Writes Martina Navratilova in a NYT op-ed. According to Navratilova, Williams was being coached, whether she knew it or not, and once she'd been given a warning, it "couldn't be dismissed retroactively," smashing the racket was "an automatic violation," and the umpire "had no choice but to dock her a point."
If, in fact, the guys are treated with a different measuring stick for the same transgressions, this needs to be thoroughly examined and must be fixed. But we cannot measure ourselves by what we think we should also be able to get away with... [B]ut it is also on individual players to conduct themselves with respect for the sport we love so dearly....I don't love tennis. Do you? Quite aside from matters of ethics and character, I should think that people who are invested in the sport — whether they "love [it] so dearly" or just have a big money stake in it — should pay some attention to how spectators and potential spectators feel about it. They should want people to love them.
Is it a sport full of jerks? I don't believe that good sportsmanship is genuinely about lofty values. It's more of a con, isn't it? Like "civility" bullshit in politics.
If throwing tantrums on the court and getting melodramatic with umpires is what draws spectators, then they'll do it won't they? But maybe some people like to watch players who are polite and stoical and concentrate on demonstrating athletic prowess. I don't know. I'm not going to start watching tennis either way.
ADDED: I asked "Is it a sport full of jerks?" but I should also ask: Do we like jerks? I mean, Donald Trump is President. Let's stop being so prissy about what we like and don't like. What are we watching and what are we voting for? Let's stop lying about ourselves.
पोस्ट्स
१४६ टिप्पण्या:
If, in fact, the guys are treated with a different measuring stick for the same transgressions, this needs to be thoroughly examined and must be fixed.
Guys come with their own measuring stick.
I have no interest in tennis as an organized sport but I will point out there are a number of examples of golf professionals calling a penalty on themselves when they violate a rule, even if not noted by an official.
@rhhardin
LOL. I came very close to making a similar comment.
"I have no interest in tennis as an organized sport but I will point out there are a number of examples of golf professionals calling a penalty on themselves when they violate a rule, even if not noted by an official."
Golf can't have an umpire looming over each player, so it depends on self-policing. There are also cameras everywhere, so if a player didn't call a penalty on himself and it later came out that he'd committed one, there would be a big problem.
I don't buy the analogy with "civility bullshit." Sports is more real than politics and the link between sportsmanship and the outcome is weak, whereas politicians are selling images and words, and civility is just another strategy within the game they play. Athletes have to do something on the field, and their parents and coaches have been telling them (or not telling them) that it matters for their whole lives.
Althouse said...”Let's stop lying about ourselves.”
Michael K...”but I will point out there are a number of examples of golf professionals calling a penalty on themselves when they violate a rule, even if not noted by an official.”
Althouse treats her civility bullshit principle as a natural law. Not all civility and sportmanship is bullshit.
This brings up an interesting question, which is: Did she smash her tennis racket because she thoroughly lost her temper or did she do it because she has a certain sense (accurate or not) of what her fans like about her, and the behavior that goes along with that, and one of the behaviors that goes along with that is smashing your racket at certain points in the game?
I don't watch tennis. I would be more inclined to watch it if I thought a player would occasionally do things like apparently lose his/her temper and smash a racket, but then, I've been watching GLOW on Netflix.
She was being coached, as the coach admitted. Obvious violation 1: warning.
She smashed her racket, as anyone could see. Obvious violation 2: point penalty.
She berated the umpire vociferously, as anyone could hear, in language I have never heard from a male player, including calling him "liar" and "thief" and warning that he would never referee one of her matches again. Obvious violation 3: game penalty.
To play the gender card fairly (ha), her defenders need precise evidence (ha) showing that men were not penalized for equally egregious behavior. Of course, they should also consider data showing that at times men were treated more harshly--including disqualification.
Anyway, as we know from American law and politics, rules and evidence are for -- I was gonna say pu**, then I was gonna say the b**, I'll just say nice people.
I don't love tennis. I occasionally watch some. The men are amazing athletes.
I don’t watch tennis, and the notion that a player who is being thoroughly outplayed should be able to disrupt the flow of the game by smashing the racket and picking a fight with the umpire unpenalized makes me less interested in watching it rather than more interested. If the WTA is interested in promoting women’s tennis then their support for Serena Williams is clearly counter-productive.
"Golf can't have an umpire looming over each player, so it depends on self-policing. There are also cameras everywhere, so if a player didn't call a penalty on himself and it later came out that he'd committed one, there would be a big problem."
But that is not why (most) golfers call penalties on themselves. They want to do, you know, the right thing because it's the right thing. Strange, I admit.
I recall, way back in time, when Billary was the most wonderful loser of all. Then it was McCain.
Now our betters are reduced to lecturing us about people who play with their balls.
"There is a huge double standard..."
The double standard is so bigly that you're not even sure whether it exists:
"If, in fact, the guys are treated with a different measuring stick"
HULK SMASH!!!
Do we like jerks?
Do we watch hockey for the fights?
Do we watch NASCAR for the car crashes?
* * *
I watched a lot of tennis in my teens and twenties, and played as well, but at a certain point it just got really boring. They need to mandate wooden racquets.
Do we like jerks? I mean, Donald Trump is President.
Nothing jerky about his goerign policy nor his economic policies. Leave it to a cosseted former denizen of the academic ivory tower to care more about a president's tweets than about his policies. FWIW I understand that he is very gracious in person.
Given that Martina was a great player, the 'sport we love' I think refers to the players, not the general population.
I don't watch or follow tennis so my question: I'm being lead to believe that this sort of bad behavior happens a lot on the male side and is regularly overlooked or forgiven. Is this true? I mean, if that really is the standard then that's pretty bad I guess. Or is it? Is this what in fact viewers want? Drama, yelling, smashing of rackets? People bursting into tears?
