Riggs probably threw the match against Billie Jean King.

[Chopin]

...I'm sorry.

This goes beyond drinking the kool-aide.

You're basically drowning in it.

Do you actually think Riggs looked like he was in great form for either of those matches, even the Court match? Was that really impressive stuff to you? His movement was not great, which isn't surprising for a 55-year old, but my goodness, he was hitting moonballs in the Court match and she basically made 10,000 unforced errors.

 

[Hard Court]

People make weak arguments like that all the time. (Probably including me! Saying one person "would have" won easily is not an argument at all.
you can make vaild points why college football team A is better than team B. Then the other person counters with" Yeah, but who do you think would win if they played/" You say team A, and the other guy says it's ridiculous!

Other people look at Riggs beating badly Court and then losing to King, and then say there is no way that Riggs could have lost.
To believe, that you have to believe 4 things:

1. Court played at the level that she normally did.
2. Riggs did not play better than he usually did at that age against Court.
3. King played at the level that she normally did.
4. Riggs played at the level that he normally did against King.

If all of those are true, then it does look suspicious that Riggs would beat Court so badly, then lose convincingly to King.

What if Court just had an off day?
what if Riggs played better than normal against Court?
What if King played better than normal against Riggs?
What if Riggs had an off day against King?

Almost everyone thought Court was off. If any of the other three "what ifs" are true as well, then it doesn't look suspicious at all.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I was asking the poster who just implied the outcome was predetermined by the media, which greatly expands the conspiracy theory.

The whole conspiracy theory makes no sense though. He could have made 100k if he had won. Like his manager said, he'd have stood to make a lot more afterwards if he had won too. Think about it: what if he had won but "made it close," so another female challenger stepped up? He could have kept on doing matches. Once people saw King could beat him and that he was washed up, it was over for him.

He needed the mob to write off all his debts, and he made a huge amount as well in a percentage of the bets. That was his best deal by a country mile.

 

[Dan Lobb]

People make weak arguments like that all the time. (Probably including me! Saying one person "would have" won easily is not an argument at all.
you can make vaild points why college football team A is better than team B. Then the other person counters with" Yeah, but who do you think would win if they played/" You say team A, and the other guy says it's ridiculous!

Other people look at Riggs beating badly Court and then losing to King, and then say there is no way that Riggs could have lost.
To believe, that you have to believe 4 things:

1. Court played at the level that she normally did.
2. Riggs did not play better than he usually did at that age against Court.
3. King played at the level that she normally did.
4. Riggs played at the level that he normally did against King.

If all of those are true, then it does look suspicious that Riggs would beat Court so badly, then lose convincingly to King.

What if Court just had an off day?
what if Riggs played better than normal against Court?
What if King played better than normal against Riggs?
What if Riggs had an off day against King?

Almost everyone thought Court was off. If any of the other three "what ifs" are true as well, then it doesn't look suspicious at all.

Riggs made Court look off form. Her strategy was to play from the baseline and wait for Riggs to get tired and make mistakes. But Riggs was in superb fitness and was just too good for that. His game was too well-rounded to not take advantage of what Court was allowing.

 

[Chopin]

People make weak arguments like that all the time. (Probably including me! Saying one person "would have" won easily is not an argument at all.
you can make vaild points why college football team A is better than team B. Then the other person counters with" Yeah, but who do you think would win if they played/" You say team A, and the other guy says it's ridiculous!

Other people look at Riggs beating badly Court and then losing to King, and then say there is no way that Riggs could have lost.
To believe, that you have to believe 4 things:

1. Court played at the level that she normally did.
2. Riggs did not play better than he usually did at that age against Court.
3. King played at the level that she normally did.
4. Riggs played at the level that he normally did against King.

If all of those are true, then it does look suspicious that Riggs would beat Court so badly, then lose convincingly to King.

What if Court just had an off day?
what if Riggs played better than normal against Court?
What if King played better than normal against Riggs?
What if Riggs had an off day against King?

Almost everyone thought Court was off. If any of the other three "what ifs" are true as well, then it doesn't look suspicious at all.

Great post. Just because player A beats B and B beats C does not mean that A can beat C. The transitive property does not apply where playing ability is similar!

There's also, frankly, a lack of tennis-playing ability/perspective that underlies many of these threads. Most lower level amateur--nothing against them--tennis player have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to discussing playing levels, but have no shortage of opinions about high level play. Once you get the perspectives of 4.5-5.0+ players (still low level in the larger tennis scale), you see that these players are generally more circumspect in their judgments. Once you practice with a UTR 12-13 (D1 men, WTA level) you see it blows away 5.0.

