Is Three equal to Five

[exchemist]

Though no one in authority wants to say it, the reason why females and males do not play competitively against each other is absolutely a simple matter that the women would never win any trophies at all.

SECRETLY….(!!!) it was tried out and found to be so embarrassing that if was never published openly and will never be seen in the National broadcast media.

Many SPECULATIONS and calculations even put it that even the greatest female such as Serena Williams would only be qualified at around ranking level of 400 in the world … Ok, I get that part and think it is right that this should not occur! I’m also pondering whether male players would not play at their best due to chauvinism (intentionally lose - though that is against the rules - why is it in the rules of it ain’t been seen to happen!!?)

I do wonder, also, if those in authority would declare the true reason why such disparities are there then the woke equality brigade would come out in arms to say it’s not fair… (Note the word, ‘Fair’… not ‘Equal’!!) but without putting any case for what they think WOULD be ‘fair’, or indeed ‘EQUAL’ (their definition of ‘Equal’ of course!)

When I watch female tennis, I see that most women are all but some out by the end of three sets that lasts more than 2 hours… 2 Hours!!!!

I am going to say also that many matches are very much, ‘To me - to you…’ base line to base line play. This leaves plenty of time to see where the ball is going to, what spin is put on the ball, and requires the yeast effort. Hold on - hold on… I’m not talking the greats of female tennis - I’m talking the ‘a little less than the greatest’ female players.

Being that the case, 2 hours, three hours would actually HARM the women… SIMPLE AS… a five set match, no matter the pace, would cause significant physical harm to them.

Tennis Federation, why not just say so? We ALL know that that is the reason!

Truly, if it were true that five sets doesn’t cause harm to women, then SWAP AROUND the schedule and show us that your claim is true (it isn’t!).

These days, even today, women are being told not to be embarrassed by their failings. An advert says, ‘I was brave enough to ask a question in a meeting … it was a strength to ask that question - no one can blame [someone] for not knowing something!!’
Another, a woman with cancer proudly showed off her bald head during her cancer treatment… something that was so embarrassing a few years ago that no woman would ever go out like that… in fact (yes, I’m rambling!) I saw a charity request in which a woman was being treated for cancer BUT IT WAS HER HUSBAND and husbands of friends (who had beards) who had their beards cut as the charity pull!!! Yes, the husbands - not the WIVES to support another woman - yet the woman was called ‘BRAVE’!

What am I saying? Women today are building STRENGTH in their ability to accept the truth about aspects of their being. It is OK to say that the reason women don’t play five sets IS BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKELY GET HURT!

Tell me: Why would you not see a race between a one legged man (no prosthetics!) and Usain bolt?
Would it not be because there would be a huge disparity of equal or near equal ability - no shame in saying that, eh??? Where is the shame in saying that women do not have the stamina for five hours without hurting themselves!! Where is the shame in saying you would play Chelsea women’s football team against Liverpool men’s team (English football). By the way, Chelsea woman's team is by far the very best England have in woman's football - and the 90 minutes is irrelevant since it’s a fixed time played multiplayer at their own pace - tennis is played one on one to the finish however long that takes!)

And as for the strange aspect of equal prize money meaning that the women are actually paid (earn!) FAR more than the men for FAR less effort - and bring in far less revenue from sales of tickets and food and drinks and (er-hum, Gambling!! Shh!!!). Personal income from self advertising and photoshoots is up to the players (huge amounts for the best… and prettiest or more daring…. I seen some that are near pornographic - not what you expect from sporting stars!!!)

You seem to be talking out of your arse. The physical endurance of women in athletic sport is equal to that of men, if not superior. The difference between the sexes is mainly in physical strength, not endurance. I speak as one who has rowed for 40 years and done a certain amount of coaching - of both sexes.

But as your posting style is flamebait rather than considered argument, I'll stop there.

 

[Soapy]

No, there isn't. It is a cultural construct. If there was a clear definition you would have an objective definition, that could be turned into calibration of an instrument.

So what is ‘EQUALITY’?

What does it mean, then…!

Perhaps I’ve been reading the wrong dictionary all this time!

Can I give you another word: ‘FAIRNESS’…

I think fairness takes into account disparities but it still doesn’t say that £1M for three sets over 1h 30m is fair against £1M for five sets over five hours!

