• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Serena and McEnroe Kerfuffle

In no way was he being disrespectful to her or negative to her in the interview; indeed, reading through, it's clear he's giving her praise. But yes, the qualifier on there absolutely is needed and appropriate. The 700 number was likely low, but seemed more of a flabbergasted grab at something than some kind of honest specific spot. If someone takes that while ignoring the heaps of praise he puts on her throughout then it just suggests they're coming at this from an agenda driven stand point.

The reality is the physical make up of women and men are different, and this impacts their abilities in various sports. This isn't some kind of knock on gender, it's simply a reality of things.

The top 25 fastest men's speeds for the 100 yard dash are all at least .6 seconds faster than the world record time for the females

The top 25 fastest men's speeds for the 400 yard dash are all at least 3.4 seconds faster than the world record time for the females

Katie Ledecky's RIDICULOUS 400m freestyle world record at the Olympics? A full 16.39 seconds slower than the men's world record holder.

The 75kg clean and jerk? The men's world record is 56 kg heavier.

The fastest recorded serve for a female tennis player is 131 mph (Serena is 4th at 128.3 mph). The 30th fastest recorded serve for a male tennis player is 144 mph.

While serve speed is hardly the end all be all, it's one great example of the differences between the men's and women's games, and it's not unreasonable to suggest the power difference found within the serves would be found within all other contact with the ball as well.

Suggesting she'd be a middling player in the lower hunderds? I don't know, not experienced enough with Tennis and the intricacies of technique and how that would translate over and how much of her game is built heavily around that. However, I don't think there's anything wrong at all suggesting that she'd not be able to likely compete at a high level in singles competition against the top of the men's field. And I don't think that's a slight on women, but simply recognizing the reality regarding the physical differences between the two sexes and how that plays into things like athletic competition.
 
calamity said:
If bad form leads to 23 grand slam victories, we should all have such poor form. But, if Serena played Federer of Sampras, she'd probably never even see the ball.
Click to expand...

I never made one comment about any of her swings and if they were technically picture perfect. I don't put much weight into how someone swings the racket. If the swing itself doesn't cause injury(bad form can increase injury risk) and if they are successful then it doesn't matter.
 
Henrin said:
You realize that doesn't address anything I said, right? Her movement was terrible on the court and she relied too heavily on the fact she was stronger (this showed when she gained weight in her career or when she lost muscle mass at the end) than her opponents when she played. Her game also had a lot of holes sprinkled throughout that just aren't there with more all around players. A great player is someone that is great at everything in the game and she just isn't, sorry.
Click to expand...

Yet again trumpeting to the rooftops that you have absolutely no clue what you're braying about.

Her game has so many 'holes' that she has 23 grand slam singles titles.

IOW, she's great, despite your whining to the contrary.
 
I only watch Women's Tennis for their Great Forms

Not like the old day when the Women where Manly.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Yet again trumpeting to the rooftops that you have absolutely no clue what you're braying about.

Her game has so many 'holes' that she has 23 grand slam singles titles.

IOW, she's great, despite your whining to the contrary.
Click to expand...

That's a really dumb way to evaluate overall skill level. Just sayin'. When I look at individual aspects of someones game I'm looking just at that, not their win percentage or titles.

Would you say Lebron had a great overall game as a rookie because he got a lot of points? No, because that would be stupid. His game as a rookie needed a lot of work regardless of his point totals.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
In no way was he being disrespectful to her or negative to her in the interview; indeed, reading through, it's clear he's giving her praise. But yes, the qualifier on there absolutely is needed and appropriate. The 700 number was likely low, but seemed more of a flabbergasted grab at something than some kind of honest specific spot. If someone takes that while ignoring the heaps of praise he puts on her throughout then it just suggests they're coming at this from an agenda driven stand point.

The reality is the physical make up of women and men are different, and this impacts their abilities in various sports. This isn't some kind of knock on gender, it's simply a reality of things.

The top 25 fastest men's speeds for the 100 yard dash are all at least .6 seconds faster than the world record time for the females

The top 25 fastest men's speeds for the 400 yard dash are all at least 3.4 seconds faster than the world record time for the females

Katie Ledecky's RIDICULOUS 400m freestyle world record at the Olympics? A full 16.39 seconds slower than the men's world record holder.

The 75kg clean and jerk? The men's world record is 56 kg heavier.

The fastest recorded serve for a female tennis player is 131 mph (Serena is 4th at 128.3 mph). The 30th fastest recorded serve for a male tennis player is 144 mph.

While serve speed is hardly the end all be all, it's one great example of the differences between the men's and women's games, and it's not unreasonable to suggest the power difference found within the serves would be found within all other contact with the ball as well.

Suggesting she'd be a middling player in the lower hunderds? I don't know, not experienced enough with Tennis and the intricacies of technique and how that would translate over and how much of her game is built heavily around that. However, I don't think there's anything wrong at all suggesting that she'd not be able to likely compete at a high level in singles competition against the top of the men's field. And I don't think that's a slight on women, but simply recognizing the reality regarding the physical differences between the two sexes and how that plays into things like athletic competition.
Click to expand...

