Lack of competition leaves women’s tennis in bad shape
Roar Guru
By David Wiseman, 9 Sep 2009 David Wiseman is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Grand slam, kim clijsters, women's tennis
Russia's Svetlana Kuznetsova sits on the court as she plays Serena Williams of the United States during a Women's singles quarterfinal match at the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne, Australia, Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2009. AP Photo/Dita Alangkara
I’m curious to know how weak the state of women’s tennis is when a player who hasn’t picked up a racquet for two years can stroll through to the quarter-finals of a Grand Slam?
No doubt that Kim Clijsters has an affinity for the US Open – it is the only Grand Slam she ever won – but to make it this far and this easily makes a mockery of the rest of the WTA.
Of the Top 16 women’s seeds, only nine made it past the second round. This is a shocking statistic and a damning indictment of how bad women’s tennis at the top level is.
Dinara Safina demands that everyone recognises her at the world’s number one ranked female player. But why should we?
She was abysmal at the US Open and lost the first set in each of her three matches. She should have been eliminated in the first round, but young Aussie Olivia Rogowska completely lost her nerve.
When it comes to a women’s Grand Slam, if a Williams sister doesn’t win, it comes down to who chokes less.
I have seen ladies finals and semi-finals of a Grand Slam where neither player can hold serve and the first player to do so wins. Is she how it should be? That the winner comes down to who makes fewer double-faults?
Every Grand Slam, the usual suspects of Elene Dementieva, Jelena Jankovic, Daniela Hantuchová Svetlana Kuznetsova, Vera Zvonareva and Victoria Azarenka will find another excuse to bumble and stumble their way out of the tournament, leaving it for some outsider to make it deep.
At the French Open it was Samantha Stosur, at Wimbledon it was Sabine Lisicki, and at the Australian Open it was Jelena Dokic.
Jennifer Capriati also made a comeback and and won the 2001 Australian Open and then two of the next four majors.
Clijsters knows all about this, as she lost the final of the 2001 French Open to Capriati, going down 12-10 in an unforgettable third set.
Could you imagine this happening in men’s tennis?
No way.
A player leaves the game for an extended time and most likely the game is going to leave him far behind. Ok, he might have a good tournament here or there, but he wouldn’t have the unbelievable success that Capriati and Clijsters enjoyed.
Women don’t deserve the same prize money as men.
Playing three sets Vs five sets is just one point, but the more pertinent one is that the depth just isn’t there in the women’s draw.
To win a Grand Slam title, you should have to play the best tennis you can possibly play as opposed to being the one who chokes least.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Other Sports articles
- Victoria Azarenka vs Maria Sharapova: Australian Open women’s final live scores, blog (89)
- The sporting fallacy of the Olympic ‘Games’ (46)
- Sonny Bill needs to start boxing full time (46)
- Djokovic vs Nadal was great, but do we need six-hour finals? (36)
- Sonny Bill looking sharp for his first real test (29)
- Sonny Bill wins title in first round (25)
- Nadal vs Djokovic: The match for the ages (20)
- Real boxing still exists: here’s where to find it
- London’s Olympic Games have a long way to come (10)
- New champ Williams looking to next fight (5)
- Aust and GB aim to convert 4ths to bronze
- Young pitcher signs big deal with Red Sox (7)
- World Cup Darts heartbreak in Hamburg (3)
- Mayweather and Pacquiao have shamed boxing (13)
- Real boxing still exists: here’s where to find it (0)
- London’s Olympic Games have a long way to come (10)
- World Cup Darts heartbreak in Hamburg (3)
- Mayweather and Pacquiao have shamed boxing (13)
- Will Tom Brady’s legacy be affected by one drop? (20)
- Sonny Bill needs to start boxing full time (46)
- Lachlan Murdoch squashing FTA sport for Fox’s benefit (4)
- Explore:
- Grand slam, kim clijsters, women's tennis
David Wiseman said | September 9th 2009 @ 3:52am | Report comment
quarter Finals ….make that semi-finals.
Na Li really didn’t put up much of a fight. Surely Serena is going to put a stop to this nonsense?
Colin N said | September 9th 2009 @ 4:04am | Report comment
Hang on, if anything, surely the fact that the world number one struggled against lower rank opponents suggests that there is plenty of depth in Women’s tennis? I agree with the general sentiment that there is a lack of quality there, but I feel the actual title doesn’t reflect the state of Women’s tennis.
David Wiseman said | September 9th 2009 @ 5:29am | Report comment
Colin – I didn’t do the title so can’t speak about that.
But in regard to Safina – she was atrocious in her three games, really bad. That was the issue more than anything her opponents did/didn’t do.
Hammer said | September 9th 2009 @ 10:15am | Report comment
Safina is the Marcelo Ríos of female tennis … a quirk of the rankings system …
the next question should be is Murray the new Henman
WA said | September 9th 2009 @ 12:12pm | Report comment
5 sets will sort ‘em out. Simple really. Then they can actually earn their money.
ohtani's jacket said | September 9th 2009 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
Well, Clijsters played in Cincinnati and Toronto where she played well.
I have little interest in women’s tennis since Henin retired, but I have no problem with Clijsters doing well as a wildcard. Remember when Goran Ivanisevic was 125th in the world and won Wimbledon as a wildcard? It was a great story.
