Serena vs. McEnroe Fantasy Match

Serena vs. McEnroe


  • Total voters
    99
  • Poll closed .
Serena drew a clear line, she said : keep me out of it. She isn't playing this game with McEnroe. He was asked.... he was asked.... as if anybody is forced to answer a question just because somebody is asking it. McEnroe keeps playing this game.

But why shouldn't he answer it if the answer is fairly honest (other than the # 700 which he pulled out of his hat but which still has the main idea right)? Why do you think this is a point that shouldn't be addressed to an interviewer trying to insist that Serena should be called the best tennis player. Sometimes, it has to be clarified up front if they don't get it.
 
But why does media not like said answer? Why should such an answer make headlines when it's not the first time something like this (or even more 'uncomplimentary') has been said? Pl reflect on the question because it tells you a lot about the prevailing climate of discourse. There is nothing to get outraged there over. If anything, the last part of McEnroe's answer was a real mess to read, going back and forth, maybe because he had already sensed he was stepping on a minefield. And that is unfortunate.
Some media are too PC while some media are too "alt right". People were always going to be unhappy with the answer to this. As someone said on here, if he said she'd be a top 10 player, the meninists would've been outraged saying she's bad and that McEnroe is wrong, if he said she wouldn't be a top 10 male player then some feminists would be outraged that she wasn't. It turned out he gave the latter response and thus controversy.

It was a lose lose situation. I don't actually dislike McEnroe. I know he was just trying to create headlines for his book to promote sales, I just wish Serena was left out of this at such a crucial time.
 
Fed's slices, topspin on forehand/backhand vis a vis hers. Fed volleys better than hers.

On this point, I agree, don't accuse me of snipping now, I am just responding to this point, yes Federer's volleys, slices and strokes ARE better than Serena's. It doesn't mean that the men are always better. I wrote before that if you watch Hopman, Ana's volleys are way better than Djokovic's. She can do stuff he can't. Particularly stop volley.

So the women are not always inferior, even in absolute terms.
 
They are both playing saxophones and sax artists, right? So imo the more apt comparison would be first division and second division in football. I used to prefer watching second division football myself because of my favourite team, years and years ago. I don't claim however that the second division is as good as the first division.

It would be worse than second div v/s first in the case of Kenny G and Coltrane. The former plays elevator music, the latter was one of the greatest jazz musicians. Having said that, I do wonder IF there was no gender difference, would I still watch the WTA? I don't watch local ITF tournaments though the state broadcaster does faithfully broadcast them. Maybe I would think the same way about it if it wasn't for the fact that it's a separate women's tour with its own rivalries.
 
500 spots, but only 241 ranking points. #200 Marc Polmans (272 points) vs #700 Issam Taweel (31 points) -- roughly the same number of points separating Raonic (4150) and Thiem (3895).

Plus, Braasch spent the day at the golf course, smoking cigarettes and drinking beer, if I remember correctly. He was roughly 15 years older than them, and beat Serena 6-1 and Venus 6-2.
Ranking points are miniscule once you leave the top 200 so the comparison that Polmans and Taweels quality is about as close as the difference between Raonic and Thiem's quality is laughable. As I said, Polmans was playing slam qualifying while Taweel is probably playing ITF qualifying or lower. The difference is immense.

And Serena was 16 and playing her first ever grand slam when that match took place, she was a nobody. She wasn't at her peak or even a fantastic top notch player so I don't really rate that match as the defining factor. But I know it's the only evidence we have of her playing a male so people use it.
 
It's all good. Apologies, I didn't mean to be rude. My point is, I just hate the idea of comparing these things we'll never know the answer too. Not just the gendered based ones. I hate when people are like "how would Rod Laver do in this era" "who would win- peak Djokovic 2011 or peak Fed 2006".

We'll never know the answer and all it does is create a ****storm. Is tennis really that boring at the moment that we have to speculate where a woman would be on the mens tour? I'm currently loving the quality of tennis on both tours. I don't know why others are so preoccupied with these stupid questions.

