Kane described the gender battle as a publicity stunt, calling the court size reduction utterly ridiculous, while Mrs. King also voiced her strong condemnation.

Tonight, the "gender battle" between the top-ranked female Sabalenka and Australian notable Kyrgios will officially kick off at Dubai’s Coca-Cola Arena.

However, this event has been strongly criticized by France’s Billie Jean King Cup captain Cornet, who said in an interview, "In my opinion, this is a huge publicity stunt, and the match itself is actually of lesser importance."

Cornet believes the most absurd aspect lies in the match rules, especially the court size reduction, which she calls "utterly ridiculous" and damaging to the image of women's tennis. She said, "Reducing the court size undoubtedly diminishes and undermines Sabalenka’s abilities. She is fully capable of competing baseline against Kyrgios, who is nearly retired, untrained, and has knee issues."

Regarding the serving rules, Cornet expressed acceptance, noting that since players like Kyrgios can serve four aces in a game, this rule might act as a balance and is understandable.

Notably, the match organizers responded that the core of the rules is "restriction" and "compensation," which led to these two key changes. Each player has only one serve per point, eliminating the second serve, clearly targeting Kyrgios’s powerful serve. Additionally, Sabalenka’s court area is reduced by 9%. The organizer Evolve explained that studies show female players’ average movement speed is about 9% slower than males’, and the smaller court aims to offset this speed difference.

Despite the organizers’ statements, controversy continues. Tennis legend and 1973 gender battle participant Billie Jean King distanced herself from this match, stating clearly, "The only similarity is that one is a boy and the other is a girl. That’s it."

Mrs. King pointed out that the original match was about social change and cultural progress, whereas today’s event is entirely different. She insisted on playing in a standard court against Riggs back then, rejecting any handicap rules.

Furthermore, Grand Slam finalist Ruud commented on the Sabalenka-Kyrgios gender battle, saying, "If you really want to do this, you must have fair playing conditions. If the two players don’t compete under the same terms and serve rules differ, it’s not a genuine contest."

Facing a flood of criticism, Kyrgios responded by calling Sabalenka "one of the greatest players in tennis history" and emphasized their friendship. He said the event was simply to deliver an exciting show together and attract more attention to tennis. They love challenges and don’t care about outside opinions.

Sabalenka expressed respect for Mrs. King and said she is proud to represent women’s tennis by participating in this modern symbolic event.

On social media, opinions are sharply divided. Some viewers see it as a pure and entertaining show, saying, "Tennis needs such topics and entertainment spirit; watching top male and female players face off across the net is an honor itself, and the rules only make the match more exciting."

Others agree with Cornet and Mrs. King’s views, commenting, "The rules imply that female players are the ‘weaker side’ needing ‘protection,’ which is a regression. It feels like a staged show where the result doesn’t matter, but the message is very negative."

Many also question Kyrgios’s condition, saying, "A player who rarely trains and is ranked outside the top 600 can hardly represent the ‘power’ of men’s tennis. This comparison is inherently unfair."

The 1973 gender battle took place amid the women’s fight for equal rights, and Mrs. King’s victory transcended sport to symbolize social progress. Over 50 years later, the gender battle returns as a "special rules exhibition," focusing on commercial entertainment and gaining attention. Organizers try to "create fairness" by artificially changing rules, but this highlights the physiological differences between male and female players and has sparked criticism of "undermining women’s abilities" through compensation rules.

Regardless of tonight’s outcome, debates about the fairness of the rules and the event’s significance are sure to last far longer than the match itself.(Source: Tennis Home Author: Lu Xiaotian)