Besides, Clijsters knocked off Venus. Fair play. The other girls don’t have the power of Clijsters. Her problem was always the mental fragility that plagues the rest of the WTA circuit.
Tennis comebacks are always fun. I wish her the best of luck and I hope Henin comes back too.
Greg Russell said | September 9th 2009 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
Clijsters was always an exceptionally talented player who had mental fragility that prevented her from realizing anything like her full potential. My guess is that, so far at least, she’s playing free of pressure, and this positive is making up for the negative of not having played for several years. So I do not find her progress to be an abominable statement on the level of women’s tennis (although I agree that it is not saying great things).
I am also curious about the difference in attitude that people have towards Federer and Serena Williams. People have no issue regarding Federer’s domination of men’s tennis, and do not take it as a statement of men’s tennis being weak. So why is it that they take Serena’s results as a statement that women’s tennis is weak? Serena quite clearly is a female equivalent of Federer, it’s just that she goes about her business in a completely different way, so one can form the impression that she isn’t really trying, and that lesser players should be able to beat her, and that women’s tennis is weak.
I must confess that I used to have the just-stated attitude about women’s tennis. But then a friend of mine pointed out to me the longevity of the Williams sisters. Serena won her first grand-slam title in 1999, Venus in 2000. A decade later, and they are still at the top. Henin, Clijsters, Hingis, etc. – none of their rivals has lasted anything like this long. Maybe their apparently casual attitude is the key to their longevity, and they should be praised rather than criticized for this.
Tennis has always been a sport where the best player will usually win, and so there are dominant champions. Serena is simply the best.
Viscount Crouchback said | September 9th 2009 @ 6:23pm | Report comment
Do you really believe that Federer could spend half the year attending fashion shoots and making jewellery and still pitch up at Wimbers and give the other chaps a good thrashing? I rather doubt it. The mere fact that the Williams sisters can maintain such dominance whilst being semi-detached from the game is a terrible indictment of of ladies’ tennis.
Frankly, it is an abomination that such third-rate athletes receive the same amount of wonga as the chaps. I advise any man with a daughter or two to drill them on the tennis court for a few years because it won’t take much to make them competitive, and plentiful dollops of cash will surely follow.
Greg Russell said | September 10th 2009 @ 10:51am | Report comment
VC – this year Federer did not play a single warm-up match on grass before Wimbledon, in fact he played nothing at all between the French and Wimbledon. It was the same a few years ago too (I think 2007, when he also won). Often he has played no genuine warm-up tournaments, but only the hit-and-giggle invitation thingy at Kooyong, prior to the Australian Open. So the difference between Federer and the Williams sisters is not as great as you think. It’s just that Federer stays out of the news when he’s not competing, as opposed to going to fashion shoots.
The issue of equal prizemoney is a different one. Without wishing to bring the forces of PC righteousness down upon me, I am definitely more of your view on that one. At the very least the girls should have to play best of 5 sets if they are to get the same prizemoney.
ohtani's jacket said | September 11th 2009 @ 1:50am | Report comment
He’s only required to play the four Grand Slams, 8 Masters 1000, 4 ATP 500 tournaments, and 2 ATP 250 tournaments. He’s been skipping the 500 tournaments of late, but it’s completely understandable given his wife was pregnant, RG and Wimbledon were draining, he’s the World No.1 and doesn’t need the points, and more than likely doesn’t agree with the playing schedule.
He didn’t skip the Masters series in the lead-up to RG or the US, and in fact he won two of them. He only really skipped Halle, which was understandable after RG. GS finalists usually skip their next tournament. Roddick pulled out of stuff after Wimbledon.
Savvas Tzionis said | September 9th 2009 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
I agree that Women’s tennis needs to do something about length of the matches.
As sport has become more professional, more effort is required to win. But the nature of tennis does not allow the women to test the endurance aspect of their game,.
The problem is that a 5 setter is not an option. The female body (in theory at least, I am willing to hear counter arguments) is not built to play that long.
So do we extend the length of the set to 8 games? That won’t happen because the interest in the set will be reduced because it is now longer!
Any other solutions?
Chop said | September 9th 2009 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
Savvas,
They are trying to shorten tennis matches not lengthen them. All the double tournaments are using a ‘pro-set’ (extended tiebreaker) now and grand slams have changed their rules around advantage sets so they are only for the 3rd set in womens and 5th set in mens matches.
I am no expert but I don’t know why women can’t play 5 sets, they are receiving the same amount of $$$ for winning grand slams, why can’t everyone play 5 sets.
I think the attraction to Women’s tennis at the moment is the fact it doesn’t seem to be the two horse race (even with the Williams sisters dominance) at each grand slam. The Federer/Nadal show has been going on for about 5 years with a few exceptions.
Rob said | September 9th 2009 @ 5:14pm | Report comment
Just one example of a male comback: Anyone remember that no-name bald-headed fella who married that German tennis player? Oh, yeah, Agassi was his name…
So why can’t the Capriattis and Clijsters of this world do it too? Would you have said that when Agassi came back men’s tennis was just as weak?
Savvas Tzionis said | September 9th 2009 @ 5:20pm | Report comment
Rob,
I don’t think Agassi had stopped playing. He just fell down the rankings. A bit if a difference.