I mean, I'm not the best person to judge any of this. I'm mystified at the popularity of trashy reality TV that I personally find unwatchable. But maybe tennis needs drama like this to help ratings?
I just found out that one of my favorite cartoonists, M.K. Brown, was married to one of my other favorite cartoonists, Kliban.
At some point "civility bullshit" is itself bullshit. Without some constant pushback on assholeocity, the culture could get a lot uglier than it already is. We may be a bit complacent with the relative peace of our society, and it won't be just the intellectuals and elites who will feel that loss of something now taken for granted. Of course calls for civility are mostly attempts to shut up opponents, but not always. I think a good standard is "how would you want your son or daughter to act?"
"We cannot measure ourselves by what we think we should also be able to get away with..."
On the TV show "Friends", Phoebe (the NewAger) made Ross (the scientist) apologize to a cat - because Ross said it's not Phoebe's reincarnated mother - and Phoebe did this by utilizing the peer support of Ross' sister, Monica, and the woman he loves, Rachel.
I know - it's a TV show - but it is what women are doing now, and it's so much more manipulative and wrong that I can't imagine the equivalent for men beyond government.
I don't like jerks (or bad sportsmanship), and generally won't watch it or subsidize it. That's why I have a Derek Jeter jersey but not a John McEnroe tennis racket. Also one reason why I didn't vote for Trump. But other people may have different tastes. In the end, every dollar is equal, and the majority wins.
Compare and contrast player and crowd comportment at Wimbledon and the US Open. The former maintains much, not all, of the decorum that was a part of the sport from the beginning. If there are rowdy vocalists in the crowd in Wimbledon then they are escorted out. Want to wear a catsuit or a black tutu? Sorry, can't play. Want to give some lip to the official? Don't think so. In the US, of course, players and spectators go by feelz.
In unsupervised tennis there is very much an ethical code that is followed in making line calls and let calls. A cheater or someone who leans toward consistently making these calls in their favor does not get a lot of games.
Men learn these rules of sportsmanship from an early age. Not sure if women do.
Tennis supposedly has a ethic of sportsmanship like golf. One of the more dramatic examples of that I saw was in a doubles match (a finals? at Wimbeldon?). A ball was hit that may have grazed an opponents shirt. If so, it would have been a point for the hitting pair. The player on the other side indicated that he wasn't touched. Much consternation ensued.
Look at this: The Players’ Guide to Fair Play and the Unwritten Rules of Tennis!
"Do we like jerks? I mean, Donald Trump is President."
And his behavior is constrained by the officials -- the American people.
The question is not whether you can be a jerk. The question is whether you can be a jerk without paying a penalty for your actions.
Serena wants her actions to be penalty-free.
Jerry Springer gets a lot of eyeballs, but I don't want my world peopled with either his protagonists or his audience, especially those who watch to mock 'em all.
Good on Navratilova.
I find it typical of feminism that as women are starting to act more like men, and although they openly despise men's attributes as toxic in us, for some reason they champion those same attributes in themselves. For the most part, few men are fans of feminine attributes when adopted by men, even if they are positive behaviors. Men like being men, but I'm starting to think women don't like their gender much. That leaves too few to champion some wonderful stabilizing and badly needed standards that at least a healthy portion should possess like control rods in a reactor.
"Let's stop lying about ourselves."
Fine idea, and while you're at it, don't get caught up in the lie that "what we like and don't like" is ever going to be neat and tidy and constant. as far as I can tell, a person's emotional make-up is more often a big contradictory mess, changing even to the point of doing 180s faster than the speed of light for reasons we can barely figure out after the fact. That makes figuring out what's the lie and what's the truth a tricky exercise, and the answer will change depending on when in that cycle you're doing the figuring-out.
Why should the WWF have all the money and fun? Some promoter should immediately set up a rematch between Osaka and Williams. It would be bigger than the Riggs/Billie Jean thing. Osaka could complain of her stolen glory and her quest to restore justice in the world. Williams could say that this is Ali-Frazier redux, the crooked rules have robbed her of her rightful title and that she is playing not just to win a tennis match but to restore honor and dignity to every black Woman who has ever been treated unfairly in this world......It would sell a few tickets. And isn't it the ultimate goal of all professional tennis players to make a lot of money in the sport they love.
I like tennis. I like the decorum the sport has tried to maintain. I miss the white balls. If I want to see in-your-face-me-me-me athletics, I just watch football or basketball, which I also like. Martina nailed it.
I understand that he is very gracious in person.
He is gracious in person- to friends, family, employees, strangers. aHave we not collectively figured out the blowhard jerk thing has an element of tongue in cheek that he has carefully cultivated because it has works for him- in the past against rough and tumble New Yorkers, against a bedwetting Hillary supporting mainstream media complex, against anyone who who chooses to butt heads with him.
It's that last part thats most interesting with Trump. All the bitching and wailing about his attitude and negotiating skills but if you've had any background in game theory Trump's plays often mirror optimal strategies- modified tit for tat, hawkish in the face of highly cooperative situations, etc.
If you have the means, BBC Four just ran a lovely programme on the subject. The last 10 minutes they could have been referring to Trump specifically...
BBC For: The Joy of Winning
"Do we like jerks? I mean, Donald Trump is President. Let's stop being so prissy about what we like and don't like. What are we watching and what are we voting for? Let's stop lying about ourselves."
That depends on the jerk. I have one friend who's real hands-y - always punching, poking, and jostling me, to emphasize a point - but, great guy to have around in a fight. Pushes me aside like I'm a woman when he KNOWS I can handle myself. He just doesn't want to see me hurt. Terms of endearment.
