2015 Wimbledon Final: Djokovic v. Federer II

[Fiero425]

If we make the argument that Federer made a better player out of Nadal, and both made a better player out of Djokovic, then I don't see how we can fault an amazing athlete like Serena Williams for not having to rise to the level of a better competition. In a scenario that can never be proven, were she to play in the mens game, Serena has a better serve than a lot of men, which would be an advantage. A powerful forehand. And she has a will to win that is equaled basically only by Nadal and Sharapova. If she had always been asked to play v. the men. I think she'd be she'd be top 10. She'd certainly be getting over the like of Dimitrov, Nishikori, Berdych, Ferrer, Raonic and Isner. Note that I'm saying if she'd always played on the men's side. If she had, I really think she could have beaten a lot of those weak also-rans.

Honey, back away from "whatever" you're doing! Seek serious help and we'll pray for you! :cover :nono :angel:

Funny from you, who complains about the weakness of the also-rans.

Yep, but there's a big difference in trying to play between the sexes! It just doesn't work! Men have too much control over their shots in comparison to women; sorry! It has little to do with the power they can generate to blast them off the court, but the length of points would come into play and eventually Serena would have a heart attack if she seriously tried to compete even against a good college player! I'd take her on in my prime! :angel: :dodgy:

 

[I.Haychew]

If we make the argument that Federer made a better player out of Nadal, and both made a better player out of Djokovic, then I don't see how we can fault an amazing athlete like Serena Williams for not having to rise to the level of a better competition. In a scenario that can never be proven, were she to play in the mens game, Serena has a better serve than a lot of men, which would be an advantage. A powerful forehand. And she has a will to win that is equaled basically only by Nadal and Sharapova. If she had always been asked to play v. the men. I think she'd be she'd be top 10. She'd certainly be getting over the like of Dimitrov, Nishikori, Berdych, Ferrer, Raonic and Isner. Note that I'm saying if she'd always played on the men's side. If she had, I really think she could have beaten a lot of those weak also-rans.

Honey, back away from "whatever" you're doing! Seek serious help and we'll pray for you! :cover :nono :angel:

Funny from you, who complains about the weakness of the also-rans.

1000 matches evenly distributed against all of those guys and I'll give Serena the benefit of the doubt and will give her a total of one set. That's being generous. There's a reason why women don't play in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc.

 

[Kirijax]

Interesting! Just wondering if anyone thinks that Serena, or any other woman, could beat any of the men ranked in the top 50, or maybe even the top 100. My guess is that she/they couldn't.

OMG, we had this discussion on the ESPN MB when it was still up! It's been done already; Serena and Venus got their lunch handed to them by someone ranked #203; Karsten Braasch in 1998! He came out to the court hungover, hadn't shaved, smoking a cigarette and smoked them both IIRC; giving them doubles lines (1 & 2 respectively)!

- https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100623163931AAXlfiH - :eyepop

If we make the argument that Federer made a better player out of Nadal, and both made a better player out of Djokovic, then I don't see how we can fault an amazing athlete like Serena Williams for not having to rise to the level of a better competition. In a scenario that can never be proven, were she to play in the mens game, Serena has a better serve than a lot of men, which would be an advantage. A powerful forehand. And she has a will to win that is equaled basically only by Nadal and Sharapova. If she had always been asked to play v. the men. I think she'd be she'd be top 10. She'd certainly be getting over the like of Dimitrov, Nishikori, Berdych, Ferrer, Raonic and Isner. Note that I'm saying if she'd always played on the men's side. If she had, I really think she could have beaten a lot of those weak also-rans.

I always have a nice chuckle when I see this assumption. And how do we know this? By how loud they grunt/scream/groan? :snicker

 

[DarthFed]

Moxie I sincerely hope you are kidding. On average she might win a game per set vs a guy ranked 100 on a very fast court just due to her serve.

 

[DarthFed]

Roger and his weak era sure are lucky they didn't have to face Serena!!

 

[Moxie]

Honey, back away from "whatever" you're doing! Seek serious help and we'll pray for you! :cover :nono :angel:

Funny from you, who complains about the weakness of the also-rans.

1000 matches evenly distributed against all of those guys and I'll give Serena the benefit of the doubt and will give her a total of one set. That's being generous. There's a reason why women don't play in the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc.

I don't want to derail this thread for the endless question of how much women in sports are even valued. My hypothetical was if Serena had always played against men, and had the value of that level of competition, which everyone seems to appreciate for the guys. When we look at the relative wimpyness that we see in the men's game, below a certain level, I do think that Serena could have done reasonably well on the men's side. I'm sorry if that makes your fuzzy tennis balls shrivel. But Serena is ballsier than most of the men in the game. And, Fiero, if you contradict me on this, then you are a hypocrite.

 

[Fiero425]

Roger and his weak era sure are lucky they didn't have to face Serena!!

Oh the mocking begins! :lolz: :laydownlaughing - Good one! You saved me from doing it! :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Moxie]

Moxie I sincerely hope you are kidding. On average she might win a game per set vs a guy ranked 100 on a very fast court just due to her serve.

I'm not. At least Serena is no pushover. Can't say the same for the likes of lot of "in-the-hunt" men. You'll tell me she'd lose against them, but I'm telling you that's a matter of opinion, and she's wayyy tougher than a lot of them. As I said: if she had always played against men, I think she'd be better than a lot of the ones on offer.