Oh and I hate the idea of Serena being dragged into this and put down by people which we've seen in these threads calling her petty and just all round criticizing her. She's 6 months pregnant, just leave her be. Yeah she posed for a magazine, doesn't mean she doesn't deserve to be kept out of the negative headlines at what is a stressful time for he

I agree with you but at the same time, the media has a duty to be informed. Believe me, there are a lot of people outside ardent tennis following circles who do believe Serena could perhaps beat Fed. Not necessarily because somebody on twitter told them so but there you are. So I don't find the idea that the interviewer would ask something like that so strange; it's a dire state of affairs.
 
On this point, I agree, don't accuse me of snipping now, I am just responding to this point, yes Federer's volleys, slices and strokes ARE better than Serena's. It doesn't mean that the men are always better. I wrote before that if you watch Hopman, Ana's volleys are way better than Djokovic's. She can do stuff he can't. Particularly stop volley.

So the women are not always inferior, even in absolute terms.

I don't disagree w.r.t Djokovic, he's one of the worst when it comes to volleying. There are probably, probably some men that Serena can serve better than as well. But overall as a total package, I reckon the men would be better.
 
It would be worse than second div v/s first in the case of Kenny G and Coltrane. The former plays elevator music, the latter was one of the greatest jazz musicians. Having said that, I do wonder IF there was no gender difference, would I still watch the WTA? I don't watch local ITF tournaments though the state broadcaster does faithfully broadcast them. Maybe I would think the same way about it if it wasn't for the fact that it's a separate women's tour with its own rivalries.

Then that is a matter of how far apart you feel Kenny G and Coltrane are. But they are both playing one instrument so we can compare them. Men and womens sports are using different bodies, different instruments. So I compare same with same on its own merits.
 
I agree with you but at the same time, the media has a duty to be informed. Believe me, there are a lot of people outside ardent tennis following circles who do believe Serena could perhaps beat Fed. Not necessarily because somebody on twitter told them so but there you are. So I don't find the idea that the interviewer would ask something like that so strange; it's a dire state of affairs.
I didn't find it strange either, I just don't think he needed to give a number and I didn't like the responses and criticisms of Serena's reply.

He gave a number to create headlines for his book is all.
 
I don't disagree w.r.t Djokovic, he's one of the worst when it comes to volleying. There are probably, probably some men that Serena can serve better than as well. But overall as a total package, I reckon the men would be better.

Yes, the men are going to be better in terms of absolute work output in each aspect by default because their architecture is different.
 
Ranking points are miniscule once you leave the top 200 so the comparison that Polmans and Taweels quality is about as close as the difference between Raonic and Thiem's quality is laughable. As I said, Polmans was playing slam qualifying while Taweel is probably playing ITF qualifying or lower. The difference is immense.

The operative word being "...probably..." -- i.e., conjecture. Then you use that conjecture to prop up a completely-unsupported-by-evidence statement like "the difference is immense."

And Serena was 16 and playing her first ever grand slam when that match took place, she was a nobody. She wasn't at her peak or even a fantastic top notch player so I don't really rate that match as the defining factor. But I know it's the only evidence we have of her playing a male so people use it.

Yeah, evidence. Kinda sucks when it goes against you. But that's the way it is.
 
Serena hasn't really hit back yet. It is a line she has drawn. As long as she doesn't descend to McEnroe's level, she is still better than him.
 
Then that is a matter of how far apart you feel Kenny G and Coltrane are. But they are both playing one instrument so we can compare them. Men and womens sports are using different bodies, different instruments. So I compare same with same on its own merits.

I do respect that the women are physically at a disadvantage against the men, which is the point of having a separate tour but which is also why trying to insinuate that it's sexist to call Serena best female/greatest female is thoughtless. It's apt given that she plays in a different tour. Just call Fed the greatest male tennis player and Serena the greatest female tennis player and be done with it. And this is not the first time I have said it. But the media is hyperzealous these days.
 