The way people see different things in Trump, now, is fascinating. He's become a prism, of sorts, where he used to be a mere celebrity. (He used to show up at a wedding and people would think that was a GREAT wedding.) With the exception of his own affinity for NewAge nonsense, he even checks all the boxes I imagined "The Macho Response" represented, so I'm probably susceptible to that much of it as well, because I don't see him as a jerk - he's still just "The Donald". I was never particularly repelled by him, and still haven't been. America's a gross place and he represents it well. I feel more like we're embarrassed to see the truth of ourselves. "The Donald" was cool until the rest of the world got a look at who we really are.
If he fired Dr. Oz, and eliminated the NCCIH, I'd be willing to join his cult, if he's got one.
This is a case where this isn't about civility bullshit. Civility bullshit is a characteristic of politics- tennis and other sports are not about politics. Excusing Williams behavior on the court is politics sticking its nose in where it doesn't really belong.
Would a man get away with the behavior Williams displayed? No, he would not have- a male player would have been warned about the coaching from the stands, a male player would have been docked a point for smashing the racket, and a male player would have been docked the game for calling the umpire a thief. I have seen male players penalized for this behavior before- I do still watch a lot of tennis in the major events. There are, fortunately, very few tennis players who behave the way Ms. Williams does on the court. Indeed, she is worst I have seen since John McEnroe was playing- no one else I have seen in the last 25 years comes close to being as bad.
Ms. Williams' enablers are doing her no favors. She really should take a page from her older sister who is nearly exemplary in her on court behavior and representative of the sport itself.
Let the market vote for a rule change on a forward basis.
Why would Serena Williams pay any attention to signals from her coach?
Jerk is entertainment. And it's all show business getting elected.
Think of Jerry Lewis. Also Marilyn Monroe. One of MM's saying was," Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it's better to be absolutely rediculous than to be absolutely boring."
"Althouse treats her civility bullshit principle as a natural law. Not all civility and sportmanship is bullshit."
In American politics today, the talk about civility is ALWAYS bullshit.
It's theoretically possible for something else to occur, but I'm talking about real life. Link to some examples of someone in the actual political discourse, talking about civility where he isn't really about promoting his own side and will overlook incivility that will help his side whenever it happens. Hard to pinpoint a phenomenon that has multiple parts, but I am asserting a strong belief, and you can't shake it without giving me that. If you do, I'll add a proviso: except for that one time when...
"But that is not why (most) golfers call penalties on themselves. They want to do, you know, the right thing because it's the right thing. Strange, I admit."
Oh, bullshit.
Oh, bullshit.
Probably healthy skepticism but not always true, I have seen a couple of examples where the TV did not notice the violation. I was watching.
I’m trying to think of a famous jerk in other sports and can’t really think of one off hand. I’m not a big sports aficionado so maybe someone else can come up with one. Maybe team sports doesn’t really lend itself to a jerk becoming prominent? Can you imagine a golfer behaving this way?
Lol. Althouse will cheat at golf. Or is so dishonest she believes no one could be honest in golf.
Do we like jerks? I can only answer for myself in regards to sports- no. I was a huge tennis fan by the time I was 10 years old- I watched the famous Borg-McEnroe matches at Wimbledon and the US Open. I openly rooted against McEnroe at every opportunity- even when he was playing Connors and Ivan Lendl- a player that no one seemed to like because of his stoicism. And I rooted against McEnroe precisely because he was a boorish. I do the same for basketball players- a sport I was an even bigger viewer of, and where such boorish behavior is far more prevalent- I don't like to see whiners and complainers win in sporting events, and I can't be a minority in this regard.
I concur with Yancey Ward's opinion above.
But.
My wife once complained to me about some egregiously unethical behavior among parties to a corporate acquisition. I reminded her that those individuals stood to gain or lose tens of millions depending on the details of the deal. I said supposedly one can buy a hit on someone for ten grand; how surprising is boardroom backstabbing when millions are at stake.
Top pro tennis is big business now, with millions in prize money, and many millions in endorsements at stake.
I find it typical of feminism that as women are starting to act more like men, and although they openly despise men's attributes as toxic in us, for some reason they champion those same attributes in themselves.
This is the best statement I’ve seen of my own opinion of feminism. I find it applies not only to boorish and aggressive behavior as in this case, but also to sexual licentiousness.
In an interview the next morning, McEnroe showed support for Serena, but remembered that his dad told him he could argue all he wanted with officials but never go after the official. In short, Serena's sin was the ad hominem.
If you don't like the rules and the penalties, just imagine what tennis would be without them.
It might be entertaining for some for a while, but it would not be the great sport it is, and it would never be able to be recovered again. We need some versions of all our interests that are ones that value decorum, just for the variety that gives us if nothing else. Does everything need to be an MTV reality show, racing to the bottom?
In professional golf, you aren't the only person keeping your score on the course- your playing partners do so, too. That is the enforcement mechanism. In any case, every hole has a tournament monitor to which the players can ask for rulings when in doubt.
"Oh, bullshit."
Time for a bullshit bullshit tag.
The invocation of bullshit, in discussions of rules of conduct, is only ever a way to question and deride the authentic honesty of others.
Which does not mean, of course, that it is always wrong.
Yancey Ward, this is for you: There aren’t many huge Ivan Lendl fans in this world — I’ve only met one.
Mike Sylwester said...
Why would Serena Williams pay any attention to signals from her coach?
For the same reason she has a coach. To help her win.
Henry said,
"I watched a lot of tennis in my teens and twenties, and played as well, but at a certain point it just got really boring. They need to mandate wooden racquets."
Wooden racquets with 1960s standard heads and go back to cotton tennis whites. Some of the racquets at Dicks look like NORAD radar towers.
Mixed martial arts is probably a better place for Williams. She doesn't like to follow the rules of tennis, and has explosive outbursts.
