Australian Open 2022

yerwanthere123

Really looking forward to the men's final on Sunday. Want Nadal to win, but either result is a win for me tbh, will be quite happy for both players. If it's anything like their US Open final then we could be in for a real treat.

As for the women's final, finding it hard to muster much enthusiasm tbh. I'd have been all in for Barty-Swiatek but can't be too bothered about this one. Don't particularly like either player, but at the very least if Barty wins then the world #1 winning her third grand slam is obviously a good result for tennis. If Collins wins...🤐

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118546528#Comment_118546528

Nadal has also been out for a significant portion of time and he has looked far fitter, even despite his age. Tsitsipas will always be better clay court player, but that's it and unless there's a big jump he won't be much of a challenge on any other surface.

I do question his love for tennis and his determination to be truly elite. That's not a knock on him either, he's a lot of interests outside of tennis and I don't think that's a bad thing at all. But when it comes to being an elite athlete you need live, eat, sleep your sport and I don't know if he's on that level.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118547188#Comment_118547188

You could also argue that Nadal has been working on his comeback fitness-wise from further out (even tho had mild Covid) and that Tsitsipas was disrupted with injury over a period and then surgery more recently.

Also Nadal has not faced anyone near the calibre of Medvedev yet.

And he didn't look that fit in the heat vs Shapo - quite the opposite.

Lets see how good he looks on Sunday!

yerwanthere123

I've hauled myself out of bed on a Saturday morning to watch a match I blatantly don't want to watch 😏 I'll be sorry when Barty wins 60 62 in 57 minutes.

I didn't know the clown show, or men's doubles final as others call it, follows the Barty match. That'll probably be the more entertaining match tbf.

iffandonlyif

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118544202#Comment_118544202

But then what’s the point of the umpire if only to announce the score and receive abuse? And mechanical ball retrievers could replace ball ‘kids’.

I prefer human involvement, however fallible.

Itssoeasy

Barty takes 1st set 6-3.

poppy37

Collins hasn’t gotten into the match at all yet, she seems really fazed by the occasion. Barty understandably a little nervous, can’t imagine the pressure she is under. The boorish crowd cheering Collins double faults, they have been an absolute embarrassment, can’t imagine what they will be like for the mens doubles. At least it’s an all Aussie final though.

Itssoeasy

Collins is 3-0 in the second set and seems to have gotten into the match.

poppy37

Yeah and she’s starting to fist pump and scream, Ash needs to up her game here.

Floppybits

Barty struggling and Collins is taking advantage.

Itssoeasy

Collins leads 5-1 second set and looks much more confident.

poppy37

Much better from Barty now, crowd getting to Collins.

Itssoeasy

5-5 second set.

whiterebel

6-5. Collins.

Loafing Oaf

4 championship points

Loafing Oaf

Furze99

Frankly ridiculous in this day & age that the women aren't playing best of five sets in these big tournaments. Would be a truer test, more intriguing, allow for comebacks and give the public value for money. What are they afraid of?

poppy37

I’m glad Barty won, the pressure on her was enormous and she has carried herself so well but I do feel sorry for Collins, the crowd were horrible. You can support your home player but be respectful of her opponent and actually applaud her good shots. Collins was very upset because she is usually a very gracious loser and that handshake was perfunctory at best.

Man Vs ManUre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549367#Comment_118549367

It’s crazy that they get paid the same prize money as the men. They should only get 60%.

Floppybits

Really dislike the Australian crowd. No problem supporting their favourites but have some respect for the opponents. It seems the crowd now revel in behaving like that.

iffandonlyif

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549367#Comment_118549367

Given we’ve just seen a player go two breaks of serve ahead and then immediately squander it, in what way are comebacks not allowed currently?!

Man Vs ManUre

When he said he had a surprise to present the trophy, I thought it might be Djokovic.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549387#Comment_118549387

Come on, we've all seen great 5 setters where a player loses the first two but battles back into the match and takes it to 5.

The womens game is more like a sprint/ middle distance race than a marathon.

Regardless, there's no reason at all from a biological point of view that women should not play best of 5.

Itssoeasy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549389#Comment_118549389

Didn’t the commentators say it was going to be someone else ?

klr87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549375#Comment_118549375

They are lucky to get 60% of what the men get in most other tournaments (joint events or separate), despite all those being best of 3 for both men and women. Is that not crazy as well? At present, Indian Wells, Miami and Madrid are the only tournaments where it is equal pay for equal work. Even in other big joint tournaments like Rome and Cincinnati, there is a huge disparity. If anything, the gap widened during the pandemic, especially at the smaller events,

Also, be careful what you wish for, One consequence of the women playing best of 5 in all rounds of a slam would be women and men playing on alternate days. Personally, I'd prefer it were for just the last 3 or 4 rounds, which would be more equitable and workable.

Royale with Cheese

This is like the Oscars.

Floppybits

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549367#Comment_118549367

I think it is more of a time issue rather than the women not wanting to play the best of 5. The tournaments would need to be extended to 3 or 4 weeks or number of players cut to allow both mens and womens go to 5 sets.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549425#Comment_118549425

Surely there are solutions for that, as suggested above for example - best of 3 for both men & women for opening rounds and best of 5 from say last 16 on? It would be a truer athletic contest for women.

yerwanthere123

Glad Collins made Barty work for it at the very least. Would've been nicer to see a third set, but happy that Barty won. Despite all her success, I just can't particularly warm to her and I'm not sure why.

Xander10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549367#Comment_118549367

Turgid stuff. Not sure I'd want to see it prolonged

Girly Gal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549485#Comment_118549485

Not a Barty fan either, as you say just can't warm to her, but fair play to her for winning, she must have been under enormous pressure to win her home slam

Girly Gal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549425#Comment_118549425

They could easily make the semi finals and final best of 5 for the women with minimum effect on the schedule, don't think there's much demand for that as the standard in the women's game is very poor atm.

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118547317#Comment_118547317

I don't think Nadal will look that good though. If he doesn't win it in 3 he won't win and that will be down to fitness levels. The difference is Nadal is 35 years old and the fact he has reached the final at his age is a bit of a joke tbh and doesn't say much for the men's game.

Tsitsipas has no excuse for being physically drained so easily.

yerwanthere123

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549638#Comment_118549638

Well you say that but Nadal is no ordinary 35 year old is he. Nadal at 35 and past his best is still going to be better than most players on tour.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549579#Comment_118549579

Regardless of the standard, best of 5 would require a bit more work and graft. Fitness, stamina and athleticism would play a bigger part.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549409#Comment_118549409

Professional sport is commercially run on the basis of revenue coming from primarily three elements ->

• ticket revenue (attractiveness to event-goers)
• sponsorship (attractiveness to sponsors)
• television revenue (related to amount of viewers and also the potential for advertising)

The reason that WTA tournaments run on their own have low prize money is because the prize money is a function of those three elements of revenue - i.e. they are run on a commercial basis - how the real-world actually works.

The 4 Grand Slams and a few other Masters tournaments are artificially subsidised above what the WTA side of those three elements would bring in on their own in terms of the prize money as the men's and the women's are given equal prize money.

It's actually a slap in the face to all the other women's sports which don't receive this non-commercial subsidy - where normal commercial rules apply -> what the sport brings in commercially is what the remuneration is based on.

It's the same in the real-world commercial workplace where thankfully there is mostly a concept of meritocracy now -> whoever does the best job commercially (woman or man) should get the best remuneration.

There is actually a simple way to get an idea of this subsidy.

Here is some information that I was able to find about the ticket prices for the Women's and Men's singles finals at the Australian Open in 2021

The women’s final can be watched live for as little as $148 or as much as $530.

The cheapest ticket to the men’s final is currently priced at $550 or fans can pay $990 for the best seat in the house.

So with the same level of stadium capacity (50% capacity or 7,477 seats in 2021), the cheapest (worst seat) ticket to the men's final was more expensive than the most expensive ticket (best seat) for the women's final, it's very clear what level of subsidy is going on when you consider that the prize-money is the same for both.

When the actual attractiveness and value to consumers (in this case tickets) is laid bare by translating it to brass tax money numbers it's all very clear.

So if this was translated into the real-world -> salesperson 1 could sell a company's worst product for more than salesperson 2 could sell the company's best product but the proposal was to pay them the same - how would that go down I wonder...?

https://7news.com.au/sport/tennis/tickets-on-sale-at-a-huge-cost-as-crowds-return-to-aus-open-after-lockdown-c-2184154

Augme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549652#Comment_118549652

He shouldn't be though. His talent and ability will be better but in a sport like tennis that advantage should be drastically reduced due to the physical nature of the sport. It isn't reduced because the calibre of the people he has faced is fairly poor.

yerwanthere123

https://twitter.com/christophclarey/status/1487395273366450178

I thought this was interesting. I'd have assumed that the balls had to be the same across all four grand slams.

yerwanthere123

Happy for Kokkinakis but not the cúnt he's playing with. A real catch 22.

Girly Gal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549652#Comment_118549652

It's true he's no ordinary 35 year old, but, he's also a long way past his prime, has just comeback from a long layoff and this is also his least favourite slam, at this stage in his career, the younger players in and around the top 10/15 should be able for him and certainly should be putting up better performances against him. All things concerned it's remarkable that he is in the final.

Medvedev is a step up from what he has faced so far, so I would expect Medvedev to win it, but, certainly no guarantee he will.

klr87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549678#Comment_118549678

If you begrudge women getting the same prize money as men (and clearly you do), why not take that line of argument to its logical conclusion? Why does Federer (or Rafa, etc.) get exactly the same prize money for winning a first round evening prime time match on the main show court, as does the winner between (say) the world #94 and a qualifier played first match up in the morning on some godforsaken outer court with about 20 people watching? Or if it's Emma Raducanu playing on Centre Court at Wimbledon, surely she should be getting paid more (perhaps way more) than almost everyone else on that day's order of play, regardless of gender, or the format they're playing, or how long or competitive or their match actually is?

FWIW, I'm a man.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118550582#Comment_118550582

In the example I gave, Australian Open 2021 the ticket prices for the singles finals were set at the men's quarter final stage, when it was not known who would be in the 2 singles finals.

That was the value the organisers judged they could receive for the respective product on the market.

The market value.

What you talk about already exists in the secondary market for tickets where touts and other secondary markets operate for reselling tickets.

In a similar vein if I buy a ticket for the last game in the Six Nations Rugby, the market value is X when they go on sale in advance. That price to obtain that on a secondary market by the time the last game has come around Ireland will be Y if Ireland are going for a grand slam or Z if they are bottom of the table. So due to specific circumstances.

I'm merely pointing out the relative commerciality of remuneration of the Slams and those other few tournaments versus the real-world commerciality of the vast majority which the other tournaments make up and other sports and which is more connected to the real-world workplace basis for remuneration.

If you're a man, woman or dog it makes no difference to me tbh!

iffandonlyif

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118550582#Comment_118550582

That’s hardly the logical conclusion. The prize pot for each section is determined by level of interest and is distributed based on progression.

But the logical conclusion of the state of affairs you defend is that doubles, wheelchair, etc, deserve equal pay too.

Floppybits

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549756#Comment_118549756

Nah each tournament can choose the balls they want as long as they are regulation size. All players get to practice with the balls being used in the tournaments. Wimbledon use slazenger balls, us open use Wilson, not sure what the French use probably Crivits 😀 and the Australian use Dunlop. Players just prefer some balls over others.

waynescales1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549399#Comment_118549399

I’m pretty sure that’s not the case. If women tried to play 5 sets you’d have players unable to continue due to cramp and possibly even players vomiting on court.

There is no chance any athlete conditioned to play on average 90 minute matches could suddenly start playing 3 to 4 hour 5 setters.

Mantis Toboggan

Surely the women could become fit enough to play 5 sets! Bizarre that they still only play best of 3.

Floppybits

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118551070#Comment_118551070

The fitness would come over time. Sure you see it in the men's game especially when players come onto the tour. It takes time to build up the stanima to play 5 setters. I always see the 5 setters like marathons that till you play a couple players will struggle till they get use to playing them. This is why the likes of elder pros on the tour would have an advantage over the younger pros when it came to the slams.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118551070#Comment_118551070

The physical fitness could be increased eventually in the women's game I suppose but the quality of the matches would get worse

Already the ratio of winners (W) to unforced errors (UE) is lower in the women's game - i.e. there are more errors compared to winners in the women's game than in the men's game

Analysis found that 41.3% of the men recorded a W/UFE of 1.0 or more, while only 26% of the women achieved this result.

Moving to 5 sets would only exacerbate this ratio as it gets worse the longer matches go on.

hamburgham

I really liked Medvedev until yesterday’s outburst at the umpire. I thought it was really shocking and am surprised there hasn’t been more of an outcry over it. To abuse an official like that who has no option but to sit there and take it in front of the world. I think he should have been disqualified. Novak accidentally hitting the line judge was minor in comparison. Also imagine the reaction it had been Kyrgyios who had behaved like that. It was really disgusting.

hamburgham

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118549379#Comment_118549379

The Aussies have made a show of themselves from start to finish of this. Djokovic’s treatment and then the behaviour of the crowd. It would be great if the platers started to boycott it.