Respect for Halep

[DJTaurus]

This is hilarious trolling, well done.

Navratilova's body looks normal when compared to Serena's. She was running like a horse in the final despite her age..... Her body resembles of a bodybuilder. If you cannot see that and you believe that everything is due to weight lifting and Healthy lifestyle then probably you haven't trained once in your life. Halep deserved to win the final. Nobody is questing serenas talent and her contribution to the sport. She is one of the greatest. But I truly believe that anti-drug testings should be done more efficient.

 

[BringBackSV]

Navratilova's body looks normal when compared to Serena's. She was running like a horse in the final despite her age..... Her body resembles of a bodybuilder. If you cannot see that and you believe that everything is due to weight lifting and Healthy lifestyle then probably you haven't trained once in your life. Halep deserved to win the final. Nobody is questing serenas talent and her contribution to the sport. She is one of the greatest. But I truly believe that anti-drug testings should be done more efficient.

Halep deserved to lose, Serena was much better at the same age and Serena looks nothing like even a female body builder. Ive forgotten more about training/working out then you'll ever know.

 

[Elektra]

Halep was not that aggressive enough and she lacks power. She can't beat Serena by counterpunching, she needs to play first move tennis against Serena.

 

[v-verb]

Navratilova's body looks normal when compared to Serena's. She was running like a horse in the final despite her age..... Her body resembles of a bodybuilder. If you cannot see that and you believe that everything is due to weight lifting and Healthy lifestyle then probably you haven't trained once in your life. Halep deserved to win the final. Nobody is questing serenas talent and her contribution to the sport. She is one of the greatest. But I truly believe that anti-drug testings should be done more efficient.

Wow I wish I had Stosur's shoulders and arms!!! I haven't seen a pic of Serena looking that jacked up. Muscular yes - but Stosur is on another level entirely

 

[Soianka]

She isn't a better overall player, but if you played a match purely on second serves, Halep would win. That's the gist he's making.

LOL, no.

Such desperation to find the "great white hope" of women's tennis that so many are willing to abandon all logic and reason

 

[Soianka]

I agree with most of that. Although, I think Halep's "weapons" or lack thereof are largely underrated. She is very quick, she stands up on the baseline, she takes the ball early off both wings, and hits the ball flat. She takes time away from her opponents while her shots penetrate through the court with greater pace than most women her size. Unfortunately, Serena actually LIKES pace, and tends to play better against the harder, flatter hitters in the game (see her record against Sharapova and Azarenka).

Now this is where your analysis turns from honest, to dishonest. A typical rant of the anti-Serena crowd, and not particularly reflective of the reality of the situation.

Here is what she ACTUALLY said!

"I actually had a fun match," Williams, who collected win No. 701 of her career, was quoted as saying by the WTA's website. "I just feel it was on my racket.

"I had chances in the second set but didn't take them. That's something I can't do going into the grand slams coming up."

I realize that it's politically incorrect when players actually mention THE FACTS instead of catering to the drama queens, but the numbers actually back up her statement 100%. How many times did Cliff Drysdale and Mary Joe Fernandez say things like "That's just too good from Serena", or "This match is really in Serena's hands" or "There's really nothing Halep can do there"? I heard all of these statements during that match, and so did you! Were they also failing to give Halep credit too? I mean, is EVERYONE who recognizes and comments on the actual dynamics of the game just failing to give Halep credit, as if there is some mass conspiracy to deny credit to any Serena opponent? Or are they just stating the facts? Hmm... And if they are, then why is it only Serena that's failing to give credit when she mentions the same facts? There's something incredibly inconsistent and hypocritical about these arguments.

Williams did the dictating, making 45 unforced errors (not "forced" errors) and 38 winners. Halep, one of the best defenders in the game, did her best to soak up the pressure. She struck 10 winners and 24 unforced errors. According to the commentators both before AND after the match, the match was on Serena's racket! Even YOU just said that Halep had to hang in there until "Serena's level dropped". So apparently everything Serena said (at least the part of if that you highlighted and distorted) was true. I know it'd be more PC of her to LIE and IGNORE the actual facts, but she's not going to do that, no should she.

Here's the part of what she said that tends to get ignored by people who like to make your recurring argument.