Serena Williams multiple temper tantrums are a classic sign of 'roid rage. It is clear that she has been abusing anabolic steroids and HGH for many years. If it were for entrenched black privilege, she (and her sister) would have been banned from tennis years ago.
Moreover, all the so-called experts and senile tennis stars defending Williams' outrageous behavior, which included a threat of physical violence agains the official, also should be banned from tennis.
"But that is not why (most) golfers call penalties on themselves. They want to do, you know, the right thing because it's the right thing. Strange, I admit."
"Oh, bullshit."
Damn, what a dismal view of humanity. A lifetime in Madison?
There was Cassius Clay, "The Louisville Lip," who became Mohammad Ali, but Ali's antics as I remember them were so obviously antics for publicity with no actual venom in them.
His successors have mostly missed that part of it.
"I don't believe that good sportsmanship is genuinely about lofty values. It's more of a con, isn't it?"
Wrong side of the bed today?
”Lol. Althouse will cheat at golf. Or is so dishonest she believes no one could be honest in golf.”
Yeah. I’ll concede the point in politics, but not elsewhere. Just because she would, apparently, cheat is not evidence that everybody does.
Jerks can be entertaining, but we should question whether a civilization can thrive if entertainment is its highest value.
Ann wrote: "Golf can't have an umpire looming over each player, so it depends on self-policing. There are also cameras everywhere, so if a player didn't call a penalty on himself and it later came out that he'd committed one, there would be a big problem. "
I'll just point out it's baked into the game. From The New York Times:
The great Bob Jones once called a penalty on himself when his golf ball moved as he was addressing it during a United States Open qualifying round. Jones called the penalty as he emerged from the woods, where, obviously, he was the only one who could have seen what happened. When he was complimented for his honesty, he seemed perplexed.
"Well, you might as well have praised a man for not robbing a bank," he said.
It also helps that players are praised, and remembered, for acting honorably, so it's encouraged and self-reinforcing.
My wife once complained to me about some egregiously unethical behavior among parties to a corporate acquisition. I reminded her that those individuals stood to gain or lose tens of millions depending on the details of the deal. I said supposedly one can buy a hit on someone for ten grand; how surprising is boardroom backstabbing when millions are at stake.
Top pro tennis is big business now, with millions in prize money, and many millions in endorsements at stake.
So when we recognize that financial incentives encourage unethical behavior we should decide that scorn is of no use in discouraging that unethical behavior? I certainly don’t think so.
""Well, you might as well have praised a man for not robbing a bank," he said."
Oh, bullshit, says Althouse.
On which I call bullshit bullshit.
I'll also add that if you google "golfers calling penalties on themselves," you'll find examples of pro golfers who have sacrificed wins to being honest.
And I'll take my own civility advice and not respond meanly to Ann's discourteous "bullshit," except to express regret at her incivility.
They want to do, you know, the right thing because it's the right thing
And in the hope their opponents will do likewise.
Serve her right if her next opponent rants and raves when SW is ahead.
Henry,
Thanks for that bit on Lendl! I wasn't a Lendl fan- I just liked him against McEnroe in particular. I literally jumped up and down in the living room when he came back from 2 sets down to beat McEnroe in the French Open in 1984.
Cstanley:
I said it's not surprising, not that it does not deserve scorn.
It most certainly does.
And re golf - my son used to play competitively, junior golf. The best players were scratch, at fifteen years old. There were a few cheaters, and they were universally despised.
I sometimes wonder if the Ann Althouse that appears on this blog is actually "Ann Althouse," i.e. a blog persona. I wonder what she's like at dinner parties.
I remember discussing the ethics of employees with my boss years ago. We were questioning what makes people so different ethically. Some can be counted on with or without witnesses, and some can never be trusted.
My contention was that it was just who they are, and each type is almost incapable of acting outside their personal nature. Ethics or lack thereof was a personal imperative functioning like a neurosis, impossible to resist, despite opportunity.
I still think that, but not that it is inborn, or unalterable. I think it is mostly true of who we are at a particular time in our lives. We can change, but it's a slow hard process, and we are mostly stuck with the ethics we have developed so far.
I still think that, but not that it is inborn, or unalterable. I think it is mostly true of who we are at a particular time in our lives. We can change, but it's a slow hard process, and we are mostly stuck with the ethics we have developed so far.
We were a high trust society for a very long time. Over 100 years.
That is going away now.
High trust = low crime and low corruption.
As the figure below illustrates, in countries with high levels of trust, people are generally less likely to say crime is a very big problem for their country (the correlation coefficient for responses to the two questions is -.56). Most of the countries surveyed fit the overall pattern, including the United States, where concerns about crime are about where one would expect, given the relatively high degree of social trust.
I am not a golfer but know a number who revere the game, its rules, its etiquette and the idea that it is a game for gentlemen who would rather boil their children than cheat.
The ethic appears to be foreign to our hostess. I wonder what codes of honor her son was taught or which she adheres to. It is only a game. There are gentlemen still. Are there gentlewomen?
Roughcoat said...
I sometimes wonder if the Ann Althouse that appears on this blog is actually "Ann Althouse," i.e. a blog persona. I wonder what she's like at dinner parties.
I feel the same way about Wisconsin. The antics it gets up to. No state would act that way in real life!
Sports are competitive. Professional sports are for all the dollars. We learn to control our anger and manage our disappointments.
Jerks are common in sports. The "I will do anything to win" mentality that is very useful in sports is a common trait among jerks. Not all great athletes are jerks and not all jerk athletes remain jerks for the rest of their lives, but they are most certainly represented in sports at a higher rate than the general population.
Also, see politics.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"Golf can't have an umpire looming over each player, so it depends on self-policing. There are also cameras everywhere, so if a player didn't call a penalty on himself and it later came out that he'd committed one, there would be a big problem." 9/11/18, 9:53 A
"Oh, bullshit."
