<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Forget ‘Fab Four’, Men’s Tennis Still More Competitive</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thesportseconomist.com/2013/01/25/forget-fab-four-mens-tennis-still-more-competitive/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thesportseconomist.com/2013/01/25/forget-fab-four-mens-tennis-still-more-competitive/</link>
	<description>__economic thinking about sports__</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 19:56:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Liam Lenten</title>
		<link>http://thesportseconomist.com/2013/01/25/forget-fab-four-mens-tennis-still-more-competitive/comment-page-1/#comment-3618</link>
		<dc:creator>Liam Lenten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 04:20:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesportseconomist.com/?p=4447#comment-3618</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Nick. Well, if your definition of competiveness is purely what goes on with the just the top handul of players, then yes, surely women&#039;s tennis has been more competitive of late and the figures will bear that out. My point, however, was simply that the men&#039;s tour is about more than just four individuals. There is, admittedly, a degree of judgement about just how many players should be counted, but again, if we are talking about the &#039;Tour&#039;, then it  makes sense to me that all WTA/ATP games should be counted.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Nick. Well, if your definition of competiveness is purely what goes on with the just the top handul of players, then yes, surely women&#8217;s tennis has been more competitive of late and the figures will bear that out. My point, however, was simply that the men&#8217;s tour is about more than just four individuals. There is, admittedly, a degree of judgement about just how many players should be counted, but again, if we are talking about the &#8216;Tour&#8217;, then it  makes sense to me that all WTA/ATP games should be counted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Evans</title>
		<link>http://thesportseconomist.com/2013/01/25/forget-fab-four-mens-tennis-still-more-competitive/comment-page-1/#comment-3570</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 11:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesportseconomist.com/?p=4447#comment-3570</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apart from Serena Williams skewing the figures by preferring to use her time preparing for major tournaments, rather than picking up ranking points in other competitions, does this analysis actually show what you claim?  How many of the matches involving one of the top 4 men were upsets?

After all, the men&#039;s game can still be less competitive if the same 4 guys reach the semifinals every time they compete, even if the no.17 beats the no.15 more often than happens in the women&#039;s game.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apart from Serena Williams skewing the figures by preferring to use her time preparing for major tournaments, rather than picking up ranking points in other competitions, does this analysis actually show what you claim?  How many of the matches involving one of the top 4 men were upsets?</p>
<p>After all, the men&#8217;s game can still be less competitive if the same 4 guys reach the semifinals every time they compete, even if the no.17 beats the no.15 more often than happens in the women&#8217;s game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
