Men, can you land a plane or score against Serena Williams?

I can't do either of those things, but I can spell nonbinary...

I guess any pro tennis player could hit a double fault, against any opponent.

nonbinery, is that like somebobody who doesn't use garbage cans

Gah apologies for bad spelling

I'd like to think that I could land a plane against Serena Williams

On what surface?

Put me and Sully on the court and it's game, set, match.

On what surface?

Tarmac.

Serena in her prime, or Serena right now? Probably wouldn't make a difference for me, but at a certain level of ability, it definitely would.

I probably could land a plane if I had received extensive training beforehand, but that's not the scenario in the article. Insane premise anyway, surely if no qualified pilots are onboard you might as well have a flight attendant give it a go, at least they'd be more familiar with the surroundings.

Don't think there's any level of training where I could beat Serena, or even, like, anyone several levels below her in talent. Too dyspraxic for that shit.

dogg, i can't tie a tie without consulting YouTube

I guess any pro tennis player could hit a double fault, against any opponent.

― LocalGarda, Monday, December 1, 2025 4:41 PM (forty-eight minutes ago)

I probably could land a plane if I had received extensive training beforehand, but that's not the scenario in the article. Insane premise anyway, surely if no qualified pilots are onboard you might as well have a flight attendant give it a go, at least they'd be more familiar with the surroundings.

Don't think there's any level of training where I could beat Serena, or even, like, anyone several levels below her in talent. Too dyspraxic for that shit.

― a ZX spectrum is haunting Europe (Daniel_Rf)

Ha, this was exactly my thinking, too. I'd like to imagine I could learn to land a plane given enough time and instruction, but I don't think there's any circumstance where I could score a point against Serena Williams. Unless her arms and legs were tied together. And even then I'd still probably need multiple tries.

1. fuck no
2. fuck no

pre clemenza's point, I could probably defeat a toddler Serena Williams at tennis, but I would give it even odds

dogg, i can't tie a tie without consulting YouTube

Back in high school I had to wear a tie every day for two years. I got to the point where I could tie it without looking while walking down a crowded hallway. 30+ years later I have zero confidence I could even get it around my neck on the first try.

the question does not specifically say you have to score a point against her _in tennis_, only that she is a tennis player

I could simply say "are you still married to that reddit founder dweeb?" and my insult would be worth at least one point

This podcast does a good job off addressing the plane question (ignore the url, it’s in a two-part episode): https://www.nosuchthing.show/p/do-audiobooks-count-as-reading.

Also the chapter on Serena Williams in Citizen by Claudia Rankine is a good account of the history of people thinking they’re above an objectively exceptional tennis player. I would definitely regard anyone that’s not an actually pro with serious suspicion if they said they could win a point.

I imagine many would picture landing a plane with the tower talking you through the controls?* This happens in films but I imagine I would screw it up - I can’t really tell left from right particularly when I’m in a flap and might even accidentally turn the radio off. There are a lot of buttons.

Serena lol no way. She’s not double faulting. She looks at me and knows she just has to give it a gentle tap half a yard from any of the lines and I won’t make it.

*Airplane! They’re picturing Airplane!

Again, if it's hit a shot that wins a point, no. If it's maybe they hit the net once or double fault then unlikely but could happen. Given the extremely hypothetical situation removes any ability to know how seriously anyone is taking the game it seems not really worth discussion. Is there a crowd there? Has the pro player been told the challenge is to deny the opponent a point? Also does this happen before I kill a plane full of people?

xpost

crashing the plane into the tennis court

Just to clarify: I'm convinced that Adam, the best player in my club, could win a point against 44-year-old Serena. I can win the occasional point against Adam--he'll make unforced errors now and again. But I don't think Adam could have won a point against Serena in her prime. It's a continuum.

Feel like landing the plane (and I also assume it's being coached by radio or whatever) would involve some skills whereas winning the point could only be an accident. But if everyone on this thread played the tennis match there'd prob be a double fault or a shot against the net eventually.

Yeah but why would they go for an ace at all in those circumstances, knowing that I'm cooked even if I manage to return the serve

hubris

also if you won one point there's a chance they could collapse mentally

could I score a goal if I were first choice striker for a top Premier League team for an entire season

no, is the answer. But i'd like to see the highlights

If it was in an amazing team you'd prob get one now and again, like if someone sets up a tap in.

I could score a point on Serena easily.

If i was serving
If she played with her other hand
If her right leg was taped to the court
If she took a muscle relaxer an hour before
If there were gators to her left amd right

Also of course i can land a plane. Ever heard of a crash landing?

can't score a tap-in when you're being resusicated on the half-way line

Rando guys thinking they could win a point off Serena are getting high off their own supply and that supply is misogyny.

So are rando surveys choosing Serena for this rando question

I could totally land Serena Williams.

you could probably land a plane if it has autopilot engaged + someone on the other end talks you through it. I’ve seen it done (on youtube) in simulators

no autopilot activated? very slim (to nil) chance imo - even with someone talking you through it

Can't land a plane with charm, but giving Serena Williams a big goofy smile as she sets up to serve...

I’ll clarify that it it were like in Thai zoos where they drug up tigers with tranquilizers so tourists can take photos with them, I could probably score a point on a heavily sedated Serena Williams

Rando guys thinking they could win a point off Serena are getting high off their own supply and that supply is misogyny.

