Federer wants ATP and WTA to merge into one governing body

fedfan08

Professional
Three tournaments in one weekend is a terrible idea. Splitting your viewership into 3 won't help. You already struggle for an audience with most of the tournaments.
And how would that work with TV? Especially if events are in different time zones?
 

navigator

Hall of Fame
Personally... I don't care either way. But... unless they are on very similar financial footings, it could become problematic. This is the first step in WTA players leveraging into equal pay at all events (again, I don't care - but it will be an issue), as opposed to just the Grand Slams, and there will be other compensation issues (sponsorship money, etc). Look at the US's national soccer program - it's a disaster. The women want equal pay but their revenue - apart from the men's - doesn't come close to justifying it. If women's soccer in the US had to survive on its own... it would eek by and the players wouldn't be earning much (much like the WNBA). But it's hard to separate the two groups now. But, hey... whatevs... I don't really care.
 

Benben245

Professional
Will the governing body be objective in revenue recognition and disbursement? I think this would give enormous leverage to the men's interests, as WTA sponsors, would become ATP/WTA sponsors, the only inherent asset the wta has after Serena retires other than the standard T & A. ROIC by category would become unquestionable, big leg up for men's side
 

Alba Barragan

Professional
They could capitalize on the brand from some of the major female players. Serena will bring in more TV viewers and broadcast money than anyone outside the top few ATP pros.
It's not just about Serena. The likes of Osaka, Gauff and company already have more star power than say, Zverev, Tsitsipas and Medvedev (and I say this as a fan of those guys). And at the end of the day, big figures are the ones that fill stadiums and raise the viewers. The ATP will need some of those once the big four are gone. It's a win/win for both the ATP and the WTA.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Federer showing visionary political leadership in these trying times
Funny how many posters here are against this while players who knows the organisations inside out think it’s a good idea.

Listen to the people that knows what they are talking about!
You know what kind of person is upset with what Federer is saying, and as always their resistance / rage is not based on any rational thought. Moreover, it might make the men's side look bad, as they do not have as many active majors winners (in other words, more talent capable of winning majors). But it will be interesting to see the worst of Federer's fans--who also grip their resistence/rage politics actually criticize him....
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
In 2002 the ATP wanted to merge with the WTA because of the strength of the Williams sisters. Right now there’s more promising WTA players than on the ATP side. The ATP will be in a world of hurt when Fed, Nadal and Djokovic retire.
Yeah esp once fedal go i assume it will be like that transitional period and as someone else mentioned there are some rising stara on the wta.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
It's not just about Serena. The likes of Osaka, Gauff and company already have more star power than say, Zverev, Tsitsipas and Medvedev (and I say this as a fan of those guys). And at the end of the day, big figures are the ones that fill stadiums and raise the viewers. The ATP will need some of those once the big four are gone. It's a win/win for both the ATP and the WTA.
Exactly, it's good risk management. Many times a major or m1000 has had a weak tournament on one side of the draw, and has been saved by the other singles side. Sometimes on the men's side, sometimes on the women's side. The point is by having both men's and women's draws, you are much more likely to have a strong event in the end.

All the best tournaments (except maybe Fed Cup and Davis Cup) are co-gender events.

I think one of the best things to come out of this would be the scrapping of the divided WTFs to create one combined men's and women's end of year championship.
 
D

Deleted member 768841

Guest
If he is talking about Women players facing Male players at say, USO for example, we will see the utter obliteration of female tennis. They will all go out of the top 100, and they will most likely lose most matches. I’m not saying female tour players are bad, but against male tour players they are not as strong as the majority. I think things should stay the way they’ve been.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
You know what kind of person is upset with what Federer is saying, and as always their resistance / rage is not based on any rational thought. Moreover, it might make the men's side look bad, as they do not have as many active majors winners (in other words, more talent capable of winning majors). But it will be interesting to see the worst of Federer's fans--who also grip their resistence/rage politics actually criticize him....
I don’t really care what fans think, cause this is about the players, not us. Who am I to tell how they should organise them self. It’s not really my field since I’m not and never been a pro player. But I like they thought of them being united as it seems to work well in other sports, better use of resources.
Will strengthen them both. Who knows how well the ATP will do when the big 3 (4) will do when they retire.
Its not like they have to play all tournaments together, it can be the same tour as it is, just that they are in the same organisation as Federer said.

It’s also quite obvious why it was exactly Federer airing it to everybody (they seem to have been talking about it already behind the curtains), since he is a powerful, respected and popular player. It’s easier to get everyone on board with him saying it that for example Serena(who has pissed many off during her career, also WTA players) and lets say Popsil who doesn’t have the same weapons to make an impact. I’m not a huge Federer fan, but if I wanted something big changes to be done, he is the right man to get everyone on the idea imo.
 

fedfan08

Professional
If he is talking about Women players facing Male players at say, USO for example, we will see the utter obliteration of female tennis. They will all go out of the top 100, and they will most likely lose most matches. I’m not saying female tour players are bad, but against male tour players they are not as strong as the majority. I think things should stay the way they’ve been.
Nobody is talking about women competing against men (outside of mixed doubles).
 

fedfan08

Professional
Ok, then I kinda get what Fed is talking about.
There will obviously be big issues around separate or combined tours and especially around prize money. What I would like to see are two separate tours but with a set of elite masters/premier joint events. Take the current joint events plus the best from the ATP/WTA to round out a full calendar of joint events. The rest of the events would be separate. Prize money would be equal for the joint events the rest would be based on the revenue generated. They can re-evaluate prize money each year. Maybe with a combined tour that has one brand and one marketing/sales team behind it the disparity between men’s and women’s won’t be that great. And maybe one day they‘ll end up making prize money equal across all events. So long as the men aren’t earning less to prop up the women who cares if the prize money is equal? And honestly once Fed, Nadal and Djokovic leave who knows what the men’s tour will generate. At least on the women’s side there are a number of younger stars in the making. Who’s exciting on the men’s side?
 

Tshooter

Legend
@fed “ It’s too confusing for the fans when there are different ranking systems, different logos, different websites, different tournament categories.”

Different logos. :unsure: What is going on ? Is it still tennis. Very confused.
 
Last edited:

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
I'd have to disagree with Fed on this. I actually want men and women's tours to be separated altogether. Even slams. Organizers will benefit from extra ticket sales and also visitors creating more jobs for longer for their local businesses. Men and women's tennis can then take whatever their generated revenue each and distribute that to players. No more BS on male/female equality whatsoever, they each make their own revenue and take it. Best and fairest way.
 

fedfan08

Professional
I'd have to disagree with Fed on this. I actually want men and women's tours to be separated altogether. Even slams. Organizers will benefit from extra ticket sales and also visitors creating more jobs for longer for their local businesses. Men and women's tennis can then take whatever their generated revenue each and distribute that to players. No more BS on male/female equality whatsoever, they each make their own revenue and take it. Best and fairest way.
You really think it would be economical for slams to have separate events? And how would that even work schedule wise? By the time Wimbledon is over the grass is so beat up. How long would it take to lay new grass and get the venue ready for another slam? I guarantee you TV prefers joint events. In the US there’s very few, if any, non joint events that ESPN shows.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
This is a great idea, not sure on the details but sounds interesting having more combined events and a smoother transition and understanding of the events.

It will make it easier to sort out equal pay at all levels. There's quite a difference in pay at some combined tournaments for the women in Premier 5/Premier Mandatory tournaments vs ATP Masters 1000 and the pay. Examples being:
Dubai in 2019 - for the men it was only an ATP500 but the champ won $523,000 while the women was a Premier 5 which is far higher than ATP500 but they won less with $520,000.
Or even worse, Rome in 2019. for the men it was a Masters and the champ won €958,055, however for the women it was a Premier 5 and the champ won just €523,858.

Additionally, it might open up dialogue to women playing 5 sets at slams or perhaps 5 sets in the SF and Final. I know this has been an issue for many on this forum as they deem it unequal so perhaps it'll bring that discussion up.

It'll clear up broadcasting hopefully having it in the same channel instead of the chaos I remember when I was living in America and flicking between ESPN, Tennis Channel and all these other options.

Hopefully it means more mixed doubles at the events, with the wildly successful but now defunct Hopman Cup gone, it's left a gap. Would be awesome to see some form of combined Laver Cup/ATP Cup. Countries showcasing both genders and their talents.
Federer and Bencic
Barty and Kyrgios
Andreescu and Shapovalov
Nadal and Muguruza
Mertens and Goffin
Kenin and um Querrey

Would be awesome to see them come together.
 

PMChambers

Hall of Fame
The devils in the detail and there isn't any. This could end up with three organisational bodies Joint + male rep + female rep. With the ITF still being involved.
Nearly all the benefits can be achieved with just co-operation but because they haven't the issues obviously run deeper.
Personally, I see no reason to merge.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
Won't this change many things in the sport?
Women have their own tournaments secured in established cities that some ATP 500s are not.
Logistics may have to change dramatically for either men or women.
Some long-time people in high positions might be relived of their duties with consolidation.
Does this mean the men will still play best of 5 in slams under one organization. If yes, that hardly makes sense for the same prize money.
Is this Fed's secret way of making that equal too?
 

fedfan08

Professional
Won't this change many things in the sport?
Women have their own tournaments secured in established cities that some ATP 500s are not.
Logistics may have to change dramatically for either men or women.
Some long-time people in high positions might be relived of their duties with consolidation.
Does this mean the men will still play best of 5 in slams under one organization. If yes, that hardly makes sense for the same prize money.
Is this Fed's secret way of making that equal too?
Prize money has never been based on the number of sets played. Federer beating someone 1 and 1 in less than an hour gets paid the same as some lower ranked player winning a 3 set 2.5 hour battle. I’m not on board with equal pay for some BS PC equality reason. But if that’s the major road block to combining then make pay equal so long as the men aren’t taking a pay cut to achieve it. What players should be more concerned about is greater revenue sharing with the slams and early rounds of tournaments offer more prize money than they do now (even is that means later rounds get less). If more combined events brings in more revenue and sponsorship $$ then I’m all for it. Guys who hate women’s tennis will just have to get over it.
 

Cecilia

Rookie
Back in 2002 the Wimbledon women doubles final drawer more viewers than the mens single final. At that time the women's game had way more star power and a more promising future and the ATP desperately wanted to merge. So this idea has been on the table for a long time. I am all for it
 

fedfan08

Professional
Have a look at the quality of the joint events on tour, and compare them with the events that are a single gender.

The co-gender events are generally much, much better tournaments.
Most of the joint events are Masters events on the ATP side. Some of the smaller events have a handful of people in the stands whereas places like IW, Miami, Cincy are usually packed.
 

mbm0912

Hall of Fame
Why not just let the men and women play together, and bypass all of this management nonsense. Everyone is equal, deserves the same pay, so just let them play each other.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
Prize money has never been based on the number of sets played. Federer beating someone 1 and 1 in less than an hour gets paid the same as some lower ranked player winning a 3 set 2.5 hour battle. I’m not on board with equal pay for some BS PC equality reason. But if that’s the major road block to combining then make pay equal so long as the men aren’t taking a pay cut to achieve it. What players should be more concerned about is greater revenue sharing with the slams and early rounds of tournaments offer more prize money than they do now (even is that means later rounds get less). If more combined events brings in more revenue and sponsorship $$ then I’m all for it. Guys who hate women’s tennis will just have to get over it.
WNBA, Beach Volleyball, Swimming, Track, Bowling, MMA, soccer, marathons, cycling, softball, ALL have equal time periods, quarters, rounds, lengths, distance for women and men. It is not abut PC, it is about consistency.
If they become one organization, this will inevitably change the mens slams to best of 3 format. At least in the early rounds. Maybe women & men play a best of five semi & final. I believe this is a given and a slick way for Fed to achieve that. It also extends the career of men with less injuries due to less playing time.
No more tanking a set to save energy for the fifth. Nice chess move Fed.
Oh, and thanks for the backhanded assumption that I hate women's tennis or women's sports since I mentioned prize money. Get over that BS.
 
Last edited:

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Federer probably doesn't know what kind of hot water he is getting into.

He has been overly active on social media and might have been just sharing his opinions not thinking how much people will start looking into it. He probably hasn't thought anything about politics of it and was just thinking aloud.



All men who started off by being loved by Feminists , were thrown off of that pedstal as soon as they showed a slight deviation from feminist principles.
No, some men were well protected by tennis female powers
 
Last edited:

sureshs

Bionic Poster
is pam just name dropping venus because she has been influential in teh wta or does venus agree with this? tbh i've been most curious about her thoughts and serena as well but more so venus because she seemed more involved with the tennis politics
Pam needs to think through this. Very few organizations have co-CEOs. One of them has to go if there is a merger.

To avoid fights, I would suggest a transgender CEO.
 
Top