Mary Carillo says 100's of junior boys could beat either Williams sister

[11 Bravo]

She went on to say that men ranked 500th and lower would wipe her off the tennis court. Any thoughts?

[MrMonk]

1. Who's Mary Carillo ...

and who cares what she says?

[Karmadillo]

4. Bio

http://www.hbo.com/realsports/correspondents/bios/mary_carillo.html

Widely recognized as one of the most talented and opinionated network-TV tennis announcers, Mary Carillo achieved a longtime personal goal by joining the HBO Sports' broadcast team in 1996 to work her first-ever Wimbledon assignment. Carillo joined broadcasting partners Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, John Lloyd, Barry MacKay and host Jim Lampley in providing commentary and analysis on the network's coverage of the Wimbledon Championships. Her duties for three years included hosting the daily one-hour prime time highlights program.

In 1997 she made her debut as a correspondent on REAL SPORTS WITH BRYANT GUMBEL, HBO's monthly magazine-styled program. She has earned praise for her unique interview style, turning out compelling profiles of the late NHL coach Roger Neilson, Andre Agassi, 9/11 hijacking victim Mark Bingham and University of Texas track coach Bev Kearney among others, and for her in-depth reports on female recruiters at big time colleges and an extraordinary soccer program for New York's homeless.

A network broadcaster for two decades, Carillo began her broadcasting career in 1980 as an analyst for USA Network. She also worked a host of tournaments for ESPN. In 1986 she joined CBS Sports and has worked the U.S. Open every year since. Her CBS duties expanded to include reporting assignments at the 1992, '94 and '98 Winter Olympic Games.

For HBO's groundbreaking 1999 documentary, DARE TO COMPETE: THE STRUGGLE OF WOMEN IN SPORTS, she served as co-writer with Frank Deford.

Carillo played on the women's professional circuit from 1977 to 1980. She was ranked as high as No. 33 when she retired. She won the French Open mixed doubles title with her partner John McEnroe in 1977.

more...

[marbuc]

2. Who is Mary Carillo?

Serena and Venus (in her prime) are beasts on the court, and could could probably beat ANY male player on a given day.

[11 Bravo]

6. I think Mary's statement is probably a little over the top.

But your's is just silly.

[marbuc]

8. You don't think Serena or Venus could beat the top male?

You might be right, but they are strong, athletic, and serve extremely hard. Would they dominate the men's circuit? Likely not. But they are capable of beating the top males, and would probably settle into top 20 rankings.

[11 Bravo]

10. I think they would be lucky to take a game off Roger Federrer,

and I think they would get smoked by any man in the top 50. I do take issue with Carillo's statement that many junior boys could defeat them.

[erpowers]

13. Wrong

I contend that you are wrong. I think people just think any woman cannot beat a man and do not look at the facts. Unless something has chanced men serve in about the 125 range. Venus is very capable of serving it the 125 range and she did that in at least one of her matches. In addition, Venus in her prime before the injuries played five sets in one day winning both matches. Venus may not be able to beat Federrer, but I contend that she could give him a run for his money or she could have in her prime. I contend that she could definetly take a few games off of Federrer. In addition, I think Venus could have beat some of the top 50 men in tennis in her prime.

[fishwax]

17. yeah, things have changed

The Williams sisters are able to hit the 120s, but that's a top end, not something they hit consistently. The men top out these days at over 150.

In the 2005 U.S. Open quarterfinal, Venus's average 1st serve was 106 (slower, I'd wager, than the average 2nd serve of many of the top men) and her top speed was 120.

Of course, she's not at the top of her game these days, but even in her prime I think it would have taken quite a game to play with one of the top 50 men.

Venus and Serena are incredible physical specimens, and their achievements are valuable and amazing in their own right ...

(on edit: I did some more searching, and it looks like the average 2nd serve speed for most men was below 106)

[tishaLA]

9. Very untrue

And the Williams sisters would admit as much to you. As would Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova, BTW.

They might have been able to beat a man ranked in 90-100 at their best, which they are no longer at, if everything was going their way. But they never, on any day, could have beaten "ANY male player on a given day."

Now...I'd give them a shot against a man ranked ~150.

[rockymountaindem]

20. They can't even beat any female player on any given day.

So, if we're going by the assumption that the best man (Federer) is better than the best woman (probably a tie between Davenport and Clijsters), then the Williams sisters are even farther down.

Gone are the days when Richard Williams could go around bragging that his girls could beat anybody "by playing only 70% of their game".

In the interest of clarity, I should admit that I'm a fan of both Davenport and Federer. But I think, though, if you want a really good match you'd take Serena in her prime (definately better than Venus) and have her play Steffi Graf in her prime. That would be some good tennis!

[MrSlayer]

3. Probably correct.

I'm sure there are some guys they can beat but they would have no shot against the top 100. Things just are what they are.

