Women's Grand Slam Finals

Drummond said:

With tonight's EPIC final that is now 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals which have been decided in straight sets. Equal prize money, I can certainly see why.

Click to expand...

Drummond said:

With tonight's EPIC final that is now 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals which have been decided in straight sets. Equal prize money, I can certainly see why.

Click to expand...

black_hart said:

Remember too Graf once double bageled Natalie Zvereva in the French in a match that lasted under 30min. The only mens final that comes close is McEnroe's demolition of Connor's in the '84 Wimbledon final but even then Jimmy won a handful of games.

Click to expand...

diablo14 said:

Natasha

Click to expand...

Power King said:

^Of course they don't deserve equal prize money, but let's think about some things first of all.

Say they played best of 5 sets - equal workload. Would you really want to watch this? Women struggle to run after fast balls in the bloody first set, can you imagine how slow they would be running in the fifth? Would their fitness even amount to anything watchable in a fifth set? Could they even last until a fifth set? As a viewer, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to watch a five-set women's match. The quality is bad enough in the first two sets, so imagine that quality being halved/quartered going into a fifth.

The point was raised in relation to pure viewing. Pay the women double what the men get, and let them play best of one set. That way, they get their money, and we don't have to put up with watching the crappy quality. Also, less women's tennis means less interference with the men's draw. (this is really a tongue-in-cheek statement)

Maybe there is some justice in the fact that apart from grand slam tournaments, the WTA tour rakes in ****all prize money compared to the ATP for men.

Really, women should get payed less to play best of 3 sets (from a viewer's perspective, best of one set )

Click to expand...

Rohan25 said:

No it was Natalia, and then she later changed it to Natasha.

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Court/3137/tennisnl95.html

Click to expand...

mad_eagle said:

Ah well, trying to put a positive spin too it, at least the ladies game isn't a 2 horse race all the time

Click to expand...

bombersno1 said:

So where are these appologists for equal pay..for doing what exactly! One set lats night lasted more than the entire womens final..yet they get equal pay!

Click to expand...

mad_eagle said:

Ah well, trying to put a positive spin too it, at least the ladies game isn't a 2 horse race all the time

Click to expand...

Bombermania said:

Normally I enjoy Woman's Tennis but last nights final was a poor match considering Safina is meant to be world number three.

Of those finals last years Wimby and U.S open matches were okay finals and last years Aussie final was a good looking final.

I see no reason why the woman cannot play five setters at the slams, anyway Serena won and she is the best player in the women's game.

Click to expand...

SBI said:

Because no one wants to watch women play five sets and it also would completely **** up scheduling.

Click to expand...

Cousin Jed said:

Meant to get on here last night to see if a Women's final had actually gone 3 sets before.

Cooked a Bbq and missed the whole ****ing first set.

Bloody disgraceful. May as well put the Junior boys final on at night I reckon it would be a more interesting contest.

Click to expand...

Bombermania said:

2002 Australian Open final Jennifer Capriati V Martina Hingis

Click to expand...

Is women's tennis worth it?
By Mark Stevens

THERE has always been an underlying feeling at recent Australian Opens that the women's game is flawed.

It's just that the grunt of Maria Sharapova, the artistry of Justine Henin and brute force of Serena Williams was enough to keep everyone distracted from the problems bubbling beneath.

With Sharapova and Henin missing this year, the weakness was exposed for all to see.

Throughout the first 11 days of the tournament, those still delusional about the women having as much pulling power as the men must have come to their senses.

Yes, the Jelena Dokic story was gripping, but too many women's matches were littered with unforced errors.

Then in the space of 24 hours, across Friday and Saturday, it all came to a head.

This was no ordinary wake-up call. It was like being slapped across both cheeks with a slimy mullet.

The gap between the quality of men's and women's game has never seemed wider.

Yet the gap in prizemoney has been closed. Both the men's and women's winners walk away with $2 million.

Equal prizemoney is a generous gesture, but it doesn't add up.

Anybody who sat through the Fernando Verdasco-Rafael Nadal epic on Friday night and followed up by watching the Williams-Dinara Safina cakewalk on Saturday night would have to agree.

The men who have busted a gut, playing best of five sets and at times sending the crowds into a frenzy, have every right to feel short changed.

Verdasco picked up the same pay cheque for his semi-final heroics as Russian Vera Zvonareva, who bowed out in the semis a day earlier in a forgettable two-set encounter.

And the loser of the men' marquee match walked away with the same as Safina, stoic throughout the early rounds but embarrassingly uncompetitive when it counted most in a 6-0 6-3 loss to Williams.

Safina's capitulation was excruciating to watch. Double-faults; nervous missed forehands; desperate drop shots . . . you had to look away.

Safina made 21 unforced errors in 59 minutes. A night earlier, Nadal made just 25 in 5hr14min.

The was some pleasure in seeing Williams at the top of her game, but as a contest it was a prime-time stinker.

Full credit to tournament boss Craig Tiley for backing a night women's final. It's a correct call - and the event continues to thrive as Melbourne' best international event.

But what is out of Tiley's hands is the women's product he has to work with. The depth of quality, remembering Kim Clijsters and Lindsday Davenport are other recent retirees, just is not there.

There is a sameness about the women's game. As Seven commentator Tracy Austin often said during the past fortnight, few players have a plan B.

Where's the science and subtlety? Any chance of Safina starting to use slice, take the pace off the ball or (heaven forbid) even come to the net to put Williams off? Hell, no. Plan A is all she had.

And yes, too many women turned up looking out of shape. Anyone with two eyes could see that . . . you don't need a degree in physical science.

Marion Bartoli and Kaia Kanepi were obviously carrying extra kilos and why is everyone so sensitive about it? Imagine the flack Lleyton Hewitt would cop if he turned up with "excess baggage". He'd cop it far worse.

What Roger Rasheed said about women in general in his role as a commentator was spot on. Others in the hallways may have whispered but agreed.

Take away the Dokic story and it was not a great fortnight for the credibility of women's tennis.

Click to expand...

Bombermania said:

I disagree with you on both counts.

If no one wants to watch Woman's Tennis then how can some of the most popular Tennis players be from the Woman's game also in a tournament like the Australian Open you are going to get several blow outs in both the men and women event.

Click to expand...

No it would not stuff up the scheduling for basically from the middle Sunday onwards the outside courts are dominated by doubles, mixed, juniors and senior matches which are secondary to the main event which is the men and women single tournament.

Click to expand...