Women’s Tennis Demands Heat Breaks Not Given To Men At Wimbledon Championships

As England and much of Europe swelters through a heatwave, female (but not male) tennis players at Wimbledon have been allowed to take ten minute heat breaks between the second and third sets. The only criterion that must be met for women competitors to receive this break is that the Heat Stress Index, an adjusted balance of air temperature, humidity and surface temperature, must be above 30.1°C (86.18°F).

This is despite male and female players receiving equal pay and men having to play best-of-five set matches, rather than the best-of-three set format of the women’s game. More paradoxically, boys playing the Junior Wimbledon Championship must soldier on in the heat, yet the adult women and Junior Girls Championship participants are favored by the rule.

Many of you will be familiar with one of my first ROK articles, which criticized the lunacy of “equal” pay for female tennis players. Equal pay means competing in the same field, not constructing your own so that you get massive financial rewards you otherwise would not.

Like I said back then, it’s analogous to creating an equally paid extra NBA for short people, or a sister NFL competition for the skinniest men unable to go the distance with normal, burly football players. The sexist heat rule debacle at Wimbledon is simply adding more butter to the bread of why female sports in general have a gross sense of entitlement, all whilst seething for so-called “equality.”

The heat rule not only privileges women, it’s contextually ridiculous

If Serena Williams wants equality, she can earn it by playing five sets, without the chance for heat breaks and against men like Novak Djokovic!

As The Daily Mail points out, at the 2014 Australian Open temperatures went above 40°C (104°F) for four days straight. The difference between 30.1°C (86.18°F) and 40°C+ (104°F+) is gargantuan. Both Wimbledon and the Australian Open are held during Britain and Australia’s respective summers, and the heat rule for Wimbledon can be applied by female players at a temperature that is below the middle-of-the-day average for the Australian Open.

What’s more is that many of the highly ranked tournaments around the world, including a number in the US, occur in very hot or humid climates.

The excellent British Times journalist Matthew Syed, whose crisp analysis in another article I used for my earlier tennis equal pay ROK piece, makes a compelling argument against this “We’re special princesses!” hypocrisy:

Why do female players acquiesce in this sexism?

They have been vocal in calling for equal prize money, equal status, equal everything. But when it comes to playing over five sets, rather than three, what you might call equality of effort, something that these lithe and impressive athletes are perfectly capable of doing, everything seems to change.

When men, in tennis or beyond it, don’t give women “equality,” it’s sexism. That equality includes giving the same rewards for on average inferior skill and work, such as entry and promotion in the military, pay and recognition for sports, and the use of (female) gender quotas on business boards.

But when women claw invariable privileges that butcher the notion of theoretical equality, there’s usually no accompanying compunction for any of them to speak out against it, let alone forfeit their special treatment.

Oh wait, Maria Sharapova says the rule isn’t unfair

Do people watch Maria because her skills are on par with Federer (or the Men’s World Number 200) or because of continual feminist “equality” propaganda and her body?

Exhibiting perfectly how entitled females can dismiss any form of privilege they receive as nothing, Maria Sharapova brushed aside the gender unevenness of the rule:

I think if it’s something that they’re concerned about it, they can re-evaluate. If it does get quite hot for us, we’re able to use it, then why not?

This is the same woman who has raised so-called sexism against female players innumerable times, even as she says nothing about having to play fewer sets than the men at notoriously hot tournaments like the Australian Open. Or about the artificial conception of her being paid the same as a man for winning a Grand Slam, as if her performance and spectacle were somehow equal to his. Caroline Wozniacki and Serena Williams also opined this week that the organizers were encouraging sexism by having more featured men’s matches on Center Court.

To argue that they deserve more airtime, women’s players have to, like Sharapova, mentally crowd out the litany of ways in which they are privileged over the men. Only then can they “coherently” lambast the powers that be, who are actually those that allow them to gain special treatment in the first place.

As people, overwhelmingly men, across the United Kingdom are forced to work strenuous jobs in the midst of this heatwave, including as removalists, postmen, builders, laborers, roof tilers, and truck drivers in boiling vehicles, well-paid female athletes like Sharapova are being pampered in the pursuit of millions in prize money.

Play the men under the same conditions or get out

Who will save the wee tennis women from themselves and their heat-ravaged bodies?!

The perennial whinging of female athletes and others who demand that we bend over backwards to accommodate their queen-sized expectations is only expanding. Before too long, feminists will be arguing that guidelines or laws should be instituted so that women’s sport is guaranteed 50% of the airtime on television and minimum expected coverage in newspapers and other print or online media. After the SJWs have performed their legislative or similar magic, sportswomen will still be the recipients of skewed rules that make their lives much easier relative to the men.

Whereas some people see sport as a distraction not reflective of society, I take the opposite view. By seeing female athletes bellowing for substantial privileges, the average woman is actually “inspired” to insist on her own form of these privileges, whether at work, in the state support she expects for being a mother, or the way she extracts material and other benefits from the men she interacts with.

