equal pay at majors, the debate is over

R

richied

Rookie
The women players are not putting bums on seats at the majors. A survey of Wimbledon punters showed that 75 per cent were there to watch the guys.

The women's job market is not as competitive. You look at the women's top 10 and the question "anyone for tennis" is far from the lips. The eyes glaze and the hands reach for the ear muffs. Sharapova, Azarenka, Radwanska, Kvitova, Stosur, Williams, Wozniacki, Bartoli, Kerber and Errani. We're not exactly on first-name terms like we once were with Billie Jean, Martina and Steffi, players worth our admission money.

Would you be able to name the last 10 slam winners for the women? I could'nt even give you five.

Now, look, I don't want the women to play 5 sets, that would be a punishment worse than death. But right now, the women's game is at an all time low and they shouldn't be getting payed equal at slams.

Bring in the patrons than fine, but that's not the case and everyone knows it.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
How much should they get paid then? The women need to earn a living. Unless you mean just cut back their pay for Grand Slams...
 
Hood_Man

Hood_Man

G.O.A.T.
Mustard said:
There's plenty of people out there who are much more into women's tennis than men's tennis.
Click to expand...

sexface.gif


I think if they played 5 sets the debate really would be over as I'd have no complaint.

Not that I'm that bothered now, it's not my money.
 
HunterST

HunterST

Hall of Fame
There'd need to be more evidence that they are not drawing viewership. A few years ago, I remember, the match that received the highest TV ratings was a Williams sister's doubles match. I think Sharapova tends to draw a tv crowd too. Tennis players/enthusiasts prefer to watch the men, but casual fans are often interested in the men. Really, as long as they're bringing in viewers and, thus, advertising money, they deserve equal pay.
 
Bobby Jr

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
HunterST said:
...Really, as long as they're bringing in viewers and, thus, advertising money, they deserve equal pay.
Click to expand...
You can't argue both ways.

Equal pay is done to remove gender inequality regardless of value - that's what it is.

If it were truly done by value - value they add by way of viewership, ticket sales, media time, attracting sponsorship etc - then women would legitimately only be able to command about 1/3 of what men do.

This is the exact reason why they don't ever argue those things.. .they go the other way and say it's sexist to not have pay equality in the modern world... the comparison however to 'normal' jobs is a very slim one. In normal jobs males and females are doing basically the same job with only minor, often indistinguishable differences in ability, and in which their gender has no direct link to their value to their job. In tennis however the complete opposite is true - the gender does make a difference to the ability and the value they have to the tennis business. It's hyper political-correctness being used as a window dressing for the pro tennis world to appear to be a modern group of organisations.

The reality is without male tennis propping up the ship female tennis would lose most of its revenue stream pretty quickly.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
KHSOLO said:
Cut back on the shouting and screaming first
Click to expand...

Hey I don't watch it, nor do I think it compares to the mens game. However as Bobby Jr pointed out if we want to make it fair the women should receive perhaps 1/3 of the prize money as the men. For the lower seeds such a drop would obviously be disasterous living standards wise.

Doesn't effect me so I don't care if they get the same pay for half the right. There are worse victims of feminism than professional tennis.
 
Virginia

Virginia

Hall of Fame
Bobby Jr said:
You can't argue both ways.

Equal pay is done to remove gender inequality regardless of value - that's what it is.

If it were truly done by value - value they add by way of viewership, ticket sales, media time, attracting sponsorship etc - then women would legitimately only be able to command about 1/3 of what men do.

This is the exact reason why they don't ever argue those things.. .they go the other way and say it's sexist to not have pay equality in the modern world... the comparison however to 'normal' jobs is a very slim one. In normal jobs males and females are doing basically the same job with only minor, often indistinguishable differences in ability, and in which their gender has no direct link to their value to their job. In tennis however the complete opposite is true - the gender does make a difference to the ability and the value they have to the tennis business. It's hyper political-correctness being used as a window dressing for the pro tennis world to appear to be a modern group of organisations.

The reality is without male tennis propping up the ship female tennis would lose most of its revenue stream pretty quickly.
Click to expand...
This is so true and (speaking as a woman), the top prize money for women is ridiculously high. Three quarters of what the men get would seem to be a fairer. Maybe give some of what's over to the girls who don't reach the last 16, to give them a chance of making a decent living.

I don't watch the women at all - it's just so boring. Men watch (sometimes) because they think the woman look hot.
 
