Talk About Tennis 2.0

^^ Interesting article about the schedule with more information than I had seen before. Not sure if the critique about her time at the end of coaching Andy is fair or not, not clear on if all coaches are typically asked to be visible or not, but it's an opinion piece, so this is how he sees it. But the breakdwon on the scheduling, I thought, was informative.

Mauresmo has taken a lot of flack for the scheduling of the night matches. Devil's advocate here. Does she have to do better or does the WTA and its players need to do better?

Fair point - and makes me wonder how frequently do the tours speak with the organiser...if at all...during the Slams

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 12:08 am Mauresmo has taken a lot of flack for the scheduling of the night matches. Devil's advocate here. Does she have to do better or does the WTA and its players need to do better?

Mauresmo definitely has to do better.
With the current parity in the WTA, most matches are interesting - lots of momentum changes, the probable winner often not being known until the final 5 or 10 minutes of the match...
Outside of Swiatek's matches, the women's matches overall are at least just as interesting as the men's matches.

I don't know why the author of the article above mentions Raducanu, but not Leylah. Not only did Leylah have a much better Roland Garros than Emma, but Leylah also speaks fluent French. And, as I mentioned previously, Leylah played at least 2 'night worthy' matches this year - vs. Bencic, and vs. Anisimova. Both went 3 sets, and even before the matches began, the potential for a good close match was definitely there for both. Leylah even made the quarterfinal vs. Trevisan interesting, going 3 sets, despite being injured.

Also, if they're going to start the night matches at 9pm local time, it makes far more sense to have a women's match at that time, rather than risk a 4 or 5 hour men's match.
My solution would be to alternate men's and women's matches as the night match from one night to the next - with the men's match starting at 8pm, and the women's starting at 9pm.
That ^ is if there is only one night match. If there can be 2 night matches, then put both a women's and a men's, with a start time of 7pm, and alternating between the men and women as to which plays the 7pm match. Also put a doubles match on the secondary court - alternating men's and women's, starting at 8pm every night - for the people who can't get into centre court, or for those who want to switch courts if one of the singles matches turns out to be boring.

Deuce wrote:

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 12:08 am Mauresmo has taken a lot of flack for the scheduling of the night matches. Devil's advocate here. Does she have to do better or does the WTA and its players need to do better?

Mauresmo definitely has to do better.
With the current parity in the WTA, most matches are interesting - lots of momentum changes, the probable winner often not being known until the final 5 or 10 minutes of the match...
Outside of Swiatek's matches, the women's matches overall are at least just as interesting as the men's matches.

I don't know why the author of the article above mentions Raducanu, but not Leylah. Not only did Leylah have a much better Roland Garros than Emma, but Leylah also speaks fluent French. And, as I mentioned previously, Leylah played at least 2 'night worthy' matches this year - vs. Bencic, and vs. Anisimova. Both went 3 sets, and even before the matches began, the potential for a good close match was definitely there for both. Leylah even made the quarterfinal vs. Trevisan interesting, going 3 sets, despite being injured.

Also, if they're going to start the night matches at 9pm local time, it makes far more sense to have a women's match at that time, rather than risk a 4 or 5 hour men's match.
My solution would be to alternate men's and women's matches as the night match from one night to the next - with the men's match starting at 8pm, and the women's starting at 9pm.
That ^ is if there is only one night match. If there can be 2 night matches, then put both a women's and a men's, with a start time of 7pm, and alternating between the men and women as to which plays the 7pm match. Also put a doubles match on the secondary court - alternating men's and women's, starting at 8pm every night - for the people who can't get into centre court, or for those who want to switch courts if one of the singles matches turns out to be boring.

Mauresmo talked about this at length on the Tennis Podcast the day after she made the controversial comment. I don’t know if was her or the podcast hosts (I think it was Mauresmo) who said ideally it starts a little earlier and they have a doubles match or legends match to go with the one main draw match. One match isn’t enough for a session. (The French love the legends draw, so it work at times.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 12:49 am

Deuce wrote:

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 12:08 am Mauresmo has taken a lot of flack for the scheduling of the night matches. Devil's advocate here. Does she have to do better or does the WTA and its players need to do better?

Mauresmo definitely has to do better.
With the current parity in the WTA, most matches are interesting - lots of momentum changes, the probable winner often not being known until the final 5 or 10 minutes of the match...
Outside of Swiatek's matches, the women's matches overall are at least just as interesting as the men's matches.

