2019 Men's Wimbledon Championships

[tenisplayrla08]

Naturally Tsitsipas broke right back and leads 4-3.

It is SO strange though to see Fabbiano and Schwartzman in matches though. Because the tour is full of 6'1" and above guys with a number of 5'11" guys (my height), these shorter guys seem SO short and odd. But I mean. I see 5'8" guys every single day in regular life. It's just on the tennis court it's nearly unheard of. So impressive from Schwartzman to get to the top 10 or close to the top 10 a couple years ago.

There's a ball kid on court that's got a solid 6+ inches on Fabbiano. He's got to be 6'2" or 6'4" even. Hardly a kid. But can't be more than ... 17 or 18. Bean pole.

 

[mrzz]

nd I can concede the argument that it's impossible, during a slam, to determine precisely where the revenue is being generated

Someone above thread posted that tickets to men's semis and finals are three times more expensive than women's. Even if it were impossible to determine -- which I don't think it is, as the above example shows -- all other data point to that.

Also, if you take the historic average, I bet that men's tour revenue is way larger than women's. Even in specific moments, if you take the tour as a whole, the difference is probably huge at any point in time. Artificial, and completely irrelevant, moves as equal pay in major events are inherently a bad, extremely bad thing, because you bring the "equality" discussion exactly to a context where it can be (quite easily) criticized.

Even the US soccer example could be a bad one. It is quite possible that the revenue generated by the men's US team -- even if the results are way worst -- is much larger than women's (but I don't know the data). If it is not the case, then this should be the flagship example for the "equality" cause.

 

[don_fabio]

Fabianno got a first set

 

[tenisplayrla08]

On the height front. When you watch a match like Zverev/Vesely and see the difference in their bodies despite similar height and think of DelPo and Kyrgios and Khachanov (though he's incredibly fit) it just highlights how... almost unfair it is for guys like Zverev and Tsitispas and Medvedev and FAA to be that tall but have the body build of a 6'2" guy like Djokovic and move as well as ... well not as Djokovic. But incredibly well. Of course it's not actually unfair. But you can see why they rose to the top rather than being relegated to struggling like a Vesely or Janowicz or Hurkacz. Hurkacz doesn't seem to move poorly. But he's still a stockier build. And while Isner is on another level at 6'10" or 6'11". Querrey is about 6'6" and isn't just a stockier build but is carrying extra weight. Which is mostly fine. If you're not a tennis player. But even Karlovic is a bean pole. My point being that growing up American you're naturally going to carry more weight because we just don't eat as well as the rest of the world. Too much junk. Too much hidden sugar and other crap in our food. And too much salt. So we carry around more water weight. I say this a mildly overweight man who doesn't do anything really to keep himself fit. But I'm all too aware of out food problems in the States.

 

[Federberg]

Someone above thread posted that tickets to men's semis and finals are three times more expensive than women's. Even if it were impossible to determine -- which I don't think it is, as the above example shows -- all other data point to that.

Also, if you take the historic average, I bet that men's tour revenue is way larger than women's. Even in specific moments, if you take the tour as a whole, the difference is probably huge at any point in time. Artificial, and completely irrelevant, moves as equal pay in major events are inherently a bad, extremely bad thing, because you bring the "equality" discussion exactly to a context where it can be (quite easily) criticized.

Even the US soccer example could be a bad one. It is quite possible that the revenue generated by the men's US team -- even if the results are way worst -- is much larger than women's (but I don't know the data). If it is not the case, then this should be the flagship example for the "equality" cause.

you're preaching to the choir I made those points in a previous debate. The argument used as an attempt to refute it (even though I don't necessarily agree with it) is that you can't use specific matches to come up with an aggregate for the respective genders. Yes Novak vs A N Other might command a higher price than Barty vs A N Other. But a top 10 women's match on any given day might match up well vs a top 10 men's match....

 

[don_fabio]

Kwon really fighitng hard, KK couldn't serve it out, 5:5 in 4th set now

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Fabianno got a first set

Yeah. So when I was looking at the betting lines last night, I didn't place any bets. But I wanted to because of the skewed lines. I wanted to place one on Fabbiano, Lorenzi, and Pospisil. And Kohlschreiber to an extent. But honestly I figured Djokovic would win that one because when he loses to someone he takes great care to beat them as handily as he can for a while after that. But. Tsitsipas, Medvedev, and FAA have all shown that they are still young and not the most consistent. So they are certainly more ripe for upsets. After dropping that first set FAA took the next two fairly simply. He's the better player. We know that. But Pospisil already has one set. It wouldn't take much to get to a fifth. Tsitsipas' day just got at least a bit longer if not a lot harder. And Medvedev. Well he's the guy that I consider the most inconsistent of this bunch. But Lorenzi... I mean. It's Lorenzi. His long career is built on clay. On the grass it seems nearly impossible. Hence Medvedev's -5000 line. If the line for Lorenzi winning had been a bit bigger, I may have actually taken the bet at like 10 bucks, just in case.

 

[DarthFed]

Tsitsipas, you grieve me. He needs to stop playing every damn week of the year, maybe another early loss at a major will knock some sense into him.

 

[don_fabio]

Yeah. So when I was looking at the betting lines last night, I didn't place any bets. But I wanted to because of the skewed lines. I wanted to place one on Fabbiano, Lorenzi, and Pospisil.

