Do tennis players earn too much money?
- Thread starter FromThailand
- Start date
ENGLISH FOOTBALL(SOCCER) STAR signs $9M!!!! deal to write five books!!!
how much do you think andrew murray would get? $5.99 perhaps(!!??)
the big money is
golf
football
football(us)
and so on
how much do you think andrew murray would get? $5.99 perhaps(!!??)
the big money is
golf
football
football(us)
and so on
Didn't know about the pension scheme, but I'm all for that. Better distribution of prize money - that's what we need.sureshs said:
Sharapova can keep her sponsorship millions but having her prize money reduced by 15% and that amount distributed among lower ranked players wouldn't mean much to her, but it would mean a huge difference to other players.
It would allow for a much larger base of high quality players, players who earn their living with tennis and thus we would have more top players, more players in general,more interest for this sport, a larger fanbase, more amateur and recreational players, more media coverage, more industry covering the logistics and as a result - more sponsors with larger sponsorships.
Those wer my 2¢.
SpinMeister
New User
that's like asking bill gates to give $3 to everyone in the world. What'cha gonna buy?
SpinMeister
New User
It would be extremely odd to lower prize money all of a sudden.
We shouldn't penalize top players for being at the top.
Money is the sponsors' responsability. Not the players'.
We shouldn't penalize top players for being at the top.
Money is the sponsors' responsability. Not the players'.
re: lower prize money
I think it is a ridiculous idea to lower prize money for the top players. The top of the top are the ones who need to make as much as possible as they are the ones who drive the evolution of tennis, not the lesser players. (Think Agassi playing Wimbledon from the baseline; today, you don't even see a serve and volley wear pattern, granted, the new grass is somewhat engineered to be slower...)
I know you need competition to drive performance, so you need the lower players interested to play, but the top guys are the ones playing a tourney every week and making it to the finals with hardly any rest at all. They need to be motivated to come back, otherwise we risk losing them after their first $20 million. (What a loss Henin's retirement is to female tennis... She just isn't motivated anymore.)
This is not to say that money is the only motivator. I am just saying that the answer is not in bridging the income gap between the top and the murk. I think it has to do more with just increasing the wellfare of the "average" touring pro.
Lastly, don't forget: Most every country has a sponsorship scheme in place to help their talented climb the ladder. Men usually until the age of 21, girls until 19 or 20, depending on the country, get money to pay for hotels and airfare.
Usually this sponsorship only lasts as long as the players show a "propensity" for improvement. (ie: their ranking is improving) Besides, what's the point of having a guy/girl who is #500 with no improvement get to hang out on the tour?
The answer is not decreasing the top player's prize moneys. They are the ones who sell the game. (Speaking of selling, when the HECK are we going to get enough doubles coverage on TV????? Now THAT would be exciting.)
Cheers, -m
I think it is a ridiculous idea to lower prize money for the top players. The top of the top are the ones who need to make as much as possible as they are the ones who drive the evolution of tennis, not the lesser players. (Think Agassi playing Wimbledon from the baseline; today, you don't even see a serve and volley wear pattern, granted, the new grass is somewhat engineered to be slower...)
I know you need competition to drive performance, so you need the lower players interested to play, but the top guys are the ones playing a tourney every week and making it to the finals with hardly any rest at all. They need to be motivated to come back, otherwise we risk losing them after their first $20 million. (What a loss Henin's retirement is to female tennis... She just isn't motivated anymore.)
This is not to say that money is the only motivator. I am just saying that the answer is not in bridging the income gap between the top and the murk. I think it has to do more with just increasing the wellfare of the "average" touring pro.
Lastly, don't forget: Most every country has a sponsorship scheme in place to help their talented climb the ladder. Men usually until the age of 21, girls until 19 or 20, depending on the country, get money to pay for hotels and airfare.
Usually this sponsorship only lasts as long as the players show a "propensity" for improvement. (ie: their ranking is improving) Besides, what's the point of having a guy/girl who is #500 with no improvement get to hang out on the tour?
