A confrontation between a man and a woman in tennis is always presided over by expectation and a certain morbid curiosity. Hence they are given the nickname ‘Battle of the Sexes’, in memory of the original matches of 1973. At that time the match had a certain sociological interest because it was in the days when women were in the Western world in the struggle for full equal rights and, in parallel, women’s professional tennis was consolidating itself. Given that Bobby Riggs, the man who played that match, declared that women did not have the mental balance to play tennis and should concentrate their activity “in bed and in the kitchen” and Billie Jean King, one of the contestants, was – and still is – a promoter of women’s professional sport, the name of the clash – which both strove to promote – was appropriate.
That ‘series’ ended 1-1. First Riggs beat Margaret Smith-Court. Then Court beat Bobby. Billie Jean remembers half a century later that “that match was watched by 90 million people. Professional tennis had just started, but a lot was written about it. It was a matter of social change. It made women gain a lot of confidence. The Super Bowl, which is something huge in the United States, had that year 53 million viewers. It is probably the moment when tennis has received the most attention…”
But her triumph remains the only female triumph in history. There have not been that many matches between men and women. As far as is known, there have only been five, four of which have been more or less official. There were the two mentioned in 1973, a Connors-Navratilova in 1992, a Venus and Serena Williams against Karsten Braasch in 1998 (actually, little more than a training session) and a Mirra Andreeva against Yanis Ghazouani Durand in December 2023. In all the others, the male contenders have won.
In 2025, women’s tennis is well established. In fact, in its facet as a spectator sport, the general public makes no distinction between the two (in the days of Arantxa Sanchez Vicario and Conchita Martinez as leaders of Spanish tennis, they were the main protagonists, for example).
However, we also live in a curious sociological moment in which extravagant sexist thoughts are once again gaining some popularity on the back of social networks, denying, for example, the legitimacy of women’s sport by adducing male physical strength. In this sense, it is worth asking whether the reaction of these sectors, which are flattered by some sectors by creating content acceptable to them and echoing their opinions because they are a public likely to become customers, to a victory of Kyrgios or of the tennis players to a defeat of Sabalenka could be negative for women’s tennis.
The first thing to note is that, as Billie Jean herself said, neither the tennis players before nor now said they were capable of beating men. In fact, since these matches are a spectacle, the norm is to set them up with special rules to encourage competitiveness and Aryna will have advantages against Kyrgios, apart from the fact that she is the current world number one and Nick, although he has been a finalist at Wimbledon and top 20 ATP not so long ago, has been out of his best form for some time and his career will always be marked by his condition as a wasted talent
But nobody sees the encounter as a ‘real’ battle of the sexes, and nobody even takes the concept of a ‘battle of the sexes’ seriously. Although Evolve, the management agency that works with both players, has said that this match is a tribute to those of 1973, Billie Jean herself has said that “the only similarity is that one is a man and one is a woman. The rest was not the same. It was not the same in 1973 as it was in 2025. I hope it’s a great match and that Sabalenka wins, but it’s not the same”.
Kyrgios doesn’t think the same. His choice for the match has been controversial as two years ago he was involved in a domestic violence case but the court that tried him found no criminal offence – Nick apologised for the events. But just as Bobby Riggs disdained women as tennis players, Nick points out that “there’s always going to be negative noise, but I have the utmost respect for Aryna. We have a good friendship. We’re going to go out there and compete and we’re entertainers, we’re going to have fun, but we want to play a tough match. That’s all. She’s the number one player in the world and she’s very capable”. In fact, the original rules of the match were to give Kyrgios one serve and Aryna two “but he got so stressed that he took one away from me,” Sabalenka revealed. “With two serves of his I wouldn’t have felt safe, and I’m not joking,” said Nick… Aryna points out one obvious thing: “I have nothing to lose” and has promised to “kick his ass”, although Nick also said, when launching the ‘challenge’ at last year’s US Open, that he would win easily..
When Martina Navratilova and Jimmy Connors faced each other in 1992, Carlos Costa, then a professional tennis player and in recent years Rafael Nadal’s agent, said of that match that it was “a good show and allows you to make money”. No one takes the Kyrgios-Sabalenka match any other way. There may be some exceptions, but as Rafael ‘el Gallo’ said, “there are people for everything”.
Read the full article here
