|
美国essay范文
如果我们认为男子网球活动目前是发展的黄金时期，瑞士的罗杰?费德勒和西班牙的拉菲尔?纳达尔他们已经是网球史上最有名的球星，那么女子网球业好像正处于下降趋势。在年轻一代之中很少有我们所熟悉的球员，丹麦的卡洛林，另沃兹尼亚奇已经位于世界第一的头衔超过了一年期，却没有拿下过任何大赛冠军。更为糟糕的就是女子网球比赛一直是被外界认为打法过于单一，没有什么观赏性。但是这一点需要归结于比赛的形式。
网球目前可以说是最为引人注目的比赛了，它一直分为男和女两种规则。虽然这仅仅只是体现在四项大满贯的赛事之中，其中男子采取的是五盘三胜制，而女子采取的是三盘两胜制。
IF MEN’S tennis is enjoying a golden age, with Switzerland’s Roger Federer and Spain’s Rafael Nadal already established among the all-time greats, then women’s looks in a slump. Its younger generation of players includes few recognisable champions. Denmark’s Caroline Wozniacki has been ranked number one in the world for over a year without winning a single grand slam tournament. Above all, women’s tennis is criticised for being one-dimensional and dull to watch. Could its format be at least partly to blame?
Tennis may be the only high-profile sport that still has different rules for women than men. This is only the case in the four grand slams, or majors, where men play best-of-five-sets matches and women contend best-of-threes. But those tournaments are the most prestigious. When Wimbledon, the oldest, was first played in 1877, it was strictly a men-only contest. Conventions of the day meant women were deemed too frail to play a five-set match.
So when the women’s Introducing best-of-fives into women’s majors would have numerous benefits. For a start, it should boost athleticism. That has been perhaps the most exciting development in the men’s game over the past decade. As modern tennis has retreated to the baseline and rallies have lengthened, the need to prepare for a punishing, five-set encounter has made fitness a priority. The supreme conditioning of Mr Nadal and Serbia’s Novak Djokovic, who have split all of the last seven slams between them, has allowed them to perform acrobatics that would have been unimaginable a few years ago. This has replaced the court craft of the 1970s as the visual treat for spectators.
By contrast, without best-of-fives, the fading of serve-and-volley tennis has arguably led to a setback for athleticism in the women’s game, which probably peaked with Germany’s Steffi Graf in the 1980s and 1990s. Players approach the net less frequently than ever before, and yet they have never had to build much stamina. Even some of the higher-ranked players—such as France’s Marion Bartoli, ranked ninth in the world, or Russia’s Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova (pictured), now 16th—sometimes look notably out of shape. Meanwhile, the fitter women have little opportunity in a best-of-three to make their physical superiority count.
That is also, partly, because best-of-threes give weaker players more chance to cause an upset. A brief lapse in concentration or a lucky mishit can determine the outcome of a set and put a player firmly in control of a match. Best-of-fives, on the other hand, reward consistency. They also favour more cerebral players, who can adapt their game plans to counter troublesome opponents. That makes them more interesting to watch as well as harder to win. It is notable that over the past three years, eight different men have won Masters 1000 tournaments, where best-of-threes are played, but just four have triumphed at majors. Although the element of chance is not always unwelcome in sport, it exacerbates one of the current problems in the women’s game: the absence of a marketable star or, better still, a rivalry.
In itself, the shorter format demeans women. It gives ammunition to opponents of equal pay, who argue that women put in fewer hours and attract less interest than men. And the discrimination is unusually sexist. While most of the twentieth-century Olympic Games did not include women’s distance-running events because of similar old-fashioned prejudice, amends were made in the 1980s. Since then, women have competed in events as gruelling as the marathon with no ill effects. In tennis, meanwhile, the influence of the Victorian mindset is still apparent.
Reform will not happen unless women demand it, however. And the leading players remain silent on the issue. That is hardly surprising. Having enjoyed success as things stand, they have little incentive to call for a physically taxing change, especially as tournaments like Wimbledon now pay them equal prize money to the men. Tournament organisations are unlikely to back an overhaul, either. The scheduling of early-round matches during a slam is tricky even now. Extending the duration of women’s matches could make it impossible to fit a tournament into a two-week period. It would also run against the trend: men’s tournaments have been phasing out best-of-fives in attempt to prevent injuries caused by wear and tear. Not least, organisations dominated by men must be wary of interfering in what is, essentially, an issue for women. But unless women’s tennis gets some fresh impetus, its slump may well persist.
The most primitive form of tennis is called indoor tennis (Real tennis). Most historians believe that the sport originated in France in the 12th century church in northern missionaries corridors ball with the palm of a game. [2] to the mid-14th century French poet put this ball game introduced to the French court, as a royal pastime for men and women. [3] was to play this game, the venue is a hall inside the palace, there is no network nor the racket, the ball is rolled into round with a cloth after using a rope tied into. Space in the middle set up a rope for the sector, using his hands to make a racket, throw the ball from the rope to throw to, French called Tenez, English is called "Take it Play!", Meaning: "! Seize lost in the past" today, "tennis" (Tennis) a phrase that comes from this. By the 16th century, wooden racket was used in place of hands Bounce. Initially tennis, just two hemispheres filled with grass, leaves or hair made, and later with the development of tennis balls making more and more attention.
Early 16th century, the ball game is a French national found curiosity began to follow suit, and soon spread to major cities, and improved equipment. Ball manufacturing was more durable wood to beat the parchment panels, making the surface area is enlarged, but also lengthen grip handle. Site in the middle of the rope, the rope to the ground increases numerous short hanging from the rope below the ball after, can be clearly noticed. Later, the French king Louis ban was ordered, and the provisions of this game is the privilege of the court.
Early 17th century, the site is no longer used the middle rope curtain, in favor of small square nets, mesh better than the role of curtain, tempo switch racquet stringing, flexible and lightweight convenience. When making such games in the French court, the court placed next to a golden container after each game is completed, the audience will money into the dish, as the winner of the prize. This approach initially good intentions, then gradually evolved into a gamble. The number is still small at the start, the more time passes the greater gamble, even someone is bankrupt, so the dispute after another, King of France, then banned again for this game, which is the early 18th century, the main reason for the decline of tennis.
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
