The Championships, Wimbledon

#105
#105
BigPapaVol said:
modern outfits have altered the game. It's a fashion show now and the play is secondary.
Click to expand...

How have outfits altered the game? Women's tennis has always been a bit of a fashion show... as has men's to an extent.

1519945869_67ee8c4798.jpg


0,,12781~8095129,00.jpg


gallery9.jpg
 
#106
#106
Anyone on here disagree with Giles Simon's position that women professional tennis players should NOT be paid the same as men tennis professionals?

It is absurd that these women players get equivalent pay to the men, especially at the grand slams. The two most obvious arguments are that men play best of five and are the reason that butts are in seats.

The game of professional tennis, in at least in some regards, is nothing but a wacky social experiment. Can you imagine if players in the WNBA were paid the same as the NBA? Absurd.

In an interview, Simon said he could care less about the impending backlash towards his comments. I bet 'his people' issue a "statement" soon to clarify or atone for his political insensitivity.
 
#109
#109
DyronNix said:
Anyone on here disagree with Giles Simon's position that women professional tennis players should NOT be paid the same as men tennis professionals?

It is absurd that these women players get equivalent pay to the men, especially at the grand slams. The two most obvious arguments are that men play best of five and are the reason that butts are in seats.

The game of professional tennis, in at least in some regards, is nothing but a wacky social experiment. Can you imagine if players in the WNBA were paid the same as the NBA? Absurd.

In an interview, Simon said he could care less about the impending backlash towards his comments. I bet 'his people' issue a "statement" soon to clarify or atone for his political insensitivity.
Click to expand...

I'm letting my wife answer this one. I'm just typing what she says:

For the most part I would agree with Gilles, although to see five sets on the women's side would lull a lot of people to sleep like Orsine, for example. To hear women scream through five sets would be worse. Their argument that you pay the same amount for a one hour movie as a three hour movie is absurd. Not that men aren't prone to drama and injury timeouts, but through the whole, most men handle themselves with sportsmanship and dignity, unlike the women. Faking injury is rampant in the women's game.
I've watched many, many matches and many times there are more butts in the seats at doubles matches than at the women's singles matches, even marquis names. Most of the women I prefer to see don't even get televised. As far as entertainment value, watching women's tennis compared to the men is like watching paint dry. The stuff like rushing to the ump as the winner and shaking hands first as a form of one-upmanship is disheartening. Most of the women are downright silly, and poor sports. Until the depth of women's tennis goes over five or ten that stand a chance and they start putting people in seats, it's not justified.
 
Last edited:
#112
#112
IBlvNTmWrk said:
How have outfits altered the game? Women's tennis has always been a bit of a fashion show... as has men's to an extent.
Click to expand...

The shame of that is that I bet Chrissie Evert would have been a pretty hot little piece back in her day with a decent get up.
 
#113
#113
BigPapaVol said:
The screaming crap has to cease.
Click to expand...

But how? Giving out penalties for decibel level?

It's totally unenforceable. The screaming will go on.

I find the way best way to tolerate it is to pretend I'm having hot sex with whoever is doing the grunting. Makes me feel pretty good about myself.
 
#114
#114
DyronNix said:
Anyone on here disagree with Giles Simon's position that women professional tennis players should NOT be paid the same as men tennis professionals?

It is absurd that these women players get equivalent pay to the men, especially at the grand slams. The two most obvious arguments are that men play best of five and are the reason that butts are in seats.

The game of professional tennis, in at least in some regards, is nothing but a wacky social experiment. Can you imagine if players in the WNBA were paid the same as the NBA? Absurd.

In an interview, Simon said he could care less about the impending backlash towards his comments. I bet 'his people' issue a "statement" soon to clarify or atone for his political insensitivity.
Click to expand...

Is the payout for women's only tournaments significantly smaller? I would think the economics of it would dictate smaller payouts. With the slams, they are playing under the same umbrella -- literally and figuratively -- and so KidB's 50 bucks to watch Rafa Nadal, to them, is just 50 bucks to get on the grounds. They know people are there to watch the guys, but it's easier for them to pay the females the same amount of money just to keep the feminazis away.
 
#115
#115
MphsBlues said:
I'm letting my wife answer this one. I'm just typing what she says:

For the most part I would agree with Gilles, although to see five sets on the women's side would lull a lot of people to sleep like Orsine, for example. To hear women scream through five sets would be worse. Their argument that you pay the same amount for a one hour movie as a three hour movie is absurd. Not that men aren't prone to drama and injury timeouts, but through the whole, most men handle themselves with sportsmanship and dignity, unlike the women. Faking injury is rampant in the women's game.
I've watched many, many matches and many times there are more butts in the seats at doubles matches than at the women's singles matches, even marquis names. Most of the women I prefer to see don't even get televised. As far as entertainment value, watching women's tennis compared to the men is like watching paint dry. The stuff like rushing to the ump as the winner and shaking hands first as a form of one-upmanship is disheartening. Most of the women are downright silly, and poor sports. Until the depth of women's tennis goes over five or ten that stand a chance and they start putting people in seats, it's not justified.
Click to expand...