S

sundaypunch

Hall of Fame
I would rather watch Cibulkova and Ivanovic play bad tennis than a 5-hour Nadal / Djokovic bash fest where neither can end a point.
 
10is

10is

Professional
Virginia said:
This is so true and (speaking as a woman), the top prize money for women is ridiculously high. Three quarters of what the men get would seem to be a fairer. Maybe give some of what's over to the girls who don't reach the last 16, to give them a chance of making a decent living.
Click to expand...

As a woman, I completely agree. The current payscale parity is actually more sexist and reverse discriminatory to men. Equitable pay NOT equal pay.

I don't watch the women at all - it's just so boring. Men watch (sometimes) because they think the woman look hot.
Click to expand...

True -- as evidenced by Sharapova's overwhelming popularity despite her underwhelming game. Henin for me has been the only redeeming aspect of the WTA in the last decade; the tour is an utter disgrace otherwise. Kvitova seem to be the only one worth watching these days, that is, when she's not crashing and burning, which seems more often than not to be the case.
 
kishnabe

kishnabe

Talk Tennis Guru
It should 5 sets for the womens QTR til the Final.
In the olden Tennis days. Mens played best of three for the first few round...then later stages were best of five.
 
sbengte

sbengte

G.O.A.T.
Hood_Man said:
I think if they played 5 sets the debate really would be over as I'd have no complaint.
Click to expand...

They already cause enough problems being on court for 3 hours playing best of 3 and delaying men's matches which invariably get scheduled after women's matches. Imagine a best of 5 with all the screaming and choking. Thanks but no thanks.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Usually I would advocate for equal pay but the womens tour is putting out their crappiest product ever the last several years. No they dont currently deserve equal pay.
 
Virginia

Virginia

Hall of Fame
sbengte said:
They already cause enough problems being on court for 3 hours playing best of 3 and delaying men's matches which invariably get scheduled after women's matches. Imagine a best of 5 with all the screaming and choking. Thanks but no thanks.
Click to expand...
My God, yes - that absolutely drives me crazy - on both counts.
 
C

CDestroyer

Professional
1st round hotties

The absolute babes always lose early in tournaments combined with the shrieking keeps me from watching most WTA matches.

Plus the Williams sisters.

But the ladies should be paid the same.

Even if they don't draw the same size crowd they work just as hard to be there.
 
HiRO

HiRO

Rookie
I agree with most of you.

5 sets at grand slams for both men and women (maybe fitter more consistent tennis would emerge?). This needs to be done.

The screaming and lack of finesse players will hopefully change over time...but that should have little bearing on pay for equality purposes.
 
B

Bart

New User
HiRO said:
I agree with most of you.

5 sets at grand slams for both men and women (maybe fitter more consistent tennis would emerge?). This needs to be done.

The screaming and lack of finesse players will hopefully change over time...but that should have little bearing on pay for equality purposes.
Click to expand...

Are you crazy guys! You want to let WTA play on Wimbledon or RG central courts 5 setters? I've been watching tennis many times at these majors and can tell you one thing - that's bad, when you have Wimbledon central court tickets and there are Azarenka, Radwanska or Kvitova playing for 3 hours, and 10% of seats are occupied! And, at the same time, top ATP guys are playing on court #17, with crazy crowd and no chance to get close to the court. I would let WTA play just one set, to reduce their time on courts and TV. I don't care about the prize money, that's free market, demand and supply - girls demand big money, BNP or KIA supply it ;)
 
C

ChrisRF

Legend
richied said:
Would you be able to name the last 10 slam winners for the women? I could'nt even give you five.
Click to expand...

Interesting question. I have a try:

AO 10: ?
RG 10: Schiavone
WIM 10: ?
USO 10: Clijsters

AO 11: Clijsters
RG 11: Li Na
WIM 11: Kvitova
US 11: Stosur

AO 11: Azarenka
RG 11: Sharapova

Maybe I have 8. In the decade of 2000-2010 I know only a handful, but I think I'm quite well about the winners in the Graf-Seles-Sanchez era.

In men's tennis I could name all major winners since at least 1988.

By the way, I agree with your whole post in most parts.
 
DRII

DRII

G.O.A.T.
richied said:
The women players are not putting bums on seats at the majors. A survey of Wimbledon punters showed that 75 per cent were there to watch the guys.