― il lavoro mi rovina la giornata (PBKR)

I would say that treating "Serena" as an abstraction--that there's no difference between the 22-year-old force of nature and the 44-year-old mom--severly shortchanges the 22-year-old. I couldn't see, much less hit, a Sandy Koufax fastball in 1965; I might have been able to in 1995; I'm pretty sure I could today. So if all those guys who said 'yes' were thinking of the 22-year-old, yes, they're sadly deluded. If they're good club players, and they're thinking about today, I don't see any misogyny there. (Also matters: are you talking about a set or a match? A set would be 24 straight points; a match, either 48 or 72--much better chance of fluking into a point.)

Why are men trying to land a plane on Serena Williams to score points?

I feel theres some misogyny there because this sort of discussion seems to come up when bros are talking about womens sports

that said I still think there's an interesting discussion there, I love talking about how randos would fare against professional athletes, I love how sometimes these superhuman freaks can struggle to do routine things, idk I think its a fun thought experiment at least

(for me the answer is - I couldn't score a point in a match, but given 1000 tries? probably one. sometimes tennis balls can have freaky spin to them)

I don’t think it’s even a maybe, of course it is misogynistic.

I have just seen these two stats in the past two days and now want to know what other dumb stuff men have been asked.

I think part of what fueled the poker boom is the idea that you really could win a hand against Annie Duke or Phil Hellmuth or whoever, even if winning a whole tournament against them would be unlikely. I always compare that to playing one-on-one basketball against an NBA or WNBA pro, or playing chess against a pro, where the odds of winning anything would be ultra-slim..

Given the extremely hypothetical situation removes any ability to know how seriously anyone is taking the game it seems not really worth discussion. Is there a crowd there? Has the pro player been told the challenge is to deny the opponent a point? Also does this happen before I kill a plane full of people?

1) Yes, it's your respective families plus Noel Edmonds
2) No, they have only been given your first name and a photo of your childhood home
3) N/A, because you land the plane easy peasy

lemon squeezy

If you recast this in golf terms--could you win a hole against Tiger Woods?--I can see the exact same questions coming up. Do you mean Tiger in 1995, or Tiger today? In '95, beating him for even one hole (playing your local course that you're familar with, which would be significantly easier than the courses he played; he'd be chipping into every par 4) would be tough. It'd be tough today, too, but if you're a guy who shoots in the high 70s or low 80s, winning one out of 18 holes does not seem farfetched--you make a lot of pars, he's going to mis-hit a shot now and again.

xxxp you could definitely win a heads up match against those people, in fact I'd wager a decent amateur could beat the best poker players in a standard heads up tourney at least 40% of the time. and yeah that's absolutely the appeal. the whole poker boom started because of Chris Moneymaker winning the 2003 WSOP despite being a thoroughly mediocre player...all he had was a willingness to gamble. if Sam Farha had won it I don't think it would've happened to nearly the same extent.

maybe if he's wearing full marine uniform

xpost

yeah, golf is a good example of where a lot of players could prob take a hole or two off a pro? like especially if you're the local player and you know the course. albeit my dad tells a story of getting to play a round with bernhard langer before, years ago, and he said that they had a chat or a drink after and he realised that after one round langer seemed to know the course as well as my dad did having played it for 20 years.

By the way, recommend this to anyone interested in a closer look at Serena's struggles (both physical and mental) to win her 24th major--covers five or six years, just before and after the birth of her child. That may or may not be germane to this question; again, if you're talking Serena today, I think it matters the quality of the guy she'd be playing. (Who was surveyed? If it's a bunch of Joe Yahoos who've played tennis a few times in their lives, then of course the question is absurd--landing the airplane would be easier.)

https://i.postimg.cc/JzRh9yx5/serena.jpg

think there's a section in conor niland's excellent book the racket, about the life of a not-quite-good-enough tennis pro, where he practises with serena when he's younger. highly recommend the book tho, really shows the painful reality for the journeyperson tennis player.

I feel theres some misogyny there because this sort of discussion seems to come up when bros are talking about womens sports

^^^
I absolutely guarantee that fewer men would would say they could if the question was about Roger Federer, but the gulf between the Serena/Federer and the average clod is functionally the same.

why is clemenza taking this so seriously lol

"Serena in her prime" is such a non-starter, when the real question is which version of _you_ will be playing against her. I would challenge her as a baby, and she would forfeit as it is unsporting to play tennis against a baby

Ok, hear me out: Serena just took an epidural and is in labor and I just took a massive dose of anabolic steroids.

Who could land the plane?

I don't think steroids work like an epidural. You're thinking of the drug "venom" from the Batman comics. Bane could probably defeat Serena Williams.

I guess I've been doing it wrong.

this vers of serena anyone of any gender could take down

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZeAQRhb66U

why is clemenza taking this so seriously

I don't mean to nitpick, I just think it's a great question (and has been since King trounced Riggs--I was watching!), but that the question needs to be clearer as to who Serena is and who the opposition is--otherwise, the answer doesn't mean anything.

Nonbinary Finary

I absolutely guarantee that fewer men would would say they could if the question was about Roger Federer, but the gulf between the Serena/Federer and the average clod is functionally the same.

― il lavoro mi rovina la giornata (PBKR), Monday, December 1, 2025 3:37 PM (twelve minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

John McEnroe famously said that if Serena competed with the men she'd be ranked something like 700th in the world. So, while I do think there's probably more than a whiff of misogyny when it comes to this "hypothetical," on the other hand I do think there's something fascinating about how extraordinary athleticism in one context can look quite different in another. But at the end of the day, most sports are about imposing an extremely arbitrary set of parameters and seeing who can excel within them. So obviously I don't think the division of sexes in Tennis makes Serena's accomplishments any less extraordinary.

