Battle of the Sexes: Serena v Andy Murray

[britbox]

http://www.tennisfrontier.com/news/battle-of-the-sexes-serena-vs-andy-murray/

If it takes place, the match format will be interesting.

 

[tented]

Interesting, indeed. What an odd pairing, but why not? I hope they turn it into a charity event, but they probably will.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

interesting indeed. however, i also wonder why she never called up Mr. Karsten Braasch. got a feeling the result wouldn't be as lopsided anymore. or maybe it would

 

[Kieran]

Here's Serena on it.

I'd like to see Serena v Borg or Mac, that'd be a bit of crack. And it might be competitive for a few games also...

 

[El Dude]

Would love to see this. My guess is that Serena would do better than she says she would and, in a full best-of-three match, would lose 6-1, 6-2, or something like that.

 

[Iona16]

To be honest I’m really surprised that the newspapers picked up this story. It was clearly a sarcastic response to a twitter user trying to be clever. With no further upsets or public spats to talk about I guess the newspapers were desperate to find something else to write about.

I’ve found some of the responses on newspaper sites etc quite amusing. Posters thinking it could be a close match.

Andy suggested Las Vegas as a venue and Novak has said he could play Sharapova. I doubt very much that it will happen but it would be funny.

---

Would love to see this. My guess is that Serena would do better than she says she would and, in a full best-of-three match, would lose 6-1, 6-2, or something like that.

You think Serena could win 3 games against Andy Murray.

 

[tented]

To be honest I’m really surprised that the newspapers picked up this story. It was clearly a sarcastic response to a twitter user trying to be clever. With no further upsets or public spats to talk about I guess the newspapers were desperate to find something else to write about.

I’ve found some of the responses on newspaper sites etc quite amusing. Posters thinking it could be a close match.

Andy suggested Las Vegas as a venue and Novak has said he could play Sharapova. I doubt very much that it will happen but it would be funny.

Thanks, Iona. I'm not sure what to make of it at this point. While it began as a lark, it seems to be gaining traction, so perhaps it will happen. They'll both be in the US in a few months for the USO, so maybe they could do it then.

 

[kskate2]

To be honest I’m really surprised that the newspapers picked up this story. It was clearly a sarcastic response to a twitter user trying to be clever. With no further upsets or public spats to talk about I guess the newspapers were desperate to find something else to write about.

I’ve found some of the responses on newspaper sites etc quite amusing. Posters thinking it could be a close match.

Andy suggested Las Vegas as a venue and Novak has said he could play Sharapova. I doubt very much that it will happen but it would be funny.

---

Would love to see this. My guess is that Serena would do better than she says she would and, in a full best-of-three match, would lose 6-1, 6-2, or something like that.

You think Serena could win 3 games against Andy Murray.

---

I do Iona. Only because of her serve do I see her getting 3 games. Any other woman's serve and I would say "not."

 

[Kieran]

Serena wouldn't win a game against the guy ranked 276...

 

[kskate2]

Then we'll just have to disagree Kieran.

 

[Ricardo]

To be honest I’m really surprised that the newspapers picked up this story. It was clearly a sarcastic response to a twitter user trying to be clever. With no further upsets or public spats to talk about I guess the newspapers were desperate to find something else to write about.

I’ve found some of the responses on newspaper sites etc quite amusing. Posters thinking it could be a close match.

Andy suggested Las Vegas as a venue and Novak has said he could play Sharapova. I doubt very much that it will happen but it would be funny.

---

Would love to see this. My guess is that Serena would do better than she says she would and, in a full best-of-three match, would lose 6-1, 6-2, or something like that.

You think Serena could win 3 games against Andy Murray.

---

I do Iona. Only because of her serve do I see her getting 3 games. Any other woman's serve and I would say "not."