One set rate…. divided by the sets played…, isn’t that what happens outside of grand-slam tournament?

Answer to ‘Equality’ please.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No no!!! THEY ARE putting in their fullest effort - I know that! And that’s just what I said… at the end of an hour and a bit they are exhausted - let alone thinking they might have two more sets to play… two more sets means upwards of at least 50 or more points to play!!!!

Yeah and giving them the same pay is unfair in your brain. We get that.

 

[Soapy]

You seem to be talking out of your arse. The physical endurance of women in athletic sport is equal to that of men, if not superior. The difference between the sexes is mainly in physical strength, not endurance. I speak as one who has rowed for 40 years and done a certain amount of coaching - of both sexes.

But as your posting style is flamebait than considered argument, I'll stop there.

Excellent, thank you for projecting your misapplied points. Best thing you did was to stop posting!

Since you were coaching it is in your interest to be impartial towards both sexes. I would hazard that you were being paid for your services…. A shop keeper doesn’t care that he knows a thief’s money is buying his goods. Telling your females that they are equal to the men is pure politics. Why on earth would you say anything counter to that unless you wanted to lose your revenue stream…. So yes, your point is mute from the aspect of impartial input.

 

[Ella S.]

No no!!! THEY ARE putting in their fullest effort - I know that! And that’s just what I said… at the end of an hour and a bit they are exhausted - let alone thinking they might have two more sets to play… two more sets means upwards of at least 50 or more points to play!!!!

Then where is the inequality when they are being paid the same for the same (or more) amount of effort?

 

[Soapy]

Yeah and giving them the same pay is unfair in your brain. We get that.

Not just mine - the men complained vigorously but kept getting turned down.

Andy Murray was one of the leading complainers… the problem with him was that his coach AND MOTHER is a feminist … hmmm.., conflict of interest there!! My question was why didn’t the men, who bring in far greater revenue, also protest with ‘Downing Rackets’… beats me on that score. They just have in!!

 

[Soapy]

Then where is the inequality when they are being paid the same for the same (or more) amount of effort?

Ha ha ha… funny!!

If people are paid just for their effort then EVERYONE should be paid the same REGARDLESS of the amount of effort…. Even the LOWEST RANKED player puts in their all…. But loses!

Hmmm.., have you been reading your Bible: Jesus says that anyone who works for righteousness receives the same reward of a life in paradise… no mention of effort. Even the person who only worked an hour got the same as the person who worked for 8 hours (a whole day).

Sadly, Tennis, ….Sports…. is not a path to paradise (not for all of us, anyway!)

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So what is ‘EQUALITY’?

What does it mean, then…!

Perhaps I’ve been reading the wrong dictionary all this time!

Can I give you another word: ‘FAIRNESS’…

I think fairness takes into account disparities but it still doesn’t say that £1M for three sets over 1h 30m is fair against £1M for five sets over five hours!

One set rate…. divided by the sets played…, isn’t that what happens outside of grand-slam tournament?

Answer to ‘Equality’ please.

You have to learn to include the referent of a word, not just the defintion.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Not just mine - the men complained vigorously but kept getting turned down.

Andy Murray was one of the leading complainers… the problem with him was that his coach AND MOTHER is a feminist … hmmm.., conflict of interest there!! My question was why didn’t the men, who bring in far greater revenue, also protest with ‘Downing Rackets’… beats me on that score. They just have in!!

Yeah, you are arguing using emotions about your version of fair.

 

[Soapy]

You have to learn to include the referent of a word, not just the defintion.

Oh, no definition of Equality, then!!

 

[Soapy]

Yeah, you are arguing using emotions about your version of fair.

I used the word fair as a counter example to EQUALITY… but I don’t see how that fits with the line of the thread?

‘Fairness’ takes into account disparities. ‘Equality’ does not.

What is your argument?

 

[exchemist]

Excellent, thank you for projecting your misapplied points. Best thing you did was to stop posting!

Since you were coaching it is in your interest to be impartial towards both sexes. I would hazard that you were being paid for your services…. A shop keeper doesn’t care that he knows a thief’s money is buying his goods. Telling your females that they are equal to the men is pure politics. Why on earth would you say anything counter to that unless you wanted to lose your revenue stream…. So yes, your point is mute from the aspect of impartial input.