John McEnroe

lol

Actually, King/Riggs is a good example of what I'm trying to say. "Can the 50-something Bobby Riggs beat a woman?" Well, depends--which woman? He beat Margaret Court--older, still on the tour but past her prime. He got crushed by Billy Jean King--much younger, just entering her prime.

xp at me: sorry, there's a missing sentence there. i meant that using Serena as a case study likely stems from this famous comment? my point was more about how i think these kinds of hypotheticals and "mixing and matching" are inherently interesting to people, but some seem more likely to become lightning rods for controversy because of sexism in our society

there's probably a meaningful difference between Serena and Federer, iirc the top men serve about 15 mph faster than the top women, Federer's serve might be too fast for the non-pro to even take a decent hack at

I saw some sports science thing about that long ago, basically something about how the average dude could probably hit a 85 mph fastball through sheer luck, but if you crank it up to 100 mph most guys couldn't even swing the bat fast enough

could serena take a point off roger federer

I’ve given this question the amount of thought it deserves and have come to the conclusion that I could score a point off of a plane

I need to know how many of those 1 in 8 men actually regularly play tennis. Or have played tennis, like, at all in the last decade

I can almost guarantee at least a few guys have never played at all and were like "yeah it's just one point, no problem"

this is also reminding me of the last time I played Microsoft Flight Simulator with the goal of flying from a major airport to my house, and then attempting to crash land in my yard. I crash landed directly into a grocery store about eight blocks away

a more interesting question is how often a decent rec league player could win a game of HORSE vs. an average NBA player. obviously it depends a lot on the player, can't imagine very many people would be able to score more than a lone H vs. Steph Curry but some players are notoriously bad at shooting the ball, it's one of the most fascinating things about the NBA imo. because everyone has to shoot free throws and chances are you know people better at that then several NBA players are

could win a game of HORSE

I have no idea what this is but my brain has decided it's basically like tag except you have to shout "HORSE!" when you touch someone. I reckon I could win this against an NBA player, sure.

I need to know how many of those 1 in 8 men actually regularly play tennis. Or have played tennis, like, at all in the last decade

To me, that's almost the beginning and end of it. For you to win a point, you'd have to be playing regularly and playing well by the standards of the average club. If both of those are true, and you're playing Serena today, I say you'd win a point. No one's saying you'd win a game, just a point--the smallest unit in a tennis match.

see, this was a YouGov poll, and having checked out that site some time ago to evaluate what the vibe is over there, I can guarantee you that the average user does not do much other than do YouGov polls

how many of the 1 in 8 reckon they could fight off a bear, e.g.

how many of the 8*

YouGov? sorry, everybody knows the definitive place to get the answers we need is Quora

it's mad it was a yougov poll as i was going to say it's so dumb and intended to provoke the worst possible answers/discourse that it reminds me of their polls.

budo jero otm

https://today.yougov.com/society/articles/35852-lions-and-tigers-and-bears-what-animal-would-win-f?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=animal_fights

6% of Americans believe they could win in a fight with a bear. 8% a lion. Unfortunately they only seemed to poll Americans.

from quora: I'm flabby, 58 years old, and I haven't picked up a racket in years. So obviously, if I played her in a 3 set match, Serena Williams would slaughter me in straight sets… But a point? I'd probably win a point or two.

i could land a plane bc I would have to or i would die. if i stood in against serena I would likely die when her serve struck me

On the pros vs randos tip, there's this great artifact of 2000s reality tv called "Joes vs Pros" where the conceit is regular guys facing against pro athletes (mostly retired, mostly men but also some women) in various convoluted contests, and the sight is compulsively watchable:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxi_8TDQXAY

The wind and fog would slaughter me on the tarmac… But a wheel? I'd probably land a wheel or two.

listen, all i can really guarantee is that the plane will touch the ground in some form

there's a fun book called Andy Roddick Beat Me With a Frying Pan that tackles a lot of these fun what if sports questions. including the "could you score a point off Serena" one. the book doesn't seem particularly reliable in its conclusions but it does have a lot to say about how good these guys are exactly. there's a good chapter on whether or not your average college baseball player could hit better than a major league pitcher, the answer is "definitely not"

6% of Americans believe they could win in a fight with a bear. 8% a lion. Unfortunately they only seemed to poll Americans.

My absolute favorite of these. The orangutan doesn't even stand up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFMpWm6ECgQ

I have often wondered how many people out there could beat up a kangaroo, I feel like the answer may be close to zero

I was totally baffled when I read about kangaroos luring people (and dogs) into bodies of water and drowning them. Like, who the fuck would follow a kangaroo into a lake?

I watched so much Pros vs Joes when it was on TV

Time for the follow-up Pilots vs Joes

The kangaroo feels like an ideal match really, rather than, you know, carnivores equipped with jaws for the efficient tearing of flesh. Though we have no real equivalent to their hind legs if weaponised.

I suspect it is mainly dogs foolishly following kangaroos into water. I wonder if dog-like creatures even constituted evolutionary pressure for the development of such drowning tactics. Even before the relatively recent introduction of the dingo, I think the thylacine was widespread outside Tasmania. Australia is somewhat lacking in sizeable bite-y land-dwelling predators otherwise.

i could totally win against a shark if we were both on land, they think they're so tough and scary but wait til you're out of your safe space bitch!!

what if I'm just worried about the kangaroo because I didn't know they were aquatic and got trapped?

I used to play reasonably high level competitive tennis so I could probably score a point on serena, maybe a couple if she was having a bad day and I was having a good one. I don't think I could land a plane though

I have to ask the same question again: which Serena (and which you?)?

Barely any idea how tennis even works tbh.

But I understand planes and radios well enough, could give myself a 50/50 chance of contacting the tower and letting them walk me through it.

An anecdotal data point:

In 2003 or 2004, Venus and Serena (both multiple major winners at that point, but prior to Serena's most dominant era) played an indoor exhibition here, alongside Anna Kournikova (well past her peak) and Brenda Schultz-McCarthy (then the record-holder for the fastest-ever serve by a woman pro).

In their singles set, Venus was firing serves at Kournikova that she was consistently returning well wide.

A frat guy who appeared to be in his early 20s and a typical "jock" looking type, was sitting a couple of rows behind the baseline and was heckling Kournikova. She got fed up with him after missing 3 straight returns, walked to the on-court security guard, and had him escort the guy onto the court.

Kournikova handed the guy her racquet and, into her mic, said, "If you think you can do better..."

Dude walks to the baseline and gets himself set. Takes a couple of "practice swings." Venus fires a serve down the T. And that guy had not *begun* the swing of the racquet until the ball was all the way behind him and had bounced into the stands.

And everyone in the arena had a good damn laugh, and he seemed appropriately cowed as he gave Kournikova her racquet back.

Whole lot of men on the internet who I wish had been at Rupp to see that.

I have to ask the same question again: which Serena (and which you?)?

― clemenza, Monday, December 1, 2025 8:21 PM (eighteen minutes ago

wouldn't really matter, but we can say present day. I wouldn't have much of a prayer on her serve unless she double faulted, but she'd have no incentive to take chances with her serve. I'd get 6 service games over 2 sets, and if the goal were to win a single point, I'd just hit every serve flat and hope she guesses wrong on one of them. I think this question is probably more geared toward your average guy off the street than someone in his thirties who plays regularly, though

With landing a plane, I remember some disaster movie, probably a TV movie, where a child lands a plane with guidance from air traffic control. I thought there was a way for autopilot to do most of the work. I admit that if I were asked I might have said I could do it.

Modern autopilots are supposedly extremely good at landings. I think the captain and copilot kinda just let it do its thing as long as visibility and weather conditions are fair. The trick is that autopilots rely on all the other instruments functioning properly, which isn’t always the case.

I read a book once that did say if you have to land a plane in an emergency the ATC should be able to talk you through it - they have experienced pilots in the tower on duty for just that kind of circumstance apparently?

didn’t some teenager recently do it?

In 2012, I lived across from a pool. It was free! free public pool. I started swimming every day

The changes in my body were electric. I got lean and hot. My faceskin suffered from the daily exposure to such chlorination. But I loved it— 30 minutes of lengths begat 45 minutes of laps. My body stopped looking like “a sinking trawler” and began to resemble “an able skiff”. I skimmed across the water with such speed, it was life-changing.

I had to travel for work in 2012. I attempted to book lodgings that would accommodate my newfound swimming necessities. In London, I stayed at a hotel in Shoreditch— no pool, but access to one across the street. I went over and swam.

I became aware that the woman doing lengths in the lane next to me was, like, a serious swimmer. I took breaks every few laps to cool down with a breast stroke, but she was freestyle all the way. I clocked her duds and they looked, well, professional. I suddenly thought to myself— omg, it’s 2012 and it’s summer and I’m in London swimming lane to lane with an Olympic contender! and I maintain to this day that this was likely the case.

I felt ennobled by my own fitness and started swimming freestyle like a fucking maniac. I counted our respective lengths. She’d swim 2, I’d swim 3. This happened consistently for about 15 minutes and I thought to myself with some jollity that, after several months of daily swimming, I could keep up 66.6% with an Olympic aspirant. I swam and swam and contemplated career changes, like “I could coach kids to swim” and felt my slim trunk and my strong arms and just felt connected with the world on the whole

45 minutes passed and I was done, my professional concerns were causing me distraction so I stopped. I looked over casually at my next door neighbour in hopes of catching an emblazon or a text that might indicate what country she might be competing for…

…and I saw none. There might’ve been one, but I saw that this entire time I’d been engaging in my own private fitness assessment, she’d had her feet bound. She was swimming arms-only. She was outperforming me 3 to 2 with only her fucking arms.

So I stopped swimming, and told people it was because “chlorine was harsh on my face” but rather it was because “there is absolutely no world in this timeline or any other where an ILXor could ever score a single point against a professional athlete”

I’m thinking of a student pilot, nvm. according to wikipedia a talk-down landing of a commercial plane has never been done

xp

FGTI, there was a lot of that kind of thing in London in 2012. I was running a lot around that time, in Victoria Park which on my side is Bethnal Green but borders the Olympic village etc on the other side. There were some insanely fast runners in the park. Some of them a good bit older too so I figured coaches or ex-Olympians.

Thanks :) but I will never swim regulously again, and no, none of us could score a point against 40-something year old Serena

Gonna consult with my FIL tomorrow if significant hours at Microsoft Flight Simulator might’ve enabled me to land a plane but otherwise it’s “nonbinery” and no, no

Incredible story, jon_oh

Think I've only seen the "I can beat a professional woman tennis player at tennis" arguments because they always got equal billing at slams and then actually won out on getting equal prize money. Just so much misogyny and anger.

in a 3 set tennis match, SW will serve between 72 to 120 points. her career DF average is 4.5% - that would give you 3.2 to 5.4 points. of course, that’s based on her playing competitive tennis where her aggression and risk / reward calculus would be significantly different. if you discount her average significantly to 1%, you’d get 0.7 to 1.2 points. you’re unlikely to push her to the full three sets so she’d trend more towards the minimum 0.7. it’s def looking less promising lads

yeah if her goal was to not lose a point on her serve, she would just spin every serve in and it’s unlikely she’d DF

Just have to make sure she doesn't read YouGov first, though some of her comments about proper British binmen suggest it may be too late.