It's hilarious because most on here would find a way to criticize Serena for anything; And i do mean most anything. Any reply she would have given would have been criticized to the freaking moon. The most criticized player in history over so many small things that happened over a decade ago. Her accomplishments far far outweigh the few brutish comments and missteps, by far a great great champion and great ambassador to the sport of tennis. I'd like to see the skeletons in the closets of sooooo many of you. I wonder how pristine you'd be if every misstep were magnified and publicized in the media and public eye. It really makes my wonder how many of you are just flat out racists. I really don't see any other motivation for blasting a player her entire career for some minor bad behavior.

John should have said no comment, next question. It was a stupid loaded question from the media. What a surprise.
 
The trajectory is more forward with heavy RPM then dips. His follow through is across his shoulder to bicep while Nadal is way above his head with a whip like snapback that raises the trajectory arc much higher.

He still hits with a ton of spin. More than Djokovic and Murray if I recall correctly.
 
Yeah, evidence. Kinda sucks when it goes against you. But that's the way it is.
Funny, I can't bring up the fact that she was 16 and a basic nobody on tour and playing her first slam but you can mention how he drank beers and played golf on the day.

Point still stands, she's never played anyone around that ranking. :)
 
It's hilarious because most on here would find a way to criticize Serena for anything; And i do mean most anything. Any reply she would have given would have been criticized to the freaking moon. The most criticized player in history over so many small things that happened over a decade ago. Her accomplishments far far outweigh the few brutish comments and missteps, by far a great great champion and great ambassador to the sport of tennis. I'd like to see the skeletons in the closets of sooooo many of you. I wonder how pristine you'd be if every misstep were magnified and publicized in the media and public eye. It really makes my wonder how many of you are just flat out racists. I really don't see any other motivation for blasting a player her entire career for some minor bad behavior.

Well, people have no trouble blasting Fed or Nadal or Djokovic for that matter.

As for her specifically, I don't like her behavior on and off court, her outbursts, the way she plays the game. I don't think I'm racist, considering I don't feel that way about Venus, or Tsonga, or Monfils, or Tiafoe, etc. I just don't like her
 
Funny, I can't bring up the fact that she was 16 and a basic nobody on tour and playing her first slam but you can mention how he drank beers and played golf on the day.

Point still stands, she's never played anyone around that ranking. :)

I believe her long time hitting partner at one point said that he got too excited during practice one time, when a lot of people were watching. She couldn't keep up with him and got angry, so he had to dial it back.

There's also been speculation of her hypothetical rank by former pros who have practiced with top women and men, like the Top Tennis Training guys. So I value their judgment more than an anonymous dude on the internet
 
Men and women are just different biologically. Nobody can argue that. So they demand comparing the absolute output from both when the two sets of systems are producing two things entirely.
 
Well, people have no trouble blasting Fed or Nadal or Djokovic for that matter.

As for her specifically, I don't like her behavior on and off court, her outbursts, the way she plays the game. I don't think I'm racist, considering I don't feel that way about Venus, or Tsonga, or Monfils, or Tiafoe, etc. I just don't like her

I'd put forth that the vitriol aimed at Serena is at an entirely different level than the dismay launched at Fed, Nadal and Djokovic. For the latter, it's typically from the camp of an opposing player..........................Nadal fans feel Nadal is the very best and bash Fed, you get the point. No one is throwing shade at Serena while promoting their favorite player. BTW, I can't even watch Serena play, and find her a bit annoying, similarly to how I felt about Monica Seles, I preferred Graf. But, I can still see that she is unfairly maligned constantly.

it's not the dislike, It's the level of dislike for some, like it's a personal crusade. If it's that heightened, and if someone cares that much and gets that riled up, something else is going on.
 
Federer IS better than Serena in stroke production, that isn't in dispute or that most men would be. Give these men a female body, then see if their stroke production is still better.
 
John should have said no comment, next question. It was a stupid loaded question from the media. What a surprise.

