[Nikigreat]

Just thinking.. Why does everyone still use this word in woman Tennis?
Why doesn't anybody understand that in WTA to receive is better than to serve?
You don't have chances to commit double faults while receiving, and 99% of women play better from the baseline and in receiving than how they serve.
Break means, as the word says, that there is an important rupture of the equilibrium of the match; that the draw situation given by the following of serve is "broken". But there is no following of serve in women Tennis.
What do we break if in a WTA matches is usual to see players to lose at least half of their serve games? Nothing.
To hold or not to hold doesn't change nothing, in WTA it's only a run where players have to come first to 6 games, not where it's decisive to break first or at least one more time than the opponent.
Sometimes it happened to watch games in which the crucial "break" was given by the hold of a player, not by the serve loss. And I'm really not going too far.

[Demonata]

Unless you are serena williams. HA

[gregm]

I agree but alot of times it just makes you appreciate the good servers in the wta that much more. The Williams sisters, Ivanovic when she is stable, Kvitova, Stosur, Petrova, Lisicki when she is not on tilt. Venus has hit serves at 128 mph, Ivanovic and Lisicki have hit serves up to 124 mph, its not the power its just the consistency.

Sharapova drives me crazy wagering on her and watching her service games and Ivanovic and her ball toss at times. Makes you really appreciate the williams sisters alot more when they were at their best.

[Nikigreat]

When I was writing this I already knew someone would have talked about Williams sisters or other good servers.
But that's the point: we are talking about exceptions, that confirms the rule said in the first post. It's not normal and regular to have good WTA servers, and don't forget to serve it's all about to be focused and we all know how women can lost concentration in every moment of the match.

[gregm]

I think your first post was interesting niki, a break in womens tennis is not a big deal to me. I would much rather have most womens players I am wagering on winning the match on their return game than serving for a match. I have a friend who teaches tennis and he is always talking about how he teaches his girls about the importance of rallies and defense, there are physical differences between men and women that influence these serve differences. Though to tell the truth, I could never serve like Venus and some of these big women servers ever could. I am just not as tall as Kvitova, LOL.

I actually like watching the womens game for that reason and the nice visuals of course. Watching these really tall guys like Isner and the really big servers are some of the most boring matches to watch for me, hold your service game and get to the tiebreak. A guy like Ferrer or a great guy in rallies like Nadal is so much more fun for me to watch.

[BrianLaverty]

http://tennisinsight.com/match_stats...chID=173474211

This match was between Hantuchova and Bondarenko last week.

They combined for 1 ace and 31 double faults.

There was a total of 32 service games and 24 breaks.

It was the worst 3 hours of tennis I've ever watched.

[gregm]

http://tennisinsight.com/match_stats...chID=173474211

This match was between Hantuchova and Bondarenko last week.

They combined for 1 ace and 31 double faults.

There was a total of 32 service games and 24 breaks.

It was the worst 3 hours of tennis I've ever watched.

I didnt see that but that must have been brutal to watch. I thought the same thing about the Venus and Wozniak match, it was just horrible tennis and then Venus turns around the next match and was a completely different player. I know some of that was the sjorgens syndrome she suffers from, but WTA is such a mental game.