The answer is not decreasing the top player's prize moneys. They are the ones who sell the game. (Speaking of selling, when the HECK are we going to get enough doubles coverage on TV????? Now THAT would be exciting.)
Cheers, -m
The-Champ
Legend
Serena is getting $40 000 000 from Nike, that was in 2004. She's doing quite well for someone not playing that many tournaments.
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-177644/Serena-Williams-aces-Nike-deal.html
Venus on the other hand endorses Reebok and gets the SAME amount as Serena..
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/12/21/sports/main259015.shtml
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-177644/Serena-Williams-aces-Nike-deal.html
Venus on the other hand endorses Reebok and gets the SAME amount as Serena..
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/12/21/sports/main259015.shtml
Last edited:
lethalfang
Professional
What's the Champion's prize for a Grand Slam event? $1.5 million?
That's the highest achievement possible for a professional tennis player. Consider this: there is no guaranteed contract for a tennis player. Pretty much every dollar is earned through winning matches. No win, no money.
What's the highest prize for an MLB player (e.g., Carl Pavano is making $11 million annual salary and he hasn't pitched for years).
What's the highest prize of an NBA player (e.g., Stephon Marbury is making $19 million).
That's the highest achievement possible for a professional tennis player. Consider this: there is no guaranteed contract for a tennis player. Pretty much every dollar is earned through winning matches. No win, no money.
What's the highest prize for an MLB player (e.g., Carl Pavano is making $11 million annual salary and he hasn't pitched for years).
What's the highest prize of an NBA player (e.g., Stephon Marbury is making $19 million).
jmsx521
Hall of Fame
If I was a top ranked pro, I'd be ashamed of the amount of money I am given. Not to mention pro athletes from even higher-paying sports... that's even more disgusting. To know that that amount of money is going to be stored in a bank without serving a purpose is selfish: Capitalist values at their best! The money would do much better assuring health, water, food and prosperity for the poor than lying properly-aligned together, in an air-conditioned safe, in the darkness, behind a 10ft thick... wall for eternity.
Andres
G.O.A.T.
Monaco vs. Davydenko, Austrian Final last Saturday.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.
And the mental part plays a great role in that as well.
After 2 hours of playing, they showed a stat of net time and gross time.
Match duration: 2:00
Court time: 0:18
Eighteen frickin' minutes!!!
True. Without question playing professional tennis is a nice way to earn a living but in the grand scheme I don't believe anyone is 'overpaid'. All the sponsors who pay Sharapova, Agassi, Federer, etc millions of dollars get much more than that in return--so why shouldn't the players benefit from their cachet while they can? Also, comparing what a player won in 1970 compared to a player wins now is not a valid argument--every professional athlete today earns much, much, more than those who played decades ago.
akv89
Hall of Fame
Prize money is always deserved, so I guess this thread is about endorsement money. Any organization that is willing to endorse a certain player is not stupid enough to be hemorrhaging money to the athletes. Its free market so they are going to pay the athletes based on how much appeal they have. In any kind of employment you don't get paid based on how hard you work; you get paid based on how valuable you are to the person paying you. So in a way, any money earned is 'deserved'.
akv89
Hall of Fame
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.
And the mental part plays a great role in that as well.
As someone who enjoys playing both sports quite a bit, I must say that basketball is much more tiring. In tennis we forget about the 10-20 second breaks we take between each point and the only time I ever feel out of breath when playing tennis is after a very long point.
In basketball everybody is always running and always trying to lose the opposing defense off their backs or trying to keep up with the movements of the offensive player. Your movement is dependent very much on the person you are guarding so it is physically and mentally very taxing. You can tell simply by looking at the physical shape of professional basketball players in comparison with professional tennis players.
You pay those outragous incomes for athletes
These athletes make so much money, they don't like anyone talking about it. They really don't want people to know just how much income they make. an announcer mentioned, off the cuff during an interview with Aggassi, that he had recently sold an extra house he had. Aggassi had a look of shock and disdain towards the commentator. He had just sold an extra house he wasn't using for 25 million. This was an extra house. This gives you some idea of the amount of money they have, which they don't like to disclose.
So where does all that money come from? YOU! That's right, every time you purchase a ticket, buy those tennis shoes or rackets, or even watch TV. Its all built into the cost of everything sports related. Yes, the athletes make a lot of their money off of endorsements, but that money is built into the cost of the products they endorse. Ever wonder why those tennis shoes, made in China for a few bucks, sell for $80???? Now you know. Of course, the manufacturer has to make money, but some of the excessive costs of simple athletic gear is not "for the name", but for the endorsements.
Its built into the cost of the tickets too. Have you attended a sporting event lately? Ever wonder why those tickets are priced so high? OK, so you just watch it on "free" TV like ESPN. Well, those advertisers have to pay for time. That cost is built into the bread you just bought, and the butter, and the beer.
ALL the money that is paid to athletes comes from YOU, the CONSUMER. So next time you hear about Sharapova making 23 million per year in endorsements, you know some of it came out of your pocket.
These entertainers, through the use of powerful agencies, have bulked up their net worth beyond what you can imagine. They are pampered and primped, and can make more in a few years than most would make in 100 lifetimes. And it all comes out of your pocket. It adds to the cost of every tennis shoe, sweatshirt, and racket you ever bought.
I think the endorsement game has gone crazy. But as this board will prove, it is effective. Everytime some athlete (around here its tennis) shows up with a new racket, shoes, or even ankle supports, everybode wants to know what it is and where they can get it, as if it will make them a better player. The companies know this, which is why they find it profitable to pay the endorsee millions. Those costs are passed on to the consumer in higher prices.
These athletes make so much money, they don't like anyone talking about it. They really don't want people to know just how much income they make. an announcer mentioned, off the cuff during an interview with Aggassi, that he had recently sold an extra house he had. Aggassi had a look of shock and disdain towards the commentator. He had just sold an extra house he wasn't using for 25 million. This was an extra house. This gives you some idea of the amount of money they have, which they don't like to disclose.
So where does all that money come from? YOU! That's right, every time you purchase a ticket, buy those tennis shoes or rackets, or even watch TV. Its all built into the cost of everything sports related. Yes, the athletes make a lot of their money off of endorsements, but that money is built into the cost of the products they endorse. Ever wonder why those tennis shoes, made in China for a few bucks, sell for $80???? Now you know. Of course, the manufacturer has to make money, but some of the excessive costs of simple athletic gear is not "for the name", but for the endorsements.
Its built into the cost of the tickets too. Have you attended a sporting event lately? Ever wonder why those tickets are priced so high? OK, so you just watch it on "free" TV like ESPN. Well, those advertisers have to pay for time. That cost is built into the bread you just bought, and the butter, and the beer.
ALL the money that is paid to athletes comes from YOU, the CONSUMER. So next time you hear about Sharapova making 23 million per year in endorsements, you know some of it came out of your pocket.
These entertainers, through the use of powerful agencies, have bulked up their net worth beyond what you can imagine. They are pampered and primped, and can make more in a few years than most would make in 100 lifetimes. And it all comes out of your pocket. It adds to the cost of every tennis shoe, sweatshirt, and racket you ever bought.
I think the endorsement game has gone crazy. But as this board will prove, it is effective. Everytime some athlete (around here its tennis) shows up with a new racket, shoes, or even ankle supports, everybode wants to know what it is and where they can get it, as if it will make them a better player. The companies know this, which is why they find it profitable to pay the endorsee millions. Those costs are passed on to the consumer in higher prices.
Forehand_Punisher
Rookie
How's this for a disparity. Tiger has earned $4,425,000 playing in only 5 events so far this year. Phil Mickelson is 2nd with $3,807,270 in 12 events.