How dare him give his actual opinion on the matter and not cave to the masses who don't know anything about tennis at that level anyway.

Oh the humanity. :rolleyes:
 
I believe her long time hitting partner at one point said that he got too excited during practice one time, when a lot of people were watching. She couldn't keep up with him and got angry, so he had to dial it back.

There's also been speculation of her hypothetical rank by former pros who have practiced with top women and men, like the Top Tennis Training guys. So I value their judgment more than an anonymous dude on the internet
Fascinating. I never said where her ranking would be, so I don't expect you to value my 'judgement'.
 
I didn't find it strange either, I just don't think he needed to give a number and I didn't like the responses and criticisms of Serena's reply.

He gave a number to create headlines for his book is all.
The number was used to try and describe how far away she is from the men. I'm not sure how else he should get his point across without making it sound complicated.
 
Why is McEnroe not allowed to express his opinion as a tennis analyst ?

Becker said Rafa and Novak will win 0 wimbledons on 80's and 90's grass. Did they go to war with Becker ?

Why doesnt Serena and her fans realize the job of McEnroe is to comment on the sport ?
 
Some media are too PC while some media are too "alt right". People were always going to be unhappy with the answer to this. As someone said on here, if he said she'd be a top 10 player, the meninists would've been outraged saying she's bad and that McEnroe is wrong, if he said she wouldn't be a top 10 male player then some feminists would be outraged that she wasn't. It turned out he gave the latter response and thus controversy.

It was a lose lose situation. I don't actually dislike McEnroe. I know he was just trying to create headlines for his book to promote sales, I just wish Serena was left out of this at such a crucial time.

I don't disagree that there is an alt right media and that is very much a part of the problem. But your equivocation here is false. She wouldn't be a top 10 player. McEnroe's answer was largely honest. Yes, we don't know if the ball park would be exactly 700 but probably there or thereabouts. It's a reasonable answer and I don't see how you can argue around that. Neither being a meninist or a feminist entitles anyone to disregard the truth or some reasonable approximation of it. If they think they do, we are in trouble and I think we are because this is not the first such instance of it. A simple question and answer exchange like these should not have any ideological taint but unfortunately it does these days. So I see that you more or less acknowledge that it was a futile position for Mc to be in. In which case, he can't be blamed for the answer he gave. Blame the media for spinning it and blame academia for ideologically indoctrinating people instead of teaching them to approach any situation with a healthy skepticism and collect evidence to satisfy themselves rather than basing their position on whether it is for or against their ideology.
 
men and women are just two things. Just maybe it is barely possible to go K G vs Coltrane. Can't compare Yoyo Ma with Kenny G, and say one or the other is musically objectively better for whatever reason.
 
Last edited:
I do respect that the women are physically at a disadvantage against the men, which is the point of having a separate tour but which is also why trying to insinuate that it's sexist to call Serena best female/greatest female is thoughtless. It's apt given that she plays in a different tour. Just call Fed the greatest male tennis player and Serena the greatest female tennis player and be done with it. And this is not the first time I have said it. But the media is hyperzealous these days.

Which was our mutual conclusion to begin with.
 
How dare him give his actual opinion on the matter and not cave to the masses who don't know anything about tennis at that level anyway.

Oh the humanity. :rolleyes:

Actual some prefer not to answer loaded stupid questions put forth by the media to serve no other purpose than to create drama and controversy. As a professional courtesy to say a colleague or respected peer, one may choose not to reply. It's called having class. Nadal would never publicly say he is better than Fed and vice versa. I'm not sure why this even has to be explained. My reply to the question: Serena is a great champion, the men play 3 out of 5 grueling sets in the majors while the women play 2 out of 3 sets in the majors. The men's tour is on a completely different level. Why is this a question that's being asked? I can't find the merit in it. Perhaps you'd also like the WNBA champion to play the NBA champion? That would be absurd. So why is the question is being brought up?
 
