Absurd day of tennis has negative repercussions for the women's final which will now be delayed

randomtoss said:
Most of you guys would be completely upset if the men's final were a 'Not before...' because a women's semifinal had to be completed before. And rightly so!
Organisers should have stuck with the women's final schedule and organised everything around it.
Click to expand...
Assumptions.
 
randomtoss said:
Most of you guys would be completely upset if the men's final were a 'Not before...' because a women's semifinal had to be completed before. And rightly so!
Organisers should have stuck with the women's final schedule and organised everything around it.
Click to expand...

Disagree.

I cannot count the number of times I have seen this announcement.

It is part of tennis, and anyone turning it into a men vs women debate is here for reasons different than tennis.

8-)
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Everything you said perfectly fits the men’s SF. They can wait another hour or two for heavens sake, these are professionals. Suppose it was raining and they did not have any roof, what then? Etc. etc. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They have to play the following day, though. The earlier their match gets on, the fairer it is for them.

It's much less of an effect on Serena-Kerber. As awkward as this whole situation is, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. Delaying the women's final by a couple of hours isn't going to effect the finalists by much, is it?
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Gotta admit that this is pretty poor.

Because of the annoying Wimbledon rule of no play after 11PM and the crazy long Anderson/Isner match, Djokovic v Nadal had to be suspended at the start of the 4th set. The organizers have decided to schedule the match to resume at 1PM tomorrow which is BEFORE the women's final at 2PM. Considering how long the sets have been between these two players, it is highly likely that the women's final will now be delayed. Not only will it be delayed, the women will have to wait around, potentially for hours for the men to finish playing which is definitely unprecedented in recent years for a slam final.

Say what you want about women's tennis (i'm sure there'll be a lot of negative comments here), but can you imagine how you would feel if the men's final was to be indefinitely delayed because of a women's match? People would go crazy.

To make matters worse, earlier in the tournament, organizers were adamant that the timing of the men's final wouldn't be changed if England made the World Cup final so many are asking why the women's time slot is ok to be amended but not the men's.

Kerber and Serena are set to play one of their biggest matches of their career (Kerber going for slam #3 and Serena looking to equal Court's record of 24 slams). But instead of knowing when their match will start, they potentially could sit around for hours (if the match is anything like the Anderson/Isner match, they could be waiting for a long, long time).
Click to expand...

I think Wimbledon is too stuck in their traditions. I'd schedule the Serena-Kerber first tomorrow and move the men's final to Monday, everybody's happy including the other finalist Anderson and people who want to watch the WC.
 
zagor said:
I think Wimbledon is too stuck in their traditions. I'd schedule the Serena-Kerber first tomorrow and move the men's final to Monday, everybody's happy including the other finalist Anderson and people who want to watch the WC.
Click to expand...

Monday is a working day, though. I like your solution but for those who bought tickets for the final, that would throw a wrench in everything. Especially those who flew in and would have to alter travel arrangements.
 
Tennis_Hands said:
Disagree.

I cannot count the number of times I have seen this announcement.

It is part of tennis, and anyone turning it into a men vs women debate is here for reasons different than tennis.

:cool:
Click to expand...
The difference here is that we are discussing a slam's final, it's not just any match.

We female (and some male) members of this forum weren't interested in bringing sexism in the debates. What we can see since about a year is the incessant creation of threads and posts about women's tennis, or Serena Williams, or the WTA, whose sole purpose is to bash female players and women in general. I wouldn't be surprised if some members of TTW were also ***** forums visitors.
 
Mr Feeny said:
Monday is a working day, though. I like your solution but for those who bought tickets for the final, that would throw a wrench in everything. Especially those who flew in and would have to alter travel arrangements.
Click to expand...

Yeah, doesn't work.

Serena and Angie can wait two hours. They are professionals, they know how to deal and prepare for these situations.

As Federer once said, there is only player who knows the exact time he or she will be stepping onto court in a tennis match, and that is the defending Wimbledon champion opening the defense of their title on Center Court. All others are subject to change.
 
Mr Feeny said:
Monday is a working day, though. I like your solution but for those who bought tickets for the final, that would throw a wrench in everything. Especially those who flew in and would have to alter travel arrangements.
Click to expand...

Good point, hard to make a right call here. Still if the regular working hours are 9 to 5 pm then they could schedule is a night match thought it would be cutting it close because of the curfew. Too many damn rules in WImbledon.
 
This has been poor viewing experience for me, not only because Wimbledon's poor organisation but media.
1. This is meant to be an out door Tourney. Wimbledon say so thenmselves when utilising roof. So it needs to start play at 11am every day. This would have assisted the several times. But is also traditional and in line with the roof.
2. Federer constantly on centre when there are far better outer court matches.
3. The roof should only be used when rains Men's SF should start open.
4. Sunday "no tennis" is poor viewing experience, CT 1 & 2 should have 4 to 6 matches in total for viewing.
5. Wimbledon Memes are terrible if you been around, tradition! Ya right Wim 2018 looks nothing like 1980, 1990 or 1950.
6 I think they've done a great job of trying to remain relevant but they've lost a lot of prestige in recent times. Trying to gain importance through poor experience won't assist.
7. Keep no TB. Just schedule better. It would not have been an issue if 2nd match and first was started at 11am. Start, not warm up or scratch bum etc.
8. Maybe the 2nd roof will fix all this as CC CT1 will be nearing identical conditions.
9. Tennis is world sport, catering to remote views is more important than those that attend. It's better to have tennis on as much and as long as possible. Players need to feel fairly treated they don't.

Anyway it will be interesting how it goes in the future. With lack of grass court experienced players and fast HC it's going to be more of an anomaly than quality. If Nadal or Dvokovic win this as Clay Court players both whom bearly have a pre-warm up it not looking good as quality Tourney. Maybe slowing it down and making consistent bounce so it plays like soft hard court has proven the right choice in this poly era after all.
 
zagor said:
I think Wimbledon is too stuck in their traditions. I'd schedule the Serena-Kerber first tomorrow and move the men's final to Monday, everybody's happy including the other finalist Anderson and people who want to watch the WC.
Click to expand...


Do you mean that they should consider this solution based on the mentioned consequences, or that the consequences will be a mere result of the decision to let the women's final be played before the conclusion of the men's second SF?

If the first instance that would mean that they assume that they should schedule around the condition of one of the players (or both), which I am decidedly against, or they should take in consideration another sporting event that has nothing to do with tennis, which I am decidedly against.

So, if the second, why would they not finish the men's SF first as both players have already waited for another match to finish, before they commenced?

Would it be normal, from their point of view to wait another match to finish, before they take the court, and wouldn't that be an even bigger insult to the names of those players?

8-)
 
Sentinel said:
So you mean it makes sense for the women to wait interminably ?
Not getting your logic. I felt the women should be first.

I understand your part that the men will get 2 hours more to rest for the final, but apart from that the W final could get delayed a lot, although i don;t think these 2 will go into a long 5th set.

But yeah, if the W final is first then the semi doesn't start straight away, there will be the ceremonies and speeches and what not. You don't want to hurry that up for another big match, I guess. But on the other hand, the royalty now don't know when the final starts. Duke and Duchess of Kent I mean. The younger ones will probably be happy to sit through the men's semi.
Click to expand...
Honestly

If the royalty doesn't want to watch a classic like Nadal-Djokovic then WHY THE **** ARE THEY THERE
 
Tennis_Hands said:
Do you mean that they should consider this solution based on the mentioned consequences, or that the consequences will be a mere result of the decision to let the women's final be played before the conclusion of the men's second SF?

If the first instance that would mean that they assume that they should schedule around the condition of one of the players (or both), which I am decidedly against, or they should take in consideration another sporting event that has nothing to do with tennis, which I am decidedly against.

So, if the second, why would they not finish the men's SF first as both players have already waited for another match to finish, before they commenced?

Would it be normal, from their point of view to wait another match to finish, before they take the court, and wouldn't that be an even bigger insult to the names of those players?

:cool:
Click to expand...

From what I've seen in tennis over the years, the match that was postponed for whatever reason (darkness, rain) usually doesn't open the action next day, it's usually scheduled 2nd presumably so it gives the players time to rest from the previous match. The problem here is that in this scenario those players have to play the day after as well which I presume is the main reason they're putting them first tomorrow (as I said, it's usually not the practice from my impression).

I know it can be a slippery slope but I think there should be room for some flexibility. Ignoring the WC part (which fair enough, shouldn't factor into decision) you had one semi where one finalist played a 6+ hour match and the other will have to play 3 days in a row. You think it's wrong to take that into account?
 
randomtoss said:
The difference here is that we are discussing a slam's final, it's not just any match.

We female (and some male) members of this forum weren't interested in bringing sexism in the debates. What we can see since about a year is the incessant creation of threads and posts about women's tennis, or Serena Williams, or the WTA, whose sole purpose is to bash female players and women in general. I wouldn't be surprised if some members of TTW were also ***** forums visitors.
Click to expand...

I have you as a level-headed poster, so I am a bit disappointed that you have given in to that sort of agendas around here.

In fact, we are discussing in a thread, which OP has been doing exactly the opposite of what you claim is happening around here.

There is no shortage of criticism towards ATP from everyone, including about competition, generations, surface specialists, match flops, difference between top players and the rest, etc etc, so I don't really know how you came to the conclusion that women have been criticised more than the men.

If you are not interested in bringing sexism (why, because the men will finish their match after they have already waited for another match, really, that is sexism?), then don't do it.

8-)
 
I take your point OP, but my main take away from yesterday was how earth the women can demand equal pay, when we compare the ladies SF's to the men's! I was bored on Thursday. Saturday I was glued to the tennis for 10 hours straight. The ladies final is likely to take less than 2 hours. I too would prefer Nadal Djokovic to play after, but I guess they may want the usual weird parading around centre court with the trophy. If they were going to play after, they would have to get straight on with it imo.
 
What's the big deal?

The women get longer to recover now.

Nadal/Djokovic also get longer to recover for their final.

The crowd gets an extra match.

In tennis tournaments, or any major sporting event, the most important match always comes last, it never comes first.
 
Who cares about women's tennis.

If women have a category on their own, I want a category for players under 5'7" tall.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
That's not the ladies fault that Anderson v Isner were unable to break eachothers serve. Instead the women have to wait around on one of the biggest matches of their career for a match that could also go a very long time with no final set TB.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the ladies would have easily broken either's serve, right?
 
BringBackWood said:
I take your point OP, but my main take away from yesterday was how earth the women can demand equal pay, when we compare the ladies SF's to the men's! I was bored on Thursday. Saturday I was glued to the tennis for 10 hours straight. The ladies final is likely to take less than 2 hours. I too would prefer Nadal Djokovic to play after, but I guess they may want the usual weird parading around centre court with the trophy. If they were going to play after, they would have to get straight on with it imo.
Click to expand...
1: I watched Isner v Anderson and Ostapenko v Kerber and Goerges v Serena and honestly was so bored watching the servebotting. From comments I read on twitter and from articles and even on here, people found the male match as very tedious, The Ostapenko match wasn’t great I admit but the last few games were good quality and heart in mouth stuff while Isner and Anderson was all serves.
2: the women don’t demand equal pay anymore at slams as they have it
3: women want to play B05 but the ITF, organisers, broadcasters and tournaments refuse as it would mess up scheduling.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Probably. Makes it far more interesting than ace, ace, 3 shot rally, ace as we saw for Isner and Anderson. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

O RLY? Are you for real? Do you know what it takes to serve 130 mph in the very last game of a 50 game fifth set and what it takes to return that? Nobody serves like Isner and Anderson on the WTA and you think the ladies would be able to return that? Just how deluded are you?
 
zagor said:
From what I've seen in tennis over the years, the match that was postponed for whatever reason (darkness, rain) usually doesn't open the action next day, it's usually scheduled 2nd presumably so it gives the players time to rest from the previous match. The problem here is that in this scenario those players have to play the day after as well which I presume is the main reason they're putting them first tomorrow (as I said, it's usually not the practice from my impression).

I know it can be a slippery slope but I think there should be room for some flexibility. Ignoring the WC part (which fair enough, shouldn't factor into decision) you had one semi where one finalist played a 6+ hour match and the other will have to play 3 days in a row. You think it's wrong to take that into account?
Click to expand...

You are correct on the fact that starting with the unfinished match is not the norm, however, as you point out, normally it is in much more "relaxed" circumstances, where players have a days rest before and/or after that.

I don't see the great benefit of giving them an extra rest for the sake of giving them extra rest. Part of the competitive nature of the Majors is to overcome extreme pressure from being progressively tired from the format, and still bring your relative best to your next match.

Also, playing three days in a row vs playing two five setters, one of which was a lengthy one, plus a day of rest, seem a pretty even circumstances to me (actually one can hardly figure out better balanced scenario, given the nature of Anderson's SF, IMO).

Again, given the fact that they already have waited for one match to conclude makes the solution of waiting again a bad one.

:cool:
 
Yoneyama said:
What's the big deal?

The women get longer to recover now.

Nadal/Djokovic also get longer to recover for their final.

The crowd gets an extra match.

In tennis tournaments, or any major sporting event, the most important match always comes last, it never comes first.
Click to expand...


No one wants to comment on these points? I am trying to be sensible here while most of you just bicker over personal viewing preferences... as always (which is pointless as everyone has different tastes).
 
Dolgopolov85 said:
O RLY? Are you for real? Do you know what it takes to serve 130 mph in the very last game of a 50 game fifth set and what it takes to return that? Nobody serves like Isner and Anderson on the WTA and you think the ladies would be able to return that? Just how deluded are you?
Click to expand...
Wow, fascinating. I don’t watch tennis for aces. You might but I don’t. Thanks. Good for them on serving bomb serves after 6 hours.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Wow, fascinating. I don’t watch tennis for aces. You might but I don’t. Thanks. Good for them on serving bomb serves after 6 hours.
Click to expand...

That's not the point here. You said it's not the ladies' fault that Isner and Anderson couldn't return each other as if the ladies could have returned Anderson or Isner. Please stop fangirling so stupidly. Federer didn't fare much better than Isner against Anderson's serve either. A 130 mph first serve followed by a 115 mph second delivery is just unbreakable. No, your beloved queen Serena wouldn't be able to return it either. It's hard for anybody. The only solution is a fifth set tiebreak which should have been implemented long ago at the three slams which still stubbornly stick to tradition.
 
This Djokovic vs Nadal match is arguably the most important match of the year. Who cares about Serena beating Kerber 6-3 6-1?

The women can wait. We need to see what happens in that match.
 
I cared more about the Isner-Anderson SF than the women's final and I barely gave a damn about that SF at all.

A 5.5 player could beat Snailena why do people still bother.
 
Dolgopolov85 said:
That's not the point here. You said it's not the ladies' fault that Isner and Anderson couldn't return each other as if the ladies could have returned Anderson or Isner. Please stop fangirling so stupidly. Federer didn't fare much better than Isner against Anderson's serve either. A 130 mph first serve followed by a 115 mph second delivery is just unbreakable. No, your beloved queen Serena wouldn't be able to return it either. It's hard for anybody. The only solution is a fifth set tiebreak which should have been implemented long ago at the three slams which still stubbornly stick to tradition.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t implying that the women could return it.... I was implying that it’s terribly boring servebot tennis which it seemed many agreed with..
 
paranoidandroid said:
This Djokovic vs Nadal match is arguably the most important match of the year. Who cares about Serena beating Kerber 6-3 6-1?

The women can wait. We need to see what happens in that match.
Click to expand...
tennis_pro said:
I cared more about the Isner-Anderson SF than the women's final and I barely gave a damn about that SF at all.

A 5.5 player could beat Snailena why do people still bother.
Click to expand...
Good for you both. You might care more but that doesn’t mean everyone does :)
 
Tennis_Hands said:
I have you as a level-headed poster, so I am a bit disappointed that you have given in to that sort of agendas around here.

In fact, we are discussing in a thread, which OP has been doing exactly the opposite of what you claim is happening around here.

There is no shortage of criticism towards ATP from everyone, including about competition, generations, surface specialists, match flops, difference between top players and the rest, etc etc, so I don't really know how you came to the conclusion that women have been criticised more than the men.

If you are not interested in bringing sexism (why, because the men will finish their match after they have already waited for another match, really, that is sexism?), then don't do it.

:cool:
Click to expand...
Just consider a recent post in this thread: women can't make 130 mph serves thus woman's tennis sucks, nobody cares about women's tennis... This criticism is gendered-related.

I never brought sexism on TTW, it's been brought here by a few angry and insecure men. I just react to something I think is unfairly offensive.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
I wasn’t implying that the women could return it.... I was implying that it’s terribly boring servebot tennis which it seemed many agreed with..
Click to expand...

Yeah, must be the same many who forced Wimby to slow down the grass back in the day. Kill tennis some more. Let's just have sightscreen vs sightscreen at all slams because that is so entertaining. No need for overheads, volleys, nothing, just keep bashing it back all day. I haven't said it before but I really wonder if I will lose interest in watching tennis after the Big Four when volleyless wonders like Zverev and Rublev take over. Isner's volleys were delightful and so were some of Anderson's but of course just believe the marketing and don't watch the tennis at all because nobody has attention spans anymore, right?
 
Red Rick said:
Honestly

If the royalty doesn't want to watch a classic like Nadal-Djokovic then WHY THE **** ARE THEY THERE
Click to expand...
Imagine being the Duke or whatever and not wanting free tickets to Nadalovic.

