Do tennis players earn too much money?

FromThailand

FromThailand

Rookie
Do you think that TOP Players earn too much money considering the fact that lower ranked players don't earn that much?

Compare: When Margaret Smith Court won all four slams in 1970, her income for the year was $15,000. Sharapova earns $23 million dollars as the highest paid female athlete in the world.
 
She is getting what her agent(s) and the market can support. Fairness and worth doesn't even figure.
 
They certainly earn plenty. I don't understand the mindset of some of them. Steffi's father was imprisoned for tax fraud. I mean - the girl makes more than enough money to cover everything she could possibly need - why risk going to jail by illegally trying to squirrel away more?
 
^ What AAAA said. And compared to some other sports -- like basketball, football, baseball, and even hockey -- tennis players don't get paid all that much. I'm not talking about the Agassi's and Sharapova's of the world. But consider that so far this year the 20th best tennis player in the world, Jarkko N, has earned about $275,000. Let's say he ends the year with about $500,000. The 20th best player in the NBA will make 16 times as much, maybe more. The 48th ranked guy has made $135,000 so far, and he'll probably end up with about $250,000 for the year. Yeah, that's a lot of money for most people but for a professional athlete, especially one who has to pay for a lot of his own expenses, he's going to have to find another job most likely when his career is over.
 
35ft6 said:
^ What AAAA said. And compared to some other sports -- like basketball, football, baseball, and even hockey -- tennis players don't get paid all that much. I'm not talking about the Agassi's and Sharapova's of the world. But consider that so far this year the 20th best tennis player in the world, Jarkko N, has earned about $275,000. Let's say he ends the year with about $500,000. The 20th best player in the NBA will make 16 times as much, maybe more. The 48th ranked guy has made $135,000 so far, and he'll probably end up with about $250,000 for the year. Yeah, that's a lot of money for most people but for a professional athlete, especially one who has to pay for a lot of his own expenses, he's going to have to find another job most likely when his career is over.
Click to expand...

yep true...and a tennis player have to win a tournament to get money....a basketball or soccer player will still get their same "contract" pay even if he win or lose...(you know the best soccer players earn about 50,000 pounds a week!!!) compare that to a tennis player!!!
 
sandiegotennisboy said:
tennis players make crap compared to other sports...
Click to expand...

Exactly. Tennis players' incomes come from prize money, not team contracts like most athletes. Katerina Bohmova, a WTA professional, ranked a little outside the top 100, resorted to shoplifting at a Florida mall to get some jeans. Unless you have great sponsors, even if you are the 100th best tennis player in the world, you have to win on court to get paid.
________
Vaporizer Instructions
 
Last edited:
tennis players are paid....

...what the market will bear.

In a way, I agree with Kafelnikov's statement a few years ago...that most tennis pros are way underpaid. That obviously does not apply to the upper echelon. They are paid what the market will bear (less what the ATP keeps), and they are plenty well off.

But the journeymen (who are excellent players, ranked between 100 and 1000 in the WORLD) undergo much more financial risk than their counterparts in just about any other sport. The gate does not fund what they are worth as players. Nor do the corporations.

It is really too bad. Tennis, overall, is still a pretty small enterprise compared to the "MAJOR" sports.
 
We buy the tickets, watch tennis on TV, buy the rackets/strings/clothes/cameras/etc that they endorse. The market determines their worth, tennis players are international stars - and are paid accordingly. How much did Tiger Woods make this year?
 
Freedom said:
Sharapova's 23 million is endorsements. She probably doesn't make a million yearly in prize money.
Click to expand...


whoa there. Tiger woods is worth $500,000,000 and you think tennis players are worth too much??!!!?

Take into account he is on course to be a billionaire in 2010!!!

Golf players can play into their 60s!
tennis players can barely do half that!

so i think they should earn more!!!
 
35ft6 said:
^ What AAAA said. And compared to some other sports -- like basketball, football, baseball, and even hockey -- tennis players don't get paid all that much. I'm not talking about the Agassi's and Sharapova's of the world. But consider that so far this year the 20th best tennis player in the world, Jarkko N, has earned about $275,000. Let's say he ends the year with about $500,000. The 20th best player in the NBA will make 16 times as much, maybe more. The 48th ranked guy has made $135,000 so far, and he'll probably end up with about $250,000 for the year. Yeah, that's a lot of money for most people but for a professional athlete, especially one who has to pay for a lot of his own expenses, he's going to have to find another job most likely when his career is over.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should re-state my question differently then. Do TOP players earn too much money considering that lower ranked don't earn that much?
 
Seperating the endorsement money from the prize money, the top players deserve every penny of their prize money, they WON them. Endorsement money is not really deserved it's something that's bestowed onto you.
 
in comparison to soccer football or basketball players, tennis players dont earn too much...!In my eyes sport is way too overpaid...!
 
Buuurnz said:
in comparison to soccer football or basketball players, tennis players dont earn too much...!In my eyes sport is way too overpaid...!
Click to expand...


For real money all these tennis players should be playing hockey or soccer...no individual respnsibility on a team. short season, unions that negociate salary , benefits and pensions for them. How many professonal players are really making huge amounts of money? 20? 30?

I don't know why there is no strong players Union to get the same things for tennis players.

Of course the fan base for tennis is much smaller than either hockey or soccer.
 
pound cat said:
For real money all these tennis players should be playing hockey or soccer...no individual respnsibility on a team. short season, unions that negociate salary , benefits and pensions for them. How many professonal players are really making huge amounts of money? 20? 30?

I don't know why there is no strong players Union to get the same things for tennis players.

Of course the fan base for tennis is much smaller than either hockey or soccer.
Click to expand...

i prefer the tennis fan base being small....it means that the tennis club wont be crowded no more...
 
Most of the top players big money is from endorsements not prize money. Sharipova's situation is somewhat unique because she has model looks while other top 5 players like Davenport and Clisters have average looks so they get "regular" endorsement money.

In any case as other have said tennis players make peanuts compared to other sports. Adonal Foyle averages less than 5 points per game and 5 rebounds as an NBA center. He gets a 42 million dollar contract at age 30. The total amount he will make as a very bad NBA center over his career will be more than probably 99.99% of pro tennis players.
 
The answer to your question is in the title of the thread -- tennis players EARN their money.

Compare the prize money structure of the ATP tour (as well as length of season, travel requirements, etc.) to other pro sports where guaranteed contracts are the norm....pro baseball/basketball players cash their paychecks regardless of whether they play well/poorly, or if they even play at all! They can spend an entire season on the DL and not lose a dime of their income.

Professional tennis is pay-for-performance, which IMHO is the fairest pay structure of all... :cool:
 
Captain America said:
...Professional tennis is pay-for-performance, which IMHO is the fairest pay structure of all... :cool:
Click to expand...

Captain America,
Lemme guess. You are a capitalist.
Wish more of America felt that way.
Oh, and yes, I am fascinated by your screen name.
 
Captain America said:
The answer to your question is in the title of the thread -- tennis players EARN their money.

Compare the prize money structure of the ATP tour (as well as length of season, travel requirements, etc.) to other pro sports where guaranteed contracts are the norm....pro baseball/basketball players cash their paychecks regardless of whether they play well/poorly, or if they even play at all! They can spend an entire season on the DL and not lose a dime of their income.

Professional tennis is pay-for-performance, which IMHO is the fairest pay structure of all... :cool:
Click to expand...


You nailed it.

So the question by fromthailand is kinda funny, do top performers make too much money compared to the lower performers? If you win, you should get the largest part of the prize pool, and it goes down from that...seems obvious to me.

If you watch poker, first place gets about twice the second place, which is greater than third place, etc. Don't expect to go out at the first round of a tournament and think you'll win big...
 
tennis is probably the cheapest sport. unless you are a top player, you dont earn that much money. it also has the longest season... I really dont see any financial benefits to be a tennis pro. I wouldnt be surprised if a lot less people turn pro in the future because the poor pay. I mean, no offense to the pros but a lot of them no longer plays for the joy of playing the game out there, they are trying to earn a living... just like NBA, NFL... not nearly as fun as NCAA basketball or football. the only thing keeps them motivated is $$$, which tennis doesnt have much of.
 
Captain America said:
The answer to your question is in the title of the thread -- tennis players EARN their money.

Compare the prize money structure of the ATP tour (as well as length of season, travel requirements, etc.) to other pro sports where guaranteed contracts are the norm....pro baseball/basketball players cash their paychecks regardless of whether they play well/poorly, or if they even play at all! They can spend an entire season on the DL and not lose a dime of their income.

Professional tennis is pay-for-performance, which IMHO is the fairest pay structure of all... :cool:
Click to expand...

