Do we need Equal prize money after seeing both the finals at Wimbledon ?

tennis players are entertainers. they do not get paid for playing tennis but for entertaining people with their craft.

entertainers do not get paid by hours or quality of work, they get paid by how many spectators they can attract.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
tennis players are entertainers. they do not get paid for playing tennis but for entertaining people with their craft.

entertainers do not get paid by hours or quality of work, they get paid by how many spectators they can attract.

This is often not true for athletes. Yes, attracting spectators is necessary to get money for prizes, but who attracts the most spectators is often not what decides how prize money in competition is distributed.
 

JonC

Banned
Now you are flip-flopping though, as this was not your argument a minute ago.

If it's about the value they provide (I am supposing you mean the revenue they generate), then shouldn't it be the same way with individual players? If Fed and Rafa go out in the semis, should they still be awarded more money than Berdych if he makes the final of a tournament?

Sillyness - we are talking about the WTA vs ATP not individual players. The prize money must be set - not variable depending on who wins the final.
 

JonC

Banned
I am saying that we as a society are more protective of children than we were 50 years ago.

This stuff doesn't happen in public view - there is no way for the public to protect these kids. Except to demand that the truth of what is happening in the culture-forming academic circles be brought to light and talked about in the media. Did the Telegraph article titled "'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males'" - make any mainstream news channels a few days ago? Of course not.
 

JonC

Banned
It's Fringe...And how or why you are so off topic...really?

I made a statement about liberal influence being the driver behind this equal pay nonsense and as a tangent I mentioned the push to change another logical social more - that being to make pederasty normal.

I'm just responding now.
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
Who is we? You are entitled to your opinion, but don't be using "we" as if what you're saying is unanimous Gospel. :twisted:
Do Masters tournaments not produce "real" champions? Are women's Grand Slam winners not "real' champions? I would say that I want "real" tennis players to win tournaments. Ones with the best tennis skills. Not the ones with the best fitness/endurance that win five setters on today's slow courts.

Also, if you hate Serve-bots, you should LOVE the WTA! Not many of those there!

I am sorry I am not meeting your high standards for English Language. I had to learn it at 27 (past prime in tennis terms) :)

I am not a church goer, so I definitely do not see my comments as gospel.

MS1000 are not equal to GSs and you do not find many people on this forum who claim it being so.

How many people who won MS tournaments (Henmann, etc.) did not win GSs? Must be hundreds...

Maybe there are some who won GS but not MS1000 (or equivalent) but the ratio would be 1:10 IMO (any experts on TT to come up with the stats?)

You are entitled to your opinion of course, as you kindly agreed I am entitled to mine.

You think that GS winners are successful because of endurance and history of tennis would be different otherwise?

Please let us know, who the "missing tennis greats" you are talking about?

Your point about servebots and WTA is typical of illogical comments you made in your reply.

Just because I do not like servebots, it does not mean I want to watch WTA matches.

Life, in many areas not just tennis, is not so black and white.

I can watch ATP matches of players who are not servebots instead.
 

JonC

Banned
This is often not true for athletes. Yes, attracting spectators is necessary to get money for prizes, but who attracts the most spectators is often not what decides how prize money in competition is distributed.

Golf, WNBA, bowling, - all sports besides tennis pay women and men according to the revenue their respective events collect.
 
You are a bit drastic with your comments i.e. WTA tour exists and would exist even if GS split man and women events.

I agree with you of course, that they could not then pay the same money, unless they paid out much greater percentage of revenue in prize money than man GSs.

Lady you replied to, while being businesswoman does not help women tennis and women in business cause by NOT coming up with any logical, constructive, business driven argument as to why women players are paid the same as men in GSs.

Then, lets not be to harsh on her, there is no logical etc. argument available, so all these PC boys and girls can do is to come up with feely, touchy "we are all equal, doing the same job(not)" argument.
LOL, they ARE doing the same job! They're both playing tennis. Where in the prize money contract does it stipulate, "in order to receive prize money, winner of match must play in front of a sold out crowd with an average ticket price of $xyz"? You keep harping on a non factor.