Love "Rabel's" comment at 11:01am - "Damn, what a dismal view of humanity. A lifetime in Madison?"
Well "AA" is a Lawyer and academic both professions deal with "bullshit".
AA am a golfer play twice a week and yesterday I accidentally moved my ball with my 7 iron. Called a penalty on myself. No cameras, no other players, by myself, marked my scorecard accordingly. Why? Because I would know not the camera, etc. AA, why have rules at anything then, let chaos reign not only in sports but life. Let's do it like the cave people from which all of us are descendents - no rules. AA, I think your blog is infecting your outlook or you are like the rest of the MSM - ratings overrule everything - now that's real "bullshit".
"I wonder what she's like at dinner parties."
Shes breaks down and starts hysterically crying if a libertarian is at the dinner party.
"But that is not why (most) golfers call penalties on themselves. They want to do, you know, the right thing because it's the right thing. Strange, I admit."
"Oh, bullshit."
This could also be explained in terms of enlightened self-interest - while failure to call a penalty on him or herself might help a player today, if everyone does so, no one gains an advantage while destroying the credibility and popularity (and thereby the ability to make money) of the sport.
Tennis officials shaken by lack of support for chair umpire Carlos Ramos
I was waiting for this shoe to drop.
"The umpiring fraternity is thoroughly disturbed at being abandoned by the WTA," Richard Ings, a retired, elite Gold Badge umpire told ESPN.com on Tuesday. "They are all fearful that they could be the next Ramos. They feel that no one has their back when they have to make unpopular calls."
The true test of Character is what you do when no one is looking.
When I took a golf class at 10 or 11 y.o., the first assignment was to copy the rule book. No one told me there'd be homework. I never got off the driving range, even after another class at 12. My brother got an ~80 the only time he golfed--9 holes.
"Quite aside from matters of ethics and character, I should think that people who are invested in the sport — whether they "love [it] so dearly" or just have a big money stake in it — should pay some attention to how spectators and potential spectators feel about it. They should want people to love them."
Nah. Take a knee. Here, you can have one of mine.
Link to some examples of someone in the actual political discourse, talking about civility where he isn't really about promoting his own side and will overlook incivility that will help his side whenever it happens.
Mitt Romney and quite a few of the never-Trumpers.
Blogger Michael said...
I am not a golfer but know a number who revere the game, its rules, its etiquette and the idea that it is a game for gentlemen who would rather boil their children than cheat.
Sailing is another sport that I spent many years competing in races.
Sadly, it is being taken over by very rich men and professional crews. There used to be a little gamesmanship, such as reporting your position father along in ocean races. This was frowned upon since, if the boat hit a container or a whale and was sinking, the rescue would be complicated by the wrong position.
In one Transpac race in 1981, in which I competed, a friend's boat saw an emergency flare at night and, when they investigated, they found the crew of a catamaran that had broken up in rough seas. They rescued the crew but he told them he was not going to quit the race. He gave the rescued crew the option of being picked up by a helicopter at down or going to Hawaii with his boat.
They chose to go and there were so many people on the boat (50 feet) that they had extra watches and got lots of sleep.
Willard is gone but his kids and grandkids still race and cruise the same boat.
Ann Althouse said...
"Oh, bullshit."
You might also want to consider, that when a person has already received (I don't say earned) a whole Hell of a lot of money, he may come to feel that there are other rewards in life of more interest than More Money. Some people become "philanthropists". Others indulge themselves in "ethical" behavior that allows them to feel good about themselves. Like paying more for their coffee. I think what makes politics different is that with very rare exceptions, the spectators don't want good sportsmanship, an exciting tie game in the final minutes, or a come-from-behind victory. We want a 99-0 blowout. Every, single game.
"There is a huge double standard for women when it comes to how bad behavior is punished — and not just in tennis."
Seriously!? Yet more bullshit. In criminal cases, for example, women receive FAR lighter punishment for the same crimes:
https://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx
But I guess she's right. There IS a huge double standard -- one that works to the benefit of women.
Let's put it in the time-honored way: "Trump may be a jerk, but he's OUR jerk." Signed, Deplorables.
Poor, poor Serena Williams. Just can't catch a break.
The ideal in sportsmanship is to be magnanimous in victory and gracious in defeat.
The sad fact is that this is a very high standard that far too many cannot meet.
I’m trying to think of a famous jerk in other sports and can’t really think of one off hand. I’m not a big sports aficionado so maybe someone else can come up with one.
Bryce Harper
Bryce Harper
I always think the name Bryce is a typo.
I openly rooted against McEnroe at every opportunity- even when he was playing Connors and Ivan Lendl- a player that no one seemed to like because of his stoicism. And I rooted against McEnroe precisely because he was a boorish.
Johnny Mac was - and still is - my favorite player. I know. I know.
My parents loved Borg, so there was the rebellious nature of pulling for Mac in those epic Wimbledon matches (1980, especially) and I couldn't stand Connors or Lendl. So, it defaulted to Mac. Plus, I loved his style of play. Maybe the most naturally gifted player of that generation.
But, yes. His outbursts made me cringe even as a teen. Taught me at an early age not to makes heroes out of professional athletes.
Now, Pete Sampras and Mats Wilander are my other two favorites, so I get some slack. I guess.
I read an article a while back about the Russians cheating in fencing. They had managed to be able to interfere with the electronic scoring system and register points by pressing a button on their foils.
Those wacky Russians, what wouldn't they do.
I literally jumped up and down in the living room when he came back from 2 sets down to beat McEnroe in the French Open in 1984.
Considering it'd been, what, since 1957 since an American won the French at the time, you obviously hate America.
