The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

A home truths about the state of world tennis (more specially women's)

Roar Rookie
23rd January, 2011
11
2219 Reads

Why do I still persist in watching Australia Open tennis or women’s tennis in general when the women’s game is so predictable?

Or am I still blinded by the fact that they earn the same prize-money as men and I am unable to view it objectively? Surely, it should come down to the entertainment value the audience experiences.

Your call – would you rather watch the Fed or Rafa fight it out over 4+ hours in 5 sets or watch Clijsters win 6-2, 6-1? What is more entertaining?

The time, the effort, the skill set equal the entertainment value. The decision should be easy but in a world where political correctness has gone wrong the runner up of women’s final will still pockets a measly AUS$1.1M!

I do like how the women are trying to add some humour and personality to their press conferences, but unfortunately Wozniaki caught herself out with her own stupidity the other day. Guidance is needed here, even though I did enjoy Clijsters taking it to Woodbridge. Karma can be a bitch!

Stosur’s performance the other night in being knocked out of the tournament lacked any real spirit and I guess that most Australian’s saw this coming.

For Venus, I have to say that her “supposed” injury is questionable and her fragile state of mind is highly evident. With beauties such as Ivanovic being bundled out early, all that is left is the deafening shreeks of Sharapova.

Finally, why is there such confusion about the use of the terminology of Grand Slams? The definition of a “Grand Slam” is a tennis player who wins all four opens (i.e. Australia, French, Wimbledon and US) in a calendar year.

Advertisement

Yet all the commentators are quoting that Rafa is in line for the Grand Slam if he wins the Australia Open this year. Get it right, guys, surely with your researching resources you could be factual and accurate about the appropriate use of this term. Steffi Graf for the record is the last to do so.

Roger Federer has won 6 Wimbledons, 4-Australia, 5-US and 1- French. That means he has won 16 opens, not 16 slams as the media keep referring to.

Am I on my own with these views?

close