If you follow the thread, you'll notice that I re-stated the question later. Do TOP players earn too much money considering the fact that lower ranked players don't earn that much. I will edit that on top I think...
 
nah, tennis players get paid LESS than other athletes. looks at football, baseball, and hockey? even with the nhl's "salary cap", most of the players earn more than about 75-80% of the atp tour players per year. soccer players earn a lot as well
 
They deserve it more than other sports - shoot, a baseball pitcher can go 9-14 and still get three million a year, where a tennis player starts losing, and there goes his endorsement contracts as well as his prize money.
 
arnz said:
You nailed it.

So the question by fromthailand is kinda funny, do top performers make too much money compared to the lower performers? If you win, you should get the largest part of the prize pool, and it goes down from that...seems obvious to me.

If you watch poker, first place gets about twice the second place, which is greater than third place, etc. Don't expect to go out at the first round of a tournament and think you'll win big...
Click to expand...

What would you think about giving 13 million to Sharapova instead of 23 and that the ATP would distribute the 10 million amongst Junior players who struggle to survive? Do you think that Sharapova could survive with only 13 million???
 
i think this is obvious

I think this answer is obvious. They do not make enough. Basketball, football, baseball, and soccer players make far more money for sitting on the bench half the time. Tennis players travel the world, play 7 days in 1 week to win a tournament, 3 hours each day. They have no offseason, and cannot afford to take a month off to "relax". It's far more stress on the mind and body, its not a team sport. Yet the players make maybe 500,000 bucs a year for being top 30 in the world. How's that fair?? Like someone else said...an NBA guy on the bench or in soccer makes that in a month or less....It's a joke.....
 
No, tennis players do not make too much money. They earn their money buy winning. Other sports such as baseball, where players make MUCH more money, earn theirs by contracts basically.
 
Misiti99 said:
I think this answer is obvious. They do not make enough. Basketball, football, baseball, and soccer players make far more money for sitting on the bench half the time. Tennis players travel the world, play 7 days in 1 week to win a tournament, 3 hours each day. They have no offseason, and cannot afford to take a month off to "relax". It's far more stress on the mind and body, its not a team sport. Yet the players make maybe 500,000 bucs a year for being top 30 in the world. How's that fair?? Like someone else said...an NBA guy on the bench or in soccer makes that in a month or less....It's a joke.....
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that's if you're a Top10 guy.
If you're not, you don't have to play 7 matches in a week. If you lose in 1st round, u have a week to rest.
NBA players have usually 3 matches a week, plus the flights, the training, and those matches are much more demanding than tennis matches. 82 games in 4 months, plus other 20 if u make it to the finals. It's less straining to the mind, indeed, but IMO, much more demanding to the body.

Although, it's true. NBA players make TOO much money.
 
FromThailand said:
Do you think that TOP Players earn too much money considering the fact that lower ranked players don't earn that much?
Click to expand...
Top players don't earn too much, but lower ranked players should earn more. It would be great for the sport if it could somehow be done.
 
Misiti99 said:
I think this answer is obvious. They do not make enough. Basketball, football, baseball, and soccer players make far more money for sitting on the bench half the time. Tennis players travel the world, play 7 days in 1 week to win a tournament, 3 hours each day. They have no offseason, and cannot afford to take a month off to "relax". It's far more stress on the mind and body, its not a team sport. Yet the players make maybe 500,000 bucs a year for being top 30 in the world. How's that fair?? Like someone else said...an NBA guy on the bench or in soccer makes that in a month or less....It's a joke.....
Click to expand...
I know that other sports had players' salaries skyrocketed recently like in the NHL. But is it tennis that doesn't give enough, or other sports that give too much? I personnaly think that it's a bit ridiculous to give these salaries that are very often out of proportion when you think about people who are still starving to death in our so called "modern world".
 
Andres, I can't see how can you justify NBA game being tougher than an ATP match? Tennis match in average lasts longer, is an individual sport (no team work, no substitutes) plus you hit the ball much harder than you throw the basketball. :confused:

And the mental part plays a great role in that as well.
 
mislav said:
Top players don't earn too much, but lower ranked players should earn more. It would be great for the sport if it could somehow be done.
Click to expand...
:D Finally one who understood the question correctly!
But the question is...where would they take the money if not from the top players? It should be better distributed that's for sure.
 
What do you guys think of a regular (low) salary for all ATP/WTA pros in the top N*100 (N can be decided) if they show up for a certain number of tournaments each year, and prize money on top of that for the winners in each round? The salary can be in appropriate amounts depending on country.
 
