ak24alive
Legend
Decent Men.What do you think it takes for the WTA to be in same respect level as ATP
Decent Men.What do you think it takes for the WTA to be in same respect level as ATP
So I’m not a decent man for respecting the men’s tennis more than the women’s tennis? It’s not a matter of gender in my view it’s just a matter of the quality of tennis.Decent Men.
Decent Men.
"respecting" If you would use the word "liking" there wouldn't be an issue.So I’m not a decent man for respecting the men’s tennis more than the women’s tennis? It’s not a matter of gender in my view it’s just a matter of the quality of tennis.
"Respect level".So I’m not a decent man for respecting the men’s tennis more than the women’s tennis? It’s not a matter of gender in my view it’s just a matter of the quality of tennis.
What do you think it takes for the WTA to be in same respect level as ATP
Ok, mate, we're onboard together.My mistake, I thought when you said most of the history of slams you meant most of the history of slams not most of the history of slams since 1968.
J
I am talking about the game, and you are talking about achievements, so we are not on the same page.
If I wanted to be on your page, however, I would have asked you just how many of those listed would have won those Majors, if there were three Serena Williamses at the same time, and upping their game sometimes at the same time, and sometimes in different times, while being of different age, so that they represent different challenge to overcome?
Equal levels of respect are now mandated at all slams and joint ATP / WTA events.What do you think it takes for the WTA to be in same respect level as ATP
There is no "would have" history is as it stands, and Serena played through those years, yet 23 majors were claimed by others--with several players winning more than one. On the ATP side, since 2010, these are te majors winners not named Federer/Nadal/Djokovic:
2010:
2011:
2012: Murray (USO)
2013: Murray (Wimbledon)
2014: Cilic (USO), Wawrinka (AO)
2015: Wawrinka (FO)
2016: Wawrinka (USO), Murray (Wimbledon)
2017:
2018:
That's it. Three players. Seven majors. The glaring absence of more majors-winning players--players who are not so easily beaten into a corner--settles the fact that the ATP has been filled with go-nowhere / Can't Win A Major players for two generations. This is not a diverse, competitive field compared to the WTA, where no player was/is so formidable that they prevent others among the top players (15--since 2010) from winning majors. There's no spinning the actual winners lists, and what it says about the tours.
Am I the only one getting a laugh from the Keyboard Warrior-ettes on this discussion? Wow! So ... tough.
Why? Your attempt at payback for being laughed at by every woman that's ever met you? So sad.Am I the only one getting a laugh from the Keyboard Warrior-ettes on this discussion? Wow! So ... tough.
Why? Your attempt at payback for being laughed at by every woman that's ever met you? So sad.
So ignored. Buh-bye
So a bo3 could be 76 67 76 thats 39 gamesMen play BO5 sets and women play BO3. The men work more.
Watching Nadal/Thiem after that Serena borefest just reinforces my belief that men should be payed more at slams.
So ignored. Buh-bye
Decent Men.
Yes, but why would you exclude Djokovic and Nadal?
On the ATP side, since 2010, these are the majors winners not named Federer/Nadal/Djokovic
reality is most people here are men who well have incredibly conservative/backwards views and justify it by saying that is their preference but offer no concrete reasons to justify it.
Read:
Once again, only three other players (outside of the trio listed above from my earlier post), won majors from 2010 - 2018, The glaring absence of more majors-winning players--players who are not so easily beaten into a corner--settles the fact that the ATP has been filled with go-nowhere / Can't Win A Major players for two generations, and as of Wimbledon 2018, that terrible situation has not changed.
I read it the first time.
You compare the WTA, spearheaded by one player, and then refuse to do the same for the ATP.
Good point.Stop shaving the pits, look how well it works for Nadal.
Apparently not carefully enough. For example, Williams was mentioned because WTA critics push the idiotic theory that "she wins everything" when the 23 majors from 2010-18 prove that's patently false. Either someone can count, or they are having difficulties with something so simple. Moreover, you will never bring yourself to acknowledge that among the WTA, players across different age ranges/generations have all stepped up to win majors, no matter who was the so-called "top player", but cannot explain why the ATP's limp "next generation"--as of this date--have failed to do the same year after year after year. There is a problem, and its called a case of being a pile of untalented hacks, who allow aging players to truly "win everything" more than anything seen in the WTA, or older ATP eras. That speaks volumes about the innumerable failings in the men's game in this century.
What is the excuse? "Oh, Federer/Nadal/Djokovic or just that much better" Really? Or is It a case of a kind of player that is so pedestrian in every fibre of his professional being, he's no better than a glorified practice partner. Again, what is the excuse, and what kind of future is that for the ATP once that oft-mentioned trio retire?
this and anyone pretending other wise is ridiculous. the same things they whine about wta (lbr most people here don't even pay any wta match because it gets in the way of their precious favs on the mens side, yet act like they are experts enough to comment about it). the same issues that they whine about when it comes to the wta, "screaming, choking, etc" exists very much on the atp. the same guys dominate the tour, the younger generations "choke", people take forever to win sets even with a lead, let's not pretend that the quality of atp matches are all that better.
reality is most people here are men who well have incredibly conservative/backwards views and justify it by saying that is their preference but offer no concrete reasons to justify it.
I read your posts, not your thoughts about "haters", so I read carefully enough to address what is being written.
Firstly, because you cannot have your cake and eat it too by counting Majors outside of the leading player on each tour, and at the same time grouping three ATGs on the men's tour, thus avoiding doing the counting under the same conditions.
I actually explained why what you called a "limp" generation failed to do that: it is because of those two players (as my previous comparison showed very well), and the unique set of circumstances, where the improving physical and medical care lead to prolonged stay at the top.
