why can't we compare the ATP and WTA? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

why can't we compare the ATP and WTA?

tennischick
09-08-2002, 02:28 PM
it's all about the tennis and there are times when comparisons are most apt. like looking at the way the Young'uns are doing so great over at the WTA while the Old Balls are still going strong on the ATP. or looking at the differences in the approach to ranking. or seeding, or salaries, or length of match play. there are lotsa bases for comparison even if they are different tours. comparing them doesn't have to mean that we expect them to be identical surely? heck even players on both sides of the divide make observations about each other. why shouldn't we? :confused:

Layla
09-08-2002, 03:29 PM
Of course we can compare the ATP and WTA, but it's not ok for WTA fans to come to the ATPworld and start bashing the ATP. I don't post threads on the WTAworld saying that the WTA sucks. That would be rude and pointless.

the cat
09-08-2002, 04:42 PM
TC, people love to knock men's tennis in favor of women's tennis. And I prefer women's tennis over men's tennis. But if you watch the grand slams you know that there is no comparison in the quality of tennis. The men steal the show with their great tennis. The women steal the headlines with their gossip and glamour.

Vera
09-08-2002, 07:45 PM
Couldn't agree more. WTA's popularity is getting higher, not because of the quality of tennis, it's because how they promote WTA now, sexuality. How exciting can it be when the Williams played in most of the Grand Slam finals and winning almost all other events they entered, unless you are Williams fans. And do ppl get excited seeing them and most of the Top 10 women handing out bagels to their lesser components? I wouldn't call those quality tennis. Then, Kournikova draws the largest crowd but she doesn't really play high quality tennis, does she? I find it hard to believe that all those ppl are there to watch Anna because of her tennis. There's high quality tennis in WTA, like Venus Vs Amelie in the Semi, but the quality comes far less often than the men's match.

WTA decided to promote sexuality, seeing Anna's popularity getting sky high because of her beauty. It's a smart thing to do in the marketing point of view. Sports predominately are viewed by male audience (generally speaking). What is the best way to appeal to them when promoting a female tour? I don't against it. I think it's great that you can associate beauty with athletic ability. I watched Anna too. But to say that ATP is not as good as WTA is a little too much, unless you are not talking about the quality of tennis.

BTW, I think Andre and Pete were great players at their early 20s, but not dominant. Andre is 32, but he wasn't that consistent when he's younger. He became so consistently good really since he bounced back from the bottom, which is truly admirable. So he's not over yet and why should ppl count him out just because of his age. And Hewitt, Safin and a whole bunch of others are still at 21, 22. Should we give them a little more room to allow them to establish themselves?

Chloe le Bopper
09-08-2002, 07:48 PM
I don't see the point in comparing men at the same age, to women at the same age, for the simple reason that women mature faster.

A lot of men don't really hit their stride untill their mid twenties.

Most women hit their peak before that.

luvbadboys
09-08-2002, 09:20 PM
to answer the question: two different entities

Wine is not just wine there is a world of difference between red wine and white wine though both come from grapes. Same with tennis and any sport that has a men's and women's division.

Tennis Fool
09-09-2002, 01:22 AM
Originally posted by Layla
Of course we can compare the ATP and WTA, but it's not ok for WTA fans to come to the ATPworld and start bashing the ATP. I don't post threads on the WTAworld saying that the WTA sucks. That would be rude and pointless.

Layla,

If this were 1994 and we had email and message boards, I *would* be bashing WTA on wtaworld, and believe me, I wouldn't be the only one.

When Monica and Jennifer were out of the game, and Steffi was winning everything in sight with barely a challenge, the game suffered. Remember, that's the time when commentators routinely said "there's a lack of depth in women's tennis."

Everyone knew it then, and were glad when Hingis and the Williams sisters came on the scene.

I will gladly route for the New Ballz when I see some GS results.

Layla
09-09-2002, 01:25 AM
Originally posted by Tennis Fool


Layla,

If this were 1994 and we had email and message boards, I *would* be bashing WTA on wtaworld, and believe me, I wouldn't be the only one.


