Search results

Serena losing to Jill Craybas at Wimbledon. :eek: I was there. It still seems impossible that Serena could possibly play that bad. Especially on grass. Still SMH.

Berdych smacked Roger Federer out of the Athens Olympics in 2004, one of Federer's most dominant years on tour.

He's ... behind me, isn't he?

Common usage isn't 'false', it is the usage of language that makes the most sense to most people. To most people, talking about the 1960s but including 1970 and not 1960 is weird and misleading. That is why in common usage, the 60s means 1960 - 1969.

Good stats, but we also need to talk about break points saved to get a true picture of 'clutch'. Otherwise all we are saying is that Nadal and Djokovic are much better returners than Federer. Not even Fed's most deranged supporters can disagree with that? I have the feeling that more than...

Your poor TV is stuck on Fox News? That explains everything lol ...

If there was an award for totally missing the point, it would be yours. No contest.

If you can get $4.7 million on the WTA Tour, why would you compete at a low rent slam that only pays $100K? Go back to logic school.

Probably for the best if all you know how to do is parrot clichés.

It is still business. Some regions are willing to take a loss on a big sporting event because it raises the region's profile and they think they will make more back on tourism, national and international business opportunities. It's s gamble but that is fundamentally a business decision...

You might be. The rest of us are discussing the WTA Champion taking home $2 million more than the equivalent on the ATP next week. Hint: the clue is in the thread title. Apparently this has something to do with liberal politics, virtue signalling and social justice warriors. In your head. In...

LOL. Yes those well famous Chinese "social justice warriors" meddling in the "free market" to bankroll the WTA, in the name of "liberal politics" ... Just a tip, try reading what you write before you post it to avoid making a complete and utter fool of yourself.

It will be the most lucrative event for the winner who will win the biggest prize money in the history of tennis male of female. "In comparison to the $4.75 million prize money for the undefeated winner, the men’s equivalent, the ATP Finals, pays out only $2.7 million, Wimbledon $3 million and...

You call it blackmail. I and the rest of the untriggered world call it business. The WTA has a valuable product so they call the shots. They name the terms and conditions that the slams must adhere to if they want that product. The slams are free to take it or leave it. Strictly business.

They don't have to. They can accept the fact that their tournament revenues will be decimated when the WTA boycott if they don't. Wimbledon and the French Open could have chosen to lose a ton of money in ticket sales, sponsorship and TV rights or they could have chosen to pay peanuts to close...

No contradiction. Equality of opportunity benefits everyone not just the 'oppressed'. Tennis is a competition and it is optional. Choose another job if you don't want to compete and don't complain if you only get the scraps for being an also ran. Don't expect a huge pay check just for turning...

Well I 100% agree with that. They are offering the WTA $14million not for charity but because it is good for business. In that respect they are no different to any other tournament organiser.

Yes it is speculation. It doesn't follow that because corruption in China is commonplace that every business decision is therefore corrupt. That is a thinking error in my opinion. It also doesn't explain the huge funding spike for the WTA? If this 'dirty cash' is slushing around, why is it...

That is pure speculation. It could be true. It might not be. I would have thought the WTA have experienced personnel to do due diligence and insure themselves appropriately.

Don't put words in my mouth. I argued for a steep reduction in 1st round prize money (for men and women) and increased prize money for 2nd and 3rd round prize money (for men and women). Nothing unfair about that. If you want a bigger slice of the cake you should have to earn it.

It hasn't gone out the window. The legacy of Li Na (112 million live audience for her French Open win) is that thousands of girls and women have got into tennis as participants and there is a huge appetite for women's tennis as spectators in China. The organisers can pay the prize money because...

Correct. There should not be equal prize money on separate tours. I have zero problem with the WTA Tour Champion taking home at least $2 million more than the ATP champion this year. But there should be equal prize money at joint tournaments where the men's and women's participation brings...

No doubt some would see it like that. Others would see talented athletes who have worked all their lives for the opportunity to become a Wimbledon Champion, sacrificing their personal ambition in pursuit of a much more important principle, gender equality.

The top 30 - 80 players are looking to do better than win a 1st round at a slam. I have been watching tennis for too long and seen too many Marcus Willis types happy to grab a fat 1st round cheque and do nothing afterwards. £45000 is too much. It should be more like £5000. Give an extra 10k to...

Market forces are paying the women $14 million at the WTA finals this week and $4.75 million to the winner. The men have $8 million to share at the ATP finals with an undefeated winner taking home $2.7 million at most. The market has spoken. I am sure you are OK with that ...

Founded on the principle of equal opportunity for women in sports by Billie Jean King in 1973, the WTA is the global leader in women’s professional sport with more than 2,500 players representing 100 nations competing for a record $164 million in prize money. In 2018, the WTA was watched by a...

Hmm .... You follow tennis, English is your first language and you have never heard the term 'journeyman'? You cannot work out what it might mean to combine the term with the word 'mentality'? Well, there are dictionaries for that, I suggest you consult one. £45,000 for winning a 1st round...

No I don’t. First it has nothing to do with equal pay. Pay is something you do for work. This is not relevant here. It is equal prize money, the prize you get for winning a round or even all seven. I am in favour of equal prize money because I believe that being the men’s or women’s Wimbledon...

Undefeated WTA champion: $4.725 million.

Total prize fund $8 million. Well below the $14 million total prize fund for the WTA Tour finals. Worrying times for the ATP?