Yep. It's ridiculous, IMO, that McEnroe's comments are being challenged. He sings her praises, but once he sprinkles in some reality, the PC crowd goes all out "that's sexist." It's nuts.
 
Henrin said:
That's a really dumb way to evaluate overall skill level. Just sayin'. When I look at individual aspects of someones game I'm looking just at that, not their win percentage.
Click to expand...

No, what was dumb was you claiming she's not great when here record shows she's one of the greatest of all time, if not the greatest, since Margaret Court didn't have nearly the competition that Serena has had.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Cigar said:
I only watch Women's Tennis for their Great Forms

Not like the old day when the Women where Manly.
Click to expand...

Hey now. Chris Evert was hot. Last I looked, she's still not bad, and she's in her 60's.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No, what was dumb was you claiming she's not great when here record shows she's one of the greatest of all time, if not the greatest, since Margaret Court didn't have nearly the competition that Serena has had.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Again, that's a really dumb ass way to evaluate skill level. How did people beat Serena? By moving her around the court. Why did that work? Because her movement on the court was sub-par. She needed to work on her movement her whole career, but never did.
 
Zyphlin said:
In no way was he being disrespectful to her or negative to her in the interview; indeed, reading through, it's clear he's giving her praise. But yes, the qualifier on there absolutely is needed and appropriate. The 700 number was likely low, but seemed more of a flabbergasted grab at something than some kind of honest specific spot. If someone takes that while ignoring the heaps of praise he puts on her throughout then it just suggests they're coming at this from an agenda driven stand point.

The reality is the physical make up of women and men are different, and this impacts their abilities in various sports. This isn't some kind of knock on gender, it's simply a reality of things.

The top 25 fastest men's speeds for the 100 yard dash are all at least .6 seconds faster than the world record time for the females

The top 25 fastest men's speeds for the 400 yard dash are all at least 3.4 seconds faster than the world record time for the females

Katie Ledecky's RIDICULOUS 400m freestyle world record at the Olympics? A full 16.39 seconds slower than the men's world record holder.

The 75kg clean and jerk? The men's world record is 56 kg heavier.

The fastest recorded serve for a female tennis player is 131 mph (Serena is 4th at 128.3 mph). The 30th fastest recorded serve for a male tennis player is 144 mph.

While serve speed is hardly the end all be all, it's one great example of the differences between the men's and women's games, and it's not unreasonable to suggest the power difference found within the serves would be found within all other contact with the ball as well.

Suggesting she'd be a middling player in the lower hunderds? I don't know, not experienced enough with Tennis and the intricacies of technique and how that would translate over and how much of her game is built heavily around that. However, I don't think there's anything wrong at all suggesting that she'd not be able to likely compete at a high level in singles competition against the top of the men's field. And I don't think that's a slight on women, but simply recognizing the reality regarding the physical differences between the two sexes and how that plays into things like athletic competition.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that Serena herself has said multiple times that if she tried to play the top men, she'd never get a ball back.

So, she understands this. Those trying to make hay of McEnroe are indeed pursuing an agenda.

I saw recently that they're re-making a movie about Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs playing the "Battle of Sexes," where King famously won. (With Emma Stone and Steve Carrell; originally it was Holly Hunter and Ron Silver.) It's an amusing enough story, and no one really minded Bobby Riggs, who was such a dick about the whole thing, getting a come-uppance on the court.

But it's problematic from the standpoint of telling a real "Battle of the Sexes" story. Riggs was long retired and 25 years older than King, who was a top active player at the time. Riggs had also recently slaughtered Margaret Court, who was the reigning Serena of the day, and who STILL holds records that Serena hasn't touched. And to play the match, they changed the rules to make them favorable to King, including making her court narrower so that it was harder for Riggs to get the ball in. Amusing result, to be sure, but it was not at all an even playing field.

So, it'll be interesting to see how they portray that.
 
The classier way to handle that would have been to simply say something like:

She's obviously the best female tennis player ever. Period. No question about it.
However, to be "the best", without the qualifier of "female", she'd have to beat all the men too, and I doubt very much that she could do that.
Click to expand...

Why drag it into an insulting situation by putting in the "700" bit?
That's just mean, and it diminishes her achievements.

I know McEnroe didn't mean to insult her, and I know he is sincere in his apology about it.

That doesn't change the fact that what he said was unnecessarily derogatory.

Making a stink about it is silly, but so was the comment to begin with.
 
Dragonfly said:
The classier way to handle that would have been to simply say something like:



Why drag it into an insulting situation by putting in the "700" bit?
That's just mean, and it diminishes her achievements.

I know McEnroe didn't mean to insult her, and I know he is sincere in his apology about it.

That doesn't change the fact that what he said was unnecessarily derogatory.

Making a stink about it is silly, but so was the comment to begin with.
Click to expand...

