Let's talk about periods--or not

In the lead up to Wimbledon, I read several pieces and saw even more headlines about the change in the all-white clothing rule to allow players in the women's draw to wear darker shorts/tennis underwear. (Does anyone wear those anymore? Wishing I had kept some of mine now.)

There were no bones made about the fact that this change was to ease players' anxiety about playing while on their periods. 

Point1: This change was subject to a vote because it is considered a rule change to the dress code. A vote. In 2023 that helps ease the anxiety of menstruating players. 

Point 1a: This is not a new issue. Most of the stories mention that some soccer teams are eliminating white shorts from their kits as well this summer. This discussion has also emerged in regard to long-distance athletes (cyclists, runners, triathletes) who are not as bound by dress codes/team uniforms but affected by the nature of their sports which often do not allow for a bathroom break to change a tampon or pad or empty a menstrual cup. So in those sports we have seen bloodied outfits. A few years ago (it was probably longer because everything seems to be a few years ago to me) a menstruating woman ran a marathon while on her period and was not at all ashamed by it and wanted to use the moment to bring attention to athletes who menstruate. (Google it for more details.) 

Point 1b: The fact there seems to be some concerted attention to athletes who have their periods while competing in this the year 2023 is a little demoralizing (even as the changes I have mentioned are loudly applauded). It demonstrates how little input women have in sports as athletes and administrators. 

Point 2: The print media was all over this story. I assume some radio outlets were as well. No one has said anything about the rule change on air. I have only been watching ESPN's coverage but I cannot imagine Tennis Channel is much different (and my only understanding of how the BBC operates is based on controversies over the monarchy and Great British Baking Show). The silence kind of surprised me given how commentators usually do not hold back when commenting on women's outfits. It is not as if the black and dark green shorts are not obvious. EDITED TO ADD: Martina Navratilova covered Sabalenka's 4th round match and said that the players are now allowed to wear "colored undershorts" and that it was nice to add a little color to the courts "legally." She DID NOT say WHY the change was made. The implication of her awkward phrasing is that the All-England Club wanted more color on the courts. 

But of course television/streaming media is far more conservative than print media, as I often reminded my sport management students when I taught in those departments. They basically are still not talking about periods. Chrissy Evert generally cannot hold herself back from talking about what things were like in her day and how she responded to X and Y. But Chrissy has been radio silent (or ESPN silent) about periods and dress codes. Not very surprising; she does seem to stay quiet when it comes to women's issues. (Go back and look at how she responded when asked to join Billie Jean King's women's tour in the 70s. She will now, of course, talk a lot about equity in women's tennis when the issue has been rendered nearly uncontroversial.) 

This is not about Chris Evert though. It is about when and where and how people in sports (media people, athletes, managers, coaches, etc.) can and do--do not--talk about women's bodies. We seem fine talking about women losing their periods but not about them getting them. 

The athletes at Wimbledon have been open with the media (the ones who ask) about the role their periods play when the are playing. But I really would have loved to see all of them playing in red shorts this year. 

P.S. I just read that the shorts are not allowed to "show" beneath the skirt/dress. I assume this means be longer than. But Nike's eyelet-ish dress has a scalloped (of sorts) hem that rises a couple of inches on the side seams. Aryna Sabalenka is wearing this dress and has dark shorts that are visible. No one has said anything. To be clear--this is good. I am just curious about which aspects of the dress code get enforced...and against whom...

It's just not a major sporting event until...