"Her game was great," Williams said. "She plays so well, and it's so good to see her play so well. She's so young, and I actually love watching her play. I'm actually a fan of hers.

"I really like her attitude on the court. I like how she gets pumped up. I like how she fights. I like how she plays. It's definitely a refreshing type of game."

I love how nobody ever quotes her when she says things like that (because that doesn't support the narrative they'd like to bolster).

Try to be a little more FAIR and ACCURATE during your analysis and the true parts can be taken more seriously!

great post

 

[captainbryce]

She was running like a horse in the final despite her age.....

Subjective as this appraisal is, that doesn't prove she was on drugs. That just means she's in good shape.

Her body resembles of a bodybuilder.

Subjective as this appraisal is, that doesn't prove she was on drugs. That just means she's in good shape.

If you cannot see that and you believe that everything is due to weight lifting and Healthy lifestyle then probably you haven't trained once in your life.

How many logical fallacies are you committing here?

Abusive ad hominem - attacking the traits of an opponent as a means to invalidate their arguments.

Assuming that anyone who has a different opinion than you about the appearance of a specific athlete is less experienced/educated than you about a specific topic is a logical fallacy.


Red herring/Irrelevant conclusion - the informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may or may not be logically valid, but fails nonetheless to address the issue in question.

What someone BELIEVES regarding the body shape of a tennis player has no bearing on whether or not the tennis player in question does drugs because it provides no evidence supporting or negating such a conclusion!


Argument from Ignorance - "X is too incredible (I cannot imagine how X could possibly be true); therefore X must be false."

Just because you don't BELIEVE or UNDERSTAND WHY a person can appear muscular without using performance enhancing drugs does not validate your assumptions as factual.

Halep deserved to win the final.

No, actually she deserved TO LOSE! Why? Because she's not as talented of a player overall as Serena, and because she was outplayed from every aspect of the game in the final. If she had played BETTER than Serena (like she did at the WTC), then she would have won! The fact that she lost is testament to how she didn't deserve to win.

Nobody is questing serenas talent

That's EXACTLY what you are questioning. Whenever someone assumes that a player looks/plays the way that they do is a result of drugs, that is an example of questioning their talent.

and her contribution to the sport. She is one of the greatest.

Your argument completely invalidates her contributions to this sport, and you shouldn't deny that this is your intent because that makes you look weak. Either have the gravitas to call it like you see it (whether it makes you look like the hater that you are), or just don't offer an opinion at all. Anything else is dishonest!

But I truly believe that anti-drug testings should be done more efficient.

You don't know anything about how it's done now! What are you credentials exactly?

 

[sureshs]

Serena or Nadal, the haters always lie about them taking PEDs because they can accept their superiority over their wimpy competitors.

 

[CivicLx]

Serena or Nadal, the haters always lie about them taking PEDs because they can accept their superiority over their wimpy competitors.

so you admit they only succeed because this is weak era

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

I believe that halep is a greater talent than Serena was when she started.

Then where are the results?

Sorry for saying that but Serena was just rushing her in the corners playing mostly from the baseline...... Thanks to peds she could play on that level despite her age. Halep deserved the win undoubtedly.

Unsubstantiated bullsh*t, based on a threatening hatred of Serena, who is one of the rare talents who studies the game so well, she can pick apart the games of many. That, and her great talent is the reason she wins, not hollow fantasies.

 

[captainbryce]

I actually think Halep is a better player than Serena except for serving. Unfortunately, the serve is the most important shot in tennis and this gives Serena a pretty big advantage. I thought Halep had a slight advantage in the rallies but Serena had an easier time holding serve.

if you played a match purely on second serves, Halep would win.

I find such statements to be rather amusing (if ridiculous considering how inconsistent they are with the statistics).

First of all, when it comes to "stylistic differences" between players (i.e. opponents of different weight classes), the best measure of who played "better" isn't who hit more winners or less unforced errors. BTW, aces count as winners (Serena led 8-1), and double faults count as unforced errors (Halep led 3-2). The true measuring stick to determine who was "better" is

A) Figuring out the winners to errors ratio for each player. The player with the more positive differential is generally the one who played better (regardless of playing style).

B) Determining who had the higher "1st serve percentage". This in turn tells you who's serve was more reliable, and also which player had to depend on their groundstrokes more to win points.

C) Comparing the break points won percentage. This tells you who had more opportunities to break AND who played the bigger points better. In tennis, it isn't how many points you win, but WHICH points you win. In this match, Serena won both categories!

Williams:
First serve percentage = 47% (36 of 77)
Second serve points won = 63% (26 of 41)
Winners = 38
Unforced Errors = 45
Differential = -7
Break points won = 67% (2 of 3)
Total points won = 95

Halep:
First Serve Percentage = 72% (66 of 92)
Second serve points won = 58% (15 of 26)
Winners = 10
Unforced errors = 24
Differential -14
Break points won = 67% (4 of 6)
Total points won = 79

According to the stats, neither player played particularly great throughout the course of the match (although both had moments of brilliance, and some spectacular shots/rallies). Contrary to what many of the posters here seem to believe Serena did not serve well in this match! (what the hell match were you guys watching?) However, she did play better from the baseline than Halep did (relying more on her second serve). And even though they both played the break points well, Serena had fewer opportunities to break throughout the match (the most important one being in the final set, giving her the win). Halep was in more of Serena's service games, than Serena was in Halep's (a stat which is backed up by the fact that Serena served at a lower percentage than Halep did). Serena won more points overall (based on her ground game) on her second serve, meaning that she was dictating play in the rallies. She also had a better winners to errors ratio!

That's how you determine who the better player was in the match!

Serena has the better serves, both first and second. And even if they were to play without any serves, Serena would have won at least this particular time.

Exactly!

 

[Vanhool]

I find such statements to be rather amusing (if ridiculous considering how inconsistent they are with the statistics).

First of all, when it comes to "stylistic differences" between players (i.e. opponents of different weight classes), the best measure of who played "better" isn't who hit more winners or less unforced errors. BTW, aces count as winners (Serena led 8-1), and double faults count as unforced errors (Halep led 3-2). The true measuring stick to determine who was "better" is

A) Figuring out the winners to errors ratio for each player. The player with the more positive differential is generally the one who played better (regardless of playing style).

B) Determining who had the higher "1st serve percentage". This in turn tells you who's serve was more reliable, and also which player had to depend on their groundstrokes more to win points.

C) Comparing the break points won percentage. This tells you who had more opportunities to break AND who played the bigger points better. In tennis, it isn't how many points you win, but WHICH points you win. In this match, Serena won both categories!

Williams:
First serve percentage = 47% (36 of 77)
Second serve points won = 63% (26 of 41)
Winners = 38
Unforced Errors = 45
Differential = -7
Break points won = 67% (2 of 3)
Total points won = 95

Halep:
First Serve Percentage = 72% (66 of 92)
Second serve points won = 58% (15 of 26)
Winners = 10
Unforced errors = 24
Differential -14
Break points won = 67% (4 of 6)
Total points won = 79

According to the stats, neither player played particularly great throughout the course of the match (although both had moments of brilliance, and some spectacular shots/rallies). Contrary to what many of the posters here seem to believe Serena did not serve well in this match! (what the hell match were you guys watching?) However, she did play better from the baseline than Halep did (relying more on her second serve). And even though they both played the break points well, Serena had fewer opportunities to break throughout the match (the most important one being in the final set, giving her the win). Halep was in more of Serena's service games, than Serena was in Halep's (a stat which is backed up by the fact that Serena served at a lower percentage than Halep did). Serena won more points overall (based on her ground game) on her second serve, meaning that she was dictating play in the rallies. She also had a better winners to errors ratio!

That's how you determine who the better player was in the match!

Exactly!

Kindly refrain from cluttering the discussion of this match with useless information such as facts and stats from said match. Thank you.

 

[captainbryce]

Kindly refrain from cluttering the discussion of this match with useless information such as facts and stats from said match. Thank you.

Well done! :wink:

 

[V1_Classic]

Indeed--facts, stats, common sense, etc. have no place in this forum. It's like trying to reason with a room full of pre-schoolers lol.


I loved this reply (↓) to the guy who stated he thought Halep was the better player.

__________________

 

[Soianka]

Captain Bryce, you are the MVP of this thread.

 

[captainbryce]

Captain Bryce, you are the MVP of this thread.

Too kind!