CaptainAmerica18 846 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Bring in 5 sets and there won't be those guts Men only play 5 set tennis 4 times a year. Only playing best of 3 isn't an excuse for the shape of some of the women. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKingObv 10,647 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Men only play 5 set tennis 4 times a year. Only playing best of 3 isn't an excuse for the shape of some of the women.Definitely not an excuse Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Do you want to see best of 5 sets introduced in Women's tennis? Because I think that's the worst solution.Yeah, I do. At least then I can go back to watching the men's championship, whilst ignoring the women's, satisfied that there is no injustice in the world! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the goal machine 7,803 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Yeah, I do. At least then I can go back to watching the men's championship, whilst ignoring the women's, satisfied that there is no injustice in the world!Even though the best of 5 sets womens matches will cause more scheduling problems at grand slams leaving you unsure of when those mens matches will be. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieD 18,986 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I'm not denying its awful to watch, but that's not an actual reason why the shouldn't play 5 sets.Most women players are against it as it would actually require them to lose weight and become athletic.Really? Any time I have ever heard it mentioned, every woman discussing it has been emphatic about wanting to play five setters at the slams. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Even though the best of 5 sets womens matches will cause more scheduling problems at grand slams leaving you unsure of when those mens matches will be.Yes. Extend the tournament. Increase the number of courts. I know this will be costly and far from easy, but equality usually is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Really? Any time I have ever heard it mentioned, every woman discussing it has been emphatic about wanting to play five setters at the slams.I must've missed this. They certainly don't fight as hard for it as they did the money! Give them what they want then. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKingObv 10,647 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Really? Any time I have ever heard it mentioned, every woman discussing it has been emphatic about wanting to play five setters at the slams.if they really wanted it then it would happen.It won't though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKingObv 10,647 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I must've missed this. They certainly don't fight as hard for it as they did the money! Give them what they want then.Doubt they want to do fitness training for the first time in their careers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieD 18,986 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 if they really wanted it then it would happen.It won't though. Yeah, because it was as simple and quick as that when it came to equal prize money. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieD 18,986 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I must've missed this.Evidently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKingObv 10,647 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Yeah, because it was as simple and quick as that when it came to equal prize money.There was clear campaigning for that. Can't say i've seen the same for this.And could you link me to all these women saying they want 5 set matches?As I said before, It shouldn't even be down to them. There is simply no reason why they don't play 5 sets in slams. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Evidently.What's with the wide response? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the goal machine 7,803 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Yes. Extend the tournament. Increase the number of courts. I know this will be costly and far from easy, but equality usually is.I'm sure they'll be delighted to increase costs and overheads for an even worse product that less people will want to see. And is it equal for men to be physically and genetically stronger and fitter than women? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the goal machine 7,803 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I can see the argument for making men play best of three at GS's though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Yeah, because it was as simple and quick as that when it came to equal prize money.It happened though. Nobody said it would be easy. Chuck everything that we can't do in a day should we?So how slow and difficult was it introducing equal money? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 I'm sure they'll be delighted to increase costs and overheads for an even worse product that less people will want to see. And is it equal for men to be physically and genetically stronger and fitter than women?What's that got to do with it? They are in separate competitions. It's not unequal in the context of tennis if they only play others of their gender. Even if that argument worked it suggests men should be paid more as the product will be better. As for overheads. Tough really. The overheads created increasing the women's pay were met. Overheads occur in doing things that are morally necessary sometimes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the goal machine 7,803 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 What's that got to do with it? They are in separate competitions. It's not unequal in the context of tennis if they only play others of their gender. Even if that argument worked it suggests men should be paid more as the product will be better. As for overheads. Tough really. The overheads created increasing the women's pay were met. Overheads occur in doing things that are morally necessary sometimes.Because you're expecting men and women to do the same physically when they're not the same physically. I'm sure some women would be capable of doing it but its just not realistic at all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Because you're expecting men and women to do the same physically when they're not the same physically. I'm sure some women would be capable of doing it but its just not realistic at all.Nah, they can't hit as hard, but they should manage the endurance, as in any other sport. I'm not expecting the same. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKingObv 10,647 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Because you're expecting men and women to do the same physically when they're not the same physically. I'm sure some women would be capable of doing it but its just not realistic at all.If they had to then women could do 5 sets to pretty much the same level as men.Just look at phsyical events like the Marathon, where the world records are 2hrs 3 minutes, to 2 hrs 15 minutes.There is a difference physically of course, but not to the level that they couldn't do it if they put in the work. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the goal machine 7,803 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 If they had to then women could do 5 sets to pretty much the same level as men.Just look at phsyical events like the Marathon, where the world records are 2hrs 3 minutes, to 2 hrs 15 minutes.There is a difference physically of course, but not to the level that they couldn't do it if they put in the work.Those are trained long distance runners though, these women are very fit athletes but the quality would be drastically worse and the younger girls especially just wouldn't be able to at all. I'm sure it could be done but I just don't think anyone wants to see it. There's more talk of reducing the men's game to best of three rather than five. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo 32,534 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Those are trained long distance runners though, these women are very fit athletes but the quality would be drastically worse and the younger girls especially just wouldn't be able to at all. I'm sure it could be done but I just don't think anyone wants to see it. There's more talk of reducing the men's game to best of three rather than five.That would be a fair solution. Don't like it, but it would be fair. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKingObv 10,647 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Those are trained long distance runners though, these women are very fit athletes but the quality would be drastically worse and the younger girls especially just wouldn't be able to at all. I'm sure it could be done but I just don't think anyone wants to see it. There's more talk of reducing the men's game to best of three rather than five.Then the women would have to become more athletic like the men. Half the women on the tour don't even look athletic at all. Of course currently if they suddenly went to 5 sets they would struggle. But with the proper fitness work they would adapt and the quality later in matches wouldn't dip that much more than the men's. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieD 18,986 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 It happened though. Nobody said it would be easy. Chuck everything that we can't do in a day should we?So how slow and difficult was it introducing equal money?Actually, IbroxBear54 did, which is why I was replying to him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieD 18,986 Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 That would be a fair solution. Don't like it, but it would be fair.What would be fair about it? Are the men complaining about playing five? Is it an issue of the women doing less for their money? That seems to be the usual argument, and its plainly bollocks. They are given prize money, not a wage. They are not paid by the hour. If they were, Federer would have had to have been paid an awful lot less for his dismantling of Hanescu in a "best of five" match than most of the women during this Wimbledon should have been for their best of three matches. They are rewarded for reaching a certain round of the tournament, not for "work done". If they reach the same round as the men, they get the same prize money. The argument about whether or not their product is deserving of such a reward is nonsense. If the money is there, because the organisations are making it, then it should be making its way into the hands of the athletes who bring the money in. Would you really rather that a new campari bar gets opened at SW19 than some Uzbek qualifier gets enough money to catch her flight home after being knocked out in the first round? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.