Re: Serena and seeding

[Russeljones]

The governing bodies clearly don't know what they're doing.

If you have set up equal prize money because, well, because there's no reason male and female professionals should be paid differently; why the heck can you not account for a female professional wishing to start a family?

It just baffles me that a player is being punished rather than supported through a time when the player would anyhow be disadvantaged on form basis.

Should the ATP/ITF rethink ranking protection for returning mothers?

PS: clearly that should read WTA and not ATP

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Kudos! Other than a few here like @Aussie Darcy, you are not going to get much support for your view. But I agree. If you have protected ranking for injury, you should have protected ranking for players returning from pregnancy as well. Because, you know, that's what women go through and that's why they get maternity leave as well. Does a returning corporate professional get asked to start from fresher level? No. She starts where she left off. That's how it should be in tennis as well.

 

[Chadillac]

Steffi retired when she started a family as many others have. Clisters and azerenka didnt step over others because of their creds.

Serena let the french open down in her marquee matchup vs sharapova. She hasnt earned anything but a wildcard that takes a young lady out of the draw who earned it.

Its a sport, we treat all players equally.

Serena's problem is she doesnt play other tournaments, you cant turn your protective ranking on and off. Once you declare ready, the clock begins.

Lets see her win a few tournaments (there is plenty of time) before we discredit the sport further

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Kudos! Other than a few here like @Aussie Darcy, you are not going to get much support for your view. But I agree. If you have protected ranking for injury, you should have protected ranking for players returning from pregnancy as well. Because, you know, that's what women go through and that's why they get maternity leave as well. Does a returning corporate professional get asked to start from fresher level? No. She starts where she left off. That's how it should be in tennis as well.

I haven’t posted on these threads lately as anything women’s tennis related just gets trashed by awful people on this forum but since I was tagged, I’ll say my bit.

This topic is difficult for me to make a decision on. One part of me wants to see the returning women get the seeding they had before as they shouldn’t be punished for having a child (after all, we have no future without women giving birth). But a part of me also looks at the wider picture where the player who’s going to be the number #32 seed is possibly going to be unseeded as Serena or whoever will get promoted to a seeding spot.

In addition, someone made a point which is a tad extreme and will likely never happen but still needs to be considered. What would happen if all of the top 10 happened to get pregnant at around the same time and then return? The whole seeding process would be flipped on its head! We’d have the former top 10 players as the top 10 seeds and the current top 10 players as the 10-20 seeds. It would be problematic to say the least.

What I am happy about is that Serena’s pregnancy has finally created this conversation which we really should have seen when Clijsters returned to tour as a Mum. I feel sorry for Azarenka and others who missed out on this but I’m glad the WTA/ITF are addressing this because this will be a big issue in the coming years. The majority of the WTA top 10 are younger women in their early-mid 20s so in the next decade we’ll likely see some of them go down the motherhood path so we need proper systems in place.

I just don’t have the solution and don’t know what the right one would be.. If they do come up with a proper plan then I would like all the WTA players to vote on it and get their say.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Steffi retired when she started a family as many others have. Clisters and azerenka didnt step over others because of their creds.

Serena let the french open down in her marquee matchup vs sharapova. She hasnt earned anything but a wildcard that takes a young lady out of the draw who earned it.

Its a sport, we treat all players equally.

Serena's problem is she doesnt play other tournaments, you cant turn your protective ranking on and off. Once you declare ready, the clock begins.

Lets see her win a few tournaments (there is plenty of time) before we discredit the sport further

And Steffi also had to settle for less prize money at the slams. We can argue till the cows come home about whether equal prize money is fair, but the point is past precedents don't decide what should be done from hereon. There were a lot of things men could get away with saying about women back in Steffi's time which they can't. Or wait they can because Orange is in the building now.

 

[Chadillac]

And Steffi also had to settle for less prize money at the slams. We can argue till the cows come home about whether equal prize money is fair, but the point is past precedents don't decide what should be done from hereon. There were a lot of things men could get away with saying about women back in Steffi's time which they can't. Or wait they can because Orange is in the building now.