To rephrase a famous line: if you can’t stand the heat girls, get off the tennis court.

Read More: What Women’s Tennis Says About “Equal” Pay

134 thoughts on “Women’s Tennis Demands Heat Breaks Not Given To Men At Wimbledon Championships”

  1. Where are the transgender male to female players ready to put these weak women in their place. Moreover I’d love to see some Caitlyn Jenner type’s face when the umpire requests “new balls please”

    1. Damn straight! I bet CJ would not only play 5 sets or more, but she’d have no problem with the victorious leaping over the net after the match.

      1. There’s a transgender WMA fighter I think – I forget the name – who’s pretty much demolished every female fighter s/he’s come against, so there is absolutely no reason I’m aware of why Caitlyn or equivalent couldn’t take up the challenge in ‘ladies’ tennis. Its not like most of them would be any more ladylike than Caitlyn or equivalent

        1. Par for the course and completely expected.
          I wish Caitlyn would get some tennis chops and destroy Serena on the court. But I think Caitlyn could do it simply by wearing one of Serena’s own colorful tennis outfits from her fashion collection.
          Even if Caitlyn couldn’t return a serve, she would crush both Serena and women’s tennis by bringing serving up politically correct narrative and forced unconditional acceptance without requisite skill and talent, There could be no possible defense to that style of game play.

        2. The transgender fighter is Fallon Fox who was born a man. ‘She’ KO’d her last opponent in the first round. Her female opponent Tamika Brents suffered a broken orbital bone and required 7 staples in her head. After the fight Tamaika said that she had fought a lot of women but had never before encountered the kind of strength possessed by Fallon.
          UFC commentator Joe Rogan said that he does not think it was right for Fallon to fight women because she was born a man. She possesses irreversible male physical attributes including bigger hands and shoulder joints. This gives her a significant advantage over women.
          Of course Joe Rogan was roundly criticised by SJW’s including Vice.
          It will be fascinating if more transgenders decide to compete in female sports. What will the reaction of the feminists and SJWs be when they see transgenders uniformly destroying their female opponents.

        3. yeah, that’s who I was thinking of (well how many of them can there be?). Wasn’t it Joe Rogan who was going on about how ronda rousey could beat most males. Would be interesting to pair them up

        4. You don’t even need transgender. Look at the Williams sisters who absolutely have dominated women’s tennis like no other. That’s not just skill acquisition that put her ahead if the game. She should more than likely have between 4-8x the testosterone of her usual opponents.

        5. Last time I checked, Fox was 5-1 with her (its?) only loss being to a fighter a dozen years younger. Even Randy Couture didn’t have a record like that at the same age.

        6. Look at blacks generally. In the USA the top three sports by revenue (baseball, basketball and football) are dominated by black players (except for quarterbacks). It’s only when you get to number 4 or below (ice hockey, and I guess MMA) where you see something reflecting the population distribution.

        7. As I mentioned above what Rene Richards said even a tranny who has lost 50 lbs, muscle and is taking hormones will beat the females. When those feminists see females getting their butts kicks or getting hurt it should be amusing.

        8. I don’t think it’s T. Those girls are heavy and built like gorillas and can just hit harder.

        9. Are there any negro ice hockey players? Quarterbacks take brains.
          And btw look at the Winter Olympics.
          The US soccer team for the females is also White.

        10. I think there are one or two in the NHL.
          And what is politically incorrect is the fact that thinking sports are still the domain of white guys. Linebackers are black and quarterbacks are white; boxing champions are black but MMA champions are white.
          I can’t explain ice hockey but I have my theories.

        11. Men have 10x the T levels as females. Some females are built like gorillas even with a normal female T level.

        12. Blacks make up 14% of the American population. Far more than 14% of American boxing champions have been black, especially in the heavier weight classes. UFC champions are much more proportionate.

    2. That happened with Dr Rene Richards a transsexual. He did have the operation and I guess the hormones reduced his muscles and weight but he was 6’2″. He was denied being able to play as a female but even in 1977 a court ruled he could play as a female.He was over 40 and ended ranked 20 in female. But even admitted that if the sex change was when he was 22 that no female would have been able to beat him and did sort of consider this thing about men even those minus a dick and taking hormones to still be able to beat the females.

  2. The real losers in this sexist equality are the sponsors who will have to pay the same kind of money for sucky women’s sports that draws a fraction of the audience as the men’s counterpart. But feminist math transforms inequalities into equalizes through the magic of social fairness.
    Women have their counterbalance to men’s dominance in sports. It’s called the strip club, where they can out earn any many of the men that show up to see them in action. Where are the demands for equal pay for equal pay on the stripper pole? Why aren’t club owners forced to bring in male dancers in the spirit of equality, and why aren’t they forced to pay males the same? Oh yeah, men can do the math on that nonsensical suggestion. It’s called dollars and cents.

