The survey is specifying one game though, not a set or a tournament. I don’t know the rules of tennis, but i don’t think Serena will let a single point through.
The question is “Could you win a point in a game of tennis…”. Technically it doesn’t specify that it has to be a single game. You could play a million games against her, and as long as you score one point, you still “won a point in a game of tennis”. Notably, it also says “could” rather than “would” so its just asking for a >0% possibility, under any circumstance. She is still human, so theres enough factors that something “could” allow a win. Is this completely overthinking this and going against the spirit of the question? Yes, but we’re already talking about the absurd hypothetical of putting a random non-athlete in a potentially infinite number of games against a professional athlete, so…
Do we know though if the survey clarified, that by game they mean a game in the Tennis sense, so up to 4 points, or if it means the typical way the game is played, which is in a match of 3?
E.g. when i talk about playing a round of counter-strike i also mean to play a game of 15/15 and not a single 3 minute round. Meanwhile in football the term is also a “match” but we call the halves halves and not “games”.
The way terms are used differ from popular language and specific language, so it needs to be clarified.
The survey is specifying one game though, not a set or a tournament. I don’t know the rules of tennis, but i don’t think Serena will let a single point through.
The question is “Could you win a point in a game of tennis…”. Technically it doesn’t specify that it has to be a single game. You could play a million games against her, and as long as you score one point, you still “won a point in a game of tennis”. Notably, it also says “could” rather than “would” so its just asking for a >0% possibility, under any circumstance. She is still human, so theres enough factors that something “could” allow a win. Is this completely overthinking this and going against the spirit of the question? Yes, but we’re already talking about the absurd hypothetical of putting a random non-athlete in a potentially infinite number of games against a professional athlete, so…
Whoa, there partner. You can’t read and understand the way the question was framed, this is the internet!
Fair. If I’m serving, maybe I wait until she falls asleep and that’s how I get my point
You only get 25 seconds assuming tournament rules
that’s one hell of a power nap
If you hit someone hard enough with the ball you can get them to fall asleep pretty fast
something tells me i’m the one getting hit in this scenario
She is the kind of person that wouldn’t disrespect an opponent by playing a lazy game, so 100% this.
Do we know though if the survey clarified, that by game they mean a game in the Tennis sense, so up to 4 points, or if it means the typical way the game is played, which is in a match of 3?
E.g. when i talk about playing a round of counter-strike i also mean to play a game of 15/15 and not a single 3 minute round. Meanwhile in football the term is also a “match” but we call the halves halves and not “games”.
The way terms are used differ from popular language and specific language, so it needs to be clarified.
It’s very vague: https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/344ce84b-a48d-11e9-8e40-79d1f09423a3/question/4d73bd62-a48f-11e9-aee6-6742cfe83f15/gender
Tennis isn’t played one game at a time. It is played one match at a time. Any point is one point in a game.