[RoyGBiv]

5. Hmmm ... seems I've heard this before ...

Is she channeling Bobby "any half-decent male player could defeat even the best female players" Riggs now? Wonder what her co-anchor has to say about that.

[11 Bravo]

7. I watched that match.

Is my memory faulty, or did Riggs get only one serve while Billy Jean received two; and did BJ get to use the doubles alley while Bobby's shots needed to stay within the confines of the single's court?

[Awsi Dooger]

18. The rules were standard tennis

There was some talk of altered rules after Bobby Riggs dispatched Margaret Court in straight sets a few months earlier. But that was overreaction and the Riggs/King match was played with normal guidelines. Unless you count the stupid yellow Sugar Daddy windbreaker that Riggs insisted on wearing until near the end of the match.

[fishwax]

24. I believe you're right, but wikipedia says otherwise ...

someone should correct them ... i wasn't alive at the time of the match, but had always heard that they played under the same rules ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Riggs

[Awsi Dooger]

25. That's clearly wrong

One of those myths that's somehow morphed into fact. I watched both matches and they were conventional rules. Margaret Court should have crushed Riggs herself but she played too respectful, almost scared. That match was on Mother's Day, in the middle of the afternoon with some buildup but not a huge audience. The Riggs/King match was hyped beyond belief and had the aura of a heavyweight championship fight.

[devilgrrl]

11. Does it really matter?

Who cares about men and women competing in the field of sport? This is so boring and means absolutely nothing. :boring:

[joeybee12]

12. A little over the top, but accurate....they'd be lucky to return the

serves...this is not to diss women's tennis. I happen to enjoy it more than the men's largely because the men's game (except for Federer) is all about a big serve, and then the point is over. There's more finesse in the women's game.

BTW, this discussion happened way back when during the BJ King and Riggs match. Even Chris Evert admitted at the time that she'd be lucky to get a few points off any of the current top men.

[bigwillq]

16. Hewitt's game is not

about a big serve. That is one reason, however, that Hewitt hasn't won a major in quite a few years. But I love the way Hewitt plays. He's my fave male tennis player.

[NewJeffCT]

14. I'm a huge supporter of women's sports

and, while she may be exaggerating a bit, she's not too far off base. The men are just bigger, faster & stronger.

As an example in another sport, the first time they allowed pros into the Olympics for basketball, the women's team used pros, too. The women's team that had practiced together & played together played a game against a pick-up team of high school boys... and lost.

[rocktivity]

15. So?

And I can't help but wonder if she'd have said that it they weren't black.

:shrug:
rocknation

[rockymountaindem]

19. I didn't know Richard Williams posted here

n/t

[rocktivity]

21. I didn't know Mary Carillo posted here, either!

I'm not saying she's wrong, I'm saying it's a moot issue--so moot that she must have an ulterior motive. Her statement applies to ALL woman tennis players--why is she singling out the Williams sisters?

:headbang:
rocknation

[joeybee12]

22. Well, you can't say she singled out the Williams sisters...maybe she

was asked the question specifically referring to the two of them...the original poster doesn't give much context.

[rockymountaindem]

23. I think it applies to the Williams sisters for several reasons

For starters, they are in the public eye beyond the tennis community. Davenport and Clijsters don't have fashion lines or turn up on TV shows unless they involve tennis. The Williams sisters are much better known in America as a whole than any other tennis players (male or female). Therefore, people who don't know that much about women's tennis probably assume the Williams sisters are the best. They no longer are. Therefore, I think Mary Carillo's remarks were directed at the Williams sisters in order to combat the incorrect notion held by many that Venus and Serena are the best players on planet Earth. Carillo's remark was undoubtedly hyperbolic, but I think the idea was to start debate, which it obviously has.

Secondly, the Williams sisters and their dad seem to think that the two of them are the best thing ever to happen to tennis and that they are still the best in the world, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. Ability aside, I think the Williams sisters have the biggest egos in the women's game today. That is going to draw a lot of criticism, particularly when they maintain that aura despite the fact that they are regularly beaten these days by "lesser" players (Sharapova for instance, although I think that she is also overrated). You don't see people piling on Justine Henin when she's down, and I think that's because Henin projects a much more sportsmanlike attitude.

Richard Williams just likes to call everything racism. I hate to admit it, but that may in fact the the case with some of the Williams' detractors (by which I mean I hate to admit people are biased against them for racial issues. That shouldn't be a problem for anyone). However, Richard Williams frequently blames racism for any negative reaction his daughters receive. I'll call his attention to the fact that I don't think Chanda Rubin has ever been booed on the court. Also, the national tennis center is appropriately named after Arthur Ashe, who was not only a fantastic player but a very good sportsman and a class act. I'd also call to his attention the fact that Martina Hingis also got similar bad press for being a self-centered primadonna (like that breakdown when she came in second at the French). Hingis was just a disagreeable person and a bad sport, but she can't hide behind charges of racism.

I think Richard Williams distracts from real cases of racial bias with his antics.