Riggs is 55, out of shape, and way past his prime in these matches. It's not all surprising he could lose to a top women's player. The advantages he would have enjoyed when he was younger due to dynamic movement and power are gone. He's dinking the ball and hitting backhand lobs from the baseline with Court, who played terribly. It's not really impressive stuff and King played a more poised, intelligent match. I'm sure other female pros could have beaten Riggs. King even said she didn't take any great pleasure from the actual act of beating a 55-year old man, essentially saying that she was well aware he was washed up.

 

[Chopin]

He needed the mob to write off all his debts, and he made a huge amount as well in a percentage of the bets. That was his best deal by a country mile.

Dan: I understand your perspective; you've repeated it multiple times. We'll agree to disagree.

 

[CHillTennis]

Do you actually think Riggs looked like he was in great form for either of those matches, even the Court match? Was that really impressive stuff to you? His movement was not great, which isn't surprising for a 55-year old, but my goodness, he was hitting moonballs in the Court match and she basically made 10,000 unforced errors.

If Bobby Riggs had wanted to beat Billy Jean King. He would have won in straight sets.

Bobby was told to lose that match.

 

[Vincent-C]

If Bobby Riggs had wanted to beat Billy Jean King. He would have won in straight sets.

Bobby was told to lose that match.

Ockham's Razor seems to fit that hypothesis [Cunspiracy theory!] well.

Riggs was fifty-five at the time of the "match". He was utterly helpless by then on a tennis court, I'm sure.



Tank-job..

 

[Chopin]

If Bobby Riggs had wanted to beat Billy Jean King. He would have won in straight sets.

Bobby was told to lose that match.

Well, you've really made your case.

 

[Vincent-C]

I wonder which commenters here actually saw the Riggs v BJK "match" in real time.

 

[BenBen]

I owe money to the mob and multiple bookies, I crush the number one player in the world Margaret Court in straights to set up ideal odds in the Billie Jean King match and subsequently bet against myself.....history is full of lies.

 

[Vincent-C]

I owe money to the mob and multiple bookies, I crush the number one player in the world Margaret Court in straights to set up ideal odds in the Billie Jean King match and subsequently bet against myself.....history is full of lies.

nice, and karefully done, too.

kudos.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Dan: I understand your perspective; you've repeated it multiple times. We'll agree to disagree.

Yes, we disagree on this.

I actually saw the match live. On TV.

 

[JW10S]

I wonder which commenters here actually saw the Riggs v BJK "match" in real time.

I did...

 

[WildVolley]

I was told by one of Riggs' friends that Riggs not only threw the match, but told his close friends he was going to do it. No way for me to confirm the story.

 

[mtommer]

Riggs would have won $100,000 if he had beat King, no? It was a 100k winner-take-all prize. Wouldn't that be incentive to win?

No. Making $100k just to give it away isn't much incentive to a gambler if there's a possibility to make more.. You need to make your next bankroll so you can keep on gambling.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I was told by one of Riggs' friends that Riggs not only threw the match, but told his close friends he was going to do it. No way for me to confirm the story.

I can confirm that story for you and I never met Riggs.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I can confirm that story for you and I never met Riggs.

Riggs told his friends not to bet on him for the King match.

OTL: The Match Maker

Bobby Riggs, The Mafia and The Battle of the Sexes

www.espn.com

Mulloy was apparently hired by Riggs to train him for the King match, but Riggs refused to train.

"Mulloy says Riggs urged a millionaire friend named Jack Dreyfus not to bet on him against King. "Prior to the match, Jack Dreyfus had called him and said he wants to make a bet, how do you feel, where should I get odds," Mulloy recalls. "Bobby says, 'Don't bet on me.' That made me believe he was going to tank it.""

 

[Vincent-C]

Riggs told his friends not to bet on him for the King match.

OTL: The Match Maker

Bobby Riggs, The Mafia and The Battle of the Sexes

www.espn.com

Mulloy was apparently hired by Riggs to train him for the King match, but Riggs refused to train.

"Mulloy says Riggs urged a millionaire friend named Jack Dreyfus not to bet on him against King. "Prior to the match, Jack Dreyfus had called him and said he wants to make a bet, how do you feel, where should I get odds," Mulloy recalls. "Bobby says, 'Don't bet on me.' That made me believe he was going to tank it.""

Thanks for that link. Ockham's Razor fits..