Actual some prefer not to answer loaded stupid questions put forth by the media to serve no other purpose than to create drama and controversy. As a professional courtesy to say a colleague or respected peer, one may choose not to reply. It's called having class. Nadal would never publicly say he is better than Fed and vice versa. I'm not sure why this even has to be explained. My reply to the question: Serena is a great champion, the men play 3 out of 5 grueling sets in the majors while the women play 2 out of 3 sets in the majors. The men's tour is on a completely different level. Why is this a question that's being asked? I can't find the merit in it. Perhaps you'd also like the WNBA champion to play the NBA champion? That would be absurd. So why is the question is being brought up?

Mcenroe these days is a commentator not a player so he really shouldn't dodge questions just because the answer might create controversy.
 
Mcenroe these days is a commentator not a player so he really shouldn't dodge questions just because the answer might create controversy.

It wouldn't be dodging it. So as a commentator you are required to answer even stupid insulting questions? I don't think so.
 
It wouldn't be dodging it. So as a commentator you are required to answer even stupid insulting questions? I don't think so.

Do we need the fact that men are better than women at sport to be something that can't be spoken. That's the way that Mcenroe engaged with the "stupid" question. He isn't wrong to do so unless the subject is taboo.
 
^Hahaha, then they will go have an ahnold palmer together.
This whole thing is being well used by both of their publicists. So perfect. And people are getting werkd up. Tennis wins, and so does Hollywood.
I do find Serenas response more stupid. Agree on she should just have ignored John. Doesnt look like she really wants privacy. Such an odd response from her, and I blame the preg hormones. I said some stupid thing too when I was high on those hormones.
Her handlers helped her write that stuff. It was not meant for us. It was for her fanz. Not really tennis fans.

So if Mac lied and said she could be a Top 100 player in the Men's game, is that diminishing her women's accomplishments?
...
Garcia-Navarro: Some wouldn’t qualify it, some would say she’s the best player in the world. Why qualify it?

McEnroe: Oh!
there it is! The trigger! She is a genius who started this "story's arc". Brilliant.

She was 16 and playing her first grand slam. She was a nobody at that point.
As for Tursonov, im not gonna argue who'd win. I have my own thoughts but I'll never know the truth and neither will you as the match won't ever happen.
was she really just sixteen when Karsten Braasch player her and V? I remember it, but....what year was that?
As a grown man on his way out of competitive tennis, I was asked to play practice sets with tursonov when he was thirteen, by his coach (Russian guy in CA). Dimitry was awesome. Hit the top fifty for a decent while. He was basically a slightly poorer man's jim courier, and still is. This would be a nice match. Pretty solid odds....I would put a few grand on Dimitry.
McEnroe is not the victim of a hostile media here, don't act like you don't know how the US talk show circuit works. He was not put on the spot, he was not cold approached or ambushed. This is a typical interview setup, a softball, a lob so he could put away the overhead.
Hahaha, why quaify it? That was a great line.
Could've sold out a lot of guys by saying she would lose to the top few guys today, who are all-time greats. Could've just said, yeah, she could hang! But he went with what his gut said.....and it benefits him as well as Serena. And the sport of tennis. Love how she has a photo shoot coming up. He has a book about to DRropp. Nice timing serena and john?

I do respect that the women are physically at a disadvantage against the men, which is the point of having a separate tour but which is also why trying to insinuate that it's sexist to call Serena best female/greatest female is thoughtless. It's apt given that she plays in a different tour. Just call Fed the greatest male tennis player and Serena the greatest female tennis player and be done with it. And this is not the first time I have said it. But the media is hyperzealous these days.
is this the cisgender heteronormative, binary way of thinking? Jk, man. Solid poast.

Funny, I can't bring up the fact that she was 16 and a basic nobody on tour and playing her first slam but you can mention how he drank beers and played golf on the day.

Point still stands, she's never played anyone around that ranking. :)
Hmm, well haven't several of her male practice partners been close to that level? Sascha, right? I have seen them hit. He is good. Top thousand for sure. Just my opinion. Mac would know better.