"Now, Pete Sampras and Mats Wilander are my other two favorites, so I get some slack. I guess."
What about Edberg? The award for best sportsmanship in tennis is named after him.
Sorry, ALTHOUSE, that rant you ADDED at the end is too much for me to decipher much less comment on. But I disagree with what seems your basic point higher up - Yes, I DO believe in sportsmanship 'on the field' and No, I do NOT think it's a "con" or just like "civility bullshit". But maybe it's jmostly about the mood you seem in?
What strikes me as "bullshit" is when an athlete like Serena has an inexcusable, ugly tantrum and some rush to make her some sort of offended victim. Thank goodness a few very much wiser tennis pros - females - have voiced their criticism of her 'incivility bullshit'.
As long as women play women, and men play men, it doesn't make sense to complain of double standards based on gender. All that matters is if Serena was treated fairly in the context of women's tennis. She can't claim to have been misled by how the men are treated. She's been a pro since the mid-90's and has won 23 Grand Slam tournaments. None of this is new to her. She knows the rules and the ways in which umps enforce the rules.
This was the self-absorbed tantrum of a sore loser. I'm sure in part she was trying to interrupt Osaka's momentum, which doesn't make her behavior any better or less dishonorable. She disgraced herself and showed immense disrespect for the game and her opponent. If she weren't Serena, the megastar feminist "queen" idol, more people would have the guts to call her out.
In any event, it's a ridiculous complaint based on the facts present here. I pretty much expect all umps have their own biases including different expectations for how men and women should act. They're just human. So I think it's worthwhile for these officials to examine those biases in hopes of countering or eliminating them.
But under these facts and circumstances of Saturday's US Open final, Serena was treated no differently than a man would've been treated. Every violation was completely justified. She was aggressive and bullying. It's a shame Serena forced the umpire's hand because docking her a game unfairly tarnished Osaka's victory, which was going to be overwhelming no matter what. But now some Serena die-hards will latch onto this incident and claim the umpire screwed her.
BDNYC
Are you posting about Serena or Hillary?
Women who win two sets in a tennis match are winners.
Men who win two sets in a tennis match are losers.
All other gender double standards pale in comparison.
I admit that I don't watch tennis. I do find it boring. My view yesterday asking about the double standard was about William's direct opponent. On the aspect of fine, it would be an issue to take up with WTA, but that should happen old the court.
Baseball does have similar issues. A coach coming out and arguing with an Umpire can be exciting, while usually resulting in an ejection over poor sportsmanship. Often, it is a goal to be ejected, in order to rally the emotions of the team. In other words, it is bullshit theater, but it comes with a fine.
What I think is at stake is the trust that tennis is a fair sport. When the President of USTA shows bias, then it brings into question the integrity of the sport. Now the William's side is also questioning the fairness of the sport. If I, as a viewer, can't trust the outcome as being a fair measure of talent, then what do I make of the actual rules and game?
I submit as an example the Tour de France. There strict drug policy made it impossible to watch and know who won at the end of the race. The race results could change many years later after all the drug tests, accusations, and revelations came to light. Cycling can be a boring sport, but when much of the game happens in medical labs; then it gets real boring and not worth watching.
I think tennis needs to be careful. A pissing match thrown into a tennis tournament can add excitement. But if I can't trust the game is what I'm watching on the court, then I won't watch it all.
Golfers have been calling penalties on themselves since long before TV cameras.
Bobby Jones called one on himself which cost him a big tournament. Praised for doing so he said, "well you might as well praise me for not robbing a bank today. I had to call it. The ball moved. "
Incidentally, claims about double standards are pretty much always bullshit, designed to advance the speaker by asserting that a bogus claim she is being unjustly treated on account of race or sex or religion or nationality or whatever, when in fact she is usually getting what anyone else would get. The particular claim about men's and women's tennis is demonstrably false, but so are pretty much all the other claims you hear. https://twitter.com/ATabarrok/status/1039504345862168576
I am a tennis fan. I watch all the four majors, all the Maters 1000 events, most of the Masters 500 events and a few of the 250 events. I have seen some men argue with the umpires; I've seen quite a few smash their racquets, but I have never seen one have a tantrum like Serena's.
I don't know what was in Serena's mind, but clearly her display was way over the line and she deserved what happened. Naomi Osaka has been talked about as a coming star since she beat Serena and won the Indian Wells tournament. We'll see more from her.
I didn’t say I thought golfers cheated. I said the called penalties on themselves out of self-interest, not goodness.
As for me, I never cheat. Consequently, I am wary of playing some games.
But I would never, say, keep the wrong change if a cashier made a mistake. I never once engaged in any kind of cheating in school or even considered it. Etc. etc.
I know it’s naive, but I would never take advantage of another person. I’d prefer to avoid human contact altogether.
"Link to some examples of someone in the actual political discourse, talking about civility where he isn't really about promoting his own side and will overlook incivility that will help his side whenever it happens."
Can one link find any instance of ANYONE on TV or Cable news or pundit shows talking about formal politics where it is NOT bullshit? (Aside from a discussion of a political documentary, or discussion of a historical event, such as World War II.)
I'm not sure this is about civility. Cable news is filled with promoters & pontificators.
That said, I suggest, as a hypothesis, that the majority of American adults do value civility.
We'll see in the next few years if the hypothesis bears itself out. Hard to pinpoint these things, of course.
I think Trump personifies the Althouse maxim, civility is bullshit; in his terms, that political correctness is bs. Why we like him is not because we like jerks but because he's not playing a game and he's not bound by nonsense. His agenda is the American people and the nation. As far as games are concerned that's a idealized version of life, competition with rules. I guess "fairness" is the goal, because in real life we don't generally see fairness.
