I agree - it resonates a bit like when Karsten Braasch played was it Venus and Serena and won 6-1 and 6-2 respectively. Braasch was a bit like a kyrgios figure - smoked, arrogant, flashy game, big mouth. They were always on a hiding to nothing. Braasch was semi retired, ranked 203 at the time. Came to the match having played a round of golf just before and droning two pints of beer. So it was reported. And won. And of course it fed the misogynist haters and their message, and didnt do womens tennis any good.
the story had been before that womens top players could beat any player ranked outside the top 200; Braasch took up the challenge and thrashed them. The story became that hed deliberately played like someone ranked 650 to give them a chance.
If Sabalenka loses it will feed the same rhetoric. If she wins, it doesnt matter as people will just say Nick is washed up, unfit. Etc etc.
If Nick tries hard (very unlikely) I would expect him to win with considerable ease. Far more likely is that he will joke around and win in a match tie break! I hope that there will be some odds available!
If Nick tries hard (very unlikely) I would expect him to win with considerable ease. Far more likely is that he will joke around and win in a match tie break! I hope that there will be some odds available!
He's going to really have to tank to take it to a tiebreak, 6-0 6-0 in under 15 minutes would be my prediction if he was playing at anything around 50% or above.
Obviously not Tennis related but this shows the advantage Males have in Athletics BoysVsWomen.com
-- Edited by emmsie69 on Thursday 11th of December 2025 08:25:50 PM
It's just an opportunity to generate some money isn't, it certainly isn't a meaningful sporting event. It'll be mentioned for years in the media, but mean nothing. To me it's not far off being the same as mixed doubles, cause in a match, it always seems like the pair that's determined to win will target the weakest opposing player 80% of the time.
Watched snatches of it earlier today. Clearly just a quick money grab for both of them, and a bid for Kyrgios to stay relevant in his burgeoning pundit/influencer career. Can't see him returning to the tour anytime soon - he looked well short of full fitness, breathing heavily after a set, even though it wasn't exactly the most intense match.
Sabalenka's motivations are a bit more interesting. I think she perhaps feels that she hasn't quite generated the attention she deserves, despite being comfortably the dominant player in women's tennis these last two years. Her endorsement earnings etc are still well below those of Coco and Emma, and I wonder whether her management company pitched it as an opportunity for her to gain more social media followers, wider attention and marketability.
Neither player looked like they were fully going for it. Was the court shorter on Sabalenka's end? Nick looked like he was often hitting at half pace, maybe to avoid the possibility of hitting long?
Neither player looked like they were fully going for it. Was the court shorter on Sabalenka's end? Nick looked like he was often hitting at half pace, maybe to avoid the possibility of hitting long?
The brief TV news report that I saw earlier (ITV News) said that the court had been specially adapted to "balance up" (*cringe*) the physical differences between Kyrgios & Sabalanka (obvious at first glance) & the Beeb report says this:
The court was altered so Sabalenka's receiving side was reduced by 9% in the dimensions, giving Kyrgios a smaller target to hit in an attempt to ensure a more level playing field.
Both players were only allowed one serve each and, with differing opinions about who that benefitted, it hampered Sabalenka more as she missed more first serves in the decisive moments.
I really couldn't care less, one way or the other. I didn't watch any of it. Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull over on ITV which I originally saw at the cinema was a greater attraction...
I would've been more invested if the goal was to show the disparity between Men and Women. No messing with the court sizes, just a Man and Woman playing at the top of their level.
The LTA still allow Males to compete against Females at the lower end of the game which is disrespectful to Women.
I watched it all and found it quite interesting. The change to court size was odd and had more consequences than just giving Sabalenka a smaller court. It definitely made Kyrgrios take pace off, and if course affected angles. Sabalenka was serving from well behind baseline to compensate for change. Kyrgios not your average mens 675 in world and mixed it up so much it was totally different to most women's, or mens matches even. The one serve each was more of a disadvantage to Sabalenka if anything and she lost quite a few points on faults. Presumably Nicks normal second serve still has quite a bit of pace on it as well as the spins. Annabel Croft was saying Sabalenka should have had 2 serves and Kyrgios only one....would have made it even more pointless. I don't see a problem with men playing against women at lower club level, eg our club has singles box leagues like that. There clearly are loads of people playing where women can beat men. Or young juniors playing boys v girls at under 8/9/10 at lower levels.
Haven't seen it. I'll try catch a bit of it to at least have seen some of the nonsense, not that I'm prejudging.
It does all seem rather silly with the court dimensions on Sabalenka's side forcing Kyrgios to adapt from a normal game, plus the only one serve business.