Your wife is a sensible lady.
 
#116
#116
DyronNix said:
Anyone on here disagree with Giles Simon's position that women professional tennis players should NOT be paid the same as men tennis professionals?

It is absurd that these women players get equivalent pay to the men, especially at the grand slams. The two most obvious arguments are that men play best of five and are the reason that butts are in seats.

The game of professional tennis, in at least in some regards, is nothing but a wacky social experiment. Can you imagine if players in the WNBA were paid the same as the NBA? Absurd.

In an interview, Simon said he could care less about the impending backlash towards his comments. I bet 'his people' issue a "statement" soon to clarify or atone for his political insensitivity.
Click to expand...

Maybe Gilles doesn't care. Has there been a feminist movement in France? It could be in France that females are simply seen as objects for sex and reproduction facilitation. You know, how it used to be in the US.
 
#117
#117
kidbourbon said:
Maybe Gilles doesn't care. Has there been a feminist movement in France? It could be in France that females are simply seen as objects for sex and reproduction facilitation. You know, how it used to be in the US.
Click to expand...

Equal pay? Fold my damn laundry, woman!
 
#118
#118
My gambling thoughts from last night:

Gilles Simon-150 vs Malisse: looks like absolute free money. But I don't like betting against Malisse. Y'all seen that guy play? I mean there are plenty of examples of pro tennis players that have more game than their ranking gives them credit for (Baghdatis, Nalbandian), but Mallise being ranked 75 just blows my mind. The guy is a shotmaker. And Simon is just a steady guy that moves well. Mallise may win this match. I ain't gonna funk with it.

Mardy Fish-280 vs. James Ward: if I were sure Fish were healthy and fit for a fourth set, should it go there, I would take Fish. But then again, if I were sure of all that, then Vegas probably would be as well, and this line would be way more than -280.

You know what, scratch everything I just wrote. James Ward is freakin terrible at tennis. Fish will beat him him 6-3, 6-4, 6-4. Take Fish. It's a ******n bargain.

Dimitrov-190 vs. Baghdatis: I love Baghdatis. I've seen the guy play in person three times and you wouldn't even believe how good the guy is until you see it. He has no weaknesses. He can hit ALL the shots. It's like: "why isn't this guy top 5"? The answer is that he's just a bit lazy, and isn't nearly as fit as he needs to be. I just get the feeling that he has no idea how good he is at tennis. Anyway, I like bags, but he is having an atrocious year. I see Dimitrov taking him out in 4.

Goffin-170 vs. Jesse Levine: Levine was enrolled at -- and played tennis for -- the University of Florida Gators for a single semester. So Jesse Levine can go funk himself. I hope he had fun hanging out with a bunch of douchebag New Jersey kids with too much gel in their hair and not enough knowledge of SEC football history. I further hope he enjoyed hitting on girls with fat arms for an entire semester. Also, Jesse Levine isn't all that good at tennis. He won a couple challengers. Whoop dee freakin doo. This Goffin kid -- who I still haven't seen play -- is supposed to be legit. I'd go with him.

Cilic-450 vs. Kubot: I like Cilic. Not only is he simply better at tennis, he is 7 years younger.

Anybody like any upset plays? I think there might be a smidgeon of value in:

Karlovic+800 vs. Andy Murray

or maybe

Rosol+3000 vs. Rafa

I don't think either will hit, but I do think that the lines on the favorite side might be a touch exorbitant, which of course means there is a bit of value on the doggy dogg side.

Also

Andy Roddick-1800 vs. Bjorn Phau: Phau is no world beater, but Andy Roddick shouldn't be 18-1 against my grandmother. Never mind my grandmother is dead. Roddick shouldn't be 18-1 against your mother or your naughty little sister. And Roddick probably shouldn't even be 18-1 against my 4 year old niece. In fact, I think my erect penis could figure out a way to beat Roddick once if it were matched up against him 18 times.

Ferrer ain't losing.
Tsonga ain't losing because that would bring happiness into my life, and this is no time for that.

Is Delpo healthy? If so, he ain't losing. At least, I hope not. I like delpo.
 
#120
#120
from a 2010 article...