Or a discussion of the weather. That said - Florence looks real bad. Please stay safe, this looks like a bad one.
"I said the called penalties on themselves out of self-interest, not goodness."
I didn't see that thesis. I just saw "Oh, bullshit."
Anyway, if it's an axiomatic matter of faith, there's nothing more to be said. But if it's a hypothesis, and you are open to changing your mind, what evidence would convince you that you are wrong?
What about Edberg?
Nothing wrong with Edberg. Enjoyed his game, too. Not every player could be a favorite and Wilander got there first.
Boris Becker was fun to watch, too. Unseeded kid winning Wimbledon '85 was a favorite moment.
Second Hypothesis: Americans allow for exceptions to civility.
A moment of anger, swearing in a point of pressure, snapping at someone in a stressful situation. Americans usually do not believe it was a great choice, but generally forgive it.
These assertions of a double standard come with no evidence whatsoever. And there are certainly examples of men getting penalized for bad behavior. So I doubt it’s true to any glaring degree if it all. This particular umpire may be tougher than others, but on men as well as women, as far as we know.
A hypothesis needs to be tested. I'd be convinced by repeated examples of acceptance.
Political life: Polls are imprecise but one way to do it. Voting is another.
In daily social life: It's about social acceptance or rejection. Will the person be invited to dinner, or are they excluded for the incivility?
Sports life: Does the person loose fans? Will the person loose sponsors?
You all non-players and non-watchers do understand that the women don’t play against the men, right?
So any ‘double standard’ is really just a ‘different’ standard. For example, if Serena were a man, she’d have to play up to five sets, instead of best of 3. Do women’s basketball, boxing, etc. have identical rules and application of rules to the men’s versions? (Don’t know.)
My favorites from the past were Sampras and Agassi. What a great rivalry. Two completely different players, both great in their own way. Pete the consummate serve and volley player, Andre the flashy baseline player.
Althouse wrote. "I didn’t say I thought golfers cheated. I said the called penalties on themselves out of self-interest, not goodness."
You don't believe that honoring a rule is anything other than self interest? That when playin alone you score against yourself in self interest? Making a call against yourself is certainly not done in self interest unless by that you mean doing the right thing. But you undermine the ethic of doing the right thing by ascribing it to selfishness. I gather you believe sportsmanship as bullshit.
”I know it’s naive, but I would never take advantage of another person.”
But apparently you won’t accept that others also have an innate sense of fairness or morality: “I said the called penalties on themselves out of self-interest, not goodness.”
Frankly, I find it hard to believe that you think you’re the only one.
So now, in addition to being racist and sexist, our hostess thinks that being honest is only "self-interest". Fuck that too.
someones probably already posted this; but IF womyn tennis players want to be treated like men, maybe they should enter that league.
When you're in the namby pamby league, reserved for people that aren't that good; maybe you shouldn't complain about how the big boys play
You don't believe that honoring a rule is anything other than self interest? That when playin alone you score against yourself in self interest? Making a call against yourself is certainly not done in self interest unless by that you mean doing the right thing.
Not a golfer. I imagine the goal when playing alone is to beat your best score. So, no sense in cheating.
"As for me, I never cheat."
And I believe you. But the question that raises based on your full post is - Why not?
rhhardin: Skipped right to the bottom to say, "ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Thanks.
"I didn’t say I thought golfers cheated. I said the called penalties on themselves out of self-interest, not goodness."
I used to golf every day when I had time. I guess it was out of self-interest not to cheat because I'd only be cheating myself.
What's the point of writing down an 82 if you know you shot an 86?
Those that don't golf wouldn't get it, and I think our hostess is revealing something she'd rather not.
I imagine the goal when playing alone is to beat your best score. So, no sense in cheating.
Exactly.
And those who submit lower or higher scores to fudge their handicap really get screwed the next time a scramble comes up and they're stuck with a bunch of other cheaters.
The trans women will dominate the Women’s Tennis Tour soon.
Funny you should mention... All Zappa's compositions were scored. Disciplined performance within known parameters, (rules), is the goal of public performance. Serena's opponent didn't get called on infraction, yet was beating Serena soundly. Execution, execution, execution. Results matter, as the Donald has shown, especially with Barack's judicial appointees obstruction he has surpassed modern presidencies. Watch some interviews/performances with 10 Dan Master Moriu Higaonna for disciplined execution. Regardless we have learned Serena has been cheating for some time. Don't do the crime...
I imagine the goal when playing alone is to beat your best score. So, no sense in cheating.
Cheating in golf, especially when playing alone, is to post higher scores to get your handicap up to beat other players.
Lots of gambling in golf and cheaters raise scores, not lower them.
Just in case anyone is interested in raw numbers:
Code violations called at the U.S. Open against men: 86
Code violations called against women: 22
Number of men cited for violations: 26
Women cited for violations: 10
Obviously the code creates a disparate impact on the basis of sex. This is a terrible injustice and there should be a march with special hats.
@fivewheels,
Leftists don't do raw numbers or statistics - cooked only.
I used to play a lot of tennis when younger. Due to my honesty and overall moral grandeur, I would always give the point to my opponent if I couldn't tell with complete certainty whether the ball was in or out, and I was sufficiently ahead to win anyway Sometimes, when I had better position, I could see where one of my shots was in and my opponent nonetheless called it out. Imagine my moral nausea when I discovered a trusted friend was capable of acting in such a way, but there it is. People make decisions based on their self interest. It influences their judgment. What a harsh, fallen world we live in.
The Crack Emcee,
Pushes me aside like I'm a woman
Well, we can't have that, now, can we?
"I think Trump personifies the Althouse maxim, civility is bullshit..."