...a male commentator makes a sexist remark.
Someone needs to start a blog or Tumblr or something entitled "Commentators Say the Darnedest Things"--and by darnedest I meant racist, homophobic, sexist.
Last winter the BCS Championship was marred by a one-sided game and the comments of broadcaster Brent Musburger who spent some of the game's downtime talking about the quarterback's pageant girlfriend.
At this year's Wimbledon, the comments focused on an actual participant in the event. BBC commentator John Inverdale noted, before the women's final on Saturday, that soon-to-be champion Marion Bartoli was not pretty. He surmised that Bartoli's father, who--like his daughter--has been considered somewhat of an oddity in the tennis world because of his style, told his daughter that she would have to work harder because she was never going to be a looker like Maria Sharapova.
The comments caused discord immediately and Inverdale apologized before the broadcast was over, issued a written apology to the new Wimbledon champ, and re-apologized on the air before the men's final yesterday.
His comments were not especially surprising. Commentators make note of women's appearances all the time. Usually it is within a fit/fitness discourse, i.e., "Serena spent the off-season getting fit" means that she lost weight. Men "get fit" too. But this is usually presented in terms of endurance, i.e. James Blake has really worked on his fitness this past year" means that he trained harder in order to not fizzle out in five-set matches and is no longer a "wuss"--a word I detest but which gets bandied about in such conversations.
But all the conversations about women's outfits are also comments on women's appearances. And as rude as Inverdale's comments were, I found the whole Serena/Maria feud discussions that opened this year's Wimbledon far more distasteful.
Also, Inverdale's comments implied that pretty girls--apparently as defined by being blond and tall--don't work hard. (Not sure where a muscular, Black woman falls in this pretty/unpretty spectrum.) When Sharapova came on the scene she had to prove that she was not another Anna Kournikova who, it was implied, relied on her looks to the detriment of her tennis career and thus was not a hard worker. I guess there really is no winning, even when you win.

On another commentators-say-the-darnedest-things note, there is John McEnroe. This should probably be a separate post but I am sticking it on here. McEnroe, when talking about the re-emergence of a former top player who spend some time on the Challenger circuit, imagined that his opponents would see it as a really good opportunity to gain some confidence. This is how he phrased the hypothetical player's inner monologue: "that will be a really good scalp if I beat this guy." And once again racism against Native Americans in sports goes unnoticed.
While scalping was indeed a practice some Native American tribes engaged in, it has been negatively associated with all tribes and furthers the stereotypes used to justify the extermination of many individuals and tribes, while also ignoring that colonizers too would scalp their enemies. Use a metaphor not steeped in a racist, colonialist  history next time, John McEnroe.

We're still talking about this

Some people I have spoken with don't like Maria Sharapova because they think she's too pretty--and not much else (besides a good tennis player).
I think she's pretty smart and has a good sense of humor. I love the way she deals with the corps of media folk who ask her largely inane questions.
And Sharapova continued to handle herself well yesterday when asked to respond to Frenchman Gilles Simon's comments about how tennis should go back to the days when women got paid less than men at the Grand Slam tournaments. Simon thinks men's tennis is more entertaining; that the matches are more interesting. Of course he didn't offer any means of how to measure entertainment value. He didn't note that the rest of the year women earn less at their tournaments than the men do at theirs. And he was forced to acknowledge that his straight-set loss at Wimbledon was probably not that entertaining.
Simon was recently elected to the ATP Players' Council, which seems to be providing him the platform for the airing of these grievances. He reported that every other man in the draw feels the same way, they are just afraid to say anything. But here's the thing. Even if most of them believe equal pay is unfair--the top men (the ones who were asked to comment on the statements) aren't suffering because the women got a pay raise at Wimbledon in 2007. Do you think they are going to take the time to fight equal pay? Are they going to band together and hire a consultant to study the entertainment value of men's versus women's tennis? Activism on the men's tennis tour? I don't think so.
And Sharapova's response to all this:
''I'm sure there are a few more people that watch my matches than his."
When hearing about Sharapova's response, Serena Williams laughed and wholeheartedly agreed. 

There is no Ms. in England?

I have largely stopped posting about the (mis)gendered language in sports.
But language still continues to fascinate me. And I was particularly struck by the incongruity I heard at Wimbledon yesterday while watching Kim Clijsters's match.
Wimbledon refers to female players as either Miss or Mrs (last name) depending on their marital status. While the formality is quaint, the practice seems antiquated--especially in this situation:
Clijsters is married. She gets referred to as Mrs. But she never changed her name. So she is called Mrs. Clijsters at Wimbledon. It sounds so odd.