And why do you keep referring to me as businesswoman? Is that because I worked in an office? OK, IT guy.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Now you are flip-flopping though, as this was not your argument a minute ago.

If it's about the value they provide (I am supposing you mean the revenue they generate), then shouldn't it be the same way with individual players? If Fed and Rafa go out in the semis, should they still be awarded more money than Berdych if he makes the final of a tournament?

No flip flop. When other things being equal (both groups of lower ranked players not drawing any crowds by themselves ), the skill and talent that the ATP player brings in deserves more credit.

At the same time, it is one thing to ask Fedal, Djokovic, Murray to subsidize ATP. But making them patronize the WTA tour at the majors is where things are going wrong.
 

JonC

Banned
LOL, they ARE doing the same job! They're both playing tennis. Where in the prize money contract does it stipulate, "in order to receive prize money, winner of match must play in front of a sold out crowd with an average ticket price of $xyz"? You keep harping on a non factor.

And why do you keep referring to me as businesswoman? Is that because I worked in an office? OK, IT guy.

SO, regardless of the money the women bring in, they should be paid the same as men (who bring in more money) because…….that's what the contract is right now. That's kind of stating the obvious isn't it? We are disputing the status quo if you didn't quite get that in the first 100 posts.
 

heftylefty

Hall of Fame
You think the APA is fringe? DO you know what the APA is?

Yes, I do. The key word in your statement was "some". Not all, not many, not majority. Some. Like some people dispute the roundness of the Earth. It's Fringe. Just like marriage a male marrying an underage girl.

Again, let's try and stay on topic.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
LOL, they ARE doing the same job! They're both playing tennis. Where in the prize money contract does it stipulate, "in order to receive prize money, winner of match must play in front of a sold out crowd with an average ticket price of $xyz"? You keep harping on a non factor.

And why do you keep referring to me as businesswoman? Is that because I worked in an office? OK, IT guy.

Arent they in the business of entertainment ? What good is a WTA winner if just a handful is watching the match.

The WTA talent deserves money when people are willing to shell the same money , whether the match is a ATP or a WTA ; but that is not the case now.
 

JonC

Banned
No flip flop. When other things being equal (both groups of lower ranked players not drawing any crowds by themselves ), the skill and talent that the ATP player brings in deserves more credit.

At the same time, it is one thing to ask Fedal, Djokovic, Murray to subsidize ATP. But making them patronize the WTA tour at the majors is where things are going wrong.

The early rounds should pay much more but that is not related to wta vs atp. If a WTA tournament brings in X dollars and the low seeds are no good - they should still be paid a percentage of the prize money because the players as a whole brought in the money. It just so happens that women's revenue is very low and yet their lower seeds in the combined tournaments get paid equal to men. But now we're back to the original problem of pay equality being illogical.
 

JonC

Banned
Yes, I do. The key word in your statement was "some". Not all, not many, not majority. Some. Like some people dispute the roundness of the Earth. It's Fringe. Just like marriage a male marrying an underage girl.

Again, let's try and stay on topic.

Homosexuality was normalized by a small group of homosexual members of the APA - you should read about it sometime. NPR did a whole show on it - NPR should be cool with you. All you need is a loud minority and a silent and guilt-ridden public who has been brainwashed into feeling guilty for every conceivable victim group - like women athletes for instance.
 

spirit95

Professional
Kvitova spends as much time training and has beaten as many world-class opponents to win as Djokovic. The fact that tennis is the most gender-equal pro sport in the world is something we should be proud of.
 

heftylefty

Hall of Fame
Homosexuality was normalized by a small group of homosexual members of the APA - you should read about it sometime. NPR did a whole show on it - NPR should be cool with you. All you need is a loud minority and a silent and guilt-ridden public who has been brainwashed into feeling guilty for every conceivable victim group - like women athletes for instance.

Its official...You need a hobby. Hey, you should check out Hobby Lobby.
 

JonC

Banned
Kvitova spends as much time training and has beaten as many world-class opponents to win as Djokovic. The fact that tennis is the most gender-equal pro sport in the world is something we should be proud of.

How do you feel about the prize money in the WTA tournaments being lower for the same level male tournaments? Seems like a possible injustice to fight against.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Kvitova spends as much time training and has beaten as many world-class opponents to win as Djokovic. The fact that tennis is the most gender-equal pro sport in the world is something we should be proud of.

Does that include the time she spends with the worm ? J/ k.

How many times do we have to repeat that this is entertainment business and pay should be a derivative of value provided to the viewers. Value here means entertainment times number of viewers.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
How do you feel about the prize money in the WTA tournaments being lower for the same level male tournaments? Seems like a possible injustice to fight against.

Why not ask ATP to subsidize them , since they play the same sport ? Oh wait, they are doing that already by advocating joint tournaments for even non majors.
 

heftylefty

Hall of Fame
Why not ask ATP to subsidize them , since they play the same sport ? Oh wait, they are doing that already by advocating joint tournaments for even non majors.

Indian Wells
Miami
Madrid

Three joint Premier Events combine with Masters. Wow, the ladies are really storming the gates!
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
How many times do we have to repeat that this is entertainment business and pay should be a derivative of value provided to the viewers. Value here means entertainment times number of viewers.

But this is not how it works at all in terms of prize money!
That would, as already mentioned, lead to absurd conclusions. Fed and Rafa would then have to be paid more prize money then less popular players, even if said players performed better at a tournament. But this is not how prize money at tennis tournaments works! This should not be hard to grasp.

At a grand slam players are paid for how many rounds they advance in a knockout tournament consisting of the best players of their own gender, not by their popularity (that is a case for endorsements and sponsorships).

And your claim that market value ought to determine prize money at grand slams, is at best a claim that needs moral justification, seeing as this is undeniably a moral argument.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
But this is not how it works at all in terms of prize money!
That would, as already mentioned, lead to absurd conclusions. Fed and Rafa would then have to be paid more prize money then less popular players, even if said players performed better at a tournament. But this is not how prize money at tennis tournaments works! This should not be hard to grasp.

At a grand slam players are paid for how many rounds they advance in a knockout tournament consisting of the best players of their own gender, not by their popularity (that is a case for endorsements and sponsorships).

And your claim that market value ought to determine prize money at grand slams, is at best a claim that needs moral justification, seeing as this is undeniably a moral argument.

Fed and Nadal need not be paid more. If Berdych and Dmitrov win a few majors, then there will be enough viewers for them as well.

Going one step further, it is reasonable that Fedal subsidizes ATP field because they need players to play against. But there is no reason for Fedal to subsidize Schmeidlova and Panova.
 

Midaso240

Legend
Fed and Nadal need not be paid more. If Berdych and Dmitrov win a few majors, then there will be enough viewers for them as well.

Going one step further, it is reasonable that Fedal subsidizes ATP field because they need players to play against. But there is no reason for Fedal to subsidize Schmeidlova and Panova.
Here's an idea: How about once players get to,say,the $50 million mark in prize money,they stop paying them prize money. I'm sure anyone who has earned that much will be getting enough in endorsements to keep them going.

Seriously though,I don't really care what these players are earning,whether women are earning more/less/the same. Not interested...
 

KtM

Rookie
At the end of the day male tennis players are payed more... well the top ones are because of endorsements.
 

spirit95

Professional
How do you feel about the prize money in the WTA tournaments being lower for the same level male tournaments? Seems like a possible injustice to fight against.

Why should I care how two different organisations treat their players?

How many times do we have to repeat that this is entertainment business and pay should be a derivative of value provided to the viewers. Value here means entertainment times number of viewers.

Being a pro tennis player is about being an elite athlete and winning matches, not how many people watch your matches.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
LOL, they ARE doing the same job! They're both playing tennis. Where in the prize money contract does it stipulate, "in order to receive prize money, winner of match must play in front of a sold out crowd with an average ticket price of $xyz"? You keep harping on a non factor.

Quoted for truth.
 

eelhc

Hall of Fame
Kvitova spends as much time training and has beaten as many world-class opponents to win as Djokovic. The fact that tennis is the most gender-equal pro sport in the world is something we should be proud of.

If it's equality based on equal opportunity given to both sexes then that opportunity seized via merit. I would agree absolutely. If the equality is forced and artificial, then it's nothing to be proud of.

Giving ATP and WTA players equal opportunity to earn whatever they deserve should be the goal.
 

eelhc

Hall of Fame
How is one supposed to measure the amount of struggle needed to reach the top of ATP contra WTA? And how is one supposed to arrive at a fair amount of prize money according to the amount of struggle?

And seeing as you here signal that it is the amount of struggle that should dictate what one is paid: do you think all the men struggled equally to reach the positions they have reached? Are not some more advantaged than others in terms of talent/physical abilities, in terms of economic background and other backgrounds? Should this also be accounted for through differences in pay within the sexes?

It should not matter how hard they've struggled or what they've risked. I watch them on television, I go to the matches when I can and I really don't care. My boss certainly does not care how much I struggled to earn my MS degree and I would not expect him to. He cares that what I do for him is worthy of my salary.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Joint tournaments are wanted by tournament directors.

What their reasons are I don't know.

But I do know that at the tournament I've been to the majority of spectators are either women or women with children.

And there seemed to be an awful lot of women spectators at Wimbledon.
 

Praetorian

Professional
It's funny how people make their own justifications as to why men or women, should get paid more/less than the opposite gender, when the real reason for most, if not all of you, is that YOU PREFER one over the other. Simple as that. It's not about trying to convince yourselves with subjective reasoning, when deep down, everyone knows its whether they like women's tennis, or don't, or in the case of some of the males, trying to play the "I'm sensitive to women's rights" <wink><wink> (c'mon fellas, you know what I'm talking about... lol)

At the end of the day, the only true solution to the debate of equal pay, is for men and women to play in the same draw, against each other. Since they won't, here's a little tidbit to chew on (which may come as a shocker), in everyday jobs, there are women that get paid more than men, and there are men that get paid more than women, for the same jobs - and it's not because they are men, or women. SHOCKER, yeah I know right?!?!
 

PMChambers

Hall of Fame
There should be equal prize money as it's a fraction of the revenue and needed to keep both tournaments high quality. But doubles and mix need to be dropped or heavily reduced, they're not relevant and a lower form of completion living off subsides with no development purpose.
 

spirit95

Professional
If it's equality based on equal opportunity given to both sexes then that opportunity seized via merit. I would agree absolutely. If the equality is forced and artificial, then it's nothing to be proud of.

Giving ATP and WTA players equal opportunity to earn whatever they deserve should be the goal.

I'm not talking about ATP/WTA, I'm talking about the ITF.
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
But I do know that at the tournament I've been to the majority of spectators are either women or women with children.

And there seemed to be an awful lot of women spectators at Wimbledon.

Let say your argument about women being majority of spectators is true.

On this basis if there was a romantic comedy with popular, bankable male lead with less popular, lady lead, they should be paid the same, because they do the same job and majority of cinema goers for this sort of comedy are woman?

No one takes commercial decisions in any normal business on this basis.

Women get paid the same in GS for not doing the same job because finances of GSs are opaque i.e. there is no distinction between revenue/profit generated by man against women and for PC reasons I outlined in my other posts.

I asked for one business, i.e. not emotional, "touchy feely", argument for equal pay for women in GSs but I have not seen one yet.

I am happy to accept that women should be paid more if there is evidence that their contribution to finances of GSs is more than men.

Every bit of evidence available when WTA and ATP finances are concerned shows that women tennis is no where near as successful on commercial basis.

Situation in GSs pay wise is gender bias in reverse.

Edit: ATP prize money 2011 $80mln, WTA prize money 2012 $53mln

I am happy to listen why women would generate the same income in GS as men if they can not do it outside GSs. They are basically sponging of male players.
 
Last edited:

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
There should be equal prize money as it's a fraction of the revenue and needed to keep both tournaments high quality. But doubles and mix need to be dropped or heavily reduced, they're not relevant and a lower form of completion living off subsides with no development purpose.

Same can be said of WTA.

To Each his own. I think mens doubles is 1000 times better in terms of talent displayed than WTA.
 

edk1512

New User
Some of the very silly reasons are discussed here:

1. Men play 5 sets while women play only 3 sets.
But according to TW Men's tennis and Women's tennis are two different sports. Why are you comparing the two "different" sports? Should Tennis players be paid more than Football players because they play annually more hours?

2. Men generate more revenue than Women.
I guess the Year-end championship for women offers more prize money than the Men's WTF. Revenue doesn't come just form tickets sold.

3. Ivan Dodig is more skilled than Maria Sharapova and thus he should be paid more than her.
Well, Andy Murray is more skilled than Milos Raonic and the latter got paid more in this last Wimbledon. You don't get paid for skill, popularity or fame, you get paid for results.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Some of the very silly reasons are discussed here:

1. Men play 5 sets while women play only 3 sets.
But according to TW Men's tennis and Women's tennis are two different sports. Why are you comparing the two "different" sports? Should Tennis players be paid more than Football players because they play annually more hours?

Comparison is being done because WTA is sucking blood out of ITF.

2. Men generate more revenue than Women.
I guess the Year-end championship for women offers more prize money than the Men's WTF. Revenue doesn't come just form tickets sold.

One data point. Excellent. FYI , the financial commitment of both tournaments are the same.

3. Ivan Dodig is more skilled than Maria Sharapova and thus he should be paid more than her.
Well, Andy Murray is more skilled than Milos Raonic and the latter got paid more in this last Wimbledon. You don't get paid for skill, popularity or fame, you get paid for results.

Well, Players like Milos Raonic have to exist for Andy Murray to play on the tour. If Sharapova vanishes tomorrow, it does not impact Andy Murray or ATP. (may be just Dmitrov).
 

heftylefty

Hall of Fame
If pay equality has become such an affront to some players and fans, time to man up and boycott the Slams. It's time that the rubber meet the road. If you unwilling to take a stand, PTFD.
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
Some of the very silly reasons are discussed here:

1. Men play 5 sets while women play only 3 sets.
But according to TW Men's tennis and Women's tennis are two different sports. Why are you comparing the two "different" sports? Should Tennis players be paid more than Football players because they play annually more hours?

2. Men generate more revenue than Women.
I guess the Year-end championship for women offers more prize money than the Men's WTF. Revenue doesn't come just form tickets sold.

3. Ivan Dodig is more skilled than Maria Sharapova and thus he should be paid more than her.
Well, Andy Murray is more skilled than Milos Raonic and the latter got paid more in this last Wimbledon. You don't get paid for skill, popularity or fame, you get paid for results.

Anyone can come up with some silly comments to support his/her argument like Dodig one.

Your statement "I guess the Year-End etc.", is just silly. You have no evidence for this statement.

However fact is that WTA prize money for 2012 is $53mln, whereas ATP prize money is $80mln and there is no information indicating that sponsors and TV broadcast rights for WTA are more than ATP.

There is no logical reason why women players would generate the same revenue man do in GS if they can not do it outside GS, but I am happy to admit I am wrong if someone provides evidence to the contrary.

So facts as we know them are:

1) women players play shorter matches in GS and spend less time on court and on TV screens.
2) women players generate less revenue than men players do.

Only someone who never had to make budget decisions in business would conclude on this evidence that women players deserve the same pay.

But then women pay in GS has nothing to do with finance and common sense, but everything to do with PC circus of "rights".

Situation at GS is gender bias in reverse.

btw to make it clear: It is a FACT that in many jobs and professions women are discriminated against and paid less for the same or more work than men.

However in tennis situation is reversed.
 

andrewski

Semi-Pro
If pay equality has become such an affront to some players and fans, time to man up and boycott the Slams. It's time that the rubber meet the road. If you unwilling to take a stand, PTFD.

Why should we boycott GSs where men play and we enjoy watching them play?

We even enjoy watching some women play and Venus-Kvitova and Maria-Halep FO final matches were great.

Reality is people like you can not come up with any valid reason why women should be paid the same in GS for less work of lower quality and for bringing less revenue.

I would even ignore less work argument, if you could prove they bring the same or more revenue.

Then they clearly deserve the same pay.
 
Top