Nadal and Djokovic are not from Federer's generation,
I mean, Sharapova is the closest thing that the WTA has to that, and she is the same age as Djokovic, but has like 1/3 of his career.
No, you did not, hence your refusal to address the repeated heart of the message about ATP players who cannot win majors as of this date.
Utter nonsense. Learn to count, for there is only one conclusion to be reached about why the named male players (and others who played in the time frame)--as of this date--cannot win a major, leaving only a few not named RF/ND/RN.
Desperate, nonsensical reply. If your post had any connection to the truth, then "improving physical and medical care" should also aid the other, majors-free players to weather anything the trio throw at them...or is a case of the others simply not being talented enough to beat the trio in question no matter the age or level of conditioning? Take your pick.
According to...?
You proved my point: Sharapova had a larger, stronger field of quality competition to deal with, as a result, she was not going to have the same number of majors, in the timeframe.
It is a disgrace against humanity that only 3 people have liked this post. Hoodjem, you deserve so much better.Tennis began when Roger first won Wimbledon in 2004. There was nothing before that. No records. No history. No tournaments. Just a few players traveling the world randomly bumping against each other. That began in 1998.
Just formless dark chaos.
Then Ferd brought light and order.
—Genesis 1:1
2003*Tennis began when Roger first won Wimbledon in 2004. There was nothing before that. No records. No history. No tournaments. Just a few players traveling the world randomly bumping against each other. That began in 1998.
Just formless dark chaos.
Then Ferd brought light and order.
—Genesis 1:1
The women's slams need to stand out more compared to the women's ms1000's. Everything is relative and so it hurts the women's game that the men's slams have a big point of difference with their prestigious bo5 format compared to their bo3 ms1000 format and the Women don't have much of a difference between their ms1000 events and slams. Best of 5 for Women's Slam semis and final might help.
I addressed the "heart of the message".
Is Kerber of the same generation as Serena?
Kerber is just one year younger than Djokovic.
Your reply about the medical care shows that you are ignorant about many issues beyond just counting.
As the game gets more endurance oriented (thanks Homogenization!!) the sweet spot for getting the best of your physical qualities is in your late twenties, early thirties. This edge doesn't last forever (so a guy in his 40ies won't have it), but is just enough to move the advantage from the current younger players to the current older players.
End hereditary misogyny.
Seriously. I don't know how anyone can watch the WTA and think the overall competition is bad. It is different than the ATP in the msallest terms of pace or power play, but the competition, point construction, and fight is very good. The "respsect" issue lies much deeper in the limited machissmo male brain is all. Easy to see. Heck, just read comments here or in similar threads.
No, you did not. You are claiming "all time great" status for certain players when the question is about the others who cannot win a major. Being as hyper-defensive of males in tennis as you are, you will not focus on that heart of the problem. Its not a simplistic a s "oh, they are ATG, so that's that." No. What is happening with the other players--their coaching...basic talent that prevents them from breaking through as young male players of other generations did.
You have no reasoned, honest answer for that when you tap-shuffle-tapped around the question to provide "cover" for a generation of players who--as of this date--cannot get the job done.
Serena will be 37 on September 26th. Kerber is 30. That's the same generation, no matter what your astounding misunderstanding of what "generation" means continues to lead you to push this slapped-together notion.
This from a person using fantasy training / medicine as an explanation, when your every word had as much clinical value as a witch doctor shaking beads while dancing around a fire, as we see below:
Still dancing around the fire--with some cackling of lies, for if anything you posted was anywhere near the truth, then being in that sweet spot should have paid off in the majors for players in that age range--
John Isner: 33
Gilles Simon: 33
Sam Querrey: 30
Vasek Pospisil: 28
Kei Nishikori: 28
Grigor Dimitrov: 27
--so much for your sweet spot theory. Now get back to the real issues with the named players. I doubt that will happen if your last few posts are any indicator.
Over and Over I keep hearing from most of the males (but not all) on here that women's tennis must be and remain "beautiful" and soft and the players have to be attractive to THEM to matter.^ This should be part of the Talk Tennis banner.
As mentioned in another thread, some regressive males have a ridiculous fantasy of women's tennis being the 1940s country club with women falling into every "soft and weak", pencil thin doll idea, playing a game few respect. They only exist to be objects of desire for loser males living somewhere other than reality.
The WTA already has the same respect level as the ATP.
Any disrespect is in the minds of chauvinists and that's not going away anytime soon.
^ This should be part of the Talk Tennis banner.
As mentioned in another thread, some regressive males have a ridiculous fantasy of women's tennis being the 1940s country club with women falling into every "soft and weak", pencil thin doll idea, playing a game few respect. They only exist to be objects of desire for loser males living somewhere other than reality.
As long is conversations about where the top womens players would rank in the mens circuit get shut down and censored, i will not respect womens tennis as much as mens tennis.This notion of women's tennis less interesting then men, is a myth cause women's tennis is interesting when you have the right competition and players pushing each other. To me I don't think the women are working to push each other the way ATP players are doing.
People were as equally interested in Chrissie and Martina then they were in Borg and McEnroe.What do you think it takes for the WTA to generate the kind of fanbase and crowd drawing like ATP?
That isn't the conversation AT ALL. OMG!As long is conversations about where the top womens players would rank in the mens circuit get shut down and censored, i will not respect womens tennis as much as mens tennis.
According to...?
Lots of adult males in this world, very few Men.If the men would just hate something they know absolutely nothing about in silence so the rest of us could enjoy watching and discussing women's sports, that would be enough for me. However, that never happens because these type of men can't stand to not be the constant center of attention or to not control our every thought and action. Hate the WTA, we can live with that but just hate it quietly in some far distant space.