I think the double fault thing is a bit of a red herring. Pros only miss a second serve due to scoreboard pressure and taking a risk (a few exceptions, some pros do go through the "yips", but this is not happening on a park court vs Joe Schmo). They can also rally all day long at half speed so if they choose not to let you have a point, they will not let you have a point. They've probably sized you up in the warm-up and decided which gear to use. The only chance Joe Schmo has of getting anything off Serena or any other current or recently retired tour pro, is through boredom. Of course, if you're rather more than Joe Schmo, like USTA 4.5(?) recreational/competitive, then Serena/whoever will need to step up the pace a bit, and could spray the occasional shot, and you might get on the board. But it's still 0-6 0-6 unless you have a heck of a serve.

The Riggs/Court-BJK thing; Court is only a year older than BJK but it's true, she was past her peak and Billie Jean had Slams ahead of her, and was world class to the end of the decade. I think it was more discomfort with the concept that inhibited Court, and she UE'd her way to a lopsided defeat. BJK embraced the whole spectacle. One of those occasions when all the extra-curricular stuff had a material impact on performance, not just a straight match up of skill.

I never successfully landed a plane on the Acorn Atom back in the day, and I don't think I've improved.

It's folk psychology but I guess it's interesting to think about the reasons men are typically tempted to respond yes, while women don't see the point. Either men think they look good projecting confidence (even the goofy type) and an unverifiable claim seems like an opportunity, or they don't want to be caught admitting there are things they can't do, either personally, out of arrogance, or that men can't do in general out some principle that everything is possible. Maybe it's on the vague hope to instill doubt in the person asking (you don't know what I'm capable of) or they take the opportunity to evaluate their credibility (if it's a group convo). Finally, they see no danger in trying out a yes: Serena is not waiting in the garden, no one will ever ask you to personally take on a plane's commands, and it would be easy to retreat from the claim anyway. A woman would just say no, but clearly a man fears saying no, especially a straightforward no without explanation or trying to play with the parameters.

One more thought that is probably obvious: downplaying complexity. It seems like everyone can hold a racket and hit a ball, or push some big buttons. I think it's more surprising to have people think they can fight off a wild animal. If I remember the original set of questions, there was also the question can you fight off a dog with your bare hands. But for example, I don't think many men would claim they can win a game of chess against a GM, or some other equivalent feat where the mastery needed is more obvious, and the possibility of bluff is less.

Landing a plane definitely easier.

Lol. The only explanation I have for the plane is speculating on the fact that the plane can practically land itself, and you get to look like a hero on the front page of the newspaper by keeping your calm and pressing exactly one button at the right moment. For wild animals, I don't know, films? But I was just thinking that there are a million examples where people would back off from outlandish claims because the pay off / cockiness ratio is not right.

The biggest thing with tennis imo is the TV sort of anaesthetises the speed and brutality of it. Maybe there is stuff like this in other sports but I've never felt such dissonance watching football or rugby live. Tennis on the other hand, the first time you see it live, and every time, it's astonishing to realise how fast the ball moves and how much physical effort is involved.

Maybe it's the camera angle as seeing it side-on seems a big part of that perception.

A familiar one for me is alpine skiing. The front-end camera makes it look smooth. When the drone follows them from behind and you see the slope and the speed, it's already terrifying. And if they put the camera on the skier and you have the vibrations, the snow splashing and the lower visibility over the terrain, you think about mortality.

there was a viral conversation in certain corners of golf twitter this year around whether a scratch male golfer could beat an LPGA pro over 18 holes - sensible consensus seemed to be ‘not a chance’

Only one man can fight a bear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maVufIw5fj8

Doesn't the golf example sort of happen sometimes? Like the local amateur hanging around the leaderboard in whatever pro tournament?

that local amateur is (1) not an average joe and (2) probably knows the course very well

average drive distance on the LPGA is 256 yards. average scratch golfer drive distance is 259 yards. that 3 yard upside is not enough to compensate for all the other skills an LPGA pro has over a scratch golfer

xpost sure, i made the latter point upthread about knowing a course.

i guess with golf isn't it a lot more normal for the best players in the world to shoot way over now and again, for whatever reason? doesn't seem outlandish that someone playing off zero would be able to beat them on a one-off day given that's the case. the reason they aren't pros afaict is more to do with lack of consistency?

I mean beat the men also obviously

xpost sure, i made the latter point upthread about knowing a course.

i guess with golf isn't it a lot more normal for the best players in the world to shoot way over now and again, for whatever reason? doesn't seem outlandish that someone playing off zero would be able to beat them on a one-off day given that's the case. the reason they aren't pros afaict is more to do with lack of consistency?

― LocalGarda, Tuesday, December 2, 2025 6:53 AM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

that’s the general idea, yeah. this is part of the reason tournaments are 4 rounds, to decrease the variance and try to ensure the best players have the best chances of winning

They can also rally all day long at half speed so if they choose not to let you have a point, they will not let you have a point.

Thought the same thing last night: that there's a certain point along the continuum of her opponent's ability, and with anyone short of that, all Serena would have to do is keep the ball in play and wait for an unforced error. (A point that I am way on the wrong side of.) It the player is good enough that he can theoretically hit the occasional winner--a ball right down the line, a great drop shot, etc.--and she has to play more of a normal game, then that might then open up the possibility of an unforced error on her part. But playing Joe Schmo, if her goal is simply not to lose a point, she won't.