Don't be ridiculous. Of course I was not being paid. Rowing at club level is an amateur sport.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Oh, no definition of Equality, then!!

There is no Equality.
Definition of EQUAL

Depending on how you weigh some of the words for some of the definitions, you get different equality.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I used the word fair as a counter example to EQUALITY… but I don’t see how that fits with the line of the thread?

‘Fairness’ takes into account disparities. ‘Equality’ does not.

What is your argument?

Fair has no objective referent. Learn to account for the referent and how that has a part in what is going on.

 

[Ella S.]

Ha ha ha… funny!!

If people are paid just for their effort then EVERYONE should be paid the same REGARDLESS of the amount of effort…. Even the LOWEST RANKED player puts in their all…. But loses!

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I think your desire to not only ridicule women's abilities but also shortchange them financially is unethical, though.

Your "equality" ends up seeming more like prejudice to me.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Though no one in authority wants to say it, the reason why females and males do not play competitively against each other is absolutely a simple matter that the women would never win any trophies at all.

SECRETLY….(!!!) it was tried out and found to be so embarrassing that if was never published openly and will never be seen in the National broadcast media.

Many SPECULATIONS and calculations even put it that even the greatest female such as Serena Williams would only be qualified at around ranking level of 400 in the world … Ok, I get that part and think it is right that this should not occur! I’m also pondering whether male players would not play at their best due to chauvinism (intentionally lose - though that is against the rules - why is it in the rules of it ain’t been seen to happen!!?)

I do wonder, also, if those in authority would declare the true reason why such disparities are there then the woke equality brigade would come out in arms to say it’s not fair… (Note the word, ‘Fair’… not ‘Equal’!!) but without putting any case for what they think WOULD be ‘fair’, or indeed ‘EQUAL’ (their definition of ‘Equal’ of course!)

When I watch female tennis, I see that most women are all but some out by the end of three sets that lasts more than 2 hours… 2 Hours!!!!

I am going to say also that many matches are very much, ‘To me - to you…’ base line to base line play. This leaves plenty of time to see where the ball is going to, what spin is put on the ball, and requires the yeast effort. Hold on - hold on… I’m not talking the greats of female tennis - I’m talking the ‘a little less than the greatest’ female players.

Being that the case, 2 hours, three hours would actually HARM the women… SIMPLE AS… a five set match, no matter the pace, would cause significant physical harm to them.

Tennis Federation, why not just say so? We ALL know that that is the reason!

Truly, if it were true that five sets doesn’t cause harm to women, then SWAP AROUND the schedule and show us that your claim is true (it isn’t!).

These days, even today, women are being told not to be embarrassed by their failings. An advert says, ‘I was brave enough to ask a question in a meeting … it was a strength to ask that question - no one can blame [someone] for not knowing something!!’
Another, a woman with cancer proudly showed off her bald head during her cancer treatment… something that was so embarrassing a few years ago that no woman would ever go out like that… in fact (yes, I’m rambling!) I saw a charity request in which a woman was being treated for cancer BUT IT WAS HER HUSBAND and husbands of friends (who had beards) who had their beards cut as the charity pull!!! Yes, the husbands - not the WIVES to support another woman - yet the woman was called ‘BRAVE’!

What am I saying? Women today are building STRENGTH in their ability to accept the truth about aspects of their being. It is OK to say that the reason women don’t play five sets IS BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKELY GET HURT!

Tell me: Why would you not see a race between a one legged man (no prosthetics!) and Usain bolt?
Would it not be because there would be a huge disparity of equal or near equal ability - no shame in saying that, eh??? Where is the shame in saying that women do not have the stamina for five hours without hurting themselves!! Where is the shame in saying you would play Chelsea women’s football team against Liverpool men’s team (English football). By the way, Chelsea woman's team is by far the very best England have in woman's football - and the 90 minutes is irrelevant since it’s a fixed time played multiplayer at their own pace - tennis is played one on one to the finish however long that takes!)

And as for the strange aspect of equal prize money meaning that the women are actually paid (earn!) FAR more than the men for FAR less effort - and bring in far less revenue from sales of tickets and food and drinks and (er-hum, Gambling!! Shh!!!). Personal income from self advertising and photoshoots is up to the players (huge amounts for the best… and prettiest or more daring…. I seen some that are near pornographic - not what you expect from sporting stars!!!)