---

Firstly, Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

If they were going for real like on ATP tour, then Serena gets nothing. Her serve? best serve on WTA simply won't cut it. Let's try some objective thinking before trying too hard to 'believe'. Her fastest ever serve maxed out at 130mph on a perfect sunny day, ball is new and dry, low humidity and condition is perfect. In 99% of her matches she has not been able to replicate that, which is something WTA fans would love to believe that a 130mph serve would 'do it for her'. Unfortunately if you really take notice of her matches, only minority of her serves even go faster than 120mph and even fewer go in. Her natural ability with control (at which she can get good % in) goes under 120mph. If you notice further, her fast serves are flat unlike the guys... meaning a Federer serving at 130mph has more spin and is harder to return. Many guys don't serve faster than 130 mph, because they put a lot of spin into it to get more in. Another important factor, when serving at her max she doesn't have the same deception meaning it becomes easy to read. The guys who seem to max out at 130 mph actually can go well beyond that if they choose to totally flatten out like Serena. But they don't serve with full strength so they get more spin, more control and most importantly, more deception. If you go all out, it's easier to see where you are going.

The problem is, Murray beats a lot of guys 6-1 6-2 who can all serve bigger, with more control and deception than Serena. In fact those guys can also rally and volley better than her, and of course they also move better naturally.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that. He simply has nothing to prove, unlike Serena who would need to show she can do something and would have to play 100% to even have a chance of a game.

Ever wonder after Braasch said that he only gave half his effort so the sisters would have a game or two, they threatened to challenge again in future and never did? granted it happened when they were teenagers, yet they never even tried in their peak years because i am sure, they know it better - they know Braasch was right, the gap is too big that their improvement doesn't even matter.

---

Would love to see this. My guess is that Serena would do better than she says she would and, in a full best-of-three match, would lose 6-1, 6-2, or something like that.

I like your stats normally, not your judgement if that's your estimate when they play for real. I think Murray would let her have 6-2 6-4. Game wise she has nothing in her that can earn a game.

 

[tented]

Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm thinking of this event (should it happen) as an exhibition match, in which case I agree with you. Murray wouldn't be out for blood in such an environment. The point would be to have fun, and raise money, not to humiliate others.

 

[jhar26]

Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm thinking of this event (should it happen) as an exhibition match, in which case I agree with you. Murray wouldn't be out for blood in such an environment. The point would be to have fun, and raise money, not to humiliate others.

I'm against any sort of battle of the sexes matches. I can understand the BJK/Bobby Riggs thing because it was some much needed good pr for womens tennis even if in itself the match proved nothing other than that one of the best female players can beat an old guy. A match between Murray and Williams is pointless to me. If both give it their all Murray will win 6-0/6-0, which would be humiliating for her (and womens tennis as a whole). If he gives her a few games it would be even more humiliating because it means that she's not good enough to win a few games herself. And if they make certain changes to the rules like taking away Murray's second serve or allowing Serena to hit into the doubles alley it's just pointless. It would be like letting Usain Bolt race against Shelly-Ann Fraser, but Bolt has to run 120m and Fraser only 100m. I don't understand this battle of the sexes obsession that unlike any other sport tennis obviously has. It's pointless because we already know that men are stronger and faster than women and if you change the rules to get a more competitive match you are already admitting that before they even get started. But all that doesn't mean that we shouldn't respect Serena or other great female athletes. They are as good as a female body allows them to be, just like the best men are as good as a male body allows them to be.

 

[Ricardo]

Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm thinking of this event (should it happen) as an exhibition match, in which case I agree with you. Murray wouldn't be out for blood in such an environment. The point would be to have fun, and raise money, not to humiliate others.

That's the point i think, if you remember Murray's coach Lendl who took an exo too seriously and ended up beating Wilander 6-0 6-0.... to this day Mats still says he could never forgive Lendl for it. In turn Lendl says he wanted to give the crowd his best as they paid to watch him. Difference is, it was an exhibition and Murray's is a charity, so Lendl maybe has a point.

---

Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm thinking of this event (should it happen) as an exhibition match, in which case I agree with you. Murray wouldn't be out for blood in such an environment. The point would be to have fun, and raise money, not to humiliate others.

