This is getting pretty silly (and that was a very old comment you’re responding to), but I don’t think Serena could beat 99.99% of professional tennis players; rather I think she could beat 99.99% of all men in tennis, and the only ones she couldn’t beat would be most of the professional tennis players and some of the top level amateur players.
But it’s not important to my overall point and isn’t really worth discussing. I don’t have numbers and calculations handy – I’m using “99.99%” to mean “pretty much all except the very absolute best”.
I have seen Grand Slam tennis live. The women are great. But the level is easily matched by any pro in any tennis club worldwide. The men are on another planet. The gameplay is soooo fast, you hear the ball being hit, you don’t *see *it.
Serena would beat 99.99% of men only if we count every male on the planet. She would win against any man who played tennis regularly, but it would be a competitive match, not 6-0 6-0. Against a man who played tennis at any sort of organized level? She would struggle.
And I say this as someone who has watched Ladies Tennis for years, and was a big fan of Graf, Seles, Davenport, Hingis, Capriati etc and thinks that Serena is in contention for being pound for pound the greatest ever.
He had been retired for 22 years at the time of the match. King wasn’t number 1 (though Riggs had defeated Margaret Court, the Number 1 ranked women’s player that year, a few months beforehand), but she did win Wimbledon that year.
Note that both Williams sisters had their own “Battle of the Sexes” sets almost 20 years ago against the 203rd ranked men’s player - Serena lost 6-1, Venus lost 6-2 immediately afterwards.
I’m assuming this is intentional hyperbole. I haven’t been at a Grand Slam, specifically, but I’ve been to the Citi Open and watched top players, sometimes from VERY, very close. I have not struggled to follow the ball.
Just my opinion, but I don’t think this is true, either. I’m a 3.5 player who plays regularly with and against 3.5 and 4.0 men. I think she’d beat us all, and it would not be a challenge for her.
IIRC, Serena’s serve speed is only matched at the very, very highest levels of male tennis – significantly higher than “any tennis pro at a club” level.
I don’t see what’s foolish about Tursunov’s statement. He said that he thought he would probably beat her, but that it depends on a lot of variables. That sounds to me to be perfectly consistent with them being about comparable in ability, if you allow for a small amount of heightened self-confidence on the part of a competitive player (after all, no player, going into an equal match, is going to say “Eh, it could go either way”, even though that’s true).
Riggs has long dropped hints he lost on purpose, because he was embarrassed he lost, and of course stories have a way of growing over the years.
He didn’t tank. He lost for real. Watch the match; King played exactly the correct way to defeat a stronger but older, less conditioned opponent. Riggs does not look like a man losing on purpose; he looks like a man who is both rattled and tired.
Serena Williams would stand no chance against a ranked male tennis player, but against a 55-year-old FORMER ranked tennis player who didn’t train for the match? Oh, that might be a very different story indeed. A man is not at 55 what he was at 30.
The guy who did beat Venus and Serena estimated that they couldn’t beat the top 600. Still, I do think there should be more battle of the sexes. Mixed doubles is an actual thing in pro tennis, and battle of the sexes exhibitions are often big draws.
Do what they did for Connors vs. Navratilova in 1992. They altered the rules a little and the result was fairly competitive. Connors won 7-5, 6-2. And I think Serena is MUCH faster and stronger than any female tennis players from the 80s. Give that girl half of the doubles court to hit to and I think you’ve got a match.
I’ve not read the rest of the thread, so my pardon. I just wanted to point out that Serena Williams has never hit a serve faster than 128.3 mph. That’s just second-serve territory for most men on the tour. So a man playing against her would be feasting on her first serve; in the other direction, she’d be trying to hit serves that were about 20 mph faster than anything she ever faces.
This is not right. 2015 Wimbledon, fastest first serves: Murray 132, Federer 128, Djokovic 127, Nadal 124. Average first serves: Federer 118, Djokovic 116, Murray & Nadal, 114.
And if you look here you can see that over the first three grand slam events of 2015 Serena averaged 109mph on first serve and 96mph on second. Djokovic was 117/96 and Murray 114/86.
However, what these numbers don’t show is the spin and action the players can get on the serve. A 100mph serve by a man will generally have a lot more spin and movement than a 100mph serve by a woman.
See my post below yours. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray have had a modicum of success over the years.
If you ignore the actual number of 125mph and ask if there have been any successful men with weak serves, the best example I can think of is Nadal. He beefed up his serve over the years, which got him more success on faster courts, but in his early years when he dominated just clay court tennis, he probably had the weakest serve of any top player.
I had discussed this topic a while back with 2 tennis professionals (both ranked in the top 500’s or so but not able to qualify for the US Open) and one highly successful NCAA Division 1 men’s tennis player. All 3 said none of the top 10 women could compete with anyone ranked in Men’s Tennis, claiming it was a different game by way of speed, strength, length of stride, etc.
IMO, Serena (and most of the women ranked in the top 20) could handily beat your average male tennis weekend warrier. But she’d have no chance against a professional man ranked in the top 1000.
That being said, with the men’s game is evolving into more of a power game, I find myself enjoying women’s and/or doubles matches more. There is nothing more boring than an ace/ace/ace/ace game.
What kind of weekend “warrier” and what do you mean by handily? Someone like me, she’d struggle to double bagel; chiefly because I would be dead from exhaustion at 4-0 in the first set. A fitter and keener tennis player, she would win easily, but I do see him being able to take a few games off her. Someone who played tennis at a some organised or competitive level. She would struggle. Top-ranked female players have struggled to defeat their brothers and husbands who had been school or college players.
I would have to think just sheer athleticism is a bigger advantage in soccer than in tennis. I’m not saying tennis players aren’t magnificent athletes or that soccer doesn’t have elements of strategy, but a really substantial physical advantage in soccer just makes strategy and nuances of technique irrelevant. The young men will just run the women off the field.
I mean, you could take this even further; imagine the Canadian women’s hockey team, the very best in the world, playing an top NCAA men’s team that absolutely gave it one hundred percent. I honestly don’t think the women’s team would have enough players on their feet to finish the game. That sport is one where size and strength is even more important than in soccer; you’re literally allowed to crash into a player as hard as you can.
An under 15 boys team beat the US women’s team 5-2 recently. A few years ago the US national under 17 boys beat them 8-2. Apart from the scores I think the fact that these ages are chosen to play against the women’s national team tell us something. I assume whoever choses these friendly games knows their stuff and they know it’s a competitive/semi competitive contest between USWNT and talented boys aged 15-17. I suspect USWNT versus most decent under 18 male teams would not be a worthwhile contest for either side