Did you misquote? Aside from Steffi, your post mentions nothing i said. I didnt mention prize money.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

This topic is difficult for me to make a decision on. One part of me wants to see the returning women get the seeding they had before as they shouldn’t be punished for having a child (after all, we have no future without women giving birth). But a part of me also looks at the wider picture where the player who’s going to be the number #32 seed is possibly going to be unseeded as Serena or whoever will get promoted to a seeding spot.

In addition, someone made a point which is a tad extreme and will likely never happen but still needs to be considered. What would happen if all of the top 10 happened to get pregnant at around the same time and then return? The whole seeding process would be flipped on its head! We’d have the former top 10 players as the top 10 seeds and the current top 10 players as the 10-20 seeds. It would be problematic to say the least.

I agree with these points in essence but these same problems also exist in the case of injury-protected ranking. It's why the players were up in arms when Seles wanted her protected ranking extended all the way to 1995. I say, these problems will have to be tackled as and when they come because you cannot have an all encompassing set of rules but the time is ripe to make a start now to help mothers returning to tennis unless one would rather they struggle and then give up on the game.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Did you misquote? Aside from Steffi, your post mentions nothing i said. I didnt mention prize money.

You said Steffi retired and had her babies and Clijsters didn't have the benefit of protected ranking. And I am saying what happened in their case doesn't dictate what happens now. I am not saying Serena alone to the exclusion of every other returning mother in tennis should be given ranking protection but that a new set of rules to tackle this have to be put in place. If it is done for everyone, it's fair. Yes, it won't be fair to past players and which is why I said Steffi's world and today's are very different.

 

[Chadillac]

And I am saying what happened in their case doesn't dictate what happens now.

Thats exactly the opposite of how laws and rules work.

There are many examples of woman who leave the tour to start a family post steffi. I know why there is a sudden upsurge for serena at the open, that way they can give her an easy draw. But she cannot beat many top seeds, her position with the WC entry would make her beat 4-5 top 16 players.

She has plenty of time, just win a few rounds and she will be fine. Not sure why there is such panic at this point in the year for an event 3months and 10 tournaments away.

Results speak for themself, if she cannot win matches in other tournaments (boosting her ranking) there is no reason to give her a top seed

 

[Russeljones]

Thats exactly the opposite of how laws and rules work.

There are many examples of woman who leave the tour to start a family post steffi. I know why there is a sudden upsurge for serena at the open, that way they can give her an easy draw. But she cannot beat many top seeds, her position with the WC entry would make her beat 4-5 top 16 players.

She has plenty of time, just win a few rounds and she will be fine. Not sure why there is such panic at this point in the year for an event 3months and 10 tournaments away.

Results speak for themself, if she cannot win matches in other tournaments (boosting her ranking) there is no reason to give her a top seed

I know I used Serena as an example but I was hoping people would see the bigger picture.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Thats exactly the opposite of how laws and rules work.

If this were true, there would still be slavery in USA, no vote for women, blacks, I could go on. So, no, laws do evolve with time.

 

[Chadillac]

If this were true, there would still be slavery in USA, no vote for women, blacks, I could go on. So, no, laws do evolve with time.

Yet Steffi was a dated reference? LOL

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Yet Steffi was a dated reference? LOL

Eh? You claimed "That is the exact opposite of how laws work" and I gave examples of precedents being overturned. If you want recent precedents, equal prize money will do just fine. Steffi didn't enjoy the benefit of that either. So Steffi has nothing to do with today.

 

[Chadillac]

Eh? You claimed "That is the exact opposite of how laws work" and I gave examples of precedents being overturned. If you want recent precedents, equal prize money will do just fine. Steffi didn't enjoy the benefit of that either. So Steffi has nothing to do with today.

More recent than slavery and women voting. I just found your analogy way out there

Its the wta, not the united states. Stuff you spoke of has no relevance in a private org that makes you sign a contract

 

[Dolgopolov85]

More recent than slavery and women voting. I just found your analogy way out there

Its the wta, not the united states. Stuff you spoke of has no relevance in a private org that makes you sign a contract

Thank you for helping me make my argument. So you can throw your "That's the exact opposite of how laws work" statement out of the window. WTA is a private organisation and if they feel the time has come to approach pregnancy differently, they will and past precedents have nothing to do with it because it's not a court of law.

