TENNIS THREAD- WIMBLEDON 25- It's the FINALS countdown....

[Raahh]

The £300 would also have covered the earlier doubles final and you can’t give a refund cos a match is quick/crap.

Sabalenka, all power (and grunts) and little class is extremely sloppy and presents gifts, Swiatek is the opposite.

She was never going to get the same let offs in the final against the best player in women's tennis today. Just 2 unforced errors in the first set, plus the depth of her returns, Swiatek didn't give the girl a sniff.

Graf, probably the goat of women's tennis, was the last elite female player, and Swiatek has the potential to be the best since her.

Although not at the level of Serena Williams, Sabalenka has that same reliance in power over skill/finesse. Hate to see that rewarded. Likewise in women's gymnastics where it has gone from the extraordinary grace and artistry of Korbut and Comaneci to the humdrum of "how many more spins can I do".

Speaking of Williams, she got very lucky Graf retired at 30 as she was winning nothing while Graf was still on the circuit. The hole left by Graf after she handed Williams a hiding before bowing out with another slam was vast. Hingis, another class act, her ankles going kaput also left the way clear to stockpile easy titles.

Swiatek now conquering grass could see her win multiple titles at Wimbledon and finally see a female player elevate herself above the rest as it's been much of a muchness for quite a while with 8 consecutive new winners.

Sabalenka was the worst possible preparation for her as she was able to benefit from so many gifts, gifts she was never going to get from Swiatek. She quickly became disillusioned when she was not being presented with the same opportunities, and when you become disillusioned and the head drops double faults will happen more often (she already had by far the most of those in the tournament).

Just don't think she had any answer. At her best she could have made it more respectable, maybe 6-3, 6-4, though in saying that Swiatek has been known to bagel quite a few opponents. She hits it so deep that makes returns much harder, whereas returning against the more limited Sabalenka is much easier.

As they said in comms Sabalenka was dreadful throughout the tournament (again), but relied on sheer power (amongst all the wayward shots) to overpower previous opponents. It's an indictment on the women's game that you can play as poor as she has in every game yet reach a Wimbledon semifinal. She's a poor number 1. Swiatek with some form back should retake that easy. Still baffled how she managed to lose to that in Paris.

That's the one major weakness of the women's game, power can take you really far. In the men's as everyone has power its effectiveness is much more limited (bar Ivanisevic who was an exception with that serve of his which got him one slam). You need much more to your game in the men's game. Once someone returns your shots, as Swiatek does, then your limitations get exposed.

Serena Williams was able to capitalise immensely from such an advantage in power (as was Navratilova who had forearms reminiscent of a bloke), walking past all these slips of a girl. Against Graf, that power was matched, and then add the vastly superior game of Graf (and that whipped forehand) you end up with the dismantling of Williams in their last "contest" before Graf's early retirement at 30 for family reasons. Had Graf hung around for a few years those tantrums of Williams would have ramped up tenfold with no cannon fodder allowing you to scoop up titles galore.

Amanda did do a great speech

@ChessorBuckaroo
agree with the points you made about the role of power play in the women’s game.
And yet it felt from the very beginning of this match that Anisimova was maybe intimidated- her body language from the first few points seemed flat, no energy, almost resigned.
Swiatek walked out briskly, appeared forceful and dominant. Intimidating.
Sounds like Anisimova has had traumas in her life- hopefully she can support and return.

Yes, and I'm glad that she did - it took some nerve!

I love that- well done Wimbledon

When they were at the net at the beginning, Iga was swinging the racket around in a really aggressive fashion whilst the umpire was talking to her. It seemed somewhat unnecessary and even a bit rude. If Amanda was already feeling intimidated by the huge stage, it won't have helped in any way. All's fair in love and war of course but it seemed to set the tone right from the get go.

Why? Unless you personally think women's sport is less valuable/interesting/worthy?

@Foolsgold74
I agree about Iga’s behaviour at the net before the match. Body language at its most extreme.
I wondered whether Anisimova is at the level where she would have a sports therapist, psychoanalyst in her team?
It was so upsetting to see her mental state essentially blocking her incredible physical capabilities.
An unforgettable final for the wrong reasons.

I don’t get the measuring the ticket value by time of match either. The ticket is for getting to see the occasion and event in person and experience it live. I’m quite happy when sports matches are a bit shorter! This match is disappointing to watch, but because it’s sad to see someone performing below what you know they can. But what you do on the day is the result.

I’m watching it now, the crowd is fantastic in supporting Anisimova. It’s not as bad as I thought it would be reading the comments here, Anisimova has flashes of brilliance. I feel so sorry for her, because it looks like she has the weight of the world on her. I wonder if she’s worrying about funding and sponsorship. Mirra Andreeva said she only thought about the next point as if she was losing. It’s such a game of mental strength. They’re deuce in the third game of the second set at the moment.

