As the tennis off-season provides a brief respite, a controversial exhibition match is set to dominate headlines for all the wrong reasons. This Sunday, 28 December 2025, the BBC will broadcast a new 'Battle of the Sexes' event, pitting women's world number one Aryna Sabalenka against the controversial Nick Kyrgios in Dubai. Widely condemned as an unwanted and regressive sequel, the spectacle is a far cry from the iconic 1973 match that carried profound significance for gender equality in sport.
A Stark Contrast to a Pioneering Legacy
The original Battle of the Sexes in 1973 was a landmark moment for women's rights. It featured trailblazer Billie Jean King against the self-proclaimed 'male chauvinist pig' Bobby Riggs, a 55-year-old retired champion. King's straight-sets victory was a powerful statement, coming in the same year she helped found the WTA. She later revealed she believed a loss would have set women's tennis back 50 years, playing for a shot at 'societal change'.
Five decades on, the 2025 edition carries none of that gravitas. Organised by the Evolve agency, which represents both players, the match is a three-set exhibition with a single serve per point. In a contentious twist, Sabalenka's side of the court will be nine per cent smaller, a so-called handicap based on data that women move slower on average. Critics argue this only gamifies a gimmick and provides Kyrgios with a ready-made excuse for potential defeat.
Problematic Participants and Profit Over Purpose
The choice of participants has further fuelled the backlash. While Sabalenka is a dominant four-time Grand Slam champion, she has previously made comments downplaying the interest of the women's tour. Her opponent, Nick Kyrgios, is ranked 673rd in the world and hasn't played a competitive match since March 2024. He is arguably more famous for on-court outbursts and off-court controversies, including a past assault admission and associations with far-right influencer Andrew Tate, than for recent sporting prowess.
Unlike the 1973 match, which fought for fair pay and recognition, this event appears driven by naked profit and attention. Promoters are encouraging viewers to 'pick a side', turning a once-unifying moral cause into a divisive personality clash. The irony of hosting it in the UAE, a nation with a poor record on women's rights, has also been highlighted as overwhelming.
Inevitable Fallout and a Damaging Spectacle
Observers fear the outcome will be damaging regardless of the result. A Kyrgios win would be weaponised by online misogynists to demean women's sport, while a loss would likely be dismissed as irrelevant, keeping him in the headlines he craves. This echoes the original aftermath, where King's comprehensive victory was still met with accusations that Riggs 'threw' the match.
The BBC's decision to broadcast the event has been labelled a serious misstep, dragging the broadcaster into a 'cesspit' of modern gender politics and click-driven content. Presenters Clare Balding and Andrew Cotter have been enlisted to lend respectability to what many see as an indefensible spectacle.
While some may dismiss it as harmless off-season filler, this Battle of the Sexes sequel represents something darker. It hijacks a historic moment of progress for empty entertainment, risking tangible damage to the perception of women's athletics. As the original proved, these matches are never 'just a game'. This one, devoid of higher purpose, may quickly fade from memory, but the regressive message it amplifies will linger.