I would think the disparity occurs in most sports, given the average build and allied qualities of males and females, and even if there is some overlap I suppose there are good reasons to shape the sport around the average male or female. I honestly don't have any complaints if it is mostly down to biology. But then my interest in most sports is minimal.

 

[Soapy]

Don't be ridiculous. Of course I was not being paid. Rowing at club level is an amateur sport.

You said you were coaching.

 

[Soapy]

I would think the disparity occurs in most sports, given the average build and allied qualities of males and females, and even if there is some overlap I suppose there are good reasons to shape the sport around the average male or female. I honestly don't have any complaints if it is mostly down to biology. But then my interest in most sports is minimal.

Disparity is set in categories. Each member of a category only competes against another member in that same category.

Persons from one categories do not compete with persons from a different category….

Stands to reason!

And, because of differences of ABILITIES and skill levels etc, it is only right that there should be different rules for each category so that each member in each category is performing up to the limits of their category… if they outperform their category then they are eligible to move up to the next level category…. Similarly, if they are hugely underperforming in their category then they should seriously (or are made to) move to a lower category.

Complete sense. No one wants to see anyone competing in a wrong level category and failing miserably or getting hurt.

Also, competing in a category above your ability means you never win and will get frustrated.

If is for this reason that …..

Oh dear, what was I just saying to say???

Men’s grand slam would not be what if is if they only played three sets.

How much does a ticket at Wimbledon cost? And then 1 hour later you are getting up to applaud the GRAND SLAM WINNER of £1M in the greatest tournament of the tennis year tour … not even time for my ice cream and strawberries to get swallowed!!

Has anyone wondered why the men play on Sunday and women on Saturday…. Hmmm… interesting that!

Equality? The women didn’t fight very hard (token protest!!) got five sets…. And no protest at playing on Saturday when the least number of people (of the two days) is watching or attending. And why should they…, if one hour of work bags £1M for winning or half a million for silver then which of them is going to complain!!!?

Oh, answer!! The men who play five hours for the same £1M….

Oh, wait…. These days anyone can SELF-GENDER….

Hey, Novak, I got an idea - cost you just a smidgen!

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Disparity is set in categories. Each member of a category only competes against another member in that same category.

Persons from one categories do not compete with persons from a different category….

Stands to reason!

And, because of differences of ABILITIES and skill levels etc, it is only right that there should be different rules for each category so that each member in each category is performing up to the limits of their category… if they outperform their category then they are eligible to move up to the next level category…. Similarly, if they are hugely underperforming in their category then they should seriously (or are made to) move to a lower category.

Complete sense. No one wants to see anyone competing in a wrong level category and failing miserably or getting hurt.

Also, competing in a category above your ability means you never win and will get frustrated.

If is for this reason that …..

Oh dear, what was I just saying to say???

Men’s grand slam would not be what if is if they only played three sets.

How much does a ticket at Wimbledon cost? And then 1 hour later you are getting up to applaud the GRAND SLAM WINNER of £1M in the greatest tournament of the tennis year tour … not even time for my ice cream and strawberries to get swallowed!!

Has anyone wondered why the men play on Sunday and women on Saturday…. Hmmm… interesting that!

Equality? The women didn’t fight very hard (token protest!!) got five sets…. And no protest at playing on Saturday when the least number of people (of the two days) is watching or attending. And why should they…, if one hour of work bags £1M for winning or half a million for silver then which of them is going to complain!!!?

Oh, answer!! The men who play five hours for the same £1M….

Oh, wait…. These days anyone can SELF-GENDER….

Hey, Novak, I got an idea - cost you just a smidgen!

Yeah, solve that and we have made Heaven on earth.

 

[Soapy]

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I think your desire to not only ridicule women's abilities but also shortchange them financially is unethical, though.

Your "equality" ends up seeming more like prejudice to me.

I spelt out the maths!

Ig iz the women who are benefitting hugely by jumping on the woke gender equality feminist bandwagon so they could bag money without the effort.

Their issue was EQUALITY OF PAY (Prize money) but they didn’t consider EQUALITY of GAME PLAY.

EQUALITY is a single entity… there is no partiality.

As a point: can you give me an example of EQUALITY that was partial?