Federer IS better than Serena in stroke production, that isn't in dispute or that most men would be. Give these men a female body, then see if their stroke production is still better.
Justine had tremendous stroke production. Rena's strokes are pretty clean, too.

Ok....now....Give a man a female body? Overheard Roger asking, "Ja, so is this 70 Chinois character character asking me to undergo gender reassignment?"
As in...the T in LGBT?
 
Last edited:
Do we need the fact that men are better than women at sport to be something that can't be spoken. That's the way that Mcenroe engaged with the "stupid" question. He isn't wrong to do so unless the subject is taboo.

The men's tour is clearly more physical and the quality of play clearly superior. It's a stupid question. I have no idea what you are talking about. Asking a question when the answer is obvious is stupid. And to be clear, what difference does it make if Serena can't beat the 700th ranked player or the 500th, or the 300th, etc...................

It's an apples and oranges questions.

There's a reason the men and women have separate tours. WTF?

So a question approved by you and one that Mac would have to answer according to you would be; "Why don't the men and women play on the same tour?"
 
The men's tour is clearly more physical and the quality of play clearly superior. It's a stupid question. I have no idea what you are talking about. Asking a question when the answer is obvious is stupid. And to be clear, what difference does it make if Serena can't beat the 700th ranked player or the 500th, or the 300th, etc...................

It's an apples and oranges questions.

There's a reason the men and women have separate tours. WTF?

I'm not defending the asking of the question I'm defending the answering of it....what's Mcenroe supposed to say "That's a stupid question so I'm not going to answer it but I can't specify why." All he did was honestly answer a question. It's not universally conceded that it is a stupid question...some posters have said she is the greatest (as opposed to best) player because her record is superior.
 
I know he was just trying to create headlines for his book to promote sales

That's very cynical. He gave an interview, sure, they probably plugged his book. But I doubt he would deliberately give a calculated answer just for some extra publicity.
 
Exactly. Media asked question, John gave an answer he knew would create headlines for his book, media did not like said answer and therefore gave him the headlines. .

You must be psychic to know know what McEnroe was thinking, or the motivation of the interviewer? But the scenario you paint is unlikely at best. For the 100th time, McEnroe was asked the question, he sought clarification from the interviewer, when he received clarification he answered the question. No conspiracy or collusion here. McEnroe was just answering a question as directly and honestly as he could. His answer of Serena ranking around 700 on men's tour is reasonable. Case closed.
 
I'm not defending the asking of the question I'm defending the answering of it....what's Mcenroe supposed to say "That's a stupid question so I'm not going to answer it but I can't specify why." All he did was honestly answer a question. It's not universally conceded that it is a stupid question...some posters have said she is the greatest (as opposed to best) player because her record is superior.

All Mac had to say was that the level of play on the men's tour is on a completely different level. Respect Serena for what she's done and leave it at that. She's a great champion, and there's a reason we have Fed or Nadal as the greatest men's champion and Serena as the greatest women's champion. I'm not going to get into how she would fare against the men because as I said, two completely different levels of play. Apples and oranges. I think I could beat her but hey, perhaps we'll never know. The fact that questions are arising about how she'd fare against the men is a testament to how far above her competition on the women's tour she is.

Anyone suggesting that she's the greatest ever, including the men, need's to have their head's examined and are clearly putting forth a feminist agenda.
 
Ranking points are miniscule once you leave the top 200 so the comparison that Polmans and Taweels quality is about as close as the difference between Raonic and Thiem's quality is laughable. As I said, Polmans was playing slam qualifying while Taweel is probably playing ITF qualifying or lower. The difference is immense.

And Serena was 16 and playing her first ever grand slam when that match took place, she was a nobody. She wasn't at her peak or even a fantastic top notch player so I don't really rate that match as the defining factor. But I know it's the only evidence we have of her playing a male so people use it.

And the following year a 17 year-old Serena beats Graf. I guess Graf you have lost to Braasch handily too.

I truly believe some of these guys have Norman Bates style mommy issues.
 
Back
Top