 

[Chadillac]

Thank you for helping me make my argument. So you can throw your "That's the exact opposite of how laws work" statement out of the window. WTA is a private organisation and if they feel the time has come to approach pregnancy differently, they will and past precedents have nothing to do with it because it's not a court of law.

Laws "and" rules.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Laws "and" rules.

In the case of rules, clearly precedents aren't everything so you have even flimsier ground to stand upon.

 

[Chadillac]

In the case of rules, clearly precedents aren't everything so you have even flimsier ground to stand upon.

We disagree on the basis of the sub topic. Not going to debate something this simple.

If pregnancy is a problem, put it on the list for the players to review and vote on next year. Like how everything elseworks, wada etc.

Its like the ufc putting cm punk on the main ppv card, we know whats going on. But some respect the sport and cringe when it becomes wwe. Where star power takes away someones seed, wc or spot in the draw.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

We disagree on the basis of the sub topic. Not going to debate something this simple.

If pregnancy is a problem, put it on the list for the players to review and vote on next year. Like how everything elseworks, wada etc.

Its like the ufc putting cm punk on the main ppv card, we know whats going on. But some respect the sport and cringe when it becomes wwe. Where star power takes away someones seed, wc or spot in the draw.

Oh of course I want the player council to vot on it rather than the tournaments unilaterally making an exception for Serena. I just disagree with saying that because some players in the past didn't get protected ranking, Serena shouldn't either.

 

[Bartelby]

They don't run these things on popular vote! Where do you get such bizarre ideas?

We disagree on the basis of the sub topic. Not going to debate something this simple.

If pregnancy is a problem, put it on the list for the players to review and vote on next year. Like how everything elseworks, wada etc.

Its like the ufc putting cm punk on the main ppv card, we know whats going on. But some respect the sport and cringe when it becomes wwe. Where star power takes away someones seed, wc or spot in the draw.

 

[Bartelby]

Laws do work on precedent, but superior courts can change precedent.

In any event, rules are not laws and can be changed to suit the times.

Thats exactly the opposite of how laws and rules work.

 

[Chadillac]

Laws do work on precedent, but superior courts can change precedent.

In any event, rules are not laws and can be changed to suit the times.

There is more than one person deciding on the change of rule, its similar.

If one person could do it, it would of been done, thus why its up for debate.

 

[ScottleeSV]

Voted no.

The tennis tour is not the same thing as a big standard office job somewhere.

 

[Bartelby]

The USTA can decide on such a rule for their own tournament in the same they decided on tie-breakers and equal pay.

Whether the ITF/WTA chooses to follow their lead is also their prerogative. It's not really a problem for the ATP obviously.

There is more than one person deciding on the change of rule, its similar.

If one person could do it, it would of been done, thus why its up for debate.

 

[Stretchy Man]

there's no reason male and female professionals should be paid differently

Really? You can't think of any reason?

 

[Russeljones]

Really? You can't think of any reason?

As an employer and employee, absolutely not.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

As long as the men are not paying for it, it should be fine.

 

[Stretchy Man]

As an employer and employee, absolutely not.

Not even if one gender is more skilled than the other? Do you think male violinists should be paid as much as females? Or female rugby players should be paid the same as males?

 

[Bartelby]

Female strippers get paid more than male ones and I for one am OUTRAGED!

Not even if one gender is more skilled than the other? Do you think male violinists should be paid as much as females? Or female rugby players should be paid the same as males?

 

[Stretchy Man]

Female strippers get paid more than male ones and I for one am OUTRAGED!

This does not seem fair.

 

[Bartelby]

Men shouldn't be the only ones to get a raise!

This does not seem fair.

 

[jarko111]

Feels like people on here are so anti-progress it's really sad.
I was one of 3 that voted they should get special seeding proceedings by the ITF. Maybe not everyone gets a seed but certainly someone who owns Wimbledon like Serena does gets a seed. you know?

 

[Deon Sanders]

This is a decision that is up to the women of the WTA tour and only them

The only thing that is stopping them from changing the rule is themselves

Why don't you support the women's decision????

 

[Bartelby]

We don't live in a democracy. Organisations change rules. But they can only be lobbied to do so.

The USTA will change its rule on seeding, but who knows if any other organisation will as yet.

This is a decision that is up to the women of the WTA tour and only them

The only thing that is stopping them from changing the rule is themselves

Why don't you support the women's decision????