FromThailand said:
:D Finally one who understood the question correctly!
But the question is...where would they take the money if not from the top players? It should be better distributed that's for sure.
Click to expand...
Yep, I agree. We need a better distribution.
 
sureshs said:
What do you guys think of a regular (low) salary for all ATP/WTA pros in the top N*100 (N can be decided) if they show up for a certain number of tournaments each year, and prize money on top of that for the winners in each round? The salary can be in appropriate amounts depending on country.
Click to expand...
That could be a good incentive.
 
mislav said:
Andres, I can't see how can you justify NBA game being tougher than an ATP match? Tennis match in average lasts longer, is an individual sport (no team work, no substitutes) plus you hit the ball much harder than you throw the basketball. :confused:

And the mental part plays a great role in that as well.
Click to expand...
3 hours match in tennis = 40 mins of real playing.
That's less than a whole basketball match.
You don't consider about the phyysical stamina, and short springs. In tennis, you're not always running permanently, in fact, you don't run that much, since you have only to take a few steps USUALLY to get the ball, except when you're in total defense, when you have to chase balls down, but that's for 10 seconds total, and then, a 30 secs rest.
You don't have any rest in basketball, you're always sprinting.

Plus, you're not considering the contact. In basketball, you always get elbows hits, headbutts, smacks, slaps, always bumping with each other, getting hit. And the injury rate is SO MUCH BIGGER than in tennis.

It's true, I haven't played professional tennis ever, but I did have played professional basketball in the LNB (national nasketball league) for a season, plus the inferior categories (it's like JUNIORS in tennis), and at Advanced level in tennis. After a 40 mins match at basketball, i'm pretty tired. I don't get that tired after a 3 hours tennis match.

That's why you see the fitness of the basketball guys. All you guys are impressed by Nadal's speed, but you didn't see for example, Magic Jonhson, who's 6'9'', running so much faster than him, or Scottie Pippen or Michael Jordan, or any other guard, even small forward in the league. Those are faster, and have much more stamina and endurance than any tennis player.

They are REAL athletes.

Just my two cents ;)

(Of course, in NBA, there are exceptions) :p
 
Captain America said:
The answer to your question is in the title of the thread -- tennis players EARN their money.

Professional tennis is pay-for-performance, which IMHO is the fairest pay structure of all... :cool:
Click to expand...
In a free market economy, if you can command a certain amount, you've earned it. Everything else is philosophy. I and others have pointed out how little tennis players make compared to their counterparts in some other sports, but, then again, the broadcasting rights of NBA, NFL, NBL, and even NHL games far exceeds that of tennis tournaments. In America at least, people really only care about the US Open and Wimbledon. The French Open, a bit less interest, and America in general is probably only half aware that the Australian Open even exists. Compare that to even an unimportant baseball game -- if nothing else, tons of people who live in the teams market will watch. Team sports has geography going for it, a team being paired with a city gives it an immediate following. Tennis too international for American tastes.

The same could be said for golf, but more people play golf than tennis, people seem to relate to those older, out of shape guys wearing Dockers than the tall pretty boys of tennis. Even compared to another "pay for play" sport like golf, tennis players make jack. In the summer it seems like one of the big networks is airing a golf tournament every weekend. Compare that to tennis. I think the RCA is the only tournament that network TV covers other than the 3 big Grand Slams and the Nasdaq. Less TV revenue, less interest, less prize money for tennis players.

Lastly, I know that pay based on merit seems fair but from what I've seen it rarely is. There's a lot of ways management can abuse such a system. Calculating merit can become incredibly subjective, it not downright "creative." As far as guys in team sports getting guaranteed contracts, if the market allows for it, then they "deserve" it. Otherwise, we can start the ole' does Tiger Woods deserve more money than a doctor or teacher debate. You know, get all philosophical. But the way I see it, those football players, the management doesn't care about them. If they had it their way the owners would stop paying the player the moment he gets injured, all the while knowing that in sports like football, injury is almost a given. The management has no problem with football players using drugs to keep their tattered bodies going in order to win games. Owners have no problems with players taking steroids, compromising their health, to sell tickets, increase sales of team merchandise, and win pennants. And for some guys the injuries will NEVER go away. As far as salary negotiations go, I'm all for real politick -- every side should be adults and realize that everybody involved in negotiations is only looking out for their own best interests. Whatever compromise they eventually reach is probably the fairest deal possible. Make no mistake, the billionaire team owner who increase his own net worth by getting middle class tax payers to build his team a new home is going to act like he doesn't have any money to pay his players, like the player is trying to ruin him. It's all just a big game.
 
we need more hot women playing and more styles for men.

they should also change the camera angles. on tv, it just looks too easy and boring. we can't even see how high it bounces so it seems like the balls travels slowly.

which retards decided to film from the ugliest angle?
 