That's a lot of upsets

At the moment can see FAA going to 5th and possibly even Tsitsipas. KK managed to seal the deal in 4th

 

[tenisplayrla08]

you're preaching to the choir I made those points in a previous debate. The argument used as an attempt to refute it (even though I don't necessarily agree with it) is that you can't use specific matches to come up with an aggregate for the respective genders. Yes Novak vs A N Other might command a higher price than Barty vs A N Other. But a top 10 women's match on any given day might match up well vs a top 10 men's match....

Well furthermore. These tournaments get money from tv rights and from ad space/sponsors. Wimbledon of course notoriously doesn't have sponsor names plastered all over the place. So they get less, if not nothing from that. But the other slams do. And the tv rights are still lucrative. And the ratings the tv folks get from different matches, or what they choose to show on their main channel is irrelevant to Wimbledon. They got paid one time for the rights.

Futhermore, even if the men's semis and finals fetch higher prices, the VAST majority of the revenue for the event comes from the first 11 days through the quarters. And not even necessarily from the show courts but from grounds passes. Hundreds of thousands of people are gonna pass through Wimbledon over the next two weeks. The last couple days will only be about.... probably less than 20% of that. Maybe it creeps over 20% of revenue because of higher ticket prices on Centre Court. But, honestly I doubt it. Though, even on those last days there are grounds passes and people watch the juniors or sit on Henman Hill/Murray Mound and watch the semis and finals on the giant screen.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

That's a lot of upsets

At the moment can see FAA going to 5th and possibly even Tsitsipas. KK managed to seal the deal in 4th

I mean. You don't expect all the upsets. You place the bet and hope you get one. At 10 bucks a bet I would have lost 30 at most. But could have won a couple hundred if more than one of the upsets happened. Or just around 100 if only one went.

Who is KK?

 

[herios]

I said before I cannot stand Zverev. Despicable to yell "C'mon" on his opponent UFE. Bad sport.

 

[DarthFed]

I said before I cannot stand Zverev. Despicable to yell "C'mon" on his opponent UFE. Bad sport.

That's a Nadal specialty too.

 

[herios]

Tsitsipas, you grieve me. He needs to stop playing every damn week of the year, maybe another early loss at a major will knock some sense into him.

I am not worried. He will win.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

And I didn't mention it in the betting lines. But Vesely over Zverev is the upset I'm hoping for the most and can sort of see happening the most. He's been seriously struggling and that line was big. I did consider that one. Along with Arnaboldi/Karlovic. Karlovic, at 40, with his serve is still the favorite. But the line was like ... well the one I'm looking at now is -2016. I don't think that's what it was on the other site I saw last night. But Arnaboldi is at +709. Vesely was less than that. But Lorenzi was over +1000. As was Kohlschreiber I think. Fabbiano at the moment only says +375. But on a different site, last night, I feel like it was much higher. And what I'm looking at may be for live in match betting, if that site allows that type of stuff. Like betting after a set or something. Which I don't know if anyone does that. I have never done any sports gambling before. I was just thinking about getting into it last night. But also I check the lines from time to time just to see how much the sportsbooks think someone is going to win.

 

[herios]

That's a Nadal specialty too.

Is he Vamos-ing" in those cases? I cannot recall, cause I am avoiding watching him, unless he plays one of my favorites.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

FAA through in 4. He can only improve.. Good debut at Wimby.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

So FAA comes through in 4. Breaks to win the match. Definitely the better player. Obviously. So excited for this kid's career. Don't see it happening. But wouldn't mind seeing him just win this thing. Rafa at the French being the last teen to win a slam. I'm not sure it can be done at Wimbledon today. Not with the Big 3 around. But. Surprise upsets and teen champions are a surprise for a reason. Obviously he wouldn't be "coming out of nowhere." But it'd still be HUGE.

 

[herios]

So FAA comes through in 4. Breaks to win the match. Definitely the better player. Obviously. So excited for this kid's career. Don't see it happening. But wouldn't mind seeing him just win this thing. Rafa at the French being the last teen to win a slam. I'm not sure it can be done at Wimbledon today. Not with the Big 3 around. But. Surprise upsets and teen champions are a surprise for a reason. Obviously he wouldn't be "coming out of nowhere." But it'd still be HUGE.

You are getting carried away. Felix will not win Wimbledon this year.

 

[don_fabio]

And I didn't mention it in the betting lines. But Vesely over Zverev is the upset I'm hoping for the most and can sort of see happening the most. He's been seriously struggling and that line was big. I did consider that one. Along with Arnaboldi/Karlovic. Karlovic, at 40, with his serve is still the favorite. But the line was like ... well the one I'm looking at now is -2016. I don't think that's what it was on the other site I saw last night. But Arnaboldi is at +709. Vesely was less than that. But Lorenzi was over +1000. As was Kohlschreiber I think. Fabbiano at the moment only says +375. But on a different site, last night, I feel like it was much higher. And what I'm looking at may be for live in match betting, if that site allows that type of stuff. Like betting after a set or something. Which I don't know if anyone does that. I have never done any sports gambling before. I was just thinking about getting into it last night. But also I check the lines from time to time just to see how much the sportsbooks think someone is going to win.

Many gambling sites allow live tennis betting, but I stay away from it because it's too addictive.