I’m going to go back and watch this, I just took it as her psyching herself up for the final. They keep saying she wasn’t confident about grass?

Can I ask what happens with pricing for the ballot? Can you choose what pricing bracket you want to be in the ballot for? I want to enter it this year and hopefully take my kids next year, but there’s no way I’d be spending £1200 on tickets! No matter the match length 😁

The men’s game can go to 5 sets whereas the women’s game only goes to 3. Why would they be paid the same?

My understanding is that for many non-Slam tournaments, the men also play best of three.

Additionally, a number of female players have campaigned for women’s matches to be best of five, if that is what it takes for an equal pay consideration. On the whole, this would make the draws much harder to manage (as more time would need to be allowed for matches in every round) so I don’t think the PTB would want this.

Training, travel, numbers of tournaments per year etc are all equal across the two sexes.

You've convinced yourself that 5 is better than 3 simply because it's men. It could quite easily be the other way round. 3 sets for men because of the huge amount of power and force expended and 5 for women because it's a slower pace. If that were the case, you'd still be arguing that the men's game was better and inherently worth more.

Because women only play best of 3 (and they've reduced the men's doubles down to best of 3 too) you get a lot less tennis for the money.

We have this talk that women are happy to play 5 sets, yet no one has done a test tournament for it, so they don't actually believe in it.

Women's football is 90 mins, you have women's 100m (not 80m) etc. The tennis matches are shorter and so the ticket pricing should reflect that.

I'm not keen on them reducing the length of the men's doubles either, you are really getting short-changed for yesterday.

Honestly this makes as much sense to me as if you were to say the men should be paid double for playing on Sunday, whereas the women play on Saturday, why should they be paid more. The rules and settings of the tournament vary and aren’t to do with the players reward.

If we’re talking about number of sets, I think the men should play 3 sets, I don’t want to watch 3+hr sets personally and this year they’ve played 3+hr matches in 30+ degrees heat consecutive days. Ripping pec muscles, dodgy legs. I’d rather watch a better quality level of play in the final than broken tired players by day 14. You can see the quality of play by each individual drop as the days roll by.

You say all of this, yet you've had the women's tournament for best of three sets, and then a player in the final being steamrolled and losing 6-0, 6-0.

Best of three didn't improve yesterday's match.

The men's French Open final would've been over and Sinner the winner, but best of five led to an amazing comeback and a great final.

You would get some really interesting women's matches over five sets.

If I go see a film, I don't pay less for a 90 minute film than I do for a 3 hour film. And if it's a good film I don't enjoy it less either. In fact a high quality 90 minute film is always more enjoyable than a mediocre 3 hour film. I also don't expect a refund if I go to a film that turns out to fall short of my expectations, I just think win some lose some.
I know Wimbledon final costs way more, but I think the analogy still applies because you know the risks when you shell out the money, just as you do with a film.
And of course the prize money should be the same for the above reasons, 90 minutes isn't lesser than 4 hours, it's the drama and quality of the tennis and the event that counts and it's not guaranteed for any match, women, men or mixed.

To be a top woman tennis player is exactly the same commitment as to be a top man tennis player and involves the same expenses and exertion of energy and resources.

I’ve just finished watching Anisimov v Swiatek - that wasn’t because of injury?

I think matches like yesterday happen, can’t use it generalise across the sport, a player in a bad head space or a bad day for the team. Don’t think the number of sets would change that. I’m looking forward to today’s match but I always dislike seeing people in pain playing. Hope Sinner is ok. Watching Dimitrov’s injury was awful. I do think the length of the matches and the heat contributed to that.

You just get what you’re given basically - if it’s a date/price that you’re not happy with you can return the tickets but then I don’t think you get another chance for other tickets

I joined the LTA last year (just over £20 a year I think) and got tickets through them. I chose court 3 in the first week which was good value - I think you can only get centre and no 1 court tickets through the Wimbledon ballot though

What is this nonsense? Steffi and Serena only ever played each other twice. Steffi won the first in 3 sets and Serena won the 2nd, also in 3 sets.

And if you think Serena and Sabalenka only rely on power, you know zilch about tennis.

Men only play BO5 during the 8 weeks of grand slam tennis. For the remaining 44 weeks of the tennis calendar, men play the same best of 3 sets as women yet (apart from a handful of combined masters/1000) are paid more.

Why should they be paid more than women when they play the same BO3?

No, you can't use it to generalise a sport.

It's actually mainly about the final. There is a tendency for a player to get caught in the headlights of a final and lose quite badly, and I've seen it quite a lot in the women's final of Wimbledon.

When you have a player who is in a debut grand-slam final against an experienced player it can be quite one-sided (not always and there can be upsets), but it does happen.

That's why tickets to yesterday are avoided by a lot of people out of the risk of something like yesterday happening.