Well, I don't know what to say to that, except that you obviously love to bash something others hold dear, on their on turf. More power to you. :rolleyes:

Tennis Fool
09-09-2002, 01:28 AM
Oh, I'm sorry if I don't post what you want me to, rosey pictures with butterflies...:rolleyes:

Chloe le Bopper
09-09-2002, 01:32 AM
The problem isn't that you question the ATP's status atm...the problem is that all you do is spew out negative post after negative post about it, and totally disregard fact when you are clearly wrong about somethings.

You are impossible to debate with, because you don't want to be open minded about the othe side of the issue.

Such has been the vibe I've been getting at least. I'd like to be wrong.

luvbadboys
09-09-2002, 01:33 AM
Tennisfool Lleyton and Marat have had results why do you dismiss them all as opposed to lokking at each of them individually. Last time I checked the new balls campaign consisted of LLeyton Marat Guga JCF Nico Tommy H. Andy and JMG

Tennis Fool
09-09-2002, 01:43 AM
Sigh. I'm trying to state what I feel, people. Please read my posts carefully.

Lleyton: As I said, doing a great job. I've posted so over and over and even posted what Lleyton thought about the NBz not making the grade (except him).

James Blake: Great. Rapidly developing. Thumbs up.

Guga: Great rebound from surgery. Great US Open result and win over Marat (will come back to Marat). Want to see he do even more on this surface and please play Wimby!

Juan Carlos: Froze up in final of French. Should have won. Keeps disappointing me.

Marat "Where's your head at" Safin. My fav but a horse I won't bet on.

Tommy: Great to get to #3; needs to feel more confidence in serve and needs to break through majors consistently.

Andy: Needs maturity.

JMG: A male Anna.

Roger: Another disappointment.

I am a sincere fan that's it grieves me so. Now if I see results next year, believe me my tune will change.

Ace Tracker
09-09-2002, 01:44 AM
your argument is flawed, Tennis Fool...the WTA Tour's depth, if a little bit better, still remains weak...Steffi was as dominant back in 1994 as Serena and Venus seem to be in 2002...occasional opposition would be provided by Sabatini, Novotna, Arantxa and Mary Joe the way Capriati, Hingis, Amélie and few others do right now... but the lack of depth outside the top 15 has never improved much, and I don't think it has ever been there in first place...further proof of that was provided by Navratilova, who at 44 (?) could still compete against top ranked players...if you think the WTA Tour is much deeper today than it was back in 1994 and that's the reason why you think it is better than the ATP, then I'm sorry, but you have the wrong reasons....

Chloe le Bopper
09-09-2002, 02:19 AM
Tommy: Great to get to #3; needs to feel more confidence in serve and needs to break through majors consistently.

Tommy actually reached number two.

Either then that I can't disagree that some of the guys have been a tad dissapointing.

Just give them time.

TennisHack
09-09-2002, 02:23 AM
Originally posted by Tennis Fool
Sigh. I'm trying to state what I feel, people. Please read my posts carefully.


Do you want a hug for that?

Tennis Fool
09-09-2002, 02:26 AM
Ace Tracker:

I see you point. Thanks for your reply.

tennischick
09-09-2002, 12:27 PM
this is a perfect example of how and why the tours can be compared. i also happen to agree. thanks!

Originally posted by Ace Tracker
your argument is flawed, Tennis Fool...the WTA Tour's depth, if a little bit better, still remains weak...Steffi was as dominant back in 1994 as Serena and Venus seem to be in 2002...occasional opposition would be provided by Sabatini, Novotna, Arantxa and Mary Joe the way Capriati, Hingis, Amélie and few others do right now... but the lack of depth outside the top 15 has never improved much, and I don't think it has ever been there in first place...further proof of that was provided by Navratilova, who at 44 (?) could still compete against top ranked players...if you think the WTA Tour is much deeper today than it was back in 1994 and that's the reason why you think it is better than the ATP, then I'm sorry, but you have the wrong reasons....

Nimi
09-09-2002, 01:05 PM
People dont see that mainly, the WTA & the ATP are two different sports. Really, look at it from any angle & you will see.

