2018 U.S. Open (Tennis)

[gus]

I heard the commentator point out that Serena had adjusted her play to exactly what she thought those hand signals were meant to convey. But what would Chris Evert know anyway...

I was responding to the assertion that "after her marketing and PR people brainstormed how to overcome the bad look she had in on the court, they decided to go with the sexism angle. "

[elvis14]

I was responding to the assertion that "after her marketing and PR people brainstormed how to overcome the bad look she had in on the court, they decided to go with the sexism angle. "

Got it. I freely admit that it was my take on it and I could easily be wrong.

[cato]

Considering that Serena made the argument while on the court, you must think the hand signals from her coach are really detailed and efficient.

She also denied doing something that she had done and completely lost control, so . . .

[BD80]

Officials are not pleased with Serena's "women should be allowed to berate the officials at least as much as the men have" message.

They think they should be protected from such abuse, from men or women, and are threatening to boycott tournaments. A big issue is the trickle down effect. Young players see their "heroes" berate officials and feel it is the way they should treat officials.

I don't think Serena has yet to admit she was wrong for berating the official, just the victim of sexism.

Of course, officials aren't human, so it is OK to threaten their livelihood, or their integrity, or to stuff a tennis ball down their throat.

[nmduke2001]

I have not liked Serena for quite some time. Years ago I noticed that after most losses she never really complemented the women that beat her. It was always something like, "I didn't have my 'A' game", "I wasn't feeling it today", "I just couldn't get my back hand going". Never did I hear her say something like, "Maria, played great" or "Caroline was really tough today". It really bothered me. It's strange because Venus is always very nice and says nice things about her opponents.

Anyway, I wasn't the least bit surprised this happened.

There's little doubt that if she never took a break for child birth or blood clots Serena likely would already have 28 majors but all that greatness doesn't bring class. Reminds me a bit of Tiger. In his prime, Tiger seemed like a first class jerk. Maybe that's what makes them both great.

[gus]

I have not liked Serena for quite some time. Years ago I noticed that after most losses she never really complemented the women that beat her. It was always something like, "I didn't have my 'A' game", "I wasn't feeling it today", "I just couldn't get my back hand going". Never did I hear her say something like, "Maria, played great" or "Caroline was really tough today". It really bothered me. It's strange because Venus is always very nice and says nice things about her opponents.

Really? I don't see a lot of her press conferences, but she was very complimentary of Osaka. Here's here post game press conference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KIyoTEqrxo
http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=143461

A lot of questions about the incident and the drama that didn't really lend itself to talking about Osaka, but she answered a question like this

Q. Do you think the chair umpire played any part in any outcome of tonight's match?
SERENA WILLIAMS: I think that's a really good question. I don't know. I feel like she was playing really well, but I feel like I really needed to do a lot to change in that match to try to come out front, to try to come out on top.

It's hard to say because I always fight till the end and I always try to come back, no matter what. But she was also playing really, really well. It's hard to say that I wouldn't have got a new level, because I've done it so many times in my career. So it's a tough question.

later..

Q. Was there something in Naomi's game that maybe you weren't expecting?
SERENA WILLIAMS: I feel like she was really, really consistent. I think her game is always super consistent. I felt like she played really well.

Like I said, she made a lot of shots. She was so focused. I think, you know, whenever I had a breakpoint, she came up with some great serve. Honestly, there's a lot I can learn from her from this match. I hope to learn a lot from that.

Q. Obviously it's her first Grand Slam title. Do you think it's a shame that all this happened, the drama happened, with all the booing and everything from the crowd? It's a very difficult thing, isn't it, for her to go through, as well?
SERENA WILLIAMS: That's what I said. That's why I was, I don't want to answer the questions. This is her moment. Stop booing because she doesn't deserve it. I don't deserve it. The people on the tennis court didn't deserve it. They were all here to see tennis.

She played an amazing match. She deserved credit, she deserved to win. At the end of the day, that's what it was.

After her loss in Wimbledon: http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=141824

First question:

Q. Did you feel like she never really gave you an opportunity to get into the match? She seemed to take control fast.
SERENA WILLIAMS: Yeah, she played from first point to the last point really good. She played unbelievable today.

She withdrew in the French, so obviously talked about there.

[cato]

. . . to stuff a tennis ball down their throat.

I was a *huge* Serena fan before that. It bothered me at the time, and has slowly eaten away at my respect for her ever since.

How you treat people under your thumb is revealing.

But she is a fantastic tennis player and I hope she can continue to succeed at the highest level as a mother and role model.

[dudog84]

In winning 23 major singles finals, only once did Serena lose the first set 2-6 and come back and win (2005 Australian). In fact, only once in the other 22 did she also lose the first set (2003 Wimbledon, 4-6). Both a long time ago in tennis years. In her 8 finals losses, she always lost the first set.

Like Tiger Woods (mentioned upthread), Serena is a great front-runner. Not so great at coming from behind. Regardless of what she says. Seems everyone nowadays gets to make up their own facts to fit their narrative.

She knew she was going to lose. The tantrum was a ploy.