    1. Why aren’t club owners forced to bring in male dancers in the spirit of equality
      SHHHHHHHHH! Don’t give them any stupid ideas!!!!!

    2. That’s true of basketball. Not tennis. Women’s tennis draw an audience. Not because they are good at tennis.

      1. If the poles that hold up the net were a bit taller, then the women players could give an inter-set show.

    3. The clear winners are the female players who get the same prize money at everyone else’s expense. Depending on how the economics shakes out, people who prefer watching women’s events might get to do so at a lower cost, either in person or on TV. Certainly, the SJWs get the smug satisfaction of helping women to fleece men while advancing their narrative.
      It is pretty much guaranteed that everyone else loses out in some way. The male players probably get less money than they otherwise would. In demand men’s events get crowded out by unwanted women’s events and that can push ticket prices up. Broadcasters probably have to pay a package rate for an equal number of hours of both men and women, and then take a hit on their advertising revenue when they shuffle the low quality footage off to a less lucrative time slot, or otherwise bore their audience to tears while broadcasting live.

    4. You’ll never hear these women (and their supporters) talk about women using their sexuality to make a buck. That would go against the narrative (men objectifying women).
      Women will gladly take the money and pose for the pictures (for money) but remember…it’s all unfair (for women).
      You have to fucking laugh at this nonsense.

      1. There have been some pretty ugly female tennis players who were pretty good. But they never got sponsorship or any deals. The hypocrisy of women’s sports is that they know they have to be good-looking to make it, and only that. But then complain about everything else like it was their talent that got them there. They ought to do some studies about how the more attractive female athletes get (in the media) the more their points and achievements go down.

  3. I always find these sorts of arguments rather muddled. Pay and prizes should be governed by market forces. You get paid as much as you can negotiate, and you pay as little as you can negotiate. That negotiation should in general find something close to the value you add. The Wimbledon prize money shouldn’t depend on how many matches you play. It would be utter nonsense for me to show up offering to play twenty matches rather than five or three, and expect a fat cheque. No one is interested in watching me play.
    Female models and porn stars are paid high multiples of their male counterparts. I’m sure the men work as every bit as hard, but ultimately people just like looking at women’s bodies more. Conversely, most people find male competitive sports more compelling, so male athletes tend to earn more in that sphere.

  4. I’m sure that they get less money for their participation on tennis than their male homologous but:
    In summary the Ladies’ claims
    Less profitable work – equal wage
    Less work – equal payments
    Less performance – same appreciation
    Less juridical and general responsibility – equal juridical condition
    They call it feminism

    1. Wait a moment, I thought feminism was: ♪ <3 ♥ 🙂 ♫ but it is such —–c=================================3 for all men mostly betas

      1. the first panel usually is feminism, they just construct a hamster maze of nonsense to obscure their desires

      2. To the left feminism is about victim status. Women are victims of men therefore men must be controlled and women must be elevated to power over men. It’s part of the social justice agenda. It’s all about divide and conquer and control.
        If you notice the woman on top is alone. The woman on the bottom has a male friend. Don’t be fooled by the SJWs. Divide, conquer, and control is what they do.

        1. Only Ancient Egyptian people enslaved by whitnnies can hold the situation of victims and conquers

      3. Notice how in the bottom picture, the color of the male’s hand is more dramatically changed.
        Equality. ITS A TRAP

    2. I don’t care what they’re paid because the audience who attends would determine if they’re worth watching.
      In real life though females are overpaid for whatever job they have compared to the same job done by a man , in General.
      I’m not saying females don’t work but I’ve noticed that in these low paying $10 an hr jobs which are mainly teen type jobs at supermarkets etc it’s the boys who do the heavier jobs or have to push 20 carts from outside in in all sorts of weather.They should be paid more actually.

      1. One would think the sports (and the participating sex) with a higher amount of impressiveness (speed, strength, endurance) would have the higher amount of promotion/air-time/attendance and money. This would be logical. This would be the principle of supply and demand in action.
        However, this article shows that this is starting to change. Equality is more important to society over all other principles. It doesn’t matter to these people that females tennis players play less sets, aren’t as strong or as fast, or attract less crowds, or get these “heat breaks”. Equality dictates that they should have the same prize money.
        This “equality at all costs” mindset is also evidenced by Quintis’ gay marriage article a few days ago.
        It’s a very troubling time to live in right now, where hurt feelings is the law of the land.

        1. If people wanted to watch a tiddlywink game then those players would make the money. Has nothing to do with the things you mentioned.

  5. Typical… Just like in literally every workplace, women want the same salary as men when men always do the physically harder tasks. They are given the easiest tasks that anybody can do, meanwhile some men are given physically demanding tasks that only a few men are willing to do, yet they are paid the same.