Ammo said:
I just think the money should be distibuted more evenly. It would probably make the sport more popular.
Click to expand...
Communist. :mrgreen: But seriously, how would it make it more popular?

To guy above who said something about camera angles, I totally agree. I understand it's cost prohibitive, but every so often a tournament will televise a match shot more from behind instead of behind and overhead and you get a much better sense of the power, speed, and precision of our sport. I can see why in football you need a lot of long shots (lot of people on the field), but long shots in tennis, and the RCA seems to be the worst offender every year, sucks the life out of the sport.

One match in particular, Spadea versus Blake in Scottsdale, was mesmerizing. The camera was mostly behind the players and it was one of the most entertaining matches I saw all year simply because of superior camera work. You got a great sense of how hard Blake hit his forehand, and you marveled at the way Spadea got to everything. If I'm not a tennis fan and I accidentally stumble on a match shot like that, I'm probably going to watch. Who knows, I may stick around for the whole match. But those high overhead angles where you see two little dots moving around hitting a smaller dot. Nah. I'm a hardcore tennis fans and I've actually turned the channel when the camera angle sucked badly enough. Just not worth it. If the choir isn't even listening then forget about winning new converts.
 
35ft6 said:
Communist. :mrgreen: But seriously, how would it make it more popular?

To guy above who said something about camera angles, I totally agree. I understand it's cost prohibitive, but every so often a tournament will televise a match shot more from behind instead of behind and overhead and you get a much better sense of the power, speed, and precision of our sport. I can see why in football you need a lot of long shots (lot of people on the field), but long shots in tennis, and the RCA seems to be the worst offender every year, sucks the life out of the sport.

One match in particular, Spadea versus Blake in Scottsdale, was mesmerizing. The camera was mostly behind the players and it was one of the most entertaining matches I saw all year simply because of superior camera work. You got a great sense of how hard Blake hit his forehand, and you marveled at the way Spadea got to everything. If I'm not a tennis fan and I accidentally stumble on a match shot like that, I'm probably going to watch. Who knows, I may stick around for the whole match. But those high overhead angles where you see two little dots moving around hitting a smaller dot. Nah. I'm a hardcore tennis fans and I've actually turned the channel when the camera angle sucked badly enough. Just not worth it. If the choir isn't even listening then forget about winning new converts.
Click to expand...

I agree about the angles, remember how baseball ( for you old duffers) was televised, like watching it from the third deck, then they brought the camera in to focus on pitcher/catcher/batter.
 
I have downloaded a lot of matches and there's barely a handful with half decent angles.

I have to rewatch 10 times to feel the height and depth.

It would be nice to watch behind womens' matches. Sex sells. I'm interested in seeing how a 130lb Sarapova hits the ball so hard.
 
FromThailand said:
What would you think about giving 13 million to Sharapova instead of 23 and that the ATP would distribute the 10 million amongst Junior players who struggle to survive? Do you think that Sharapova could survive with only 13 million???
Click to expand...


Almost all of Sharipova's 23 million she earns per year is not from prize money. She has earned only 5.6 million in prize money in her entire tennis career thus far. The main portion of money is from commercial endorsements. Why should she be forced to give up this money? The companies that give her that money are doing it to promote their products not promote tennis in general. It has nothing to do with tennis directly. If an actress gets a does a commercial on Television should she be forced to give half her money to all the struggling actors and actresses out there?

The only way tennis is going to be a better living for all players is for tennis to become a bigger commercial sport with a bigger fanbase and bigger TV contracts like basketball, soccer, baseball ect. There are a lot sports out there where athletes train just as hard for just as long and will likely make no money off it because they don't even have pro level events- look at swimming, gymnastics, wrestling among others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Federer: Earns most money via endorsements of any sportsperson in the world, why?
2 3
Replies
138
Views
14K
Murrayjuannow
M
T
how much do tennis players make?
Replies
5
Views
2K
menelaos
M
beard
Medvedev about earning in tennis... Numbers...
2
Replies
53
Views
8K
Wurm
Wurm
T
Money, money, (prize) money......
Replies
19
Views
3K
clayqueen
clayqueen
MLRoy
The Dirty, $tinking Money $ide
Replies
7
Views
985
ollinger
ollinger
Back
Top