Serena wants to settle this once and for all:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6855313/2025/12/02/serena-williams-tennis-testing-pool-reentry-competition-return/

of all threads to generate 100+ replies, shouldn't be surprised it was this one.

I have no depth perception and haven’t held a tennis racket since junior high gym. I’m not betting on winning a point from anyone on ILX.

The airplane is complex but things like up, down, left, right, fast, slow are comprehensible. The motions involved are not physically strenuous.

Playing tennis in a way that might be able to touch a top professional is not like that: I'm just not physically able to do it, let alone clever enough about tennis to succeed by trickery.

I gather the larger point is sexist dudes' level of delulu self-perception. But it seems like there are non-hypothetical situations people could be looking at instead of this. If you want to run experiments consensually you can. Nothing practically prevents a WNBA team from playing a high school boy's team for example. Of course the premise of the sport is that the WNBA teams are playing each other, and they should be judged by how well they do that, which is their actual job.

I could probably win a jumping contest where I was on the Moon, but I'm not on the Moon.

I totally agree that the Quora guy quoted above is sexist/misogynistic, and also the guy in jon_oh's great story--would love to have been there for that!--but I still think it's an interesting question that, if framed properly (why I keep nitpicking), doesn't lead in that direction at all. Start with Serena at 44 vs. Serena at 22, the year of her Serena slam--Kevin brushes that distinction aside, but I think it's huge--and proceed from there.

Let me recast the question with a male baseball hero. If it's 1985, and you're in your 30s and playing pick-up softball around town--a good player who maybe played a bit in college--you're not getting a hit off the 21-year-old Dwight Gooden; pretty sure he'd make you look foolish. But if it's 22 years later, and it's a different guy in his 30s with the same resume, and you give him 24 strikes against a 43-year-old Gooden (eight years retired)--24 being the minimum points to win a tennis set--I think he'd get a hit. He'd get lucky once and make some hard contact, or he'd get even luckier and bloop one in. If you gave him 48 strikes (two sets) or 72 strikes (three), his chances double and triple. One hit = one point. Maybe I'm misreading, but I think some people are treating the question like one point = actually beating Serena, even for a game.

I'm treating it like "a bunch of randos were asked if they could score a point against Serena Williams and lots of them said yes because they're sexist dickheads", you're treating it like "if you were a trained player and Serena Williams was not at the top of her game then you might be able to do this thing, so clearly nobody answering the initial question was sexist at all".

so clearly nobody answering the initial question was sexist at all

But I began my previous post by citing two people who clearly were!

you seem to be particularly insistent that it's possible to answer the question in a way that's not sexist, which as far as i can tell nobody has claimed otherwise. i don't think anybody opposes you going off to the races with the thought experiment aspect of this, you just continue to frame it in a weird and defensive way

It's just really interesting to me as someone who, late in life, has suddenly started playing a lot of tennis (and who just finished a book on Serena Williams).

imo they should have had some control questions to gauge what kind of stupids are taking the poll

"Could you dunk on Lebron James" followed by "Could you dunk on Caitlin Clark" and then throw in a wildcard like "Could you dunk on George Clooney?"

Wouldn't want to be the test case for landing a punch on present-day Mike Tyson.

I find it fascinating the idea that any regular person can dunk ridiculous. They put the basket really high up!

I think I can beat Mike Tyson--wait, now I'm thinking someone surreptitiously planted that idea in my mind.

clemenza, you've made your argument clear, but restating it won't convince those who remain unconvinced by it. it is simply an argument from probability and we can only gauge the probabilities by imagining the result. the only convincing argument would be to make the experiment and tabulate the results irl.

Definitely all conjecture. And honestly, I'm not trying to discount the misongyny of the original respondents (I should have read the post that send me down this road more closely, which emphasized the word "rando"). I just kind of instinctively looked past those yahoos and interpreted it more as a tennis player/fan.

The biggest thing with tennis imo is the TV sort of anaesthetises the speed and brutality of it.

Similar to pro hockey. I never really thought much about hockey until I saw a LA Kings/San Jose Sharks game and was floored at how fast/intense it was.

I've had enough flight training way back in my past that I'm relatively confident I could land a 40 year old Cessna 150. System managing a modern commercial passenger jet to the ground? yeah right.

As for tennis, I would have serious problems scoring a point against a concrete wall

I think this thread is full of people who don’t understand sports and would probably give themselves a concussion if they attempted to hit a serve. which again, doesn’t necessarily speak against the “average guy” case

Let’s see Shohei Ohtani rank Pet Shop Boys b-sides, buddy

Garu G had a hell of a serve iirc

If he was serving against his gran

*Sigh*

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/cvgdn9ewg97o

oh nice it's in dubai

It's just really interesting to me as someone who, late in life, has suddenly started playing a lot of tennis (and who just finished a book on Serena Williams).

― clemenza, Tuesday, 2 December 2025 bookmarkflaglink

As someone who has watched a lot of slam tennis for 25+ years what's behind it is the notion that women should not be earning the money men do because they don't strike the ball as hard or whatever. I wouldn't entertain it as any kind of thought experiment.

what's behind it is yougov

(xpost) What's behind "it" may not line up with whatever interest the question has for me.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/dec/27/new-battle-of-the-sexes-is-cynical-bid-for-attention-and-own-goal-for-sabalenka

I almost went with “lol wtf” but voted “i am a nonbinary man who sure as hell couldn’t do either thing”

i can totally land a plane

it’s easy you just hit the auto-land button

for real though, i do think i could hit the runway but wouldn’t know how to stop

Big Air is always promoting the conspiracy theory that planes are hard to land because they don’t want the passengers clogging up the cockpit offering to do it

Having to land a plane with Serena Williams (as co-pilot, figuring out the controls together) would be a good dream.

then, while she’s landing the plane, you can ask her to lose a point, just a single point please, sometime during tomorrow’s friendly match over at the park

My hunch is that even if the match against Serena Williams was extended indefinitely I would fail to score a point, because I'd get exhausted long before she does. Eventually I'd end up as an exhausted wreck being pelted with tennis balls by Serena Williams, which wouldn't even be sexy because she's married to the co-founder of Reddit. I would be unable to enjoy the experience without thinking about the co-founder of Reddit. My entire sexual life has been ruined by the co-founder of Reddit. Curse you, the co-founder of Reddit.