  6. Modern women want equality only as long as it benefits them. Whenever this equality stands in the way of the traditional privileges they receive as women, they quickly haul equality in the fire. But the next second, they will again embrace the slogan of equality if it offers them any benefit. They switch back and forth, between a woman who is equal to a man, and a woman who wants to be treated like a lady.
    They change colors faster than a chameleon, and this behavior of theirs, exposes their low ethics and morals. If they truly have any morals they should behave either as a truly equal individual under all circumstances, or as a traditional lady. Switching back and forth between the two extremes is pathetic.

  7. This separate but ‘equal –for the benefits, not the ability’ must end.
    If they are equal then compete against men. Why this separate system for women players?? There are many men who aren’t good enough or strong enough to compete at the top of the men’s game– but they are very good players.
    Why are they denied the fair opportunity to compete in the women’s league– they could have great success there and have the chance to share their gifts with the world!!!
    And where are they many talented male players who wish to self-identify as female?? They MUST be allowed to play as women and fulfill their dreams.
    Why are they denied the right to play in the woman’s league. There are many more heroic Bruce Jenner’s just waiting for our applause.
    Come on guys. Let’s get inspired!!!!

    1. Tennis pay is not about winning at tennis, it is about TV ratings and getting attention. The best woman ever would be destroyed by amateur men. That’s not the issue, it’s not about sports, it’s about getting attention. And a sexy Russian woman is more fun to watch than a man, especially if they are both not top ranked. Her tennis skill is not the issue. Women’s tennis is not popular because they are good at tennis. That had nothing to do with it.

        1. Correct. Most women’s sports don’t have cute Croatian girls in little skirts. That is why it isn’t relevant that a college male could destroy the best woman ever. It’s not about sport. Their arguments about equal pay are solid on economic grounds, not competitive grounds. Obviously women are fucking miserable at sport.

        2. …and the women that are somewhat good at physically competitive sports look like she-beasts where no one wants to see. A woman looking more ripped and bigger than me is an instant boner killer.

  8. They said the same shit recently about the US Women’s soccer team. How they were paid less, etc. Blah, blah, blah.
    They don’t generate the same revenue, but they want the same pay as Lionel Messi? Yeah, that makes a lot of fucking sense. And a small rock band playing to four people in a empty bar deserve the same pay as The Rolling Stones.
    Do these cunts and their blind white knights understand how stupid they sound? For fucks sake.

    1. People who argue for this equal pay BS don’t know how the world really operates nor care to know. They just want to yell out liberal bumper sticker slogans and live in an illusion.
      Just like the folks who scream “women make $.75 to every man’s dollar” don’t give a shit about breaking facts down or how that stat is actually generated. Men work longer hours and do physically dangerous work which pays more is an inconvenient fact they don’t want to hear when they’ve got a narrow focus on trying to convince us male dominance in TECH and CEO positions are simply due to … SEXISM!

      1. Women’s tennis is unique in that it actually does generate revenue. And top women are lucrative endorsers. Sharapova makes more money selling rolexes than a comparably talented male tennis player. Revenue is not about sport skill. It’s about marketability.

        1. A common counter argument is that the women’s game is more popular, but consider this: Tickets to Rod Laver arena for the mens final were $370, but you could attend the twilight session on the 28th for $290, which included the women’s final AND the men’s doubles final. Longer matches also mean more concession sales and more eyeball time for advertisements. The men’s final actually had a much higher viewership, despite going until 1:30 AM local time. 2.4M aussies watched the match on TV, while only 1.2M tuned in to see the women’s championship.

      2. You can’t argue rationally with Libtards or Femtards so don’t waste your time. Just tell them they’re full of shit or ignore them.

      3. I am a woman and I am sorry to impose. I know this is a forum for men & I don’t wish to disrespect the boundaries set forth.
        I stumbled onto this article and was intrigued.
        I agree with you. I am a surgeon; my compensation is fee for service. In the fee for service model, one is compensated well for hard work. One is compensated less if he/she works less. There are few women in my specialty, but often they complain that the fee for service model is unfair.
        They complain that they get paid less… Blah blah blah.
        They usually work less. Fewer hours. For whatever reason, they shy away from the tough cases. They want weekends off, they don’t want to work more than 36 hours without a break, they want to work less than 80 hours per week.
        Of course they get paid less! That is completely fair! It isn’t sexist!
        I work like the men… I do the big cases, work every weekend, I don’t complain. And you know what? I make plenty of money.
        So… Sorry again. I just want you to know that a woman agrees with you.

    2. When the women’s soccer team can beat the men’s soccer team at that Boring As Fuck sport 5 out of 10 games, then let them be “equal”….

      1. The money has nothing to do with quality of play, it has to do with entertainment value.
        The lingerie league gets more attention than high school football. Surely you understand why and are not saying “they can’t even throw, they shouldn’t be on tv!”

        1. There was one comedian who said he likes to “watch” women’s tennis on TV: he closes his eyes, turns up the volume, and then listens to them grunt at each other for a couple of hours.