Serena has the last word

Everyone, it seems, has weighed in on the Centre Court sexism.
But Wimbledon winner, 11-time Grand Slam singles champion, Serena Williams definitely got the last word (even if Dave Zirin wrote his column after Serena's win). Her shirt at the post-match press conference said it all. "Are you looking at my titles?" (You can see a pic of her wearing it at One Sport Voice.)
It's appropriate given the attention women's bodies received this Wimbledon fortnight--not for their athletic ability but for their aesthetics. And especially appropriate for Serena Williams whose body is often the focus of attention [too muscular, too fat, too slow, too fragile (i.e. injury prone)]. This Wimbledon was the same for Serena. A columnist felt the need to talk about her butt--which he so cleverly (note the sarcasm) termed her "backpack." Jason Whitlock, writing for Fox Sports (which explains a lot) is overtly offensive in his treatment of the younger Williams. Example:
Seriously, how else can Serena fill out her size 16 shorts without grazing at her stall between matches?
He is referring to Serena's complaints about Wimbledon's new no food in the locker rooms rule (which was indeed silly).
I don't think African-American writers, of which Whitlock is one, should he held to a higher standards regarding race. But he should be aware, as should everyone, of the problematic connections between African-American athletes and animals. His comments were disgusting and he completely failed to note throughout his column how race plays into how Serena, and her sister Venus, are received and treated in the tennis world--and beyond. He believes that people don't want to see women equal to men in the world of sports (in terms of fame), and could be true but more immediate and relevant is that "people" don't want to see a black woman at the top of the tennis world.
Whitlock was clearly going for a reaction and this is obvious in his complete contradiction: he calls Serena sexy when she is in shape, talks about black women's booties and his enjoyment of them, but chastises Serena for not being a better athlete, for being more dedicated to her sport and her training. It's really difficult to argue that the woman who holds the most Grand Slam singles titles currently on the tour is a sub-par athlete. Because she does not meet everyone's aesthetics though, she is constantly called to task for her athletic abilities, or is it her looks? Or can we even tell the difference anymore?

This week's play on words*: Part II--The Women of Wimbledon

Various bloggers over at Women Talk Sports have already mentioned this issue, so--having been scooped--I'm simply adding to the discourse.

In a one step forward, two steps forward kind of way, Wimbledon has stopped putting Miss (or Mrs.) on the scoreboard. (Though the umpires still use the honorifics during matches.) But in a move that is so very high school, the Wimbledon powers-that-be have decided to schedule women's matches on the show courts based on looks. And everyone has noticed--even ESPN where columnist LZ Granderson writes:
Doing so [selling sex] might hurt some of the players' feelings, but it's not undermining the integrity of the sport. Court assignments don't affect the outcome of the match or tournament.
Well sometimes court assignments do affect outcomes--I mean there is a reason court 2 (the former court 2 anyway) at Wimbledon was called "the graveyard of champions." OK so that's mostly superstition but don't think that tennis does not have certain home-court advantage aspects.
More importantly, though, it does affect the integrity of the sport. One would think that tennis, Wimbledon especially, would be attempting to rectify its sexist, homophobic, and racist ways. But no. That both Williams sisters got sent to court 2 (the new one) along with French Open finalist Svetlana Kuznetsova while younger, blonder, whiter, more heteronormative players got to play Centre and Court 1 is indicative of the multiple and intersecting discriminations that still go largely unchecked.

This article notes, interestingly, that the "babe factor" is not necessarily a recent phenomenon. Citing Frenchwoman Suzanne Lenglen, the author reports (citing Susan Cahn) that Lenglen effectively combined athleticism and eroticism. Of course she also had 6 French Open and 6 Wimbledon titles.
Of course tomorrow the Williams sisters will be on Centre Court playing one another. Because even though the pretty girls got their moments on the show courts last week--they all got sent home this week.

* Oh yeah. The play on words: "No doubt about it, [the young, pretty White girls'] looks and not their talent have won them prime playing time on Wimbledon's best piece of grass." Yep. Yesterday's was better.

Calling Wimbledon on its sexism

I have to admit I don't go to Wimbledon's official site to read the articles. I go for scores and schedules and draws. That's probably a good thing given the reporting the site did on Gisela Dulko's defeat of Maria Sharapova yesterday. The story, which was all about the sex appeal of the players, has been taken down but this columnist does a good job recreating and critiquing it.
Players and promoters and agents have, for the most part, embraced the sex sells mantra in an attempt to legitimize women's tennis (hint: you're actually doing the opposite!). But the columnist is right to note that it should not be on a tournament's own site. The article seems to have turned a sports contest into a beauty contest--which player looked sexier in her all-white attire? It noted that Dulko has been named to lists of the sexiest players.
It is especially unfortunate to see it on the Wimbledon site given that I have heard several stories now about how Wimbledon will not sell out. It does not have an excessive amount of sponsors or ads placed here, there, and everywhere. But it clearly has bought into the selling of the sex appeal of its female players.

Wimbledon is coming: So please be quiet!

