Quote:
Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I think this is unhealthy. I think that she should continue to dominate against women and the LPGA and everyone else should look into why women's sports and women's golf (in specific) isn't as popular. Maybe the answer is as simple as, "people want to watch the best." But I don't think that's true because I would rather watch women's tennis than men's any day. So what is it?
TM
|
Generally, women's sports are not as exciting to watch (unless you are there in person, then it's exciting). Tennis is the exception - women's is more exciting to watch than men's because the finesse is greater in the women's game than the men. People like Venus and Serena, in my opinion, threaten to turn it into the slam fest that is the men's tour. Although I can't stand her, I'd prefer to watch Hingis than the Williams sisters any day.
Men's golf is more exciting than women's. I don't know why - men just seem to make more spectacular shots than women (short and long). And they put better, so you get those incredible long puts.
At least this is just my opinion - mens sports are generally more exciting to me.
This writer a few years ago made a comparison to mens sports played around the turn of the century and women's sports today. He argued that the men's hockey of the turn of the century is the women's hockey today. I am not sure if that is true, but it strikes me that probably men's tennis was more exciting way back when before it became such a game of power.
And I have about 10 different conflicting opinions about merging men's and women's sports, but I have to say that I admire Hayley Wickenheiser - going to Finland to play men's hockey because that is where the game is at her level. She's scoring goals and taking checks and everything. If you have to play with the men to play at your proper level, you should be allowed to, I think. Annika, unfortunately is between levels - better than the women but not nearly as good as the men. It must kind of suck to be her, in a way.