      2. “Don’t expect to see in WUSA the same kind of athleticism you would see in the men’s game. The women’s national team sometimes practices against under-sixteen boys’ teams—and loses. “They just boot it over our heads and run past us,” Kate Sobrero.

    3. Outcome equalism at its finest
      For all their claims about not believing in absolute equality, I’ve yet to see any liberal stand up to this

      1. They completely trip over the is-ought dichotomy with every step. Take every statement by a feminist that includes the term “equality” or the like, and then put them in one of four quadrants: “are equal”, “should be equal”, “are not equal”, and “should not be equal”.
        Every statement will have at least one other statement that is either ambiguous, inconsistent, or contradictory.

    4. Agree. Women need to start pulling the same load as a man before making any argument about pay. These women, in tennis, can play just as much as men (and in the heat) or shut the fuck up about not being paid, equally.
      Women…start working equally and you’ll start to get paid, equally. Until then, it’s like listening to 5 year olds complain about unfair life is for them. Boo hoo.

  9. Very good analysis. Really this everyday sexism is going too far.

    1. The hotter it is outside, the stank-nastier their beavers smell, hence the need to let the snowflakes air out the clam chowder in cooler temps. Sincerely, House / MD

  10. The male number 1000 can win easily against the female number 1 in tennis. There are likely thousands of amateur players who can win against both Wiliams sisters. And they can do it all without heat breaks.
    Feminism wants to have all the goodies of a man, but none of the responsibilities.

    1. Women’s tennis is a joke even at the highest level. I can’t watch it for more than 15 min and I used to play the game semi-professionally.

    2. Right but a sexy women tennis player is much more watchable than all but the top men. This is why they have good ratings.
      I won’t match the Men unless it’s one of the worlds best. I will watch women who have never picked up a racket if they are hot enough. This is why women’s tennis makes money. When you stop thinking tennis skill has anything to do with it, you will understand

      1. Yeah – and if they ever have soccer uniforms instead of short feminine skirts, then all those ratings would go to nirvana:

      2. I never found many women’s tennis players all that sexy (I guess Anna Kournikova would be the exception) the Williams sisters are big and brawny and even sherapova has pretty broad shoulders if you ask me. But the fact is, that as a teenager I remember lots of my friends watching it to ogle the chicks, so I agree with you. I don’t know the stats on ratings, or anything about tennis for that matter, but I can only assume women’s is more popular than men’s. It always seemed like a chick sport to me.

        1. Ivanovic could have a better body, but she has a very pretty face. Kournikova in her prime had a stellar body.
          Another argument that people make is that women play more like male amateurs and it is more relatable. Like for instance dudes have monster serves and short points and perhaps that is less interesting to watch. I can buy that a little.
          I like to watch women and imagine if I could beat them or not. I generally think any decent man who cares about tennis and plays regularly could take some serious points off elite women.
          Hot women lack motivation because everything is easy for them, so I guess that means a real incredible beauty will never be an elite player.
          Yeah, it’s kind of a chick sport.
          The point is I don’t care what feminists want in terms of equal pay or whatever. But I am fine with women tennis players making plenty of money, and more than men if they are marketable enough.

  11. Something should be clarified here: Equal pay should not come from equal work, equal qualification, or equal position – it comes only from equal results

    1. In This case the result is TV ratings and ad money, and women are good at that. Tennis is an an entertainment business like modeling or pop music. it’s nothing to do with results on the court, actual skill at sports. Women’s sports would not exist if athleticism mattered. So the “results” in this case is money/TV ratings/hype , not tennis skills.

      1. That horse left the barn as soon as they segregated the events and had difference standards. The feminists still want to rig the game because even with the cheesecake factor, the men’s events are more popular. Feminists don’t give a rat’s ass about athleticism or merit generally as long as they get the money while advancing the narrative of equality.

    2. In physics, “work” means you actually have to do something. The citation is not important but:
      “There are three key ingredients to work – force, displacement, and cause. In order for a force to qualify as having done work on an object, there must be a displacement and the force must cause the displacement.”
      If there was no effort (force) then there was no work.
      If there was no displacement (results) then there was no work.
      If the effort in question was not responsible for the results (cause), then there was no work.
      The thing about feminists is that either don’t want to put in the effort, or they exert their effort in ways that don’t get results other than perhaps making them happy, or else want to take credit for and sponge off the people who are doing the work.
      The economic criticism of “pay equity” is along your lines. They use four factors: skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions. Pay equity is not “equal pay for equal work” but rather “equal pay for work of comparable VALUE”. It’s airtight logic more circular than a hamster wheel because they define “value” in a way to get the pay level they want. It’s not market value based on considerations of supply and demand but an equitable value of what they think is “fair”.

  12. Everyone here knows that at root, ALL women are adult/child combinations at slightly varying levels across the spectrum, but shit-test feminism and the never-ending illogical demands from the inferior sex is just the bleating of children in need of boundaries and discipline. So, the children/women will always behave in selfish and infantile ways, this is like saying that the sky is blue or that we are all going to die someday; I no longer personally even bat an eyelash at all of their juvenile nonsense; it has been their essential nature since time immemorial and will always be so.

