posted Jul 3, 2009

I recall the derision which greeted Mr Williams' prediction years ago that Venus and Serena would rule the international tennis courts. Now the complaint is that others have not been good enough to stop them reaching the Wimbledon Finals once again! But then, racism is by definition illogical.

The fact which some in the white sports establishment find hard to swallow is that black people are performing better and better in what were considered the whitest of sports. Consider for example Newton Marshall,a 25 year old black Jamaican who placed seventh and won the sportsmanship award at the 2008 Percy DeWolfe Memorial Dog Sled Race from Dawson Creek to Eagle, Alaska and back. This season, Newton was 21st among 47 starters at the Sheep Mountain 150 and 13th in an extreme Copper Basin 300 that featured frigid cold, a stretch of open water and sugar-snow conditions. Look out for him in the Iditarod! Further, he is not the only black Jamaican seeking to make a name in the exclusive world of dog sledding.

The racist comments will continue; the response by black sportsmen and women must be twofold-(1) use racism as an additional spur to achievement and (2) ensure that black juniors get the benefit of the opportunities for access to first class facilities and training which was previously denied.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2009

Why do people always have to play the racist card. I agree that watching the Williams'dominate tennis can be quite boring but that has to be down to the rest of the women to rise to the occasion when the competitions come.

They are not doing that so far.

It's not racist to express an opinion just because that person is over another ethnicity to you. What is wrong with people these days.

Political Correctness gone bunkers if u ask me.

P.S: Anyone remember Arthur Ashe?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2009

how many tennis matches have you guys actually seen, about 1 i am guessing but anyway this is turning into a debate about racism in sport and although that is an important issue it doesnt have anything to do with day 10, anywayanywayanyway venus is such a crazy beast on grass that i dont think anyone could have beaten her except of course serena. however this doesnt make safina a bad player because she has won loads of other stuff and it isnt just grand slams that count, after wimbledon she will still be number 1 even though she didnt win it, this just proves that grand slams arent that important because in any tennis tournement you still have to play matches and these will make you tired so if you dont play matches most of the year and then kick bum at wimbledon then you are more likely to win at wimbledon.
PS out of the 4 semi finalists safina was definately the most attractive, possibly even out of the whole womens tournement...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 4, 2009

An interesting statistic (up to Wimbledon 2009)--For the LADIES-

As a professional, World number one,Safina has played 395 matches and has won 67% of those.

World number two, Serena has played 503 matches and has won 83%

World number three, Venus has played 644 matches and has won 80%.

World number four,Dementieva has played 852 matches and has won 51% .

World number five, Kuznetsova has played 458 matches and has won 70%

For the GENTLEMEN--

As a professional, World number one Nadal has played 461 matches and has won 82% of those.

World number two,Federer has played 805 matches and has won 81% .

World number three, Murray has played 266 matches and has won 73%.

World number four Djokovic has played 309 matches and has won 74%.

World number five Del Potro has played 177 and has won 65%.

There is a logic to the male rankings when one considers the percentage of matches won, which is not immediately evident in the female rankings. I would be interested in comments from those more knowledgeable than I am about tennis and about what goes into the rankings.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 5, 2009

My daughter has pointed out that if one applies the same comparisons to the matches played by the top five ranked players in 2009 only rather than to those played over their professional careers, then the rankings would correlate with the percentage of matches won. She is correct.

add comment | complain about this comment