UCONN Women lose: 'The Streak' ends at 90

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Kingspoint

This certainly was not tongue-in-cheek. I meant every bit of the suggestion that women athletes take get serious about their competitions if they want to be taken seriously in the sports world, while at the same time wanting to be paid the same as their male counterparts.

I love posts that start with "wow, just wow". When I see that I know the person writing it has few facts to add.

Of course you meant it and you've defended it quite nicely

[dabvu2498]

Originally Posted by Kingspoint

You don't think the physiological differences between men and women might be the reason for the differences in their competitions?

Do you? Are you saying that women are inferior to men when it comes to stamina and that's why they play best-of-three sets instead of best-of-five, and why they play three rounds of golf instead of four? I have a lot more appreciation for women athletes than that. There hasn't been a physical difference in stamina for decades between men and women when it comes to athletics.

----------------------------------------------------

Women's tennis players are fat and out of shape?

Duh! Of course they are. Do you not watch professional women's tennis? When it takes 30 minutes to complete a match, where does stamina come into play and where does the energy spent come into play to offset the obvious calories that so many of them take in. There should not be a single fat woman playing professional tennis, but when you see the very best players, it has been commonplace for quite some time that they are fat and out of shape.

----------------------------------------------------

This certainly was not tongue-in-cheek. I meant every bit of the suggestion that women athletes take get serious about their competitions if they want to be taken seriously in the sports world, while at the same time wanting to be paid the same as their male counterparts.

Use the same size basketball (which is such a joke that they use a smaller basketball than a 13-year old boy uses who is just 5 feet tall).

Play 4 rounds of golf.

Play best-of-five sets in tennis.

There's nothing physically different about women that they shouldn't be doing all three of these things.

Hate to point this out, but most of the events on the LPGA tour are 4-day events.

http://www.lpga.com/content/LPGA_Schedule.pdf

And I also hate to point out that the only men's tennis tournaments where best of 5 sets are played are the 4 majors.

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

I love posts that start with "wow, just wow". When I see that I know the person writing it has few facts to add.

Of course you meant it and you've defended it quite nicely

Still feeling that way?

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

And I also hate to point out that the only men's tennis tournaments where best of 5 sets are played are the 4 majors.

Right on. What's wrong with judging tennis based on the majors? Why can't the women play best of five in the majors?

[jojo]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Right on. What's wrong with judging tennis based on the majors? Why can't the women play best of five in the majors?

Because that would qualify as torture under the Geneva convention and the WTA doesnt want to alienate it's 10+ fans....

[paintmered]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Right on. What's wrong with judging tennis based on the majors? Why can't the women play best of five in the majors?

Probably because the extra time required for the matches would make playing the tournaments in two weeks nearly impossible.

[dabvu2498]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Right on. What's wrong with judging tennis based on the majors? Why can't the women play best of five in the majors?

I can think of one reason. Quite a few top women's players also play doubles, especially at the majors. Not one hundred percent sure, but I don't think many of the men do.

[Kingspoint]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Right on. What's wrong with judging tennis based on the majors? Why can't the women play best of five in the majors?

Which is the only women's tennis that I watch.

One of the greatest sporting events I've ever seen live was an Evert/Navratalova(sp?) French Open match. While it only lasted three sets, it seemed like five.

[Kingspoint]

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

I can think of one reason. Quite a few top women's players also play doubles, especially at the majors. Not one hundred percent sure, but I don't think many of the men do.

They wouldn't be playing the Doubles if they played a "real" match. Let me know the next time a "Doubles" match is showcased on CBS or NBC during a Finals Weekend.

Most of the men do, too. The really good men players don't as they have more important things to do than play Doubles.

[Kingspoint]

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

Hate to point this out, but most of the events on the LPGA tour are 4-day events.

http://www.lpga.com/content/LPGA_Schedule.pdf

And I also hate to point out that the only men's tennis tournaments where best of 5 sets are played are the 4 majors.

It's good that women's golf has finally figured out that they should be playing 4-day tournaments like the men's major tours (European and PGA).

That pretty much leaves basketball and tennis. Since the only tournaments that anybody watches when it comes to women's tennis are the Majors, then they should change to best-of-five sets just as the men do if they want to be taken seriously.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by paintmered

Probably because the extra time required for the matches would make playing the tournaments in two weeks nearly impossible.

OK, if time's a factor then why have anyone play a 5 set match? I don't think you've nailed the exact reason

[paintmered]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

OK, if time's a factor then why have anyone play a 5 set match? I don't think you've nailed the exact reason

Once upon a time, the conventional wisdom was that if a woman ran over 220 yards, she would die.

Watch Wimbledon and you'll notice that the schedule is always a topic of conversation. Assuming everything goes as planned, there's not much free time in the two weeks. Delays are such an issue that Wimbledon went through the expense of installing a roof over center court. Changing from three to five sets will add 50-150% to the match time. Let's assume the average of that to be 75%. Let's assume that a women's match lasts around 1:30. Now the average match lasts 2:38. That's an additional 143 hours of match time. And that's if include only womens' singles.

And as others stated, five sets is the exception and not the rule for the men.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by paintmered

Once upon a time, the conventional wisdom was that if a woman ran over 220 yards, she would die.

Watch Wimbledon and you'll notice that the schedule is always a topic of conversation. Assuming everything goes as planned, there's not much free time in the two weeks. Delays are such an issue that Wimbledon went through the expense of installing a roof over center court. Changing from three to five sets will add 50-150% to the match time. Let's assume the average of that to be 75%. Let's assume that a women's match lasts around 1:30. Now the average match lasts 2:38. That's an additional 143 hours of match time. And that's if include only womens' singles.

And as others stated, five sets is the exception and not the rule for the men.

I understand time's an issue. So why do they have the men playing a best of 5 and not the women? Why not the other way around?

[RBA]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

I understand time's an issue. So why do they have the men playing a best of 5 and not the women? Why not the other way around?

In the early years of Tennis, men couldn't accept defeat. So after 1 game, the loser said, "Best of 3 games". Still not content, the man said, "First one to 6 games wins." Then loser said, "you must win by 2 games". The loser still not happy, says, "Best of three sets". And finally the loser says "Best of 5 sets" wins the match.

[BRM]

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

That's probably the thing I like most about the women's game. They execute sets. Unlike the iso one-on-one garbarge that has largely trickled down from the NBA to the college game.

This right here is the biggest reason why I can and will watch women's hoops, although still not very often. Given that, it's hard to watch a full game though. The fact that it's more team oriented and they execute sets does make it interesting in small doses.

[Hoosier Red]

Originally Posted by WVRed

I wouldn't call it irrelevant, but it does show something I've always believed when it comes to womens college basketball, the lack of overall parity.

I can't speak for the Golden Era at UCLA because I was not alive during that time, but was the mens sport as watered down as what womens college basketball is today?

It's basically UConn, occasionally Tennessee, and thats about it.

Actually, I think it's the parity that made the streak possible. Parity for everyone else at least. Essentially Women's basketball used to be about a 4-5team race. There was UConn, Tennessee, Stanford, and maybe 2 or 3 other teams who could really play. They got all the top players, they could give each other a good game, but really they were going to beat everyone else by 40-50 points.

As the game and the talent pool expanded, more and more top players went to different schools. It started to thin out the top teams. Except for UConn.
So now UConn is collecting the same number of top players as before, (if not more because they're the biggest super power) and the rest of the teams are starting to see the talent level flatten out. Now pretty much everyone from about 2-20 can give each other a game, but all were going to get creamed by UConn.