  13. They play less sets and draw smaller crowds. On what basis can they claim to deserve equal pay?
    If tennis fans prefer to watch men play tennis, that’s tough shit for them. They should not be compensated for this ‘disparity’ in patronage because it’s the result of free choice.

        1. Federer is the greatest player that ever lived, but point taken.
          All of sports, tennis is the one that is closest in revenue between genders. This is largely tied to the hotness of the woman, of course, and if a woman as hot as kournikova in her prime could have actually competed, she would be a massive global phenomenon.
          Serena, being fairly manlike and ugly by tennis standards, is far less profitable than she could be if she were hot. If she were hot she would be transcendant.
          It doesn’t bother me hat women have extra breaks or whatever, or that they play fewer games. They are a decent draw, and people want to watch. It’s not the wnba, which is obviously absurd.

        2. There are the other points that it is easier to keep people’s attention for 3 sets rather than 5 sets, and the slower ball speeds mean longer rallies and less aces on a power serve.
          I like to watch MMA undercard fights and second tier events because they are less predictable, they take chances, they make mistakes and then perhaps get away with them. The top guys are a lot more measured. When there were fewer rules it was like watching paint dry to have two grapplers rolling for 15 minutes or more, unless you knew what to look for.
          Having said all that, you can’t say that Federer does not have something going in the looks department. Don’t know the figures, but I wouldn’t be surprise if a heck of a lot of women tune in for him.

        3. The undercard events also last fewer rounds, like women’s tennis.
          At any rate I think women’s tennis is roughly as watchable as men’s tennis, for various reasons. It’s not on my list of top stupid feminist bullshit to care about when they take water breaks in the heat.

        4. Actually, the more I read about it, tennis is a gender equal sport in most economic terms, but the SJWs push the narrative too far.

        1. Yeah right. Male tennis players get more money because they are more exciting to watch, which draws bigger crowds, which in turn draws more sponsors and revenue.
          If you have a problem with that, you have a problem with reality.

    1. SJW logic is that everything is society’s fault and if people are too ignorant to pay for an event that is obviously of equal quality, then it will be forced on the public.

  14. Women need heat breaks.
    They have hormones like estrogen that make them sensitive to heat and cold.
    They get hot flashes and pass out.
    They get cold sweats at night that disturbs their sleep.
    They get moody and depressed form lack of testosterone unless they have a man to inject them with semen on a regular basis, then they become the so called “happy slut”.
    Men on the other hand have testosterone (unless they have low T)
    It makes them aggressive, Boosts their energy and adrenaline during stressful situations, and increases their tolerance to heat and cold.
    Testosterone in normal amounts makes human being happy and confident. That’s why men suffer from depression less that women and when they do it’s because they have low testosterone (unless other issues exist like drug addiction).
    Because of hormones men and women are different and always will be unless we become an a-sexual species, but that’s not going to happen. People like sex too much so it will continue to be part of procreation.

  15. Women’s sports will always be a joke! Exactly why high school boys can pretty much dominate them.

  16. This article is stupid.
    Women’s tennis is different. So what. They get paid equal because of TV ratings, not politics.

    1. Yet feminists whinge that in sports where the males dominate TV ratings women don’t get paid the same. Plus they play less sets and get break, if they deserve the same because of TV then they can do the same work.

      1. Feminists are stupid.
        Athletes are paid by tickets sold and TV ratings. Women’s tennis gets good ratings.
        It’s not about how much work they do. That has nothing to do with anything. It’s about revenue generation. The women generate the same or more revenue.
        Yes, if women co plain about equal pay for equal work, they are idiots, because if women do the same jobs as men and generate the same revenue that men do, they are paid the same.
        Women’s basketball does not make money so they are not paid anything. It’s not about work performed. It is about ratings and revenue. Women can play matches of one tennis set with 100 breaks and would still get paid if people watch. Stop caring how much work is performed and understsnd and that revenue is the issue, and in tennis that means TV ratings.
        I would rather watch sexy women play tennis than almost any male player except the 3 or four true elites.

        1. Mangina alert. Serena/Venus running around screaming “Eeyaaaa” every 2 seconds is the exact opposite of sexy. The eastern european women play tennis the same pace as teenage boys play standing in water. I prefer to watch pole-dancing when it comes to females competing, but whatever blue-pill taste good to you, Beta.

        2. You brought up Serena. I like to watch ana ivanovic. Perhaps you have low testosterone or don’t like women, but the reason women’s tennis is big is because men like women. Maybe you don’t, that’s fine.

        3. I fully understand that, if you read my comments on a previous article where feminists were saying that female soccer players should get paid the same I said they don’t because of revenue. My comment was in relation to the feminists attitudes towards eaqual pay that are very hypocritical.