No need to always having Appologize for a complement
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No, what was dumb was you claiming she's not great when here record shows she's one of the greatest of all time, if not the greatest, since Margaret Court didn't have nearly the competition that Serena has had.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Hell, just beating Venus, who has 7 grand slams of her own, was no easy task. And, she completely stopped the Russian.

If there is anyone on the list comparable, it's Steffi. But, one has to throw up the asterisk since Monica had her number until that nutty fan put a knife in her back.

IMO, the real competition for Serena are at least 5 GS victories back: Martina and Evert.
 
Cigar said:
Ok ... most not all. :2razz:
Click to expand...

yeah. Don't be ripping on my girl Chris. I had images of her running through my head on many a night...and early mornings.
 
Henrin said:
Again, that's a really dumb ass way to evaluate skill level. How did people beat Serena? By moving her around the court. Why did that work? Because her movement on the court was sub-par. She needed to work on her movement her whole career, but never did.
Click to expand...

And she didn't have to, being the most dominant female player in history.

You have absolutely no clue what you're yammering on about, but by all means, keep digging that hole.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
And she didn't have to, being the most dominant female player in history.

You have absolutely no clue what you're yammering on about, but by all means, keep digging that hole.
Click to expand...

I am in no way digging a hole here. The problem is that you have no idea how to look at skill level of players in sports and instead look towards victories and nothing else. I hope you never decide to become a coach because you would be awful at it.
 
Henrin said:
I am in no way digging a hole here. The problem is that you have no idea how to look at skill level of players in sports and instead look towards victories and nothing else. I hope you never decide to become a coach because you would be awful at it.
Click to expand...

The point of any sport, Tennis included, is to win. You whine and moan about trivialities and 'holes' in her game when in fact her game got her 23 GS titles, and those who don't have her game don't.

I hope you never decided to play tennis. You might actually learn something some day.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
The point of any sport, Tennis included, is to win. You whine and moan about trivialities and 'holes' in her game when in fact her game got her 23 GS titles, and those who don't have her game don't.

I hope you never decided to play tennis. You might actually learn something some day.
Click to expand...

Having a game filled with weaknesses is not a small matter and it does speak towards overall skill level. Just because you fail to understand this simple fact does not mean that I'm arguing from an incorrect perspective.

The only reason she won is because she had more power than her opponents. This made it hard for her opponents to move her around the court and thus take advantage of her weaknesses, which were pretty much everywhere.
 
calamity said:
At first, I was going to throw this into Sports, but then I decided it probably fits better here because the discussion is bit more political than just regular sport talk.

Summing up: During an NPR interview, McEnroe said Serena is the best women's tennis player in history. The NPR reporter--a female--said, "Why add the qualifier, best woman?" Mac kind of flips--you know Johnny Mac--and basically spouts out that she is nowhere near the best tennis player ever when compared to men, going on further to say, she would not even rank in the top 700.

So, What's the beef? Serena would probably get smoked by any accomplished male tennis player, maybe even some kid playing college tennis on scholarship. It's a no brainier. Have we really reached a point where the obvious can no longer be stated because it's not PC?

Here's someone else's thoughts on this.



Hence, it's a Kerfuffle.
Click to expand...


Controversy sells, this society is that sick and twisted, folk will Pavlovianly respond.
 
Henrin said:
Having a game filled with weaknesses is not a small matter and it does speak towards overall skill level. Just because you fail to understand this simple fact does not mean that I'm arguing from an incorrect perspective.
Click to expand...

You said she's not a great player when, in fact, all objective data indicates the exact opposite.

Deal with it. You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
You said she's not a great player when, in fact, all objective data indicates the exact opposite.

Deal with it. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

It does no such thing. When evaluating players you look at their game and their results, not just their results. You should also evaluate why they won, like for example, how she didn't win with her overall skill level, but with so much power that her opponents couldn't handle it.
 
Henrin said:
I am in no way digging a hole here. The problem is that you have no idea how to look at skill level of players in sports and instead look towards victories and nothing else. I hope you never decide to become a coach because you would be awful at it.
Click to expand...
What does this comment have to do with the thread topic? Which is, as I may remind...

calamity said:
At first, I was going to throw this into Sports, but then I decided it probably fits better here because the discussion is bit more political than just regular sport talk.

Summing up: During an NPR interview, McEnroe said Serena is the best women's tennis player in history. The NPR reporter--a female--said, "Why add the qualifier, best woman?" Mac kind of flips--you know Johnny Mac--and basically spouts out that she is nowhere near the best tennis player ever when compared to men, going on further to say, she would not even rank in the top 700.

So, What's the beef? Serena would probably get smoked by any accomplished male tennis player, maybe even some kid playing college tennis on scholarship. It's a no brainier. Have we really reached a point where the obvious can no longer be stated because it's not PC?

Here's someone else's thoughts on this.



Hence, it's a Kerfuffle.
Click to expand...

About the kerfuffle.
 
calamity said:
What does this comment have to do with the thread topic? Which is, as I may remind...



About the kerfuffle.
Click to expand...

If she the greatest player of all time then she shouldn't have holes in her game like she does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom