 hours ago#115
      _OujiDoza_ posted...
      Darkman124 posted...
      my question is 'why did he bring this up'

      The (female) reporter is the one that raised the question...


      yeah this has been clarified and it basically turns the entire dialogue on its head

      he did nothing wrong and the reporter basically forced him to say what he did

      what she was saying was basically an insult to the male top players
      And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
      (edited 12 hours ago)reportquote
      Asherlee10 12 hours ago#116
      Curiosity got me and they still have one of my old profiles up on the Ole Miss website for soccer. This was in 2003 I think.

      RRD5f3Sr
      "Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
      ReignFury 12 hours ago#117
      If people feel offended by what he said they should do an exhibition match between Serena and #700
      MAKE AMERICA SMART AGAIN
      http://i.giftrunk.com/rv4b2c.gif
      _OujiDoza_ 12 hours ago#118
      Oh boy, Asher....you've gone and done it, now...

      This topic will now hit 500.
      R.I.P. Bilbo-Swaggins: Victim of the CommunistFAQS Regime
      |Brian-Dawkins|http://i.imgtc.com/5yil6xS.jpg.
      Darkman124 12 hours ago#119
      Asherlee10 posted...
      Curiosity got me and they still have one of my old profiles up on the Ole Miss website for soccer. This was in 2003 I think.


      you look the same
      And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
      Asherlee10 11 hours ago#120
      Darkman124 posted...
      Asherlee10 posted...
      Curiosity got me and they still have one of my old profiles up on the Ole Miss website for soccer. This was in 2003 I think.


      you look the same


      I sacrificed a virgin to the Gods of Immortality to grant me endless youthfulness.
      "Opinions should be a result of a thought, not a substitute for it."
      garan 6 hours ago#121
      He's right and anyone who claims otherwise is a massive SJW troll.
      gmanthebest 6 hours ago#122
      Asherlee10 posted...
      Darkman124 posted...
      Asherlee10 posted...
      Curiosity got me and they still have one of my old profiles up on the Ole Miss website for soccer. This was in 2003 I think.


      you look the same


      I sacrificed a virgin to the Gods of Immortality to grant me endless youthfulness.

      And that virgin? The original Vegy. His spirit is said to roam the world, possessing poor souls to make posts about cegals.
      What do I feel when I shoot an enemy? Recoil.
      ReignFury 6 hours ago#123
      Feminists are having a field day with this
      MAKE AMERICA SMART AGAIN
      http://i.giftrunk.com/rv4b2c.gif
      ReignFury posted...
      Feminists are having a field day with this

      "Equality dammit! ...except for sports" right?
      Dathrowed1 2 hours ago#125
      Asherlee10 posted...
      No s***. 99% of the time female athletes can't compete with male athletes. Men are literally stronger and faster. Going further, I think that men also have better spatial awareness than women in general. 

      And better reaction time.
      sig
      1. Boards
      2. Current Events 
      3. McEnroe: "Serena Williams would be '700 in the world' on men's tour"