        4. We can agree that pay is, and should be, revenue based.
          People that argue women’s soccer players should earn like messi are not smart enough to warrant a dialogue. They are also probably dishonest and realize you can’t pay people with revenue not earned from tickets not sold and TV deals not signed.

        5. I don’t think men watch women’s tennis to masturbate to. I love women but I’m not interested in watching them play tennis.

        6. I like looking at hot chicks even when I don’t masturbate. Call me crazy. Sometimes if I see a hot chick on the street when I don’t have the opportunity to masturbate, I still take a look.

        7. Female athletes aren’t sexy. Watching a non competitive sports event with women who (minus the occasional eastern european) are 6s at most doesn’t get me off. The ones who are hot are terrible at the sport and the ones who are butch dikes are slightly less terrible. It simply is not a valuable way to pass the time.

        8. Not everyone like the same things. Some people enjoy things you don’t. I happen to like minor league baseball even though they suck compared to major league guys.
          I don’t care much about women’s tennis but I had tickets to see it, I might go.
          You are wrong, plenty of female athletes are very sexy.

    2. But they manipulate the ratings by playing with the venues and game times, and then doing what is effectively tied selling to piggy back on the ratings of the men’s events.

  17. Just further proof that feminism and modern women don’t want equality, they want special privilege. Women want the same pay for less work. So much for being empowered.

  18. Football reamins the only sport that properly respects natural gender bias. Cheerleading as a sport provides a sideshow for the primary anchor sport of male competing teams. Since feminine women are like cats and cannot be herded or fight as a pack or ‘team’, the respective cheerleading ‘teams’ never engage in direct contact sport with one another. They stay separate and only ‘compete’ taking turns doing dance routines and performing acrobatic posturing and demonstrating the ideal stance for how the female can best and most effectively drain the balls of THE TRIBESMAN.
    Basketball also has cheerleaders, that is MEN’S basketball. Who would cheerlead for women’s basketball? Elves? Women’s contact sports, basketball, soccer have the biggest feminist fan clubs around. Women’s tennis, golf are as exciting as watching hood rats documentaries on PBS.

  19. It doesn’t bother me that women play segregated matches with fewer sets or get heat breaks or whatever as it simply acknowledges what everyone knows: Men are – on average and at the apex – physically superior to women in practically every way (a previous article notes that women compete against men in equestrian events where their smaller frame is an advantage to the horse carrying them).
    Private organizations should be able to sort out for themselves how they run their operations given market realities. If an organization wants to shoot themselves in the foot financially by making social justice one of their core concerns (*cough* Reddit *cough*) then that is their business. The problem comes as an organization becomes more monopolistic and forces their standards on everyone else. The highest and worst manifestation of this is when the government is hijacked by meddling bureaucrats, activists, lobbyists and dare I say judges, none of whom are elected and can be rather difficult for the public at large to get rid of.
    I don’t know how professional tennis is organized but the impression I get from the article is that there is one governing body that is effectively the only game in town, so to speak. Maybe players or viewers could switch to another sport but it seems that for tennis itself, there is a monopoly (or perhaps oligarchy) running the show.
    In terms of economics, it might actually make sense to hold women’s events and have the same expenses (prize money, facilities leasing, administrative costs etc) despite substantially lower revenues because profit maximization is based on marginal costs and revenues. Men’s tennis might make a billion dollars but as long as women can bring in just one more dollar than the expense of having them, then it is economically rational to add them.
    The thing about a monopoly (or monopsony, vis a vis the players) is that the possibility looms much larger that what is economically rational will get crowded out, and then there is no alternative for the market operators (in this case, viewers and players) to switch to for better value.
    The most absurd demands by tennis feminists focus on artificially inflating the revenues generated by women’s events: equal centre court time, better time slots, more matches, guaranteed equal television coverage etc. They want more and better “shelf space”. . .just because that would be “fair”. Think about how Walmart operates. Companies pay them get prime or more shelf space, or to run promotions. But why bother, if I could simply force Walmart to give my products end of aisle placement and take up half their flyer every Saturday, why wouldn’t I? It would be a bit rich however to come back later and demand more money because my products are selling so well.
    I’m not a big fan of tennis but I have noticed one thing about the women’s game that is superior to the men’s game: fewer aces and longer rallies. However, it seem that this combined with cheesecake spectacle and, whatever the aural version of the word spectacle is of hearing women exchange grunts at intervals, the market simply doesn’t put them on level. Of course, who cares what people want or are willing to pay for? “The market” is the patriarchy and it is full of ignorant misogynists. I recall reading about Canadian human rights laws regarding employment: you are not allowed to discriminate against anyone even if the market will punish you. If all your customers are in fact racists, you still have to hire the black lesbian and put her on the front counter, regardless of what happens to your business.

  20. meh
    what is going to be more interesting is how all sports are going to fit the Transgender POPULATION
    if men want privileges that women want, they can just claim to be women….