WIMBLEDON MEN’S FINALS, HIGHEST RATED (SINCE 1988)

1. 1992, Andre Agassi d. Goran Ivanisevic, 5.6

2. 1989, Boris Becker d. Stefan Edberg, 5.2

3. 1999, Pete Sampras d. Andre Agassi, 5.0

WIMBLEDON WOMEN’S FINALS, HIGHEST RATED SINCE 1988:

1. 1992, Steffi Graf d. Monica Seles, 5.3

2. 1989, Steffi Graf d. Martina Navratilova, 4.5

3. 1988, Steffi Graf d. Martina Navratilova, 4.4

Ratings are the driving force in all of televised sports


This, from Yahoo Answers, is a pretty solid opinion...


"Whenever I read arguments on this issue, both sides almost always seem to miss the mark. When a man plays less sets and spends less time on court than another man, he is not compensated any differently. The ITF pays all men equally no matter if he plays 5 sets or only 5 games (due to his opponent retiring). Unless the ITF decides to compensate each player based upon the number of sets played and time spent on court, then there is no legitimate argument that women should be paid less. The ATP is allowed to reduce the number of sets played at slams from best of 5 to best of 3, but they choose to stay with best of 5 for the sake of tradition. The WTA should not be penalized for their choice.

It's true that men's matches sometimes bring a larger crowds, but women are HUGE television ratings draw--outperforming their male counterparts. That fact implies that while men are more popular with hardcore tennis fans who would make the trek to tournanments to see the players live (and post messages in tennis forums), women are more popular with casual tennis fans--and that's partly due to shorter matches."
 
#121
#121
kidbourbon said:
My gambling thoughts from last night:

Gilles Simon-150 vs Malisse: looks like absolute free money. But I don't like betting against Malisse. Y'all seen that guy play? I mean there are plenty of examples of pro tennis players that have more game than their ranking gives them credit for (Baghdatis, Nalbandian), but Mallise being ranked 75 just blows my mind. The guy is a shotmaker. And Simon is just a steady guy that moves well. Mallise may win this match. I ain't gonna funk with it.

Mardy Fish-280 vs. James Ward: if I were sure Fish were healthy and fit for a fourth set, should it go there, I would take Fish. But then again, if I were sure of all that, then Vegas probably would be as well, and this line would be way more than -280.

You know what, scratch everything I just wrote. James Ward is freakin terrible at tennis. Fish will beat him him 6-3, 6-4, 6-4. Take Fish. It's a ******n bargain.

Dimitrov-190 vs. Baghdatis: I love Baghdatis. I've seen the guy play in person three times and you wouldn't even believe how good the guy is until you see it. He has no weaknesses. He can hit ALL the shots. It's like: "why isn't this guy top 5"? The answer is that he's just a bit lazy, and isn't nearly as fit as he needs to be. I just get the feeling that he has no idea how good he is at tennis. Anyway, I like bags, but he is having an atrocious year. I see Dimitrov taking him out in 4.

Goffin-170 vs. Jesse Levine: Levine was enrolled at -- and played tennis for -- the University of Florida Gators for a single semester. So Jesse Levine can go funk himself. I hope he had fun hanging out with a bunch of douchebag New Jersey kids with too much gel in their hair and not enough knowledge of SEC football history. I further hope he enjoyed hitting on girls with fat arms for an entire semester. Also, Jesse Levine isn't all that good at tennis. He won a couple challengers. Whoop dee freakin doo. This Goffin kid -- who I still haven't seen play -- is supposed to be legit. I'd go with him.

Cilic-450 vs. Kubot: I like Cilic. Not only is he simply better at tennis, he is 7 years younger.

Anybody like any upset plays? I think there might be a smidgeon of value in:

Karlovic+800 vs. Andy Murray

or maybe

Rosol+3000 vs. Rafa

I don't think either will hit, but I do think that the lines on the favorite side might be a touch exorbitant, which of course means there is a bit of value on the doggy dogg side.

Also

Andy Roddick-1800 vs. Bjorn Phau: Phau is no world beater, but Andy Roddick shouldn't be 18-1 against my grandmother. Never mind my grandmother is dead. Roddick shouldn't be 18-1 against your mother or your naughty little sister. And Roddick probably shouldn't even be 18-1 against my 4 year old niece. In fact, I think my erect penis could figure out a way to beat Roddick once if it were matched up against him 18 times.

Ferrer ain't losing.
Tsonga ain't losing because that would bring happiness into my life, and this is no time for that.

Is Delpo healthy? If so, he ain't losing. At least, I hope not. I like delpo.
Click to expand...

I lol'd a couple times. :) I like the picks at the bottom. Add Raonic as one to bet on. Querrey ain't beating him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top