Thursday, June 29, 2006

Nadal Advances . . . in five sets . . . against a qualifier. And he faces Agassi next. Methinks someone's capri pants are going to be in tatters by the end of that.

Meanwhile, Jon Wertheim takes on the Federer-Nadal hoo-hah, and he nails the point I made at the French:
It's less Federer's head-to-head record [with Nadal] as it is the appearance he's being beaten mentally.

Yes. Other than the first set, he played like someone believing Nadal's press agent and buying into the "clay streak" hype. Nadal played only marginal tennis that day; by the grace of god, he won when Federer showed he could play worse.

Finally, on the once again media fodder of equal prize money for the broads, I'll restate my position: Tough shit.

To elaborate: When the ladies voluntarily decide to play best-of-five for their prize money, I'll scrub the gents' loo at Wimbledon with a toothbrush to earn them the difference. Until then, a smaller prize is unfair only in the minds of such deep thinkers as Maria Sharapova.
The former champion Maria Sharapova said: "I think men and women should be treated equally."

Meantime, Leander Paes reaches for the Vijay Singh award:
Leander Paes, the Indian doubles player, said he thought 80 per cent of women players would not be able to play five-set matches.
He's right, too. But so insensitive to say so!

1 comment:

Flyer said...

I understand your point on equal pay, although I have a little different take. That is, who are people coming to see or turning the tube on to watch. I mean if it weren't for a few decent stories in the past couple years (Federer's dominance, Nadal's negation of Fed on clay, Agassi about to retire) the men's game has been entirely uninteresting while the Dynasty episode that is the ladies game has been bringing home the bacon. Maybe the do deserve to keep more of it.

However, I think that's a short term look at the business and over time the longer matches and a higher level of play means the men drive the sport and should be paid accordingly. Meaning if the ladies decided to play 5 sets I'm not convinced they'd deserve an equal share of the purse. If they think that's the case let 'em hold a Ladies French Open separate from the boys and see who draws what. Maybe I'm wrong and fans and advertisers will pay more for short skirts than power serves (I would), but I'm not convinced.