Beyond the Match: Billie Jean King & a Turning Point for Women in Sport

Introduction

In 1973, Billie Jean King stepped onto the court in Houston, Texas, to face Bobby Riggs in what would become one of the most famous tennis matches in history. Known as the “Battle of the Sexes,” the event was about far more than tennis. It became a cultural milestone, symbolizing a broader struggle for gender equality in the United States. Riggs, a former Wimbledon champion, publicly claimed that women were inherently inferior athletes and could not compete with men at a high level (Walsh). By challenging King, he aimed to discredit female athletes and reaffirm the idea of male superiority in sports. King, however, saw the match as a chance to confront these stereotypes, prove women belonged at the top of their sport, and push forward the larger fight for equality. Over 90 million viewers worldwide tuned in, making the event not only a sporting spectacle but a pivotal cultural moment that resonated across the country (King). 

With her poise, strategic performance, and confident presence, King transformed the Battle of the Sexes into a rhetorical act. Her victory challenged previous ideas about women’s physical and emotional capabilities, which Riggs spent his career commenting on, reshaping public perceptions of female athletes, and highlighting the power of sport as a platform for social change. Through her physical acts of composure, strategy, and athletic dominance, Billie Jean King turned a tennis match into a statement—one that challenged sexist assumptions, advanced the women’s movement, and redefined what female athletes could achieve on a national stage. 

Historical and Social Context

Billie Jean King’s career and activism leading up to 1973 positioned her to turn a tennis match into a powerful statement for women’s equality. The early 1970s were marked by the rise of second-wave feminism and the passage of Title IX in 1972, which mandated gender equality in federally funded education programs, including athletics (Ware). Yet, women in professional tennis were still earning only a fraction of the prize money awarded to men, despite their skill and effort matching that of their male counterparts. King’s activism was personal. After receiving 15,000 dollars less than Ilie Nastase for winning the U.S. Open in 1972, King publicly declared she would not return unless prize money became equal—and she felt sure the other women would follow suit (Schwartz). Her determination helped unite female players and eventually formed the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) in 1973. This union unified female players and advocated for fair treatment and professional recognition. That same year, the U.S. Open became the first major tournament to offer equal prize money regardless of gender (Schwartz). This was not just a milestone in King’s own career but a crucial moment for the entire women’s sports movement. 

Meanwhile, Bobby Riggs, a 55-year-old retired male champion, leaned into sexist stereotypes to keep himself in the spotlight. He mocked their athletic abilities, claiming women lacked physical and emotional strength to compete at the highest level (Ware). Riggs challenged King to a match, to which she initially declined, aware of the potential risk to her reputation and that of all female athletes. However, after Riggs’ sweeping victory over Margaret Court, he targeted King even more, “I want the women’s lib leader,” he said (Walsh). “Now I want King bad. We got to keep this sex thing going. I’m a woman specialist now,” (McEoy and Ott). King accepted the match, understanding that a loss could undermine any prior progress women had fought to achieve. 

This context reveals why King’s acceptance of Riggs’s challenge became so rhetorically powerful. She wasn’t simply agreeing to a tennis match; she was stepping into a symbolic arena where her performance would stand in for the legitimacy of all women athletes. The stakes were clear: a loss would reinforce Riggs’s narrative that women were emotionally fragile and athletically inferior, while a win could affirm years of activism pushing for equal treatment in sports. As Schwartz quotes in his article, "She was a crusader fighting a battle for all of us. She was carrying the flag; it was all right to be a jock. King understood that millions of women and girls—many of whom had been told sports were not for them—were watching. Her decision to compete, therefore, became an act of rhetorical leadership. She used the visibility of sport to challenge cultural hierarchies, expand the meaning of female athleticism, and argue, through the physical act, that women deserved equal respect, opportunity, and recognition.

The “Battle of the Sexes” Match as a Spectacle 

The day was September 20, 1973, at the Houston Astrodome, the match drew thousands of spectators and millions more via television. However, this was more than just a tennis event; it was a spectacle. From the beginning, the broadcast framed the match as a major social movement. Riggs played the role of showman, stating, “Girls play a nice game of tennis for girls, but when they get out there on a court with a man, even a tired old man of 55, they’re gonna be in big trouble” (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 00:07:57). He spent all the days, hours, and minutes before the match commenting on women’s lack of ability to compete with men.

King, however, used the spectacle differently. Sure, she fed into the drama by arriving Cleopatra-style and gifting Riggs a pig as a playful but meaningful jab at his “male chauvinist pig” label (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 00:16:06). But she refused to treat the match entirely as a joke. She directly challenged Riggs’ rhetoric and showed she understood the flair but would not let it define her or her performance. King’s interview just before the match revealed her strategic awareness. When asked about the event’s importance, she said, “I always felt that tennis could do a lot… and I think this is the type of match that would make it happen” (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 00:11:05). She spoke clearly about the women’s movement, saying it was important “as long as it stays practical” and that it aimed to make “a better life for more people other than just women” (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 00:11:05). Her calm tone and thoughtful answers stood in sharp contrast to Riggs’ loud and mocking comments. 

The spectacle around the match became a rhetorical arena, and King used it carefully and strategically. She didn’t raise her voice, insult, or humor Riggs. Instead, she used quiet confidence to show strength. The contrast between Riggs’ loud antics and King’s calm seriousness created the symbolic frame of the event. A fight not just between two tennis players, not just between a man and a woman, but between two worldviews. 

King’s Rhetoric in Performance 

King’s actions on the court were just as powerful as her words. Her performance became its own form of rhetoric. While Riggs joked and bragged before the match, King arrived focused and fully prepared. As she explained, “To be a great athlete you have to be able to compromise and to adjust, so I’ve got to be ready” (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 00:11:05). Her physical strategy, movement, and emotional control all became forms of rhetoric during the match in front of an audience of millions. Instead of relying on flashy shots or aggressive celebrations, she used consistency, smart adjustments, and calm focus to make her point. Every decision she made on the court worked to counter Riggs’ claim that women were too emotional, too fragile, or too weak to compete with men at high levels. Her emphasis on preparation and adaptability reflected qualities central to both athletics and activism. She didn’t need loud statements or trash talk—her control and physical acts on the court became the argument.

Going into the match, King recognized that if she tried to overpower Riggs right away, she risked falling into the kind of gameplay he expected and knew how to disrupt. Although her usual style relied on an attacking serve-and-volley approach, she abandoned it completely. Ware explains that she shifted to “Plan B,” a more patient, rally-heavy style designed to pull Riggs into long points and wear him down physically. This choice mattered rhetorically. King wasn’t just trying to win; she was showing what discipline, strategy, and adaptability actually looked like—qualities Riggs claimed women lacked.

While Riggs entered the match full of confidence and jokes, he looked tired almost immediately. As Lornie Kuhle put it, “It was like Bobby finally realized that the final exam was here and he hadn’t studied for it” (Ware). Through a YouTube recording of the match, it’s visible that King’s control over tempo was one of her strongest rhetorical tools. She placed the ball with intention rather than power, and her facial expressions and body language remained completely neutral. This was a smart rhetorical move; it showed discipline and physical control, especially against someone who depended on big statements and big energy. King knew how important this moment was, and she came in prepared both mentally and strategically. 

King won the first set 6–4 after Riggs double-faulted (Ware). She kept the same controlled tempo through the second set, taking it 6–3. Throughout the match, her body language only strengthened her message. She stayed upright, focused, and unemotional, even when points lasted a long time or the crowd grew loud. Her calmness showed confidence, in contrast to Riggs’ fading performance. In the third set, King continued controlling the tempo, playing what Ware calls “steady if unspectacular tennis” as she kept making Riggs work for every point. Even when she struggled to close out the final game, she stayed composed and physically dominant. After several deuces, King finally won the match when Riggs “feebly netted a backhand” (Ware). 

Even then, King didn’t celebrate wildly. She threw her hands in the air and only clapped a few times (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 02:11:11). Her celebration wasn’t loud because it didn’t need to be. Her calmness—start to finish—symbolized the professionalism and seriousness she brought to the match and how it countered Riggs. One announcer remarked afterward that King had spent days before the match “Resting up [and] being non-communicative” to prepare mentally and emotionally, and that she came into the match “perfectly ready… for a stunning performance” (Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special, 02:11:11). Her victory wasn’t just athletic. It was rhetorical. Through a thorough game plan, strategic patience, and emotional control, King proved that women athletes were disciplined, mentally strong, and capable of elite strategic thinking. She didn’t just win the argument—she demonstrated it physically, point by point. Her preparation and calmness became central elements of her rhetorical power.

Audience Reaction & Cultural Impact of the Match

The public response to King’s victory was massive. Newspapers, magazines, and TV outlets framed the match as a turning point for women’s rights. ESPN headlines read, “Billie Jean won for all women” (Schwartz). The symbolic impact of the match matters even more than the match itself. It wasn’t just entertainment; it hit an emotional nerve for so many people. Billie Jean King wasn’t only playing for herself; she was standing in for women everywhere who were tired of being underestimated. As Susan Ware put it, “On the tennis court and off, Billie Jean King put a human face on the abstract ideals of liberal feminism. Throughout her career, she worked strenuously to increase access and open opportunities for women athletes—getting them a piece of that pie, a place at that table.” King embodied a professional, disciplined, mentally tough competitor. This embodiment mattered; it contradicted sexism not through words but through an unmistakable visual and physical performance. This is exactly why the match mattered. People weren’t just watching a game; they were watching a statement. 

Her win made many women feel seen and gave younger girls someone to look up to. At the same time, it forced many men to rethink their assumptions about women in sports. The media hype, the sold-out stadium, and the millions of viewers at home all show how much this moment tapped into bigger conversations happening in the country about gender, respect, and fairness.

Broader Significance 

In the long run, the importance of the match was about more than King defeating Riggs. Her calm demeanor, athletic strategy, and controlled pacing worked as a physical form of rhetoric. By playing with confidence and showing strong athletic ability in such a public setting, she pushed back against the idea that women were not as skilled or competitive as men. Her performance showed a broader audience what women’s sports actually look like and why they should be given attention and respect. 

The match also helped shift how the public thought about gender and sports. “In a single tennis match, Billie Jean King was able to do more for the cause of women than most feminists can achieve in a lifetime” (Ware). Many viewers hadn’t seen a woman achieve something to that scale on national television, and do it with such physical and emotional control and focus. Now, this didn’t solve gender equality, but it opened doors for more conversations about equal treatment and opportunities. King wasn’t going anywhere. 

King continued her work long after the match and long after retiring. She stayed active in fighting for equal pay, better conditions for women athletes, and strong opportunities and expansion through various sports. Still, her win over Riggs remained a key moment in her legacy because it was a time when she demonstrated–through her athletic performance–that women belonged in sports in any and all capacities. The match helped shape how society thought about women’s abilities and the value of women’s sports.  

The legacy of the “Battle of the Sexes” is visible in King’s continued involvement in expanding opportunities for women in sports. Now, even in her eighties, she remains deeply involved in shaping the future of women’s sports beyond the tennis court. She is active in both the Billie Jean King Foundation and the Women’s Sports Foundation, two organizations she founded that aim to educate and expand opportunities for women and girls in athletics (Sairam). King and her wife, Ilana Kloss, have also invested directly in the sports industry. Their work includes “small ownership stakes in the Los Angeles Dodgers, the Los Angeles Sparks, and Angel City FC” (Sairam). Furthermore, one of their biggest accomplishments stands as helping find and launch the Professional Women’s Hockey League. These efforts reflect a continuation of the same strategy King demonstrated during the  “Battle of the Sexes”: using visible rhetorical strategy to create lasting change.  

Conclusion 

The “Battle of the Sexes” was far more than an exhibition match—it was a rhetorical act performed in real time, using strategy, movement, composure, and athletic intelligence to challenge gender inequality. Billie Jean King didn’t defeat Bobby Riggs with power alone. She defeated him through preparation, adaptability, and a calm, steady physical presence that exposed his claims about women’s inferiority.

Every long rally she controlled, every moment she slowed the tempo, every time she refused to react to Riggs’ antics became part of her argument. Her body became evidence. Her performance became activism. By winning in the way that she did—disciplined, controlled, and composed—King showed viewers everywhere exactly why equality in sports mattered. 

The match’s impact lasted because King’s rhetoric didn’t end when the cameras turned off. She transformed her performance into decades of advocacy, using both her voice and the credibility of her embodied victory to expand opportunities for women and girls. The “Battle of the Sexes” remains a defining moment not only because King won, but because she proved her point physically, visibly, and undeniably. In doing so, she turned a single tennis match into a movement—one that continues to shape how we think about gender, athleticism, and equality today.

Works Cited

“The Official Website of Billie Jean King.” Billie Jean King Enterprises, www.billiejeanking.com/.  

McEvoy, Colin, and Tim Ott. “How Billie Jean King Changed Women’s Sports Forever.” Biography, 3 June 2025, www.biography.com/athletes/a64959245/billie-jean-king-vs-bobby-riggs.  

Sairam, Erin Spencer. “Billie Jean King on Power, Purpose and Passing It On.” Forbes, 22 October 2025, https://www.forbes.com/sites/erinspencer1/2025/10/22/billie-jean-king-on-power-purpose-and-passing-it-on/ 

Schwartz, Larry. “Billie Jean Won for All Women.” ESPN Sports Century, www.espn.com/sportscentury/features/00016060.html.  

“Tennis Battle of the Sexes Special (September 20, 1973).” YouTube, 30 August 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqB3yi8MVbQ. 

Walsh, David. “The Big Interview: Billie Jean King.” The Sunday Times, 9 December 2007, web.archive.org/web/20110414055233/http:/www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article3021888.ece.  

Ware, Susan. “Game, Set, Match: Billie Jean King and the Revolution in Women’s Sports.” University of North Carolina Press, 2011, pp. 273–82. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5149/9780807877999_ware.14.