Wimbledon starts tomorrow and the big news, rivalling the withdrawal of Rafael Nadal, is how loud it is going to be--more specifically how loud Michelle Larcher de Brito is going to be.
Check out One Sport Voice for a recent post on the gendered nature of the grunting controversy. Yesterday's Boston Globe also highlights the grunting on the women's tennis tour. But they do mention the men.
I don't know about all this. The tradition argument that Martina Navratilova is putting forth is little, well, hypocritical as the Globe hints at. After all, Navratilova was quite the non-traditional presence on the tour when she arrived and throughout much of her playing time. And sure, I like the quiet of Wimbledon, too. But I liked the crowd quiet. I don't really care what the players are doing. I heard de Brito from a court over at the French Open and yes, it was something new. But so was Seles's grunt when she came on the scene.
And the biological arguments are interesting but not entirely convincing.
In the end, the Globe article's mention of grunting on the men's tour and the suggestion that grunting is controversial because it is unladylike really lets the gender double-standard off the hook.
I guess we'll all have to watch Wimbledon and do our own case study and analysis.

A good excuse to post a picture of Natalie Dechy

She put up an amazing fight against reigning French Open (but not as good on grass) champion Ana Ivanovic. I didn't get to see much of it because I was having a very nice local foods breakfast downtown with some new friends and I had to distress my coffee table so the scratches from glasses, computers, feet, keys, etc. seem as purposeful as the ones I created today with a hammer and screwdriver. But I digress (if you want more info on the process and/or project email me).

It looks like they're going to re-air it though so I may see some of the good points and drama.

But Diane at Women Who Serve has a good recap.

I saw Dechy last year, obviously as the above picture attests to, on an outer court. I have always liked her game and the way she moves to the net. She actually uses her doubles skills to construct excellent singles points.

A good excuse to post a picture of Amelie Mauresmo

Since I have all these pics of Wimbledon just hanging out on my hard drive I thought I would see how many I can post this fortnight.

And because in an excellent example of karma Amelie Mauresmo, who is recovering from a quad tear, beat Ashley Harkleroad today at Wimbledon. The lesbian should indeed always triumph over the Playboy model.

Wimbledon is here!

Last year at this time I was in London and getting ready to head to Wimbledon. This year I am at my usual place--the couch--watching it on television. *sigh* Oh well, can't be there every year.

I don't have too much to say about who's going to win, prospects, potential upsets, etc. Diane at Women Who Serve provides that kind of detail. Mostly I just complain.

I think I will start with the score graphics on ESPN2. I don't like them. The horizontal banner across the top of the screen is poorly laid out.

Now on to the commentators. I heard John Feinstein this morning on NPR giving a preview of the Championships. He mentioned that defending champion Venus Williams is only seeded 7th because that is the position she currently occupies in the rankings and Wimbledon chose not to alter the seedings as they sometimes do to reflect experience, or rather, success, on grass. Feinstein seemed to think this meant she only has some outside chance of winning the title--or at least that is what I inferred from his tone. Of course, she won it last year ranked 31st (seeded 25th or 27th, I believe; I forget the exact number). More egregious however was Feinstein's response to the NPR anchor who asked why the former champion was seeded/ranked so low. "She just isn't that interested in tennis."

I am so tired of how commentators are putting this disinterest on the Williams sisters. It's old and it's not even true. How disinterested can one be to put in so much time and effort--to go through so much mentally and physically? So because they do other things besides tennis thus apparently subverting the norm of professional sports where the only thing you can possibly be interested or good at is the sport in which you are a star--they're not interested? I think one could make a better case that people like Justine Henin or Kim Clijsters who walked away from the game at relatively young ages are more disinterested in tennis--at least professional tennis. It's not a judgment on either Henin or Clijsters. It must be very difficult to stay focused and interested enough to continue to train and compete at that level. The Williams sisters have found a way to not get burned out and they get crap for it.

Moving on to one of my least favorite commentators: Brad Gilbert. He's back in the booth. Damn that Andy Murray for firing Gilbert and subjecting us all to his inane, macho, and sexist comments--again. This morning Gilbert was sporting the sweater Federer will be wearing this fortnight. It's a cable-knit cardigan in cream with gold accents. Very Wimbledon. Gilbert said something along the lines of "well it doesn't make me feel very physical, but Roger seems to be doing fine with it." Translation: it's a little faggy and only the best player in the world, and the best grasscourt player can get away with wearing it and not having me call him a pansy.

I am, however, quite pleased with the amount of coverage ESPN2 is doing. Unlike the coverage of Roland Garros, there will be plenty of tennis to see. Coverage today goes from 7am to 5pm. You know where to find me.

Did you find what you were looking for?

1. Some, um, unusual I would say searches of late, such as "Wimbledon braless." What exactly does this mean? That Wimbledon is in need of support? That the searcher is wondering whether Wimbledon will enforce a bra policy alongside its predominantly white rule? Hard to say what the searcher was looking for, but I doubt any answers were found here. Another answer not to be found here and frankly I can't believe even the asking the question "why naive has two dots in it?" even brought someone here.

2. Ana Ivanovic is in the semis at the Australian Open and has a good shot at making it to the finals. [UPDATE: She made it by rallying from 0-6, 0-2 down against Daniela Hantuchova.] That means searches for her have picked up. Still getting the very odd "Ivanovic armpits" but also searches that seem to want a little more than just the armpit shot. Some searchers are getting lazy though. "Ivanovic body," for example is not going to get you very far. Yes, she has a body. Oh, you want naked pictures of that body? Not going to find them here--or anywhere.

3. On a serious note (or more serious, anyway), there have been some hits from those looking, it would seem, for information on Jaye Flood. Flood is the now-fired volleyball coach at Florida Gulf Coast University. In the past week Flood filed a suit against the university charging retaliation for her participation in a Title IX complaint. And earlier this week the university concluded its independent investigation of multiple claims including Flood's charge of retaliation (prior to filing the lawsuit Flood had filed an employment complaint with the university). Also under investigation were "student welfare issues" that initially were thought to stem from Flood grabbing the shirt of a player during a fall practice and lead to Flood being placed on administrative leave. According to the report though there was more than just tugging of shirts. It also cites an alleged inappropriate relationship with the team's student manager. Flood has said that the allegations are false and further evidence of the university's desire to hurt her professionally and personally. It's hard to believe that Flood would file a lawsuit knowing that (and since she did participate in the investigation she must have known what was about to come out) she would be accused of, essentially, sexually harassing a student and not thinking she could prove the allegations false.

Check out the Title IX Blog for more information. They have been following the case more closely and provide better detail on the investigation's findings.

4. And to whoever inquired as to "why do tennis players wear skirts" I can't really provide a good answer for you. There is, of course, the matter of history. Women started playing tennis at a time when skirts were the only option. They've obviously gotten a little shorter and little less cumbersome since the 1800s. So the easy answer is tradition. Patriarchal tradition that is. This means that my instant response to the question, the one I give from personal experience, becomes a little suspect.

I wear tennis skirts because they're comfortable. I wear shorts too, but I like my skirts because the fabric doesn't get bunched up between my legs and I like sticking balls under compression shorts rather than in pockets where they move around a little too much for my liking. Because of the association of skirts with women and femininity and because while women have taken to wearing pants yet men have not taken to wearing skirts, it is impossible for anything I say about how comfortable or conducive to play tennis skirts are to come off as anything other than a justification. Am I participating in my own oppression, playing into gender roles? Probably. Am I upset about this? A little bit. Come this Sunday when I play my match will I be wearing a tennis skirt? Yep. Options are limited in a patriarchy. Most of the shorts I have aren't gender-neutral either. As a wise woman once said to me "you have to be comfortable with a little discomfort." My discomfort is psychic--not sartorial.

Oh no, NPR

NPR's All Things Considered aired a segment on Friday about The Championships in which host Melissa Block spoke with Bud Collins who was at Wimbledon.
There were a few gaffs though in the coverage starting with the brief written explanation on the segment which reads: "Venus Williams beat No. 1-ranked Justine Henin to advance to the women's finals." Not that Venus Williams, winner of the trophy this year, didn't play well but she didn't beat Justine Henin. Poor Marion Bartoli, who had a fantastic tournament didn't get much credit.
Also, Bud Collins, who usually does a good job pronouncing players' names (Block also provided correct pronunciations) called Amelie Mauresmo, Amelia.
But worst of all was when the two started talking about Venus Williams and Bartoli and the final which would pit a 23 seed against an 18 seed. Block asked about Williams's level of play and noted that she was hampered earlier in the week by pretty severe leg cramps. Wow! Is another example of the "all Black people look alike" problem white Americans seem to have? Or a more nuanced version: the Williams sister are interchangeable. Collins, surprisingly, did not correct her.
Interestingly Block ended the segment saying the biggest upset was NBC letting Collins go after 35 years. He was quite gracious in saying that he has enjoyed his time with NBC, that he will be back as a writer and that who knows (as in there might be offers from other television media. Will the BBC snatch him up?)

Injury, rain, and racquet abuse--Oh my!

Au revoir, Amelie. We'll miss you on Saturday.

I missed about a day of Wimbledon to go camping/hiking but saw the Serena Williams injury drama and some of the Nadal-Soderling 5-setter. And alas I saw Mauresmo collapse against Nicole Vaidisova. I knew this would be a tough match but I thought if Mauresmo continued to play the way she had been, she would tough it out. She let Vaidisova, who was not serving well, off the hook and into the next round.


The San Francisco Chronicle sports blog runs down yesterday's happenings where writer Bruce Jenkins gives Serena a hard time for breaking her racket. (I will get to the cries of games(wo)manship that have been swirling more furiously than the London winds in a moment.) I didn't think it was that bad. Certainly I have seen far more egregious behavior from other players--mostly men--who receive far less criticism for their actions. Marat Safin is notorious for bad behavior and I remember once Andre Agassi, in his bad boy days, breaking a racket on court and going over to his bag and taking out at least two more rackets and snapping them in half by stepping on them.


Jenkins also reports on the comments in the London papers about various players and matches including a statement by a writer from the Times who basically says Rafael Nadal is intimidating because of he is just so masculine which includes "masculine armpits." And part of it is abut the capri pants which have a long pocket allowing him to shove a ball in deep so that it resembles a "supernumeray testicle."


But of course the real stuff I missed while out in the woods was the many cries of games(wo)manship levied (see the comments on this article) against Serena Williams. A few outlyers have suggested the cramp was faked. How anyone who saw the many, nearly countless, replays that included the close-up of the seized up calf--no, they are not supposed to do that--can think that is ridiculous. Conditions at Wimbledon are perfect for cramping. The cold and damp weather combined with the toll the grass takes on your leg muscles make cramps a reality. That she took time to stretch and that she tried to jump around afterwards does not mean she was not injured. Do the people who made these comments ever actually use their own muscles? The pain from straining and cramping can be alleviated to some degree with certain treatments, but it does not make the initial injury disappear.


And then there was the bathroom break issue. I did not know about the new rule not allowing a break before the opponent's serve--clearly neither did Serena Williams. I see the attempt to curb games(wo)manship but I think that the chance of breaking momentum is greater when leaving the court at a time when no break has been scheduled--i.e. on an even-numbered game--for either player depending on who has the momentum at the moment. I was watching the match with a physical therapist who said, basically, of course she has to go to the bathroom. During the 2-hour rain delay she likely received IV fluids and drank as much water and other fluids as she could get down. She had to continue drinking on the court to stay hydrated. I don't know why Williams opted not to go before her serve but I don't think it had anything to do with trying to mess up her opponent. For better or worse, Serena Williams has always maintained that every match is all about her own performance.


Most of the comments I have read smack of aversive racism. Though I think they have done a lot for the game of women's tennis, I have never been a devoted fan of either sister. And some of things they have done in the past have been worthy of some criticism. But I haven't found their actions or words to be any more egregious than those of other players who are often protected from protracted criticism and laundry lists of past alleged mistakes by their race, class, and ethnicity.

This is what a rain delay looks like

View from Court 6--no rain.

View from Court 6: the covers come off

Given the forecasts we heard, and the flooding in other parts of Great Britain last week, things could have been much worse at Wimbledon, weather-wise, during the first week.

But play is currently suspended across the pond so I thought I would share some pics of the rain delay process. Last Wednesday we experienced two rain delays. One was brief; the other ended play for the day. During the second one when the rain was heavier the grounds crew inflated the covers which takes a while but looks cool while it is going on.

Inflating the covers.

Wimbledon update

Well I am kind of glad we left London yesterday given the bomb scare in the city's theatre district early this morning. Security at Wimbledon was tightened today. The security situation was interesting. Much more thorough searching of bags than at the US Open. They open them and take out things and look in all the pockets. My sister actually had to take the cap off her chapstick! But they let you in with almost anything--including one bottle of wine per person (or two beers).