As for landing a plane, I have Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, and I was once order #00 consecutively in two different McDonald's restaurants eighty miles apart. Breakfast and lunch. So my question would be "which plane" and "how safely". If it was an airliner I'd need the tower to brief me on flap settings, stall speeds, and whether it would be quicker and safer to program the autopilot to auto-land, or whether I should select direct law and manually land the plane.

For a light aircraft I would need to know about flap settings and stall speeds. Bear in mind that for some light aircraft, such as a Piper Cub, the landing speed is only around 40mph, so the experience would be a bit like trying to stop a car going at 40mph without brakes by e.g. scraping it along the side of an embankment. But sideways.

On the other hand I've never sat in the cockpit of of an aeroplane, in flight or otherwise. When I play Flight Simulator 2020 I'm sat in a comfortable chair, wearing normal people clothes, looking at a screen. I'm not blinded by sunlight or thrown off by turbulence or hypoxic from lack of oxygen. But I'm reasonably confident that I could get the aeroplane down onto the runway without dying. Depending on events I might even attempt to taxi to the gate. I would need to be shown how to shut the engines down otherwise things could get messy when I try to leave the plane.

At night? There's something philosophical about dying in a plane crash at night. One moment you're in a metal box, surrounded by darkness. Then there is only darkness.

Did we ever get this sorted?

i feel pretty certain that anyone half able to hold a racquet and get in any way about a court has a chance of getting a *point* across (presumably) a three set match against anyone else

if the question was a *game* then the answer would be a strong nope

im not sure why all the answers given on ilx are so much the other way but

we can't give the devil a foothold lest he gain a stronghold

sorry i don't know a lot of tennis lingo if that is tactical observation it's lost on me

I think you are underestimating. the power of the professional game, darraghmac. I think think only way someone only able to half hold a racquet and get about a court is winning a point against even Serena today is if she doesn't know you are hopeless on the first point and accidentally double faults. After that she's playing it safe (assuming her son is to win every point).

Son = aim

it may well be so tbf

id still absolutely take it over the plane landing

if nothing else the stakes seem a little lower

if nothing else the stakes seem a little lower

This is an excellent point. I imagine the other people on the plane (if given a voice in the decision) would very much prefer that I go lose at tennis.

i’d rather die peacefully in my sleep and not screaming like the passengers on my plane

I am so fucking slow that all Serena would have to do is smash the ball on the opposite quadrant and my knees would buckle

I find bad news goes down easier with humor.

For example:

"Alright passengers, we are currently descending to -100 feet"

"anyone with an eu passport can exit the plane before landing"

I imagine it would take Serena a turn or two to figure out a serve that any of us couldn't return. And from there the question isn't whether we would score a point but whether we would return a serve for the rest of the game.

Could you land a plane while engaged in a dogfight with Serena Williams?

I imagine it would take Serena a turn or two to figure out a serve that any of us couldn't return

Some of us couldn't return a serve against a dyspraxic 8 year old, I'll have you know.

[Montage of Serena whapping ball after ball past helped ILXors]

(helpless? Don’t remember what it autocorrected there.)

I'm fairly certain Serena could land a plane better than I could

of course men can score against serena williams, that's why trans women aren't allowed to play tennis, because our chromosomes or whatever give us an unfair biological advantage

in all seriousness, i should in passing note that billie jean king, after beating bobby riggs, did go on to support renee richards in the '70s. billie jean king is awesome.

i'm not sure if i could score against billie jean king today. for that matter, i'm don't think i could score _with_ billie jean king today.

i feel pretty certain that anyone half able to hold a racquet and get in any way about a court has a chance of getting a *point* across (presumably) a three set match against anyone else
― Wichita Referee's Assistant (darraghmac), samedi 27 décembre 2025 22:11 (five days ago) bookmarkflaglink

If we re-interpret the question as 'would Serena avoid making a single mistake during a 3-set match against average Joe', I agree with you the answer could be yes simply because professionals make unforced errors, and it's not unrealistic to imagine she'd commit one even in a zero pressure game. Under that reinterpretation, it really becomes Serena's challenge to win every point, i.e 72 consecutive winners for a 3-set, 48 for a 2-set. If Joe has played some tennis and knows how to run, hit the ball, and can serve, it's probably already enough resistance to make it a challenge for Serena - albeit an extremely silly one where Joe does not really feature. For me the spirit of the question was not "can you manage to get triple bagled and Serena accidentally hits the net / wide once", but rather can you actually win a point and are you ready to bet on that?

Same for the plane. If tower control lands it for you and you haven't pressed a button, you haven't "landed" the plane in any sense.

When I was a kid, I remember hearing the official Swiss goalkeeper had showed up at the kid's yearly tournament, and they had set up a challenge where anyone who'd score a penalty against him would get a small price. Nobody did - adults included. But it's just a question of how many times you try right? There's nothing fundamentally impossible about it and no loss of dignity for the professional athlete if an amateur eventually scores a goal. Professionals are high performers, not machines.