I'm against any sort of battle of the sexes matches. I can understand the BJK/Bobby Riggs thing because it was some much needed good pr for womens tennis even if in itself the match proved nothing other than that one of the best female players can beat an old guy. A match between Murray and Williams is pointless to me. If both give it their all Murray will win 6-0/6-0, which would be humiliating for her (and womens tennis as a whole). If he gives her a few games it would be even more humiliating because it means that she's not good enough to win a few games herself. And if they make certain changes to the rules like taking away Murray's second serve or allowing Serena to hit into the doubles alley it's just pointless. It would be like letting Usain Bolt race against Shelly-Ann Fraser, but Bolt has to run 120m and Fraser only 100m. I don't understand this battle of the sexes obsession that unlike any other sport tennis obviously has. It's pointless because we already know that men are stronger and faster than women and if you change the rules to get a more competitive match you are already admitting that before they even get started. But all that doesn't mean that we shouldn't respect Serena or other great female athletes. They are as good as a female body allows them to be, just like the best men are as good as a male body allows them to be.

then this post is even more pointless. If females avoid such comparison so they don't get humiliated then that's already admitting they are not on equal terms, as far as tennis-playing ability goes. If that's the case then how can they expect the same respect that we give men? the respect their body allow them to be? what is that? the same then would apply to juniors and seniors and disabled players and whatnot, because they are also limited by their 'body'.... the only reason any particular group doesn't get the same respect is, they can't compete against the best group which is the crux of it all. Being against men vs women just for the sake of it is being wrongly judgmental and false ego, first if you can't face the reality that's your problem. What they are doing, is for a great cause which you totally miss and choose your typical 'female agenda' to get in the way of it all. Is female ego the most important thing? or is it more priority if both players agree and play it out knowing their participation would draw in more money and attention than any other regular charity matches? clearly your objection is not based on a good cause.

 

[Kieran]

I think there could be a good charity event in all this, and I agree with Ricardo, Andy would have to tone it down a little to make it entertaining. I think a match worth watching would be Mac v Serena. Let her use the alleys, by all means, but I could imagine that one being a little testy.

She wouldn't take a game off Pete or any of the 90's players. A fat, inflated tyre like Boris Becker might be too out of shape, but Mac and Borgie against Serena and Masha, that'd be a great thing for fans...

 

[kskate2]

Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm thinking of this event (should it happen) as an exhibition match, in which case I agree with you. Murray wouldn't be out for blood in such an environment. The point would be to have fun, and raise money, not to humiliate others.

That's the point i think, if you remember Murray's coach Lendl who took an exo too seriously and ended up beating Wilander 6-0 6-0.... to this day Mats still says he could never forgive Lendl for it. In turn Lendl says he wanted to give the crowd his best as they paid to watch him. Difference is, it was an exhibition and Murray's is a charity, so Lendl maybe has a point.

---

Murray wouldn't beat any female player 6-0 6-0; who would want to see a charity match end like that? it would kill the match and public interest and Andy is too nice a guy to do that.

Serena wouldn't win a game, unless Murray doesn't give it his best. I am sure he won't though, firstly he knows a win is in his pocket, there is no need to give 100%, he would offend the spectators by crashing her 6-0 6-0 and nobody would invite him for future charity matches if he does that.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm thinking of this event (should it happen) as an exhibition match, in which case I agree with you. Murray wouldn't be out for blood in such an environment. The point would be to have fun, and raise money, not to humiliate others.

I'm against any sort of battle of the sexes matches. I can understand the BJK/Bobby Riggs thing because it was some much needed good pr for womens tennis even if in itself the match proved nothing other than that one of the best female players can beat an old guy. A match between Murray and Williams is pointless to me. If both give it their all Murray will win 6-0/6-0, which would be humiliating for her (and womens tennis as a whole). If he gives her a few games it would be even more humiliating because it means that she's not good enough to win a few games herself. And if they make certain changes to the rules like taking away Murray's second serve or allowing Serena to hit into the doubles alley it's just pointless. It would be like letting Usain Bolt race against Shelly-Ann Fraser, but Bolt has to run 120m and Fraser only 100m. I don't understand this battle of the sexes obsession that unlike any other sport tennis obviously has. It's pointless because we already know that men are stronger and faster than women and if you change the rules to get a more competitive match you are already admitting that before they even get started. But all that doesn't mean that we shouldn't respect Serena or other great female athletes. They are as good as a female body allows them to be, just like the best men are as good as a male body allows them to be.