Experimentee
09-09-2002, 01:53 PM
Actually come to think of it Tommy Haas being #2 is an example of the weakness of the atp right now. Whats he done lately thats worth a mention? Hes had some decent results, but none worthy of a #2 ranking!

Also, in 1994, there was onlt one dominant player, Steffi Graf. Now there are two dominant players. I think that in itself is an example of how theres a bit more depth in the wta. And as i've said many times before its not like the Williams sisters are unbeatable. If they have an off day, Mauresmo, Hingis, Capriati and Davenport are players that can give them more of a challenge than anyone could give Graf. To compare their dominantion to Graf's is pretty ridiculous actually. Can you remember Venus or Serena double bagelling someone in a GS final?

Dissident
09-09-2002, 02:44 PM
Aussie Open GS semis
Monta Carlos TMS quarters
Rome TMS runner up
Toronto TMS semis
Indianapolis ISG semis
Long Island IS semis

And he was in the last 16 of every Slam he could play. (He didnt participate on Wimbledon)

Also, he has big points from last year end (Stuttgart title). He will drop in the rankings a lot if he cant defend those.

tennischick
09-09-2002, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by Niminator
People dont see that mainly, the WTA & the ATP are two different sports. Really, look at it from any angle & you will see.

i disagree. it's the same sport played by men and women. the outcomes can therefore be different and it would be ridiculous to expect the tours to be identical. but a great deal can be learned from the comparisons. see Ace Tracker's and Experimentee's posts above for excellent examples.

i agree that what is pointless is to make comparisons for the sole purpose of putting down either side. that's a waste of time. but most of the people who compare the tours do not do it for that reason. they do it to try to understand the trends on both sides and to figure out reasons fro them.

for instance how come there is a dearth of serve-and-volleyers on both sides of the tour, altho' there are still a handful of men -- Pete, Linus, Wayne Arthurs, Neville Godwin -- who still do it, while the women tend to stay planted at the baseline for the most part? i for one still can't believe that Dementieva and Husarova made it to the finals of the women's doubles. did anyone see them play? they BOTH remained planted at the baseline and rarely went in to net. they were two singles players playing doubles. this was also the case for Shaughnessy and Clijsters. it was incredible to watch these women who seemed scared to death to poach at the net. and this was in all of their DOUBLES matches.

on the other hand, in the guys doubles matches, both guys were almost always planted at the net. Mirnyi and Bhupathi for example.

what about the impact of better racquet technology for both sides of the tour. certainly the women are hitting better and more powerful serves, as are the men. yet the men's games remain more serve-reliant than the women's. in fact, getting broken is such a routine experience for the women that it no longer means the end of the match. but when a guy gets broken, you know he is in big trouble.

i find these and other differences interesting and curious. i like to discuss them and try to figure out what is influencing what trend on either side of the divide.

and i don't appreciate anyone telling me that such discussions have no validity. if you think they are different tours and should not be compared, i respect your opinion. because i disagree with it, i don't appreciate your repeating your point over and over as if it's a rule that we should all follow.

Nimi
09-09-2002, 04:45 PM
Im repeating it all over? You asked a question in this thread, i provided you with my answer, if there is something wrong with that, tell me now.

tennischick
09-09-2002, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by Niminator
Im repeating it all over? You asked a question in this thread, i provided you with my answer, if there is something wrong with that, tell me now.

my thread was inspired in the first place by reading you state your opinion over and over on both this and the wtaboards. you don't just give your opinion, you present it as if it a fact and a rule we should adhere by. after reading your categorical statement for the umpteenth time, i decided to start a thread making my case for why and how we can compare the tours. in other words, while i respect your right to state your opinion, i happen to disagree strongly with it.

Chloe le Bopper
09-09-2002, 05:52 PM
i agree that what is pointless is to make comparisons for the sole purpose of putting down either side. that's a waste of time. but most of the people who compare the tours do not do it for that reason. they do it to try to understand the trends on both sides and to figure out reasons fro them.

Good point. I hadn't looked at it this way. Lately I'm so used to seeing the comparison being used to shoot down the mens game (often with very weak arguements), that I tend to be turned off the idea all together.

When in fact, as you pointed out, it can be quite interesting.

:)