19. That’s the amount of consecutive victories Serena Williams has had over Maria Sharapova. A stretch that has lasted for 15 years. 

Last night in the opening round of the US Open, Williams defeated her “rival” in straight sets 6-1, 6-1. Williams’ overall record against Sharapova is 20-3*. 

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines rival as a noun. One of two or more striving to reach or obtain something that only one can possess. One striving for competitive advantage. An equal or peer. 

It is true, when Williams and Sharapova both enter a tournament, they are both striving to win the title. Only one can win. So by that definition, they are in fact “rivals.”

In their grueling practice sessions, both players work on aspects of their game to gain some type of competitive advantage over the other and all other opponents. 

Though it was Sharapova who got banned for using performance enhancing drugs to gain a competitive advantage. 

But the issue with painting the narrative of Williams and Sharapova as “rivals” is problematic because of the third definition. 

Signifying an equal or peer. 

Maria Sharapova is a five-time Grand Slam singles champion and winner of the career Grand Slam. 

She will likely, depending on how the two year drug ban is viewed, be in the Hall of Fame. 

Her career accomplishments put her on par with players like Martina Hingis, Kim Clijsters, Lindsay Davenport, and Jennifer Capriati. 

She was never, is never, or will ever be an equal of Serena Williams. 

Williams is a twenty-three-time Grand Slam singles champion. 

She has won the career Grand Slam three times. If you take away the titles from the Slams she’s won the most (Australia and Wimbledon) she still has nine titles. That’s four more than Sharapova. 

Nine titles would still place Williams in the top-10 all-time, ahead of Billie Jean King, Justine Henin, and sister Venus. All Hall of Fame players. 

The fervent ire by many fans toward the media's classification of Serena vs. Maria as a “rivalry” is connected to race. 

Tennis media predominantly reflects the sport itself. Mostly white. We don’t have to look far to find examples of race being a factor in how Serena is discussed. 

Her body is a constant, tiresome topic of discussion. It stands out in comparison to the average tennis player on the women’s tour. News flash. Serena Williams is anything but average. 

But it is that fetishization by, a mostly white media, in contrast with the thin blonde hair, blue-eyed representation of the European aesthetic that is Maria Sharapova, where this is all rooted. 

For decades if you were to ask anyone to describe what the reigning “Queen” of tennis would look like, you’d almost invariably get some version of Sharapova. Not Williams. 

Back in 2004 when Sharapova defeated Williams for the Wimbledon title and the “rivalry” narrative began to take shape, Williams was already a six-time Grand Slam singles champion and owner of a career Grand Slam. It was disingenuous to call Sharapova a “rival” then and even more ludicrous now. 

It is not a “rivalry” and those who continue to say so, know that it isn’t. Williams, never one to give the media anything to feast on, said it like this on Monday night following her victory over Sharapova:

“I don't know what the meaning of 'rivalry' is. I feel everyone I play is a rival. Whether I'm 20-2 or 0-1, it's always interesting matches.”

Whether you know what a “rivalry” is or not. You know what 20-3 means. Still, social media couldn’t resist weighing in. 

*Official tennis records count the walkover win by Sharapova in the 2019 French Open as a win, even though the match was not played. Williams withdrew with an injury, so it counts as a loss.