Thought of this thread when playing in a casual (but league-official) pinball tournament tonight, and one guy (named Angry Mike) pointed to a hotshot and said "That guy's ranked number 10 in the state of Oregon." And sure enough, he won the tourney and did quite better than the rest of us. And I thought how, yes, it would be possible to win some rounds against him (and I did win one), but also was aware of how much more practiced he was, how much more effort he had put into it, and simply enough how many more techniques he had for keeping the ball in play and maximizing points. All of which is to say: it's hard to beat someone who is both obsessed with what they do and practice every day at it.

Each year (well, maybe it only started last year), the Australian Open runs an event called the One Point Slam, in the weekend before the actual tournament. You get the idea. Amateurs and pros, up against each other. Coin toss for serve. I think the pros only get one. The amateurs qualify from feeder events across Aussie tennis clubs (so they can all play a bit). There was a 56yo guy last year who took out three pros, two service winners and an ace down the middle - finally beaten by Priscilla Hon (top 200) in the semi. Funny to watch the pros get a little nervy (Rublev faulted his way out the qf).

This year it's under the lights, 15x the prize money and they've got bigger names interested (and "celebs"). Rock-paper-scissors for serve. So, if it's truly one point tennis you're after...

Could he fly a plane tho?

could you score a point against Jannik Sinner: https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/articles/ckgyl1ndw57o

He doesn't read this board I assume.

Kind of weird they have this jolly, good vibes handout for people who like tennis but don't play for a living when I'm fairly sure the touring players ranked 200 or whatever would cut off a finger for the chance to win 1m by winning a point, a sum which would sustain them for a long time.

Sort of staged altruism.

So, Sinner served into the net when he knew he had only one serve? Was that pre-arranged with the sponsor? And people clap? A New South Wales champion deserved at least a half-played rally. I call BS.

Aussie and US slams have really gotten into gimmicks the week before for 'engagement' hence the slop we are being er, served.

Wimbledon and French seem far more reticent, probably bcz much more conservative.

promising video titles that turn out to not be from Christianity Today

Amateur Beats Sinner

UK grime debut single from Sinner

There's a tiktok video from idk maybe a year ago? that hit my fyp again lately, of a woman who runs track, specifically the 400m and 800m, competitively, whose friend's boyfriend thought he could hang or even beat her at her own distance. I think she says he just couldn't imagine being unable to beat any woman at running. She smokes him obv.

I think people have no actual concept of how good people are at these sports

and how insignificant any 'innate' difference between large groups of men and large groups of women in athletic ability is when you're stacking a random dude against an elite player. it might as well not exist at all.

like, just what happens to the human body - any human body - after years of dedicated training is so dramatic as to render that difference completely irrelevant. and that's not considering genetics. it's sort of a classic example of the axiom that even though overall women may be different than men in some ways - when distilling averages among large groups of people - the variability in each of those groups is so galaxy-sized that you can't apply those averages in any meaningful way when you're comparing individuals.

IMO it’s pretty absurd for anyone to think they are better than Serena Williams even for a single second. She is better at playing tennis than you will ever be. The end.

kind of a nonsensical way to look at this question

I do wonder if you can give varying amounts of psychedelic drugs, drink, etc... to an expert and a novice that would even them out in a contest, or if they will always give the expert superpowers like Dock Ellis.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

I still think this question is completely absurd

I identify as male and voted lol wtf

voted yes for point against serena, no for plane

I could totally land a plane against Serena Williams, she ain't that strong

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

haven't read the thread but v glad we got this sorted

I didn't vote, so not one of the eight males who think they could score a point against Serena. Still have this crazy idea that it's an interesting question that needs context (some kind of mind exercise on my part, I learned, and the incorrect response to a question that was meant to solicit ridicule).

I dream of this thread never coming back, but it always does.

JFC @ that gender ratio.

yeah this thread was def. woman repellent

who are our tennis studs. identify yourselves.

Idk if I've ever even voted in a poll.

guess it's good to know that only 8 out of 83+ ILX men are completely delusional

who are our tennis studs. identify yourselves.

above, a lot of people were seriously arguing that they could luck into a point somehow

Please, no more.

i agree

There's a tiktok video from idk maybe a year ago? that hit my fyp again lately, of a woman who runs track, specifically the 400m and 800m, competitively, whose friend's boyfriend thought he could hang or even beat her at her own distance. I think she says he just couldn't imagine being unable to beat any woman at running. She smokes him obv.
― Ima Gardener (in orbit), jeudi 15 janvier 2026 17:42 (one month ago) bookmarkflaglink

like, just what happens to the human body - any human body - after years of dedicated training is so dramatic [...]
― map, jeudi 15 janvier 2026 18:37 (one month ago) bookmarkflaglink

I think there's a common delusion entertained by men about being naturally able to overpower women, which you are told from an early age and is reinforced basically our whole life, combined with the misunderstanding that elite sports has to do more with raw talent than technique / repetition. An example that is familiar to me is sprinting. My spouse is on the shorter side, she probably needs 7-8 minutes to run a km, distinctly slower than me. Yet she would probably smoke me on a short distance - because she learnt it at school and knows how to raise her knees and has some real "explosivity", when for me sprinting just means run fast and I only gradual / normal acceleration.

can we move towards the exits now

If you don't see any interest in seriously discussing the stupid things people say or do, maybe you shouldn't be spending time on a online forum :P I enjoy the folk sociology / psychology

Apologies to LocalGarda, but I think there's a circularity in what you say: you think it's worth discussing seriously as long as you think the question is delusional. If you think it's an interesting question that needs serious discussion--i.e., context--no one wants to hear that.