Whoa!! I do not say "civility is bullshit." I say that calls for civility are bullshit. Civility would be wonderful if it were genuine, but the people who are luring you to embrace civility are not themselves committed to it. It's a con. It's rhetoric. It would be nice if it weren't, but don't fall for the dream of niceness while other people are getting ready to fight you
How many sets does Serena need to win a match? How many do the men need to win?
disparate impact on the basis of sex... there should be a march with special hats.
Yes, cats in hats, but alas the roof grows cold. This is the age of whimsy, where Puff, the hallucinating dragon, lives by the sea.
Why set up selfish as conflict with good?
Asking for Ayn Rand as friend
Isn't it the same bullshit as call for civility , turn your cheei, etc
I wonder if all the people boo-hooing about women supposedly getting harsher punishments for the same transgressions as men in sports realize that men typically face much harsher punishments than women when it comes to the criminal justice system. It seems gauche to address sports without first tackling criminal justice.
So far, well over 800 comments for a topic that should have garnered less than 80.
"Do we like jerks? I mean, Donald Trump is President."
Hillary Clinton is a jerk too. I didn't vote for Trump because he's a jerk, I didn't vote against Clinton because she's a jerk (and the particular brand of jerk who commits felonies and puts national security at risk). I accepted that neither candidate is someone I'd like to be trapped in a car with for a long road trip, and voted for the one who seemed more likely to implement policies that I would consider beneficial to the country and the world.
M for Martina and M for moron. There should be no reason to tolerate any of this behavior whether from M for McEnroe or a big buffalow
I just want to say again.
1 -There's zero evidence that International Pro Tennis is "rife with sexism". But every sports writer says there is, with no evidence.
2- There's zero evidence that Carlos Ramos would've acted differently with a male Tennis player.
3 -Almost every sportswriter is praising Williams for her fight against "racism and sexism" - when in fact, she's none nothing but play tennis.
4- Serena had every reason to get angry at the chickenshit Coaching violation AND the umpire not giving her a WARNING about verbal abuse. The Umpire didn't understand that people don't watch the US Open Final to see Carlos Ramos.
5- The US Open crowds are the worst. Vulgar and stupid. Move it OUT of NYC. Maybe, it'd improve the crowd behavior if the tournament was rotated like a US Golf Open. I think fans in Dallas or Seattle would be better behaved.
"But that is not why (most) golfers call penalties on themselves. They want to do, you know, the right thing because it's the right thing. Strange, I admit."
Oh, bullshit.
I used to play golf early in the morning on weekdays. I was usually the only golfer there. Just me and the guy mowing the greens. Strangely, I did count every stroke and every penalty for OB. Cheating on score was only lying to myself, that seemed to be a waste of swinging the clubs.
There have been numerous examples of Pro Golfers starting with Jones calling penalties on themselves.
In any case, cheating in Pro Golf is very difficult.
Unlike average people, a Pro cant' move the ball out of divot without someone noticing. OR miss the ball, and say it was a "practice swing" OR lose a ball, but then mysteriously "find it" just before the agreed to time limit runs out OR move the ball to a better position in the sand trap or rough when no one is looking.
Even when they move the ball to a better position, they still have to make the shot. People got upset at Tiger at the Masters years ago, but there's no evidence that his so-called cheating saved him a stroke.
I've played Golf for low stakes, and always with the understanding that "winter rules" applied and that you could move your ball out of a divot or out of particularly bad lie, six inches or so.
That's "cheating" - but since everyone had the same advantage, who cares?
We also considered any putt under a foot, a "Gimme" - why waste time?
I prefer golf where integrity and honor are built into the sport. That doesn't mean every golfer is perfect. My dad and grandfather were both college golfers and played a lot of tournament golf as I was growing up. My first golf lesson at age eight from my dad and grandpa wasn't on the golf swing or putting - it was on edicate and courtesy. It was drilled into me at a young age.
Golfers can call penalities on themselves both out of goodness and self-interest. I don't think it's a 100% either / or.
Golfers have an inherent interest in preserving the integrity of the game. Calling a penalty, especially when no one else knew one should be called, preserves the game. We want other golfers to do the right thing and that means we have to do the right thing. So, it is self-interest but it's also good for the game.
If a playing partner can't find their ball, I'm going to go help them look for it. It would be good for me in the short run to let them lose it but that's not the right way to win. At the end of the match, I need to shake hands with that other player. That's a great moment of respect regardless of the outcome of the match and I need to be able to look them in the eye knowing I either won or lost the right way. That's good for me, good for me, and good for the game.
Also, golf as a game doesn't respond well to tension. Lying or cheating will create internal tension. So, from a practical standpoint, a clear conscious is far more useful to playing well than one extra stroke won by cheating.
Hagar@11:02 Muhammad Ali was the dirtiest boxer of his era. Ali never missed an opportunity to rabbit punch, hit off the break, thumb in the eye, kidney punch, step on a foot, rake a face with the laces. Ali was a dirtbag.
Serena Williams complains that different rules are applied in men's tennis, than in women's tennis. Maybe, maybe not.
But, if so, then so what? The only thing that should matter to her is that the rules for women's tennis are consistently applied, in women's tennis matches. If so, then the game is fair to the participants. How the rules are applied in men's matches means nothing to her.
Robert
I fenced in an epee tournament last weekend. In one bout, at one moment, my point hit the floor (which was ungrounded), while my opponent’s point hit my knee. Both lights went off. The director called both as floor touches. My opponent objected that she had hit me, but the director said it was the floor. Then I said that I was sure she had hit my knee. The director shrugged. “I thought it was floor, but the touch is acknowledged. Touch right.” She went on to beat me.
Up until now, only three people knew about that: her, him, and me. It wasn’t something to brag about, it was simply how I believe the sport should be played. I wouldn’t mention it here, except that I’m curious: what was my self interest in acknowledging that touch?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा