Serena Williams and her husband, Alexis Ohanian, are back in the spotlight this week stemming from Serena’s interview with Australia’s “The Project,” and Alexis’s twitter rant refuting data put out by the New York Times showing male players were fined ~3x more than their female counterparts for on-court behavior at Grand Slams between 1988-2018. Yesterday, we wrote about a larger issue at hand here: the lack of respect for tennis officials and the prevalent, poor behavior sweeping through tennis players like a virus. But, I want to leave that at the water’s edge and unpack Serena’s and Alexis’s arguments, respectfully.

Serena’s Contradiction

The broader media and twitter-sphere are quick to fall over themselves in an effort to console and support celebrities whenever a social issue is the topic at hand. Rarely do we benefit from critical thinking or unbiased opinions when consuming news from our favorite media sources. However, let’s stop and be intellectually honest about Serena’s argument here.

“I just don’t understand,” Williams told “The Project.” “If you’re a female, you should be able to do even half of what a guy can do.”

Isn’t this “reverse-sexism?” At best, isn’t it anti-feminism? Serena’s making the point that men set the benchmark for acceptable behavior. Think about that. This is an extremely important point. She’s telling us that the world should look to male players for acceptable on-court behavior and to set the bar for what’s right and what’s wrong. The illogical rationale in Serena’s thought process here is baffling. At the same time she’s shouting (literally) at the ‘injustice’ of Carlos Ramos’s ‘sexism,’ Serena contradicts her own sentiment. Ironic.

Serena’s Husband’s NYT Tirade

Alexis took to twitter Sunday in a tirade of combative tweets against the New York Times and NYT writer, Christopher Clarey. Basically, Alexis was upset that Clarey ‘manipulated’ data to fit his narrative. The report showed men were fined at the Slams 1,517 times from 1988-2018 whereas women were only fined 535 times. Alexis argued that women may be punished more PER INCIDENT, and the NYT statistics only illustrated the total violations. For example, there may have been 1,000 incidents with women for which they were fined 535 times (53.5% enforcement rate). The men, however, may have had 5,000 incidents for which they were fined 1,517 times (30.3% enforcement rate). In other words, the data only told part of the story, and the enforcement rate is what’s really important.

Statistics help for @NYTimes @christopherclarey please: The argument is that women are punished more often *per incident* than men are. These data only show there are more penalties for men *total.*https://t.co/njqgH4Ut8a pic.twitter.com/2Jiqtn0l7I — Alexis Ohanian Sr. 🚀 (@alexisohanian) September 16, 2018

Before we jump into Alexis’s argument any further, let’s first get something out of the way. Let’s adjust the men’s numbers to account for the fact that they play best of 5, not best of 3. In theory, men have more opportunities to earn violations, so we need to normalize the data to a degree. Admittedly, this is an over simplification, but it gets us there directionally. On the low end, we can assume the men’s fines would be 1.5x higher than the women’s (3 sets vs. 2 sets min.), whereas, on the high end, they’d be 1.67x higher (5 sets vs. 3 sets. max). Now, we have a range for the men of 908-1011 fines when adjusted for the length of matches. The men were STILL fined materially more often than the women. I know this wasn’t Alexis’s point, but I’ve seen it mentioned all over the internet and want to put it to bed.

My problem with Alexis is twofold. First, his argument cuts both ways. I’m not saying he didn’t acknowledge this fact because he did offer to fund an independent study to compile the right data. But, who’s to say the men weren’t fined at a much higher rate than the women AND fined more often? His entire argument is a house of cards. If an independent study found that men were fined at a higher rate, then the cards come crumbling down. While I agree with his take on the NYT manipulating the data, it feels like he’s grasping and trying to find a leg, any leg, to stand on.

More importantly, Alexis and Serena had an opportunity to make a positive impression on today’s youth, the tennis community, and all those criticizing Serena’s behavior from a week ago Saturday. Had Serena come out and taken responsibility for her antics, apologized to the tennis community, Carlos Ramos, etc., made this a “teachable moment” for youth players, and turned the focus back on Naomi Osaka, then her humility would have been revered by all. Instead, she and her husband dug in, pinned their ears back, and refused to be held accountable.

It’s an unfortunate continuation of an unnecessary situation.

-Marshall

As always, leave your thoughts below. Let us know if you agree or disagree with Marshall’s take on Serena Williams’ and Alexis Ohanian’s arguments.