ATP Cincinnati 2012

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by 6789, Jul 7, 2012.

  1. 6789

    6789 New User

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    35
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Going this year and excited. Have not attended since before tourney combined women and men playing during same week.
    How has format of both women and men players changed (if at all) the "order of play" or session scheduling?
     
    #1
  2. bhallic24

    bhallic24 Guest

    I stopped going to this once they had the women's matches the same day as the mens. I want to pay a ticket to see federer v nadal not some talentless shrieking hoebag.

    I'm with ya Giles Simon! You go brother.
     
    #2
  3. Colin

    Colin Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,048
    Don't you have the option of watching all men's matches when you go?

    Everyone wants to see Federer vs. Nadal (or Djokovic or Tsonga), but that's not the majority of matches played. Those are the special ones. Would you rather watch Gilles Simon? He's a boring pusher who's making himself annoying by trying to latch on to the top men's fame for a higher paycheck.

    More people are there to watch Maria or Serena than Gilles, so he has no right to assert he should get more money than they do because men's tennis is more interesting in general. That's like the line cook at Denny's saying he should get more than his female counterpart because Mario Batali is a better chef than Cat Cora. On the one hand, that's a claim you can't dispute. On the other, it's a disingenuous, self-serving argument.

    I used to like Gilles because he was pretty, but I've seen his ugly side.

    Anyway, back on topic, Cincy should have a lot of good matches because of the surface alone. :)
     
    #3
  4. bhallic24

    bhallic24 Guest

    Yes there are some flaws with his argument of course. And I do agree with you more people would rather watch Maria than Giles Simon but.. that said there are other factors than just the talent level difference he's alluding to.
    I mean even if the talent level were exactly the same and lets say you split the ATP mens into two packs. One that played 5 setters and one that only had to play best of 3 sets and they got the same amount of pay, there would be an outrage.

    Nonetheless I think a big part of it should be driven by revenue that you generate. So yes if Simon can't get tons of people seeing his matches, he should make less than Sharapova. But at the same time, a top guy like Djokovic should definitely make more than Sharapova. for example. (BTW, I don't mean to keep picking sharapova but I figured she's probably the most popular female player since she looks easier on the eyes and she actually backs that up with success).
     
    #4
  5. Colin

    Colin Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,048
    I do kind of agree, but I think the big draws in tennis — male or female — are rewarded with endorsements and appearance fees and pricey exhibitions anyway. Roger and Maria could probably go in for a small country if they wished. Serena and Rafa could buy a mansion just to burn it down with their lit hundred-dollar bills. So, at that level, they're all wildly wealthy by average-people standards.

    After the stars, everyone else needs to make a living, so my attitude is: Why be bitter about a few bucks here and there? The men do get more in their ATP tournaments, so it's not that big a deal women make the same in slams. They're not hourly workers punching a clock. They all travel around the world on a demanding calendar, and they all spend time training and doing publicity work and media interviews for the good of tennis. Why make a big deal of something that's immutable like gender?
     
    #5

Share This Page