The women's job market is not as competitive. You look at the women's top 10 and the question "anyone for tennis" is far from the lips. The eyes glaze and the hands reach for the ear muffs. Sharapova, Azarenka, Radwanska, Kvitova, Stosur, Williams, Wozniacki, Bartoli, Kerber and Errani. We're not exactly on first-name terms like we once were with Billie Jean, Martina and Steffi, players worth our admission money.

Would you be able to name the last 10 slam winners for the women? I could'nt even give you five.

Now, look, I don't want the women to play 5 sets, that would be a punishment worse than death. But right now, the women's game is at an all time low and they shouldn't be getting payed equal at slams.

Bring in the patrons than fine, but that's not the case and everyone knows it.
Click to expand...


You realize that using your standards the men would have been payed less in the early 2000's (Hewitts short-lived era) when the women's game was more popular than the guys' game!
 
MG1

MG1

Professional
Mustard said:
There's plenty of people out there who are much more into women's tennis than men's tennis.
Click to expand...


Are you sure about that ... i think that should be replaced by FEW

in my home country you can get almost every imporatnat mens tournament(GS+WTF+All MS+Few 250/500) on TV but there is no women's match you can get on TV except 4GS finals.

this is just one example you can get many of them for women tennis state.
 
MG1

MG1

Professional
Women players need to win 14 Sets for a GS while men players need 21 sets so prize money should be in 2/3 ratio.
 
S

sureshs

Bionic Poster
LOL sexist idiots come out to vent their frustration at the fact that these days they actually have to compete with females instead of getting their life handed to them on a plate. Their unexpressed misogyny in the workplace and their inability to compete with superior males in their field and the fact that women prefer other men leads them to find issues to whine about. They should pop their Viagra/Levitra and "rise" to the occasion.
 
T

tistrapukcipeht

Professional
WTA was more interesting at the FO then ATP.

ATP is always the same guys in the quarters/semis, WTA is unpredictable, hence more interesting.

As for pay, WTA should get half of the men's prize.
 
NonP

NonP

Legend
MG1 said:
Are you sure about that ... i think that should be replaced by FEW

in my home country you can get almost every imporatnat mens tournament(GS+WTF+All MS+Few 250/500) on TV but there is no women's match you can get on TV except 4GS finals.

this is just one example you can get many of them for women tennis state.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should look at these figures:

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...Jan-27/Research-and-Ratings/Tennis-demos.aspx

And keep in mind, this is certainly a more thorough comparison than the "survey" that the OP mentioned to support his half-baked argument. The gender disparity in TV ratings isn't as big as you think.

Anyway why are so many people obsessed with this nonissue? The powers that be decided that the men and the women are worth the same prize money, and only at the majors for that matter. The fact that the women don't play best-of-5 matches is besides the point, what really matters is that the head honchos thought it a good business move, and one they haven't reversed in years. What exactly is the problem?
 
Flash O'Groove

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
NonP said:
Anyway why are so many people obsessed with this nonissue? The powers that be decided that the men and the women are worth the same prize money, and only at the majors for that matter. The fact that the women don't play best-of-5 matches is besides the point, what really matters is that they thought it a good business move, and one they haven't reversed in years. What exactly is the problem?
Click to expand...

Very good point. Mayhaps the companies which afford the prize money believe that women tennis is interesting to bring women to watching tennis, and thus watching TV advertisment. In that regard, not only women tennis bring a lot of money to these companies (ans do following the logic of the OP they deserve reward), but it is also a good move to pay them equal than men because otherwise women would stay away from watching tennis, considering it as a sexist sport.
 
F

fuzz nation

G.O.A.T.
sureshs said:
LOL sexist idiots come out to vent their frustration at the fact that these days they actually have to compete with females instead of getting their life handed to them on a plate. Their unexpressed misogyny in the workplace and their inability to compete with superior males in their field and the fact that women prefer other men leads them to find issues to whine about. They should pop their Viagra/Levitra and "rise" to the occasion.
Click to expand...

Well, that's one opinion...

I'd just love a glimpse into the parallel universe where the roles are flipped and the guys make equal money for playing best of three while the ladies play the five-setters at the majors. Now THAT would get funky... talk about a "debate", right?
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
nadal_slam_king said:
So really, the fact that women don't play best-of-5 is not a valid point. They aren't physically capable of it. Playing a long 3-setter is as hard for them as playing a 5-setter is for men.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous. There was once a time when some people said that women were incapable of running a marathon. The reality is that they can do it. There is no physical reason, anymore than the men, to prevent the women from playing 5 sets in the majors.
 
Flash O'Groove

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
Mustard said:
That's ridiculous. There was once a time when some people said that women were incapable of running a marathon. The reality is that they can do it. There is no physical reason, anymore than the men, to prevent the women from playing 5 sets in the majors.
Click to expand...

In fact a lot of male player are unable to do it, as show their cramping. Seems to me that thoose male player are also the one who don't often play 5 setters because they have poor slam result. They are not trained to play 5 setters so they can't.

Just the same for the women. If they trained for it, they could do it. Maybe not with the same intensity than the male, but what is the problem if they have to developp a different game in ordre to shorten points and efforts.
 
NonP

NonP

Legend
Flash O'Groove said:
Very good point. Mayhaps the companies which afford the prize money believe that women tennis is interesting to bring women to watching tennis, and thus watching TV advertisment. In that regard, not only women tennis bring a lot of money to these companies (ans do following the logic of the OP they deserve reward), but it is also a good move to pay them equal than men because otherwise women would stay away from watching tennis, considering it as a sexist sport.
Click to expand...

Yes, PR is no doubt a big part of it. And a perfectly valid reason for the equal pay, if they think it's good for the sport overall. These people aren't running a charity.
 
oberyn

oberyn

Professional
NonP said:
Anyway why are so many people obsessed with this nonissue? The powers that be decided that the men and the women are worth the same prize money, and only at the majors for that matter. The fact that the women don't play best-of-5 matches is besides the point, what really matters is that the head honchos thought it a good business move, and one they haven't reversed in years. What exactly is the problem?
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with you and have made similar posts whenever this "issue" comes up.
 
S

srinrajesh

Guest
Mustard said:
There's plenty of people out there who are much more into women's tennis than men's tennis.
Click to expand...

am not really sure about that even the ladies seem to follow men's tennis more and state Nadal, Federer as faves ..
Maybe the young girls follow more women's tennis than men's
 
S

srinrajesh

Guest
Women's tennis can definitely benefit from best of 5 the last 2 matches SF and finals .. but it is a big step for the organizers to take we might see a lot of 6-0 sets though initially
 
R

rynjt

New User
I agree that now women's tour do not deserve equal prize money because of quality of players produced.

IMO, there was a time around late 90's early 2000's when the women's tour was strong and could be argued was more of an attraction than the men.
 
DRII

DRII

G.O.A.T.
rynjt said:
I agree that now women's tour do not deserve equal prize money because of quality of players produced.

IMO, there was a time around late 90's early 2000's when the women's tour was strong and could be argued was more of an attraction than the men.
Click to expand...


You're absolutely right; but who was arguing for reduced men's pay back then? No one probably, and thats when the men were making more than the women!
 
W

Wilander Fan

Hall of Fame
DRII said:
[/B]

You're absolutely right; but who was arguing for reduced men's pay back then? No one probably, and thats when the men were making more than the women!
Click to expand...

The reason was that the speed of the game back then combined with the lack of power led to great balance of styles. There were S&Vers as well as baselines. In addition, the great legends like Evert and Navratilova were able to hang in there against a new crop of greats. At the same time, the mens game became homogenous with 2-3 shot tennis. You would think Agassi/Sampras would be a compelling match up in styles but somehow even that failed to be compelling.

Anyway, the fair thing would be to allocate prize money based on attendance but the WTA would not last long so there needs to be some subsidy by the men.
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
srinrajesh said:
am not really sure about that even the ladies seem to follow men's tennis more and state Nadal, Federer as faves ..
Maybe the young girls follow more women's tennis than men's
Click to expand...

I know somebody (a man) who cares more about women's tennis than men's tennis, and because of the tennis not sex appeal. He's obviously not the only such person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Minor spin on the equal pay debate
Replies
48
Views
3K
Kaz00
Kaz00
Silverbullet96
National Bank Open to become a 2 week event from 2025 & have "equal pay" from 2027.
Replies
5
Views
673
weakera
weakera
Aussie Darcy
  • Poll
Is it time for the slams to allow the women to play Best of 5? Even at least in the SF or Final? (Poll in thread)
2
Replies
57
Views
2K
Airspun
Airspun
T
Why is there equal prize money only in joint events?
2 3
Replies
110
Views
2K
Bartelby
Bartelby
Razer
Wilander says : Iga Swiatek is going to be "the Rafael Nadal of the women's 'big three' "
Replies
46
Views
2K
DSH
DSH
Top