What was odd though was that we got onto the grounds the first day without tickets because ours we at will call which was located inside the gates. We did have to go through security before getting there, though. Still they seemed to be very on top of some things and quite lax about others.

Anyway, today was probably the most interesting day in terms of match-ups. Jelena Jankovic was challenged by Czech player Lucie Safarova who I saw play Eleni Daniilidou on Tuesday. That was a very good match which I did not get to see end because of the rain that came in the third set. But Safarova has a very hard, flat two-handed backhand. She hits hard, including her serve which is a little surprising given her thin (though tall) frame.

Check out Women Who Serve for more thorough updates. I will add that another upset not yet covered on that blog was Laura Granville's seemingly easy win over Martina Hingis, who I did see walk by after her Tuesday match but I didn't get a pic. Hingis has been out with injuries and that probably factored into the loss.

One of the things I found interesting watching grass court play in person was how at times the surface does not seem to matter. For example, in the best match I saw during my two days, there were times when Elena Dementieva and Natalie Dechy could have been on hard courts the way they were slugging it out--including one rally that was 39 strokes long. (We were sitting right next to the booth where the statisticians were and they told us during the rain delay.) But there were other times when it was obvious that shots were inspired--or necessitated--by the surface. Clever slices and angles and delicate touches.

Jolly good day at SW19

Not a drop of rain! Some of us are headed back tomorrow and probably will not be as lucky with the weather but we're going to persevere.

It was an amazing day. My first time at Wimbledon and I got to see Amelie Mauresmo on Centre Court. It was wonderful. And I got to experience the atmosphere engendered by Tim Henman who has lived to fight another day--tomorrow in fact he is slated to be back on Centre Court.

Navigating Wimbledon was not as easy as the US Open. First, Centre Court tickets only get you into Centre Court and outlying courts. So you miss all matches on Court 1 and can only stand on Court 2. This was disappointing, especially because Jelena Jankovic was playing there this afternoon and we were crammed into standing room space when there were more than half of the ticketed seats empty.

But we did see some good outside court matches. Sam Stosur beat American Kristina Brandi. Megan Shaughnessy lost badly to a player I had never heard of before.

Hopefully there will be some doubles up tomorrow.

Here are some pics of the day's matches.

Raymond writes on Wimbledon

I made it. No problems. And there's wi-fi at the flat! Let the vacation blogging commence!

Lisa Raymond, who has been writing a column at SI.com, previews the Championships, Wimbledon this week. Her top pick is Henin with Serena Williams running a close second. She talks about doubles as well but oddly writes about herself in the third person as a contender for the women's doubles title.

Her column is only so-so, but she does try to convey the aura of Wimbledon during the fortnight and a good job describing the scene. It makes me very excited to head over the village.

ken goes to London!

Yep--I'm leavin' on a jet plane tonight and arriving in London at 6:30AM (their time--1:30 mine--uck).

And yes, I am going to see Wimbledon when it starts next week. I'll be queuing up and all that.

I have a brand new digital camera that has sport mode and hyper sport mode to take fast action shots--like Amelie Mauresmo's beautiful topspin backhand. And I will bring my computer and hopefully find some wi-fi and try to load pics and details as often as I can.

That being said, it is vacation so my entries will not as regular as usual.

Cheers!

Wimbledon finally catches up

What a week! Illinois retires their Indian mascot and Wimbledon has finally agreed to award equal prize money to women players. Now every grand slam has equal prize money for the winners. (The French Open still maintains a disparity in prize money up until the finals, though with the Wimbledon decision many believe the French Open will have to follow suit soon.)
As happy as I am to hear the news, I am a little disappointed that it appears the decision was not really due to any feminist activism. This is in part because there has been little feminist activism around the issue. Venus Williams wrote a good editorial about it last year before the tournament began and every year the media gets a quote or two from a female player who says something along the lines of "yeah, it's not fair; we should be paid the same as the men." No one takes it any further or even discusses the possibility of taking it any further.
Gone are the days of Billie Jean King organized boycotts.
It appears that Wimbledon finally caved because the British Olympic Committee was worried about the embarrassment of having Wimbledon be the tennis venue for the 2012 Olympics and still be perpetuating gender inequality.
But the All-England Club chairman is describing it a natural progression that began with BJK in the late 1960s. But very few seem to be buying that given that a vote taken on this issue last year was no where near approving equal prize money.
In the end, even though the pressure was not from the collective power of the women's tour members, I am glad the right decision was made.