I mean, what's the point of even being a Duke if you don't want the cool stuff that comes with the job like that?
Give your job to someone else :D

If they don't want to stick around for 6-2 6-2 later in the day then I can understand that I guess
 
randomtoss said:
Just consider a recent post in this thread: women can't make 130 mph serves thus woman's tennis sucks, nobody cares about women's tennis... This criticism is gendered-related.

I never brought sexism on TTW, it's been brought here by a few angry and insecure men. I just react to something I think is unfairly offensive.
Click to expand...

If you are referring to my comment, it was in response to Aussie's silly comment slagging off Isner and Anderson for not returning each other as if they chose to do it. Women can serve whatever speed they wish to. I have no problem. But respecting diversity means diversity of all kinds, not just the kinds you personally like.
 
randomtoss said:
Just consider a recent post in this thread: women can't make 130 mph serves thus woman's tennis sucks, nobody cares about women's tennis... This criticism is gendered-related.

I never brought sexism on TTW, it's been brought here by a few angry and insecure men. I just react to something I think is unfairly offensive.
Click to expand...

Can you tell me which post was that, and do you think that in this thread there were posts with the opposite nature?

8-)
 
Dolgopolov85 said:
If you are referring to my comment, it was in response to Aussie's silly comment slagging off Isner and Anderson for not returning each other as if they chose to do it. Women can serve whatever speed they wish to. I have no problem. But respecting diversity means diversity of all kinds, not just the kinds you personally like.
Click to expand...

Yep, I thought that randomtoss was referring to your post, but wanted to make sure, that is why I asked.

If it is, oh dear!

:cool:
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Good for you both. You might care more but that doesn’t mean everyone does :)
Click to expand...
More people care about Djokovic vs Nadal than Serena vs Kerber.

That’s a fact.

Anyway I don’t blame the women for this mess. Wimbledon organisers need to get their act together.
 
metsman said:
well this ruins my Saturday plans, don't know what I'll do now that the women's final is played at IDGAF oclock instead of IDGAF oclock, ROFLMAO
Click to expand...

VaporDude95 said:
The majority of people don’t give a flying phuck about women’s tennis. There, I said it.
Click to expand...

Purplemonster said:
The women can start their tournament after the men have finished theirs.
Click to expand...

Dolgopolov85 said:
If you are referring to my comment, it was in response to Aussie's silly comment slagging off Isner and Anderson for not returning each other as if they chose to do it. Women can serve whatever speed they wish to. I have no problem. But respecting diversity means diversity of all kinds, not just the kinds you personally like.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I mixed up posts a bit! And I'm absolutely in favour of respecting diversity, as much as I'm in favour of not condemning people on the basis of their physical abilities.

But I stand by my point @Tennis_Hands - see the examples above.
 
Wander said:
What is the difference? Would it be okay if Serena and Kerber were a junior men's final instead?
Click to expand...
No? If it was because of a women's match that the women's final was delayed then sure. If you can't see the difference then that's on you.

Honestly how would you feel if the men's FINAL was indefinitely pushed back because of a women's SF match? I guarantee people would be outraged. No difference here.
How would you feel having to keep tuning in and waiting for the match to finish and constantly being denied? You'd HATE it. I already read snarky comments on here when a women's match is dared scheduled before a man's on a main court. Imagine if it was before A SLAM FINAL. Oh the comments would be outrageous.
 
vex said:
Maybe, just maybe this “Uber prestigious” tournament which 1) has been scheduled by morons all the way thru; 2) caters to servebot play styles on a surface with no season to support it and 3) has this dumb no 5th set TB nonsense... maybe it’s just an overrated tourney
Click to expand...

No maybe about it!
 
randomtoss said:
Sorry, I mixed up posts a bit! And I'm absolutely in favour of respecting diversity, as much as I'm in favour of not condemning people on the basis of their physical abilities.

But I stand by my point @Tennis_Hands - see the examples above.
Click to expand...

So, if one prefers watching men's tennis, and doesn't care about women's tennis, he is a sexist?

It is also sexist to say your opinion of others opinion (no matter how biased that other opinion might be).

My disappointment grows further.

:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

yemenmocha
  • Poll Poll
Will Men's Final be delayed for NFL on CBS?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro
jt1224x0
5.2 Millions watched the women's final
2 3
Replies
122
Views
10K
Gizo
G
cluckcluck
Women's final to be more interesting than men's?
Replies
12
Views
553
NuBas
NuBas
tacou
Women's Doubles Final Scheduling?
Replies
1
Views
176
ibbi
ibbi
neversaydienadalfan
ESPN Coverage of Women's Final
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
Deleted member 735320
D
Back
Top