  21. Honestly if the women can get it, why shouldn’t they get it? If the men’s players want heat breaks, they should demand heat breaks. If Federer, Murray, etc. decided thiswas a safety issue and had to be addressed, I can’t imagine they’d be refused.
    Same goes for demanding pay proportionate to their work. The men should demand it. That would probably give negative publicity though. Still, it’s up to them, just like it is up to us, to stand up for their interests.

  22. An interesting article from Forbes
    Apparently, the women’s regular tour only generates 2/3rds of what the men’s does but the women’s Grand Slam has outdrawn the men’s 6 out of the last 11 years. Hard to say how much those numbers are fudged, and I suspect the ratings are within 5% of each other in most cases anyways.
    The analysis towards the end brings up a few points I made earlier, and then some:
    “So what gives women’s tennis its marketability? IRONICALLY, THE DIMINISHED ATHLETICISM ACTUALLY DIFFERENTIATE THE WOMEN’S PRODUCT FROM THE MEN’S IN A POSITIVE WAY. Pro women serve, on average, about 30 km per hour slower than men, but this makes the serve less dominant, generating longer rallies, more service breaks, and more interesting points. On the grass at Wimbledon, or even on hard surfaces like the U.S. Open, so many points among the men are either won on the serve or dictated so much by the serve that it can be monotonous.
    In addition, the women’s game offers a more concise best 2 out of 3 sets format rather than the 3 out of 5 format in the men’s game that can wear out all but the most devoted viewers. Finally, tennis is a sport in which female participation rivals male participation, providing a broader set of potential fans is some are attracted based on gender affiliation.” (my EMPHASIS)

  23. Feminism did not brake a wall between two seas, feminism is a massive pump, pumping water from men side to women’s side.

  24. How about someone getting a drug test on the Williams sisters for the love of god. Now, I’m not saying they are actually taking anything, but, if those “girls” don’t have higher testosterone than most American men, I’d be fucking shocked.
    And, yes, back to the topic, of course this is ridiculous. If you want to be “equal”, play with the same rules and against the same players. If you want to have another, different sport, don’t fucking compare it to the men’s version. A moderately good man in just about any sport is going to beat a professional woman. It’s testosterone people, and it’s not a “bad” or “evil” drug, it’s what makes men who they are. And it makes us faster and stronger, not just all the “bad” things that the media equates with it (violent, horny, unpredictable, etc).

  25. When a feminist says “equality”, he/she/it invariably means “special female privileges”. This is yet another of countless examples.

  26. There are heat waves in England but that temp. is like the norm in Summer in NY and in the south it’s even hotter. Do they get heat breaks in the US?
    Personally I don’t give a damn about sports but if no one watches the girls won’t they get paid less? How does female basketball stack up in pay compared to men? Or that dumb female boxing?
    And why would anyone think Sharapova is hot, she’s over 6′ and is not feminine sized. The Williams both look like Wookies and the others are dykes.
    The best female player couldn’t even beat a good male college amateur player.
    When ageing Bobby Riggs(55) played muscular dyke Billy Jean King she won but it was more a match between an old guy out of shape and a 20 something manly dyke. And even fooling around he really made her sweat it was 6-4,6-3,6-3.He didn’t care if he won and was just doing it for the money he was always a hustler. Even at his age he beat Margaret Court a couple of months before at 6-2 and 6-1.
    Conners played Navratilova who is built like a bull dyke and beat her 7-5 and 6-2 Conners was 40.
    These girls only played 2 sets,3 with King so we don’t know how they would have fell appart if they had to play 5.

  27. The reason women need heat breaks and men don’t is because they cannot sweat as much as men. Sweat is a key way the human body cools itself. If women played as many sets without breaks either the intensity would have to reduce or they would keel over from heat exhaustion (and quite possibly die).
    Frankly, I think it is sexist the way the sexes are segregated in tennis. Separate women’s contests suggest that women are completely incapable of competing with men when in fact they are equal to men. Just like in every other industry, women should compete directly against the men in tennis. In this way, women’s equality will be demonstrated as in 50% of the time, a woman will beat a man to win the tournament.

    1. Agreed. If women feel they are equal to men and up to the tasks of being firefighters and front line combat soldiers where lives are on the line, surely they can play some tennis with the guys where nothing is on the line except pride, a title, and some cash.

      1. Equal pay. Equal terms. Prize purses for womens tennis should be a tenth of what the men receive. They can make up for it in sponsorshit endorsements for hawking a bikini or some make up.

        1. Ugly heads but a lot can be said for a firm body that’s spent a lot of time in the gym. Far better than a pretty girl whose body is soft and out of shape. (i.e 90 percent of western women over 24 years old)

  28. Watching the men’s final, you could see these were two extremely gifted men. Not so much with the women’s final, even though one of the Williams brothers were playing and he’s built like a monster truck.

  29. Wow what a bunch of weaklings ! 30 degree Celsius and its a heatwave ? Clearly they have never lived near the equator.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *