Cincinnati Open prize money for the male champion is 87% more than the women.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aussie Darcy

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Same sets played, male tournament has 0 of the big 3, 0 reigning slam champions in the draw. Women’s tournament has all 4 reigning champs (Osaka, Barty and Krejcikova). Also had 9 of the top 10 female while the men just has 6 of the top 10.

E9LoJRVWQAA5O2u.jpg

E9LoJRwWUAsgYPA.jpg


Male QF lineup is:
Medvedev v PCB
Rublev v Paire
Ruud v Zverev
Sonego/Tsitsipas v Berrettini/Felix

Female QF lineup is:
Barty v Krejcikova
Kerber v Kvitova
Pliskova v Badosa
Muchová/Bencic v Teichmann

0 slam champs on the men’s side Vs 4 on the women’s side. Epic QF’s including reigning RG champ v reigning Wimbledon champ and 3x slam champ Kerber v 2x slam champ Kvitova. Men’s side has uhh Rublev v Paire and Ruud v Zverev.... juicy.

Really hard to justify this one.
 
NoleFam said:
This is not a controversy. This is not an ITF tournament where prize money is equal and where the tours are joined. One tournament is hosted by the ATP and the other, the WTA.
Click to expand...
Well it’s a joint tournament and the organisers decide the prize money. What I find even weirder is that the prize money is actually down for the women than last year despite that being held in New York with restricted crowds yet this year is full capacity in Cincy and the women are earning 6% less but the men has increased by 14%? Explain?
www.perfect-tennis.com

Cincinnati Open Prize Money 2026 [Confirmed] - Perfect Tennis

Find out what both ATP and WTA players will earn at the Western & Southern Open with this Cincinnati Open 2026 prize money breakdown. Includes historical prize money data and percentage changes.
www.perfect-tennis.com www.perfect-tennis.com
 
I thought sets played was irrelevant?

If the ATP is such a deadweight for the WTA to carry then cut ‘me loose, run your own tournaments, stand on your own two feet and see how much revenue you have to divvy up.

We all know exactly who is supporting who here and pretending like people watch WTA at even a level that supports current compensation is a total joke, let alone arguing with a straight face for more money.
 
yokied said:
I thought sets played was irrelevant?

If the ATP is such a deadweight for the WTA to carry then cut ‘me loose, run your own tournaments, stand on your own two feet and see how much revenue you have to divvy up.

We all know exactly who is supporting who here and pretending like people watch WTA at even a level that supports current compensation is a total joke, let alone arguing with a straight face for more money.
Click to expand...
Yes I’m sure everyone is watching Casper Ruud and Benoît Paire over Ash Barty, Kerber and Osaka. This tournament has literally 0 star power on the men’s side with none of the big 3, no Thiem. I mean maybe they’d have a leg to stand on if there was Djokovic and Nadal but there’s barely anyone.
 
Why the insistence that men and women are equal. Men within men aren't even equal even though they're biologically supposed to be more similar. Men get paid differently doing the same thing yet no one whines. When binaries are involved people lose their minds. M v F, B v W, etc....For some reason both ends of the binaries should get the same when one end of the binary isn't even equal within itself
 
Raul_SJ said:
Would rather see Casper and Paire over any of those three.
Click to expand...
I mean that’s cause you just hate the women’s tour let’s be honest. Someone could offer you a free ticket to a slam final for the women and you’d reject it. You despise the women and constantly attack various women at any point on here so your point doesn’t stand.
 
Female models have always made more cash than their male counterparts and no one bats an eye. Why should this be a problem when it's so obvious that the men's tour (even in this crapola era) draws a bigger audience than the WTA? You need a hobby.
 
-snake- said:
Female models have always made more cash than his male counterparts and no one bats an eye. Why should this be a problem when it's so obvious that the men's tour (even in this crapola era) draws a bigger audience than the WTA? You need a hobby.
Click to expand...
Ah I love when people make this comparison. Because men watch those female models, the Victoria fashion show and know all the supermodels. There’s a reason Bouchard and Kournikova made so much money from their looks and yet hot men like Dimitrov and Lopez don’t. The market is on the men’s side.
Also it’s not obvious this crapola men’s tour draws more. I’m interested to see the SF viewings of a possible Rudd v Paire SF vs Barty v Kerber which was a Wimbledon SF 2 months ago while Ruud v Paire is a slam 1R situation.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
I mean that’s cause you just hate the women’s tour let’s be honest. Someone could offer you a free ticket to a slam final for the women and you’d reject it. You despise the women and constantly attack various women at any point on here so your point doesn’t stand.
Click to expand...

Osaka is not as big an attraction as you make her out to be. If Serena and Osaka meet in NYC do not be surprised if the NYC crowd is overwhelmingly pro Serena. Yes, people are quite fed up with Osaka's antics.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Ruud and Paire are bringing in more than Barty, Osaka and Kerber? This tournament has 0 big 3 and no Thiem. It has no stars on the men’s side.
Click to expand...
Men hit the ball harder and are more athletic (not sexist, just a biological fact) and thus the men's game is more popular and probably will always be more popular. Just the way it is. The men's game still gets way more viewers even though broadcasters and tournaments are determined to give equal coverage to both the men and women.

-snake- said:
Female models have always made more cash than their male counterparts and no one bats an eye. Why should this be a problem when it's so obvious that the men's tour (even in this crapola era) draws a bigger audience than the WTA? You need a hobby.
Click to expand...
It's only sexist when women are disadvantaged. If women have a benefit, it's just normal and nothing needs changing.
 
Yes, the Sydney International was a joint tournament where the women got paid more, so it can happen the other way.

The argument works, however, to destroy the suggestion that the men should get paid more at a slam because they play more sets.

Here there is no connection between prize money and sets played, so there should be no argument for any gender difference at slams.

NoleFam said:
This is not a controversy. This is not an ITF tournament where prize money is equal and where the tours are joined. One tournament is hosted by the ATP and the other, the WTA.
Click to expand...
NoleFam said:
This is not a controversy. This is not an ITF tournament where prize money is equal and where the tours are joined. One tournament is hosted by the ATP and the other, the WTA.
Click to expand...
 
I mean there are both ATP and WTA matches going on right now. You could bring few busses full of people and they all still could get a seat in the first row of that wta match.
And I actually like wta. I was one of 10 or so (if you count pliskova's entourage) people yesterday that were watching pliskova match while tsitsipas match was going on.
 
You know what else is unfair? The tournament threads in TTW are unequal. We need all men's tournament posters to start making a comment in the women's tournament thread every time they post in the men's. One for one. Let's go people, let's go!
 
Laws of free market at work here.. Men's tennis is just more exciting to watch these days. As Nadal says, let's not turn everything into a polemic or a social justice debate.

I used to watch women's tennis during the times of Graf and as recently as when Justine Henin used to play. Loved their strokes especially Henin's OHB.

Once players like Serena/Sharapova took over, I was turned off by the grunt fest or basically lack of good strokes. Serena in particular killed my interest after her ranting at Carlos Ramos and after she threatened the lines woman at USO. Not to mention her lack of attractive game.

I personally find ATP matches much more interesting to watch in terms of strategy, athleticism, power, strokes etc. I find WTA matches near intolerable due to the incessant grunting and basically each rally being an exchange of strokes center to center.

I suspect most spectators feel the same way and that is why the ATP has higher payout.
 
The ATP/WTA have a monopoly over labour supply. There is no free market in tennis. It's almost a monopoly.

BayAreaBooster said:
Laws of free market at work here.. Men's tennis is just more exciting to watch these days. As Nadal says, let's not turn everything into a polemic or a social justice debate.

I used to watch women's tennis during the times of Graf and as recently as when Justine Henin used to play. Loved their strokes especially Henin's OHB.

Once players like Serena/Sharapova took over, I was turned off by the grunt fest or basically lack of good strokes. Serena in particular killed my interest after her ranting at Carlos Ramos and after she threatened the lines woman at USO. Not to mention her lack of attractive game.

I personally find ATP matches much more interesting to watch in terms of strategy, athleticism, power, strokes etc. I find WTA matches near intolerable due to the incessant grunting and basically each rally being an exchange of strokes center to center.

I suspect most spectators feel the same way and that is why the ATP has higher payout.
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
The ATP/WTA have a monopoly over labour supply. There is no free market in tennis. It's almost a monopoly.
Click to expand...
The money for the marketing, sponsorship comes for the more popular matches and as of today, most spectators come to watch the ATP tour. This may change once F, N and D retire.

If and when the WTA tour has a good rivalry on par with Djokodal or DjokoFed or Fedal, the free markets (read sponsorship money) will go to the WTA tourneys.

As simple as that.
 
Bartelby said:
Here there is no connection between prize money and sets played, so there should be no argument for any gender difference at slams.
Click to expand...

It proves nothing. Yes, there are joint ATP/WTA three set tournaments where men get paid more and vice versa. That does not mean the number of sets played is not one of many factors.

What is the current situation? Men and women are paid equally at all the four majors, correct?

If so, you should be happy. A great deal for women. Just imagine the outcry if women had to play five sets while men played three.
 
Last edited:
probably total of 4 to 5 people including the OP are watching the WTA. That could be a reason why they are probably not rewarded as much. That's my guess!

Mens shouldn't have that much viewership either with the lack of big 3, but women's tennis is unbearable as it stands. Musical chair isn't in helping either
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Same sets played, male tournament has 0 of the big 3, 0 reigning slam champions in the draw. Women’s tournament has all 4 reigning champs (Osaka, Barty and Krejcikova). Also had 9 of the top 10 female while the men just has 6 of the top 10.

E9LoJRVWQAA5O2u.jpg

E9LoJRwWUAsgYPA.jpg


Male QF lineup is:
Medvedev v PCB
Rublev v Paire
Ruud v Zverev
Sonego/Tsitsipas v Berrettini/Felix

Female QF lineup is:
Barty v Krejcikova
Kerber v Kvitova
Pliskova v Badosa
Muchová/Bencic v Teichmann

0 slam champs on the men’s side Vs 4 on the women’s side. Epic QF’s including reigning RG champ v reigning Wimbledon champ and 3x slam champ Kerber v 2x slam champ Kvitova. Men’s side has uhh Rublev v Paire and Ruud v Zverev.... juicy.

Really hard to justify this one.
Click to expand...

If the women don't like this they are free to compete in the men's tournament.
 
-snake- said:
Female models have always made more cash than their male counterparts and no one bats an eye. Why should this be a problem when it's so obvious that the men's tour (even in this crapola era) draws a bigger audience than the WTA? You need a hobby.
Click to expand...

Don’t forget female nurses, and literally any other female-dominated profession.

The whiners are only concerned with selective outrage. I’m sure we’ve all heard the “but most CEOs are men!”. Well, most men aren’t CEOs either.

The entire feminist movement is one huge logical fallacy.
 
BayAreaBooster said:
Laws of free market at work here.. Men's tennis is just more exciting to watch these days. As Nadal says, let's not turn everything into a polemic or a social justice debate.

I used to watch women's tennis during the times of Graf and as recently as when Justine Henin used to play. Loved their strokes especially Henin's OHB.

Once players like Serena/Sharapova took over, I was turned off by the grunt fest or basically lack of good strokes. Serena in particular killed my interest after her ranting at Carlos Ramos and after she threatened the lines woman at USO. Not to mention her lack of attractive game.

I personally find ATP matches much more interesting to watch in terms of strategy, athleticism, power, strokes etc. I find WTA matches near intolerable due to the incessant grunting and basically each rally being an exchange of strokes center to center.

I suspect most spectators feel the same way and that is why the ATP has higher payout.
Click to expand...

That's the way it is.
Like you many people followed women's tennis with Graf and later Henin.
Then Federer, Nadal and the Joker took over.
 
I couldn't put my finger on it until recently, but I finally realize why women's tennis (usually, not always, but usually) bores me, besides the less physical nature of their game. I just don't think there are any interesting rivalries in their game. Men's tennis is full of them.
 
BayAreaBooster said:
Laws of free market at work here.. Men's tennis is just more exciting to watch these days. As Nadal says, let's not turn everything into a polemic or a social justice debate.

I used to watch women's tennis during the times of Graf and as recently as when Justine Henin used to play. Loved their strokes especially Henin's OHB.

Once players like Serena/Sharapova took over, I was turned off by the grunt fest or basically lack of good strokes. Serena in particular killed my interest after her ranting at Carlos Ramos and after she threatened the lines woman at USO. Not to mention her lack of attractive game.

I personally find ATP matches much more interesting to watch in terms of strategy, athleticism, power, strokes etc. I find WTA matches near intolerable due to the incessant grunting and basically each rally being an exchange of strokes center to center.

I suspect most spectators feel the same way and that is why the ATP has higher payout.
Click to expand...
And yet the women weren’t getting paid more than the men during that amazing era while the men had a slamless #1. Funny how the women are the ones always dudded whether they’re the moe popular ones or not. Also laughable you say the men’s tour is more exciting. Didn’t Hurkacz win a freaking Masters? There’s no big name in the men’s tournament vs the countless in the women’s side but yeah men are so much more popular. Casper Fuud, juicy.
 
R. Schweikart said:
That's the way it is.
Like you many people followed women's tennis with Graf and later Henin.
Click to expand...

Osaka is more famous than Graf ever was with the general public.The problem is that Osaka is not being followed for her tennis. People are following her off court activities.
 
James P said:
I couldn't put my finger on it until recently, but I finally realize why women's tennis (usually, not always, but usually) bores me, besides the less physical nature of their game. I just don't think there are any interesting rivalries in their game. Men's tennis is full of them.
Click to expand...
Literally who on the men’s side has juicy rivalries when you take out the big 4 and Kyrgios. Oh PCB v Tsitsipas? That’s such a good rivalry.

The two biggest names at the moment of Tsitsipas and Medvedev have met a whopping 4 times in 2 years. Barty has played Sabalenka and Pliskova 3 times this year alone. What great rivalries are on the ATP?
 
Aussie Darcy said:
And yet the women weren’t getting paid more than the men during that amazing era while the men had a slamless #1. Funny how the women are the ones always dudded whether they’re the moe popular ones or not. Also laughable you say the men’s tour is more exciting. Didn’t Hurkacz win a freaking Masters? There’s no big name in the men’s tournament vs the countless in the women’s side but yeah men are so much more popular. Casper Fuud, juicy.
Click to expand...
Trust me, if/when the ATP relies on Casper Ruud/Hurkacz to bring in the money, it is a goner. At that point, I won't be surprised if someone inspiring like Coco Gauff draws all the money and attention.

BTW, I find watching Barty, Pliskova and Sabalenka is ridiculously boring. Nothing remotely attractive in their playing styles.
 
BayAreaBooster said:
Trust me, if/when the ATP relies on Casper Ruud/Hurkacz to bring in the money, it is a goner. At that point, I won't be surprised if someone inspiring like Coco Gauff draws all the money and attention.
Click to expand...
Isn’t that where the ATP is headed? Why are the men getting paid 80% more yet look at the QF comparison I showed. Not one slam champion in the men’s QF’s. 4 on the women’s side including the reigning French Open champ and Wimbledon champ. Ruud, Paire, Felix vs Kvitova, Barty, Kerber, Pliskova.

Benoit Paire as a QFist will earn more than any of the women’s SFists.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Literally who on the men’s side has juicy rivalries when you take out the big 4 and Kyrgios. Oh PCB v Tsitsipas? That’s such a good rivalry.

The two biggest names at the moment of Tsitsipas and Medvedev have met a whopping 4 times in 2 years. Barty has played Sabalenka and Pliskova 3 times this year alone. What great rivalries are on the ATP?
Click to expand...
You're probably one of maybe 5 people in the world that finds Sabalenka-Pliskova more interesting than Medvedev-Tsitsipas lmao.
 
Aussie Darcy said:
Isn’t that where the ATP is headed? Why are the men getting paid 80% more yet look at the QF comparison I showed. Not one slam champion in the men’s QF’s. 4 on the women’s side including the reigning French Open champ and Wimbledon champ. Ruud, Paire, Felix vs Kvitova, Barty, Kerber, Pliskova.

Benoit Paire as a QFist will earn more than any of the women’s SFists.
Click to expand...
Trust me, there is nothing attractive watching the playing styles of Barty /Kerber / Pliskova /Kvitova. Mostly grunting and mid court exchanges. I find watching Hsieh much more enjoyable.
 
BayAreaBooster said:
Trust me, there is nothing attractive watching the playing styles of Barty /Kerber / Pliskova /Kvitova. Mostly grunting and mid court exchanges. I find watching Hsieh much more enjoyable.
Click to expand...
By my estimation, the most entertaining women's player that has real star quality is Andreescu and she can't stay healthy enough to maintain interest in her career. Sad really, and not her fault, but it's just the plain truth.
 
BayAreaBooster said:
Trust me, there is nothing attractive watching the playing styles of Barty /Kerber / Pliskova /Kvitova. Mostly grunting and mid court exchanges. I find watching Hsieh much more enjoyable.
Click to expand...
Kerber is the only of the 4 you listed who constantly grunts, Barty is as quiet as mouse and I always find it funny when grunting is used to criticise the WTA when you literally have Nadal...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
Divide the womens Open Era greats into tiers
2
Replies
84
Views
5K
martinezownsclay
M
P
Is the gap between the top 5 women in the Open Era to the 6th, 7th, and 8th best huge, and much more than in the mens
Replies
20
Views
1K
jrepac
J
Back
Top