Top ATP money leaders through May 24
1. Novak Djokovic $2,719,094
2. Rafael Nadal $2,292,541
3. Roger Federer $1,254,959
4. Nikolay Davydenko $1,195,576
5. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga $797,506
The 63 ranked golfer, Jason Bohn has earned $801,785 so far and the top 43 golfers have already earned 1 million! lol (Wait...that's not funny...)
Sources: http://www.sportsline.com/tennis/story/10841542
http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/moneyLeaders
Top ATP money leaders through May 24
1. Novak Djokovic $2,719,094
2. Rafael Nadal $2,292,541
3. Roger Federer $1,254,959
4. Nikolay Davydenko $1,195,576
5. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga $797,506
The 63 ranked golfer, Jason Bohn has earned $801,785 so far and the top 43 golfers have already earned 1 million! lol (Wait...that's not funny...)
Sources: http://www.sportsline.com/tennis/story/10841542
http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/moneyLeaders
daddy
Legend
So what exactly is the problem here ? Golf pays more, we all know it. Tiger did win 4 of 5 events he took on so we know that also.
You should accept a few facts :
1 - Stars of any remotely popular sport will live a perfectly fine and wealthy life
2 - Those who establish themselves as superstars of the worlds sport will earn unbelievably more than the regular Joes in their sport ( Federer earns probably 20 times more then Ferrer for example ). Michael Schumacher and Michael Jordan were regularly over 30 million bucks per season.
3 - Sports have a different popularity and apeal to sponsors thus they pay differently.
lethalfang
Professional
Then you should start your own charity. Many (not enough) rich athletes do it.
At least the top ranked pros actually have top ranked talent, unlike those pseudo-celebrities doing 3rd-rate reality shows.
ruski07
New User
at the top of the game i think they get paid what they should, but on the challenger and futures circuit they r grossly under paid for all the work they put in...so many players that have had massive amounts of talent have had to give it away cos it costs so much to travell and play full time
rightytopspin79
Rookie
The top 100 can make good money, but compared to other sports its doesn't really compare. For the most part Tennis is really not a sport that commands alot revenue, its a travelling sport and Individual sport. Unlike Golf, there isn't big money behind it. Not that these guys are broke but if you're not winning you better be doing some exhibitions or something.
Greenfin Beta
Semi-Pro
hockey? really? soccer, yes. basketball, yes. but hockey?
Greenfin Beta
Semi-Pro
unlike with team sports where everything is provided, tennis players also have to pay their own air fare, accommodation, food, staff, etc.
Greenfin Beta
Semi-Pro
in switzerland or monaco...;-)
DashaandSafin
Hall of Fame
Everyone whines that the pro's in the top 50-100 should get paid more, I wholeheartedly agree, however, who the hell is going to pay them? The Challenger and Future events barely bring in any revenue. Where is the money to pay these pro's coming from? Oh wait thats right, the fans....
All 10 of them.
All 10 of them.
What a racquet!
New User
Not a popular view, sadly. In this world, the market is supreme and people can rot as far as it and its proponents are concerned.
HyperHorse
Banned
NO!!!!!!!!
American basketball/football/baseball players get even more $$$$$!
American basketball/football/baseball players get even more $$$$$!
Eviscerator
Banned
Compared to doctors, nurses, policemen, paramedics, firemen, teachers and others who contribute to society on a daily basis, yes they are over paid. For that matter all major sports stars are overpaid who contribute little other than entertainment.
However your question seems to be more along the lines of equitable distribution with other lesser known players in the sport. In that instance I would say no for two main reasons. First and foremost they bring in the fans revenue and get the TV and sponsor dollars. Secondly, it is not a team sport so they need not worry about salary caps and the like for the betterment of a team. They need to make whatever the market will bear since the money stops the day they are injured or no longer able to compete.
Similar threads
- King Fed WW
- General Pro Player Discussion
