Women Should Prove Lleyton Hewitt Wrong
Posted by Seth Walder | Posted in Tennis | Posted: June 24, 2009 at 4:51 pm
11
Lleyton Hewitt, Australian tennis player and former Wimbledon champion, made what I thought were some controversial comments yesterday. Hewitt was asked about the possibility of extending women’s matches in Grand Slams to five sets, just like the men’s.
“I don’t think a lot of them would last five sets,” he said, according to Reuters. “The training you have to do to last five sets, especially seven best-of-five-set matches, it’s a lot more than three-set matches. There would obviously be question marks [over whether] a lot of them could last that much,”
Personally, that sounds to me like he is indirectly saying that the women don’t have to train as hard as the men, something that I think quite a few women’s tennis players would feel fairly insulted by. And I don’t believe for a second that Serena Williams would call it quits in a five-set match before she was done.
I was very shocked when I read in the article on ESPN.com, to find out that it wasn’t until 2007 started awarding equal prize money to men and women competitors. That really does surprise me that it has taken so long. And it just shows the general feeling in the sport of tennis that a good number of people don’t see the male and female athletes as equal competitors, or at the very least being of 
equal importance. Personally, I think the women deserve as much credit as the men, and likewise just as much money.
However, I challenge the women to go one step further. There is no reason why the women can’t play five-set matches in Grand Slams. Yes, it would change the way they prepare, but ultimately it would add the competition, endurance would be more of a factor, just like it is in the men’s competitions. And it would prove to skeptics and people like Hewitt that the women are equally as capable as he is, and deserve to be recognized as the incredible athletes that they are.
Loading ...
I do not see this as a controversial comment. Hewitt is quite correct that “most of them would not last that much”. Women train for three set matches and men train for five because the time it takes to play those lengths is appropriate for the amount of physical stamina that each gender has.
I do not doubt that those female players holding upper ranked numbers such as Serena, Venus and Maria Sharipova could not last a five set match but the undoubtebly could not last a tournament full of five set matches. Even the top female tennis players in the world get noticeably tired in the third set of a hard match. Their focus wanes and their shots become more haphazard and less precise. the same thing happens to men in the fifth set.
Hewitt is not being anti-feminist because he is stating something true. Women do not have as much endurance as men do. It’s physical. If the USTA was to lengthen women’s tennis matches to five sets, some of which often strectch into the 5-6 hours range not only would the competition pool vanish but there would be NO chance that a low ranked player could win any tournament. In addition injuries would increase and overall quality of play would suffer.
You say that the way it stands now endurance is not a factor in women’s matches. I challenge you to watch Venus and Serena Williams play in a final against one another and tell me if you still think this is true.
I’m not sure equal prize money is a must, to be honest. Believe me I’m not being misogynistic, but lets face it, women don’t bring as big of an audience to the sport. Furthermore, the quality of play is lower. BELIEVE ME, I am very well aware that these are intensely trained, highly talented athletes. They could destroy me or anyone I know in tennis. It’s just simple business. Once there is an equal market for both Men’s and Women’s tournaments, then equal compensation should be doled out.
For example, there were 13.1 million British viewers for last years Nadal – Federer Men’s final. Meanwhile, the same year, there were 4.5 million British viewers for the Women’s final. All I’m saying is it’s business and it is quite clear that mens tennis is far more financially valuable to the sport.
Where do we stop this equality train? What about equal prize money for male and female golfers too? NBA vs. WNBA?
‘deserved to be recognized as the incredible athletes they are?’ seriously?
hewitts right at this moment there’s no way the majority of women on the tour could uphold a decent standard of tennis for 5 sets and/or 3,4, even 5 hours. hewitts seen his fair share of 5-setters and he’s as tough as they come – he knows what it takes.
also 5 set matches don’t ‘often’ stretch into the 6 hour range…in fact they rarely do.
i wrote an article a while ago debating the equal pay dilemma – complete with poll question (the women do play less…don’t bring in as high numbers…even the trophy is smaller…)
vote here:
http://thebleacherbums.wordpress.com/2009/06/06/equal-pay-in-tennis/
How many times do we see a women’s final in a major tounrmanet only last two sets and less than one hour? ALL THE TIME. It’s boring. Fun fact: every U.S. Open women’s singles final since 1996 has been won in straight sets. I would love to see the matches lengthened to five sets and if they can’t handle it then you change it back. It would make the games way more interesting and more strategic.
uhhhhh if they were all won in straight sets, they wouldn’t go to five…
if they were all won in straight sets, why make them play another? surely by that point, the opposition would more often than not, offer little if any resistance in that third set.
maybe if they had all gone to 3 sets you would have a foundation for an argument.
do you hear any of the women on the tour calling for 5-sets? i didn’t think so.. they’re pretty happy to be paid equally without doing as much work.
Actually Chris, Adam is right. Think about all of the men’s matches where someone goes up 2-0 and then the opponent wins at least a set or two to make a match of it, that’s what would happen.
Winning two sets does not mean you automatically win the third. Men’s matches frequently go beyond three sets after one players wins the first two. A five set match is completely different from a three set match. In three sets, you don’t have to pace yourself. Anyone can run around for an hour. Maybe the women don’t want to play five sets but I’m sure tennis organizations and sponsors around the world would be more than happy to have more exciting matches that create more revenue.
i mean i could say a lot here (seth, i seem to recall you saying “I’m no tennis expert, and my knowledge mostly consists of what my grandmother fills me in on when I visit her from time to time.” so don’t “actually chris” me when you know I know a lot about tennis) but i guess it ultimately comes down to preference. if you guys want to watch 5 sets of women’s tennis than you are more than welcome and will be in the minority.
i continually find it odd when people take these sports discussions so personally.
what can i say, im passionate about my sport.
oh and if the sponsors want to do it, let’s do it then. that’s what should govern our sport: let’s do what the sponsors want to do.
Seth, Want to test this whole debate out with a rickmatch at Farley? I will bring my racket and the boombox if you bring yours and the sweatbands. See you there!