then this post is even more pointless. If females avoid such comparison so they don't get humiliated then that's already admitting they are not on equal terms, as far as tennis-playing ability goes. If that's the case then how can they expect the same respect that we give men? the respect their body allow them to be? what is that? the same then would apply to juniors and seniors and disabled players and whatnot, because they are also limited by their 'body'.... the only reason any particular group doesn't get the same respect is, they can't compete against the best group which is the crux of it all. Being against men vs women just for the sake of it is being wrongly judgmental and false ego, first if you can't face the reality that's your problem. What they are doing, is for a great cause which you totally miss and choose your typical 'female agenda' to get in the way of it all. Is female ego the most important thing? or is it more priority if both players agree and play it out knowing their participation would draw in more money and attention than any other regular charity matches? clearly your objection is not based on a good cause.

---

Bring it down a level Ricardo. I won't respond for Jhar because he can clearly do that himself, but calling someone's post pointless because you don't agree is over the top.

 

[Kieran]

I'm against any sort of battle of the sexes matches. I can understand the BJK/Bobby Riggs thing because it was some much needed good pr for womens tennis even if in itself the match proved nothing other than that one of the best female players can beat an old guy. A match between Murray and Williams is pointless to me. If both give it their all Murray will win 6-0/6-0, which would be humiliating for her (and womens tennis as a whole). If he gives her a few games it would be even more humiliating because it means that she's not good enough to win a few games herself. And if they make certain changes to the rules like taking away Murray's second serve or allowing Serena to hit into the doubles alley it's just pointless. It would be like letting Usain Bolt race against Shelly-Ann Fraser, but Bolt has to run 120m and Fraser only 100m. I don't understand this battle of the sexes obsession that unlike any other sport tennis obviously has. It's pointless because we already know that men are stronger and faster than women and if you change the rules to get a more competitive match you are already admitting that before they even get started. But all that doesn't mean that we shouldn't respect Serena or other great female athletes. They are as good as a female body allows them to be, just like the best men are as good as a male body allows them to be.

Good post, Jhar! I agree...

 

[tennisville]

I think there could be a good charity event in all this, and I agree with Ricardo, Andy would have to tone it down a little to make it entertaining. I think a match worth watching would be Mac v Serena. Let her use the alleys, by all means, but I could imagine that one being a little testy.

She wouldn't take a game off Pete or any of the 90's players. A fat, inflated tyre like Boris Becker might be too out of shape, but Mac and Borgie against Serena and Masha, that'd be a great thing for fans...

I think if all things are equal and John really tries , he will then just take her to the cleaners . He is too good a player even now

 

[Ricardo]

I think there could be a good charity event in all this, and I agree with Ricardo, Andy would have to tone it down a little to make it entertaining. I think a match worth watching would be Mac v Serena. Let her use the alleys, by all means, but I could imagine that one being a little testy.

She wouldn't take a game off Pete or any of the 90's players. A fat, inflated tyre like Boris Becker might be too out of shape, but Mac and Borgie against Serena and Masha, that'd be a great thing for fans...

I think if all things are equal and John really tries , he will then just take her to the cleaners . He is too good a player even now

If you've watched John from court side, it's obvious to see that he's just got too much skill for her.....

 

[Fiero425]

Hard to believe this is still an issue or "non-issue!" I'm sorry, but the top woman isn't going to beat a male college player! The power and touch that men possess is too much for them; sorry! Martina Navratilova played an exhibition against Jimmy Connors quite a few years ago, and it probably took something out of him just to keep her in the match for a 7-5 set score; IIRC! Check You-Tube; that's where I saw it! He gave her half the doubles area as well and she still couldn't beat the old man! She had some great points and it was entertaining, but it's just not happening; even with Amazons like Serena and Sharapova! They aren't going to beat any good male tennis player; even an amateur from college!