I don't know why the author of the article above mentions Raducanu, but not Leylah. Not only did Leylah have a much better Roland Garros than Emma, but Leylah also speaks fluent French. And, as I mentioned previously, Leylah played at least 2 'night worthy' matches this year - vs. Bencic, and vs. Anisimova. Both went 3 sets, and even before the matches began, the potential for a good close match was definitely there for both. Leylah even made the quarterfinal vs. Trevisan interesting, going 3 sets, despite being injured.

Also, if they're going to start the night matches at 9pm local time, it makes far more sense to have a women's match at that time, rather than risk a 4 or 5 hour men's match.
My solution would be to alternate men's and women's matches as the night match from one night to the next - with the men's match starting at 8pm, and the women's starting at 9pm.
That ^ is if there is only one night match. If there can be 2 night matches, then put both a women's and a men's, with a start time of 7pm, and alternating between the men and women as to which plays the 7pm match. Also put a doubles match on the secondary court - alternating men's and women's, starting at 8pm every night - for the people who can't get into centre court, or for those who want to switch courts if one of the singles matches turns out to be boring.

Mauresmo talked about this at length on the Tennis Podcast the day after she made the controversial comment. I don’t know if was her or the podcast hosts (I think it was Mauresmo) who said ideally it starts a little earlier and they have a doubles match or legends match to go with the one main draw match. One match isn’t enough for a session. (The French love the legends draw, so it work at times.)

^ I wish the 'legends' (only a few of whom are actually legends) - I wish they would actually play tennis, rather than just crap around for the entire 'match'.

It's fine to joke around from time to time - but the 'legends' matches honestly looks like a social doubles match among 80 year olds at your local club! There is nothing legendary about the tennis they're playing! It seems that the fans are applauding out of a mixture of sympathy and obligation - because there is no quality to the tennis at all.
Most of these players can still hit the ball quite well... Their movement has certainly suffered with age, but there's no reason they can't play a decent level of tennis.

ti-amie wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 12:08 am Mauresmo has taken a lot of flack for the scheduling of the night matches. Devil's advocate here. Does she have to do better or does the WTA and its players need to do better?

Devil's advocate part II: Wasn't this the first year with night matches? Therefore, risking a 55 minute Iga demolition or a second set Badosa retirement may have been something she did not want to happen.
But yes, next year they should do an even split. Set up a rule/guideline: highest remaining playing seed of the day that has NOT been showcased already gets to play. If they all have played, repeat. Unless you have a monster blockbuster (Rafa/Nole type).

Watching the women's doubles..gauff seems the weak link here, lots of volleying errors..
Good and instructive to watch, though, for club players like me..I don't watch men',s doubles much- can't play like them, seems like a different game altogether ..

Neither Pegula nor Gauff played well in that 2nd set.
They've split sets now, with the French pair holding the momentum - and the crowd support - heading into the 3rd...

Pegula not coming forward on the volley, letting the ball come to her, always a mistake...now the French crowd will get involved and make the difference..

Well, that's 0 for 2 in Finals for Gauff... But, hey, she's 18 years old - she'll have plenty more opportunities. She'll look back on these experiences as simply part of her growth and evolution.

Congratulations to Garcia and Mladenovic. Second time for them as a team at Roland Garros. After a shaky (nervous?) 1st set, they settled down and were definitely the better team in the final two sets.

Deuce wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 11:29 am Well, that's 0 for 2 in Finals for Gauff... But, hey, she's 18 years old - she'll have plenty more opportunities. She'll look back on these experiences as simply part of her growth and evolution.

Congratulations to Garcia and Mladenovic. Second time for them as a team at Roland Garros. After a shaky (nervous?) 1st set, they settled down and were definitely the better team in the final two sets.

they used to have personal problems with each other, nice to see they have gotten over that

Deuce wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 11:29 am Well, that's 0 for 2 in Finals for Gauff... But, hey, she's 18 years old - she'll have plenty more opportunities. She'll look back on these experiences as simply part of her growth and evolution.

Congratulations to Garcia and Mladenovic. Second time for them as a team at Roland Garros. After a shaky (nervous?) 1st set, they settled down and were definitely the better team in the final two sets.

G and M used to have personal problems with each other, nice to see they have gotten over that

ashkor87 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 05, 2022 12:59 pm ...

G and M used to have personal problems with each other, nice to see they have gotten over that

A very good team that split due to silly gossip, and comments each one made of the other.
Mladenovic may make it to the HOF as a very good doubles player (she was #1). But had they stuck together, who knows how many slams they would have won. They were very good, and now have shown it was not flukey.

Ruud just flies around the court..like Alcaraz..balanced and even at all times...