TENNIS: FO R4 and The Gods of Tennis
Jun. 6th, 2023 08:06 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllThe second week of the French Open is starting to shape up, with Djokovic and Alcaraz getting through to the quarters in three sets (at this point of the week, it looks as though Alcaraz had the tougher draw despite the seeding.) Svitolina continued her remarkable return after giving birth. The Ukranian (married to Frenchman Monfils, which has probably helped with the Roland Garros crowd) will face Sabalenka next. Jabeur is also through to the quarters, achieving her best result in the French on her comeback (from injury.)
It’s become clearer to me what the LTA and UK Government are doing about Russian and Belarussian players for the English grass-court season, which has started at Surbiton. If players sign up to certain requirements, they can play as neutrals, with the LTA ceding to the general tennis arrangements so they won’t get fined, and so all players will gain ranking points as well as prize money. But the Home Office will be doing extra checks before granting them visas, so there’s a possibility some players may not get to play as a result.
As I can’t really watch tennis (I try to listen to coverage, but it depends on whether I can find something else to be doing that doesn’t demand too much attention, and I certainly haven’t found anything that lasts a whole match), I watched the first episode of The Gods of Tennis.
This seems to be focusing on the tennis superstars of the 1970s and 80s, and although I’ve heard about some of this stuff, it was before my time. David Morrissey was narrating, because he seems to be the go-to guy for BBC documentaries. I felt that there was a lot of shaping the narrative going on, particularly when it came to the presentation of actual matches. As for the title, obviously, they’re not gods, just extremely talented athletes.
This episode focused on Arthur Ashe and Billie Jean King, only one of whom is alive to speak now, but they did get Ashe’s brother and agent, as well as contemporary tennis players (not Jimmy Connors), tennis journalists/commentators and celeb tennis fans for colour. Oh, and inevitably Claire Balding.
The focal point was the 1975 Wimbledon singles finals, but, to give context, the programme went back to the sport turning professional and how the two were activists in their own way – King for women tennis players, Ashe for anti-racism (he was initially very dismissive of the sportswomen’s fight for equality.)
Politics and tennis interwove through the programme, with King, who had won so much at Wimbledon, wanting one more championship. Her very competitiveness was politicised as being unwomanly. Ashe, about the same age, was in the upper echelons of the sport, but had never won at Wimbledon. Both, as it happened, were facing talented young opponents they’d faced before. King had Chris Everett in the semis, who was a great interviewee, and Ashe was across the net from Connors. The twist was that the latter two had been a couple, but recently broken up, and Connors turned up mid match to watch his ex play a really important match, with his new girlfriend, when they hadn’t gone public before. How very classy. It helped King turn the match, as her opponent was distracted. Meanwhile, Ashe won his match via strategy, working out what sort of game would flummox Connors, as he was unlikely to beat him playing his usual game. As we now know, you do have to be pretty capable and mentally strong to pull such tactical play off. (Shame it was hatched in the Playboy Club, though.)
I’d heard about the famous Battle of the Sexes match, but not Ashe going to play in Apartheid-era South Africa, having the clout to insist the tournament was non-segregated, which meant black people could spectate as well as play. He faced Connors (of course) and lost, but a black South African who would become a friend spoke powerfully about the impact of seeing him and his cerebral play. It is likely that this and other experiences moved Ashe’s thinking about King’s fight.
But I did think that the problem of oversimplification for The Narrative lost something here: what of women of colour? There was no comment on how Yvonne Goolagong-Cawley was right there in the finals, playing King. As she only won one game in the shortest ever women’s final, I do understand why she might not want to discuss the match, but there was absolutely no discussion of what her experiences may have been as an Aboriginal Australian (Wiradjuri) woman athlete, and it just struck me as very odd. We heard one American racist from Virginia say in a clip that there were two races, and that’s patently not true, whither the native Americans? Why perpetuate that binary aspect, when lesbianism got a passing mention?
It’s become clearer to me what the LTA and UK Government are doing about Russian and Belarussian players for the English grass-court season, which has started at Surbiton. If players sign up to certain requirements, they can play as neutrals, with the LTA ceding to the general tennis arrangements so they won’t get fined, and so all players will gain ranking points as well as prize money. But the Home Office will be doing extra checks before granting them visas, so there’s a possibility some players may not get to play as a result.
As I can’t really watch tennis (I try to listen to coverage, but it depends on whether I can find something else to be doing that doesn’t demand too much attention, and I certainly haven’t found anything that lasts a whole match), I watched the first episode of The Gods of Tennis.
This seems to be focusing on the tennis superstars of the 1970s and 80s, and although I’ve heard about some of this stuff, it was before my time. David Morrissey was narrating, because he seems to be the go-to guy for BBC documentaries. I felt that there was a lot of shaping the narrative going on, particularly when it came to the presentation of actual matches. As for the title, obviously, they’re not gods, just extremely talented athletes.
This episode focused on Arthur Ashe and Billie Jean King, only one of whom is alive to speak now, but they did get Ashe’s brother and agent, as well as contemporary tennis players (not Jimmy Connors), tennis journalists/commentators and celeb tennis fans for colour. Oh, and inevitably Claire Balding.
The focal point was the 1975 Wimbledon singles finals, but, to give context, the programme went back to the sport turning professional and how the two were activists in their own way – King for women tennis players, Ashe for anti-racism (he was initially very dismissive of the sportswomen’s fight for equality.)
Politics and tennis interwove through the programme, with King, who had won so much at Wimbledon, wanting one more championship. Her very competitiveness was politicised as being unwomanly. Ashe, about the same age, was in the upper echelons of the sport, but had never won at Wimbledon. Both, as it happened, were facing talented young opponents they’d faced before. King had Chris Everett in the semis, who was a great interviewee, and Ashe was across the net from Connors. The twist was that the latter two had been a couple, but recently broken up, and Connors turned up mid match to watch his ex play a really important match, with his new girlfriend, when they hadn’t gone public before. How very classy. It helped King turn the match, as her opponent was distracted. Meanwhile, Ashe won his match via strategy, working out what sort of game would flummox Connors, as he was unlikely to beat him playing his usual game. As we now know, you do have to be pretty capable and mentally strong to pull such tactical play off. (Shame it was hatched in the Playboy Club, though.)
I’d heard about the famous Battle of the Sexes match, but not Ashe going to play in Apartheid-era South Africa, having the clout to insist the tournament was non-segregated, which meant black people could spectate as well as play. He faced Connors (of course) and lost, but a black South African who would become a friend spoke powerfully about the impact of seeing him and his cerebral play. It is likely that this and other experiences moved Ashe’s thinking about King’s fight.
But I did think that the problem of oversimplification for The Narrative lost something here: what of women of colour? There was no comment on how Yvonne Goolagong-Cawley was right there in the finals, playing King. As she only won one game in the shortest ever women’s final, I do understand why she might not want to discuss the match, but there was absolutely no discussion of what her experiences may have been as an Aboriginal Australian (Wiradjuri) woman athlete, and it just struck me as very odd. We heard one American racist from Virginia say in a clip that there were two races, and that’s patently not true, whither the native Americans? Why perpetuate that binary aspect, when lesbianism got a passing mention?