[cato]

In winning 23 major singles finals, only once did Serena lose the first set 2-6 and come back and win (2005 Australian). In fact, only once in the other 22 did she also lose the first set (2003 Wimbledon, 4-6). Both a long time ago in tennis years. In her 8 finals losses, she always lost the first set.

Like Tiger Woods (mentioned upthread), Serena is a great front-runner. Not so great at coming from behind. Regardless of what she says. Seems everyone nowadays gets to make up their own facts to fit their narrative.

She knew she was going to lose. The tantrum was a ploy.

I don’t think it was a ploy. She just lost control.

But yeah. It was because she was losing.

[BD80]

A nicely balanced piece, very thoughtful:

https://www.si.com/tennis/2018/09/12...umpire-penalty

[WillJ]

I'm not sure how her sponsorship figures refute the opinion piece I linked - I don't think anyone's questioning her ability to market herself. And I'm not sure I buy that her outburst was some sort of deliberate marketing strategy, or whatever it is you're implying. Regardless, this doesn't change the fact that she has been a victim of both subtle and overt racism (see the cartoon in the link I provided, for example), and a number of women (e.g. King) have come to her support agreeing there's been a double standard.

I think it's easy to say she should have controlled herself better. In competitions I've been in heated moments like that (but not, obviously, with that level of exposure or consequence). It's hard to dial back the outrage when you feel you've been wronged. Sure, she has a history of inappropriate outbursts. But there is also a history of her being treated unfairly as well (e.g., why is she drug tested far more than other players?). All I'm saying is that context should be considered when excoriating her.

What is the evidence that she's been systematically tested more than other players, controlling for the frequency with which she's won? That People magazine quoted Serena as thinking she was over-tested? As a professional statistician, I'm unimpressed. What you say could be true, but you don't show it. One of the most frustrating aspects of this drama has been the lack of any effort to place her behavior or her punishment in any kind of systematic context. The data on the frequency of punishments in matches is the only quasi-systematic evidence presented so far, and even that admits to multiple interpretations.

[dudog84]

It doesn't appear this story is going away. Quite surprised the USTA didn't back the officials. Money trumps all. Maybe they think chaos on the court (not allowing officials to control match behavior) will bring eyeballs. Everything is professional wrestling these days.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...914-story.html

[weezie]

^^^Hope Mr. Christianson isn't holding his breath. Nike isn't going to tolerate his indignation for long.

All hail the swoosh.

[Troublemaker]

The NYT throws up some data: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/14/s...men-women.html

The raw numbers don't necessarily mean that umpires are not sexist, of course. For example, if men deserved the "racket abuse" penalty (see table below from the article) 700 times but only got called on it 646 times while women deserved it 80 times and got called for it 99 times, then the umpiring is still sexist (or at the very least biased in favor of men). That said, most will look at these numbers and dismiss the sexism claim.

For me, I never really bought the sexism argument. It seemed to me that Serena was losing and took it out on the umpire, and Ramos is one of the worst umpires to have a tantrum against as he's notorious for being a stickler for the rules (which some might admire in an umpire) and someone who anecdotally has frustrated many a star player in the past (especially Nadal) and seemingly refs the stars just as harshly or maybe even more harshly than the regular players (again, something that some might find admirable).

[jimsumner]

Keep in mind that the men play 3-of-5 in grand slams, while the women play 2-of-3.

So, that accounts for some of the discrepancy.

But it does make it difficult to sustain the argument that "the men do this all the time and never get called for it."

[WillJ]

Thanks for the NYTimes data...My tentative read on these data is that men misbehave more often and that the sexes are called on it roughly equally...but it could be that a) men don't misbehave more often and are just penalized more or that b) men misbehave a lot more often and are not penalized as nearly often as women would be if the rules were "fair."

Yet this raises a fundamental problem in virtually every discussion of this issue I've seen. Suppose for sake of argument that men have to hit a higher threshold of misbehavior before they are punished. This is a good thing for men with behavior issues...but it's *bad* for men without behavior issues...the latter have to sit and listen to their opponents act out and destroy their momentum without the umpire stepping in. So having a "quicker whistle" for women, if there is such a thing, *is* bad for women with behavior issues, like Serena, but it's good for people like Naomi Osaka, Sloane Stephens (incredibly classy and charming, from what I've seen) and others. Each match is a zero-sum game, and the overall tournament's distributions of titles and money is not the least bit affected by having slightly different rules for men and women....if they exist.

[weezie]

I'd like to know what "Double Attire" penalties might represent?

I'm not much of a tennis savant, obviously.

[JasonEvans]

I'd like to know what "Double Attire" penalties might represent?

[weezie]

Ok then. This guy deserves a kick in the patoot. Nice gams though.

[Bluedog]

What other sport would one compare referring across genders?? They're basically two different sports. They have separate leagues. It's like comparing the NBA and WNBA. Why would one do that? I realize the umps are the same in tennis and the events for Grand Slams go on at the same time but as long as penalties are being assessed fairly within each "sport", I don't get it. Would a WNBA player complain that a tech is sexist? I'll give Serena credit for somehow changing the media narrative effectively from "Serena melts down, gets blown out" to "tennis is sexist" (the most equitable big time sport on the planet by far by use of prize money/salaries).