 

[DarthFed]

Moxie this is embarrassing. You are taking feminism to a whole nother level here

 

[herios]

Can we leave Serena where she belongs, on the WTA site? She has nothing to do with the men final.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie this is embarrassing. You are taking feminism to a whole nother level here

Well, I'm not embarrassed. It's a bit of a hypothetical, but why not? Fiero goes on and on with his hair on fire about how there's no decent competition for the Big 3-4. There'll all "spineless." I'm just wondering if Serena had always played on the men's side. Always faced the same competition. I bet she'd have been better than a lot of them. She's certainly got more (as much as I want to say "cojones," I'll just say) ...ambition.

 

[britbox]

Actually, none of these men are spineless wimps if you are using absolute terms - it takes a hell of a lot of work, dedication and toughness to even make the pros.

Fiero is using relative terms in respect to the Top 4.

I couldn't realistically see Serena beating any bloke in the Top 300.

 

[Moxie]

Actually, none of these men are spineless wimps if you are using absolute terms - it takes a hell of a lot of work, dedication and toughness to even make the pros.

Fiero is using relative terms in respect to the Top 4.

I couldn't realistically see Serena beating any bloke in the Top 300.

Mental toughness and commitment are real components in today's game, and we've been complaining about the ones who don't have it (past and present.) Especially with regards to this lost generation that El Dude keeps telling us about, or the flakes from Federer (and Serena's) group. I can never prove my assertion that Serena would have done better than "any bloke" in the top 300, but I think you take my point. She's surely ballsier than a lot of them.

 

[Front242]

She wouldn't score a single point against Karlovic, Isner, Raonic or anyone with a big serve unless they double faulted or hit some really slow second serves. Bear in mind also that the WTA use different balls which makes their serves faster. If she used the men's balls she'd be serving slower. I recall a ball from one of the WTA matches was hit onto one of the men's courts before and they picked it up and just laughed 'cos if the guys hit it they'd all be serving a-bombs.

 

[Fiero425]

She wouldn't score a single point against Karlovic, Isner, Raonic or anyone with a big serve unless they double faulted or hit some really slow second serves. Bear in mind also that the WTA use different balls which makes their serves faster. If she used the men's balls she'd be serving slower. I recall a ball from one of the WTA matches was hit onto one of the men's courts before and they picked it up and just laughed 'cos if the guys hit it they'd all be serving a-bombs.

I didn't realize they manipulated the ball quality between the 2 tours! I know when I played I considered what surface I was playing on; determined the balls selected! On clay I liked a heavier ball that bounced higher like those "pressureless" Tretorns ball! Conditions were heavy indoors and I usually went with Penns! I taught and played matches on a gym floor that was like playing on grass and something in-between like a Wilson would do! Anybody else care? :angel: :dodgy: - With today's big-headed rackets, IDK what I'd do if I still played! uzzled :nono

 

[Fiero425]

Actually, none of these men are spineless wimps if you are using absolute terms - it takes a hell of a lot of work, dedication and toughness to even make the pros.

Fiero is using relative terms in respect to the Top 4.

I couldn't realistically see Serena beating any bloke in the Top 300.

Thank you! I wish people would quote me properly as well; never said spineless wimps! I've used the term "gutless" a 1000 X's and you have to agree with all the lame results of "the also-rans" that can be points away from winning, serving for a match, and fail miserably again and again! It's finally caught up with Nadal and he's been going down in flames to different levels of players, but Nole, Andy, and Roger haven't been tested for the most part! Roger was very vulnerable until this past tourney, but no one "rose to the occasion" to take him out! :cover :nono :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Kieran]

Serena wouldn't win a set against the best U16 boy. Seriously.

This term "equality" is a political Trojan horse term. A made up, fake concept that has no actual value or meaning in the real world. And in tennis, it's totally unequal because the players who really make the sport what it is - the men - are penalised because it's nowadays too tough for them to add a doubles entry to their earnings, whereas for years, Serena would thump some overweight "athlete" 6-0, 6-0 in about 23 minutes, and go straight back on court with Venus to thrash a pair of gormless dolls in the doubles, and get to shove even more dosh into their knickers, like a spare tennis ball.

Equality, indeed...

 

[Kieran]

She's surely ballsier than a lot of them.

This I can hang with. She's definitely tough. But the WTA is comparatively sh1t. It's only gotten interesting this year because Serena is chasing history...

 

[brokenshoelace]

Actually, none of these men are spineless wimps if you are using absolute terms - it takes a hell of a lot of work, dedication and toughness to even make the pros.

Fiero is using relative terms in respect to the Top 4.

I couldn't realistically see Serena beating any bloke in the Top 300.

Mental toughness and commitment are real components in today's game, and we've been complaining about the ones who don't have it (past and present.) Especially with regards to this lost generation that El Dude keeps telling us about, or the flakes from Federer (and Serena's) group. I can never prove my assertion that Serena would have done better than "any bloke" in the top 300, but I think you take my point. She's surely ballsier than a lot of them.

What would balls do you if someone is miles better than you?

In relative terms, a bloke in the top 100 is in no way better than Serena. In absolute terms? She'd do well to take a game.

Don't be delusional.

 

[nehmeth]

:nono

"During the 1998 Australian Open, sisters Serena and Venus Williams boasted that they could beat any man ranked outside the world's top 200. The challenge was accepted by Karsten Braasch, a German player ranked No 203 (his highest ranking was No 38). Before the matches, Braasch played a round of golf in the morning, drank a couple of beers, smoked a few cigarettes, and then played the Williams sisters for a set each, one after the other. He defeated Serena, 6-1, and Venus, 6-2. Serena said afterwards "I didn't know it would be that hard. I hit shots that would have been winners on the women's tour and he got to them easily."

Link http://www.topendsports.com/sport/tennis/men-v-women.htm