59-yr-old John McEnroe says he can still beat Serena Williams

Large-scale ping-pong wrote:

Well Actually wrote:

Actually it does. How else do you explain that the world's #1 has never been a 60 year-old?

Compared to 20 year-olds, 60 year-olds lack quickness, speed, strength, flexibility . . . all components of natural talent.

Those are natural athletic talent.

I'm talking about natural tennis talent.

If some kid in HS had some of what you call "tennis talent" but lacked the speed, power, strength, flexibility, etc. to compete against other HS kids - instead routinely getting annihilated by mediocre HS players you would not be talking about how "talented" he was. You would be suggesting that he take his school work more seriously because he clearly lacked the talent to be successful in tennis.

Sorry, but "athletic" talent is absolutely a part of "tennis talent".

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world.

Nope, has to be a sport where upper body power matters, not lungs. Or maybe standing broad jump?

Didn’t they just have a movie about this in theaters last year?

Don’t compare 58 year old golfers to the best men. Bet they would beat the best women just like the best 58 year old tennis players would beat the top women. I can’t wait until Title IX and other laws are applied equitably so the Williams will have to earn their money against the best. To bad they will have millions banked before that happens though.

Pat9 wrote:

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world.

Nope, has to be a sport where upper body power matters, not lungs. Or maybe standing broad jump?

Explain to me then why the BQ for a 50-54 yr old male is 5 minutes faster than for an 18-34 yr old female. And only 5 mins slower for a 55-59 yr old male

Physical violence is never justified, not even if you're an old fashioned 59 year old!

Tell me wrote:

Pat9 wrote:

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world.

Nope, has to be a sport where upper body power matters, not lungs. Or maybe standing broad jump?

Explain to me then why the BQ for a 50-54 yr old male is 5 minutes faster than for an 18-34 yr old female. And only 5 mins slower for a 55-59 yr old male

But it's 20 minutes slower for a 60-64 year old male. Does that mean there is a big difference between a 59 and 60 year old?

Tell me wrote:

Pat9 wrote:

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world.

Nope, has to be a sport where upper body power matters, not lungs. Or maybe standing broad jump?

Explain to me then why the BQ for a 50-54 yr old male is 5 minutes faster than for an 18-34 yr old female. And only 5 mins slower for a 55-59 yr old male

Not a good analogy. You don't need to be the fastest marathoner in the world of either gender to BQ.

Pat9 wrote:

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world.

Nope, has to be a sport where upper body power matters, not lungs. Or maybe standing broad jump?

How do you think Michael Jordan, who can still dunk, would fare against the best teams in the WNBA? I'd say pretty good. Just plug him in at center, watch his minutes, and observe him make every shot under the sun with the small ball and great hops.

My first job out of college was working at a professional tennis tournament that Serena Williams played in - I think it was her 2nd tournament ever. My 2nd job out of college was working for the men's senior tenns tour where John McEnroe played.

So that makes me an expert.

1. To the jackass who doesn't think Serena Williams is an AMAZING athlete, and who called her fat, you are a fool. Stop. She's an unreal athlete.

2. I'd love to see the two of them play. Everyone was into Venus but Serena's dad told me his younger daughter was even better and that they'd end up caling her "Blackenroe" as she would charge the net like John. So it would be kind of ironic.

3. I had always heard about King vs Riggs but never knew he had beaten Margaret Court earlier that year. So we know a 55-year old man could beat the #1 woman 40 years ago. But I think women's tennis has improved more than men's in that time fram. And plus 59 isn't 55. So I think it's possible he would win but far from a guarantee. I think she'd likely win but imagine people could figure it out by looking at average velocity and what not for their most recent matches.

Rojo

PS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cRIb63X_e0

donefor wrote:

A 60 year-old man could not even make the US women's trials in any event.

Except for the marathon.

He just might be able to wrote:

this illustrates the big divide between the male and female (at least in the traditional way) games

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HLNIbgt6gJc

Serena is in some of those images.

Tell me wrote:

Pat9 wrote:

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world.

Nope, has to be a sport where upper body power matters, not lungs. Or maybe standing broad jump?

Explain to me then why the BQ for a 50-54 yr old male is 5 minutes faster than for an 18-34 yr old female. And only 5 mins slower for a 55-59 yr old male

Standards are not set for the purpose of comparison between ages/sexes, they're set so the organizers can control the number and composition of the field.

anti-ager wrote:

Too east wrote:

49 low for 400m wins Olympic women’s gold. How many high school boys can run 49 low for 400?

That’s right a a shitte ton

But the comparative question is: How many 59yo'ers can run 49 low for 400m?

This. And, you could argue that Serena is not your average Olympic champion, but perhaps a world record holder which is 47.6. Plus, running is not a technical sport, but tennis is. A lot of work on technique is required to stay at a high level, beyond just fitness, strength and genetics such as in running. Not sure Mac is putting in that kind of technique time and working with coaches.

You could also argue that men beat women at tennis due to a power and speed advantage. Do we really think that Mac is stronger or faster than Serena? I would pick her in an arm wrestle and 60m dash.

Serena is not even in the top 10 in the WTA rankings.

McEnroe wins 6-0, 6-0. Serena throws a fit, breaks her racquet, screams racism and sexism are to blame. Goes on the talk show circuit and makes huge $.

Waa! Waa! Waa!

Libs everywhere and idiots like rojo come to her defense.

Mojo Jerkin wrote:

I can't think of a single event in running where a 59 year old man could beat the best woman in the world. Tennis is a bit different because it is technique driven, but I'd put my money on Serena.

Men 60-69:

Women open:

Even restricting to even weight classes, the women's bench WR is 190kg at 113kg, yet a 111kg 60-year old man has done 215kg.

Tennis is a whole lot different because it involves upper body strength.

Here's an easy way to see it. Suppose that tennis didn't exist. Would Pete Sampras still have been an athlete in some sport? If so, then he had generic athletic talent. If not, then he had specific tennis talent. The same applies for other tennis players. Of course, the classification is not binary, but a spectrum.

rojo wrote:

3. I had always heard about King vs Riggs but never knew he had beaten Margaret Court earlier that year. So we know a 55-year old man could beat the #1 woman 45 years ago. But I think women's tennis has improved more than men's in that time frame. And plus 59 isn't 55. So I think it's possible he would win but far from a guarantee. I think she'd likely win but imagine people could figure it out by looking at average velocity and what not for their most recent matches.

Looks like the feminist propaganda was pretty powerful, everyone knows about the 'Rigged' match that he lost, but not the total domination (6-2 6-1) he won.

a) 55 in the 70s is probably about = to 59 today, with nutrition/drugs advances in anti-ageing

b) Court was REALLY good, she claimed as her excuse she "didn't take it seriously"?

c) Riggs was never at MacEnroe's level (he was #1 circa war years IIRC, 1939, 1946, 1947)