Men earn massively more than women in tennis!

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
#1
For all those deluded people who see the slams and think equal pay is the rule in tennis there is 'real news'.

You are wrong.

And although the pattern is more complicated than you might think it does reflect the market:

So far in 2018, 71 per cent of the world’s top 100 men have earned more than women of the same ranking, based on prize money per tournament played.

The data, though, suggests viewing figures are not gender based but determined by individual performance and personality.


https://www.theguardian.com/sport/ng-interactive/2018/jul/14/tennis-pay-gap-shouldnt-be-gender-based
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#5
Well, equal pay is only at the slams, no?
I thought that was common knowledge.

Elsewhere they're seperate tours and set their own figures, presumably based on earnings from ticket sales and stuff. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Some tournaments award equal pay like Indian Wells and Miami whilst tournaments like Rome, Cincy and Dubai don't. I dare say that the popularity of Serena and Venus has helped award equal pay at some American events. Cincy doesn't though. Although the men are Masters1000 and the women are Premier 5, the women earn almost half the men do...
 
#8
Some tournaments award equal pay like Indian Wells and Miami whilst tournaments like Rome, Cincy and Dubai don't. I dare say that the popularity of Serena and Venus has helped award equal pay at some American events. Cincy doesn't though. Although the men are Masters1000 and the women are Premier 5, the women earn almost half the men do...
Any idea what they base it on? I'm assuming ticket sales or something, but maybe it's fixed? I'd be interested to see how the pay ratio compares to ticket sales ratio.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#9
Any idea what they base it on? I'm assuming ticket sales or something, but maybe it's fixed? I'd be interested to see how the pay ratio compares to ticket sales ratio.
Would be fascinating to know. The only sort of figures of revenue that get posted here are of the entire tour and are from 2014. No information on individual tournaments that i've found. I guess it's hard to measure. The Auckland tournament director discussed how the year Li Na played the viewership was through the roof and dominated the male viewership. Depends on each nation, who you have playing, viewership etc.
 
#10
Would be fascinating to know. The only sort of figures of revenue that get posted here are of the entire tour and are from 2014. No information on individual tournaments that i've found. I guess it's hard to measure. The Auckland tournament director discussed how the year Li Na played the viewership was through the roof and dominated the male viewership. Depends on each nation, who you have playing, viewership etc.
Yeah. I bet Serena brings in more revenue at the US Open than most of the men. It's definitely a product of more factors than gender. I think nationality would be the biggest, at least after the ATG superstars like Fedalovic
 
#11
Ladies demanding the same amount of pay as much as Federer vs Rafa / Djoker slam final is ridiculous ..
I wud pay to watch Women models not Male models..
And pay to watch Fed vs Nole vs rafa .. Dont know where is Sexism here ?
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#14
Ladies demanding the same amount of pay as much as Federer vs Rafa / Djoker slam final is ridiculous ..
I wud pay to watch Women models not Male models..
And pay to watch Fed vs Nole vs rafa .. Dont know where is Sexism here ?
Demanding the same pay? They already have the same pay at slams. Do your research thanks.
 
#15
I played at a high level. I am female. I made money playing tennis. Not enough to retire on, but a decent amount.
I suppose we all wish we earned more, no matter if we are ranked 450th or we are Roger Federer.
The truth is far more complex.
In an ideal world, more people would be interested in women's tennis, and the pay would be equivalent. In the past, Graf, Evert and others often outdrew the men.
Right now, the WTA does not outdraw the ATP.
I do not have the answer as to how to fix. Here are some suggestions that may or may not improve the product.
1 at the Slams, women should be best of 5 sets. Fitness must be rewarded.
2 reduce shrieking. It is embarrassing and a turn off.
3 change court surface speeds to reward all court play (I. E. grass should be fast, clay slow, hard courts semi fast) Women can volley as well as men, let's see that!
4 promote good personalities.
5 we need announcers with panache. It cannot be underrated what a Bud Collins did for the promotion of women's tennis. We need more like this today.

At the end of the day, the product IS good, but must improve for equality to occur.
 
#16
Heaven forbid!!

Female Supermodels earn 10x more than male models!

Male footballers earn 800x more than female footballers!

But let’s use tennis as the epicentre to argue about all the perceived gender inequalities in this world.
Women birth 100% of all babies

Men get 100% of all kicks in the nuts

IT'S A DIGRACE
IT'S AN SCANDAL
IT'S AN OUTRAGE
 
#17
I played at a high level. I am female. I made money playing tennis. Not enough to retire on, but a decent amount.
I suppose we all wish we earned more, no matter if we are ranked 450th or we are Roger Federer.
The truth is far more complex.
In an ideal world, more people would be interested in women's tennis, and the pay would be equivalent. In the past, Graf, Evert and others often outdrew the men.
Right now, the WTA does not outdraw the ATP.
I do not have the answer as to how to fix. Here are some suggestions that may or may not improve the product.
1 at the Slams, women should be best of 5 sets. Fitness must be rewarded.
2 reduce shrieking. It is embarrassing and a turn off.
3 change court surface speeds to reward all court play (I. E. grass should be fast, clay slow, hard courts semi fast) Women can volley as well as men, let's see that!
4 promote good personalities.
5 we need announcers with panache. It cannot be underrated what a Bud Collins did for the promotion of women's tennis. We need more like this today.

At the end of the day, the product IS good, but must improve for equality to occur.
I don't think a lack of all court play in the women's game is a matter of court speed as much as it is a disbalance between court dimensions, ball weight, court speed and physicality of the WTA players.
 
#18
This won't end well. So many hateful people on this forum, this'll just descend into a crap on the WTA fest. :(
I guess anyone that disagrees with you is “hateful?” I’m female and hate women’s tennis and don’t think women should earn as much as men in the profession of tennis. I’m neither “hateful” or sexist. When the women play 5 sets and generate even 1/100th of the interest of Fed or Nadal, then equal pay is fine.

And the contention that Serena is as popular or generates as much interest at the USO as the top men is ludicrous. I’ve attended matches at the USO many years and there’s actually widespread antipathy towards her amongst NY-ers. Even a player like a Thiem gets more love there. Her behavior at the USO has been atrocious in the past, in case you’ve forgotten.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#21
I guess anyone that disagrees with you is “hateful?” I’m female and hate women’s tennis and don’t think women should earn as much as men in the profession of tennis. I’m neither “hateful” or sexist. When the women play 5 sets and generate even 1/100th of the interest of Fed or Nadal, then equal pay is fine.

And the contention that Serena is as popular or generates as much interest at the USO as the top men is ludicrous. I’ve attended matches at the USO many years and there’s actually widespread antipathy towards her amongst NY-ers. Even a player like a Thiem gets more love there. Her behavior at the USO has been atrocious in the past, in case you’ve forgotten.
For the 1000th time, it's not hateful to disagree with me. What's hateful is the disgusting and sexist comments I have seen on this forum in my years here.

And that's hilarious because as the article LITERALLY SAYS, Serena US Open finals have outrated mens finals in past years for US viewers.

Direct quote:
From 2010 to 2014, the women’s US Open final drew a larger audience in Americathan the men’s final. Part of that was due to Serena Williams appearing in four of those finals. But more people tuned in to watch Kim Clijsters’s win in 2010 than they did for Nadal’s victory the same year
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/ng-interactive/2018/jul/14/tennis-pay-gap-shouldnt-be-gender-based
 
#25
Isner/Anderson more popular than Serena Williams? I find that hard to believe!
This is not about the individual. It's about the entire ATP Tour vs the WTA Tour. That's what prize money is based on. Obviously Serena gets way better sponsorship contracts than both Isner and Anderson.
 
#27
I guess anyone that disagrees with you is “hateful?” I’m female and hate women’s tennis and don’t think women should earn as much as men in the profession of tennis. I’m neither “hateful” or sexist. When the women play 5 sets and generate even 1/100th of the interest of Fed or Nadal, then equal pay is fine.

And the contention that Serena is as popular or generates as much interest at the USO as the top men is ludicrous. I’ve attended matches at the USO many years and there’s actually widespread antipathy towards her amongst NY-ers. Even a player like a Thiem gets more love there. Her behavior at the USO has been atrocious in the past, in case you’ve forgotten.
You are deluded if you think the men have more viewership in the US than Serena.

Serena and to a lesser extent Venus, have been keeping alive American tennis for the past 20 year's.
Men's viewership has been on the decline since Agassi and Sampras left.
 
#31
For all those deluded people who see the slams and think equal pay is the rule in tennis there is 'real news'.

You are wrong.

And although the pattern is more complicated than you might think it does reflect the market:

So far in 2018, 71 per cent of the world’s top 100 men have earned more than women of the same ranking, based on prize money per tournament played.

The data, though, suggests viewing figures are not gender based but determined by individual performance and personality.


https://www.theguardian.com/sport/ng-interactive/2018/jul/14/tennis-pay-gap-shouldnt-be-gender-based

so what. that’s normal
 
#32
Heaven forbid!!

Female Supermodels earn 10x more than male models!
Useless and misguided analogy, sorry.

Models aren't payed based on gender but on market value, i.e. based on their popularity / market value as an individual, not based merely on their gender. More female models have a high market value, and hence female models earn more on average, but a male model with a high market value will earn more than a female model with a low market value. There's not some separate pay grade in play that dictates that every individual female model should be payed more than a comparable man merely because female models are more popular as a group. Which is what the meninists are generally arguing for w/r/t tennis – not that pay should be differentiated based on the individual player's market value but whether their gender as a whole is more popular.
 
#33
Women play with slightly lighter balls, correct? And they play with lighter rackets?

I feel that if you want to make significant changes to the women's game that maybe balls maybe should be made even lighter or something.
Racquets are lighter on average, but commensurate with body weight and strength. My racquet was 337 grams, and I'm only 1.57 meters and 50 kilos.
Balls are the same except for the felt level, which makes a big difference!
 
#34
Useless and misguided analogy, sorry.

Models aren't payed based on gender but on market value, i.e. based on their popularity / market value as an individual, not based merely on their gender. More female models have a high market value, and hence female models earn more on average, but a male model with a high market value will earn more than a female model with a low market value. There's not some separate pay grade in play that dictates that every individual female model should be payed more than a comparable man merely because female models are more popular as a group. Which is what the meninists are generally arguing for w/r/t tennis – not that pay should be differentiated based on the individual player's market value but whether their gender as a whole is more popular.
Tennis players receive appearance fees. There's nothing to stop a tournament paying a player $500k appearance money for a $100k prize money tournament where the popularity of the individual outstrips their cohort by a massive amount. Provided an individual female player is sufficiently popular her earnings have no limit.
 
#40
If you took out prizemoney from the slams it would be a bigger gap.
The parochial thinking in the wage gap myth is frustrating. The singular variable of sex as the determining factor in earnings is superficial and exclusive of all other meretricious variables such as skill, ticket sales, merchandising, and marketability.

Whites are underrepresented as a segment of the population in the NBA;the NBA must be racist.
 
Last edited:

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
#41
Meretricious does not mean what you think it means so no one is paying you for your language skills. To refresh your memory:

meretricious
ˌmɛrɪˈtrɪʃəs/
adjective

  1. 1.
    apparently attractive but having no real value.
    "meretricious souvenirs for the tourist trade"
    synonyms: flashy, pretentious, gaudy, tawdry, trashy, garish, chintzy, Brummagem, loud, tinselly, cheap, tasteless, kitschy; More
  2. 2.
    archaic
    relating to or characteristic of a prostitute.

The parochial thinking in the wage gap myth is frustrating. The singular variable of sex as the determining factor in earnings is superficial and exclusive of all other meritricious variables such as skill, ticket sales, merchandising, and marketability.

Whites are underrepresented as a segment of the population in the NBA;the NBA must be racist.
 
#45
Meretricious does not mean what you think it means so no one is paying you for your language skills. To refresh your memory:

meretricious
ˌmɛrɪˈtrɪʃəs/
adjective

  1. 1.
    apparently attractive but having no real value.
    "meretricious souvenirs for the tourist trade"
    synonyms: flashy, pretentious, gaudy, tawdry, trashy, garish, chintzy, Brummagem, loud, tinselly, cheap, tasteless, kitschy; More
  2. 2.
    archaic
    relating to or characteristic of a prostitute.
Sarcasm Bartleby; as sex is the only relevant factor. If you take it as sarcasm it makes absolute sense. The public school system has failed you; the next time I take hallucinogens I will be sure to summon the ghost of Horace Mann and chastise him in your honor
 
Last edited:
#47
Who cares? The women don't bring in the ratings the guys do, they get the same money for doing a lot less work at the slams & a lot of them make huge money from getting their kit off for magazines etc, which the men don't have the opportunity to do & get huge paying endorsements that only the very top guys get. The debate should not be about the BBC where pay scales vary wildly for all manner of reasons, sport etc where most players down to mediocre level are making vast sums of money, it should be about the 9-5 people working in offices, shops, factories etc.
 

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
#48
I am not arguing in favour of greater equality, by the way, I am merely noting that the Trumpian tartuffery around here about women steamrolling men is just 'fake news'.

Who cares? The women don't bring in the ratings the guys do, they get the same money for doing a lot less work at the slams & a lot of them make huge money from getting their kit off for magazines etc, which the men don't have the opportunity to do & get huge paying endorsements that only the very top guys get.
 

emilyhex

Hall of Fame
#50
And the contention that Serena is as popular or generates as much interest at the USO as the top men is ludicrous. I’ve attended matches at the USO many years and there’s actually widespread antipathy towards her amongst NY-ers. Even a player like a Thiem gets more love there. Her behavior at the USO has been atrocious in the past, in case you’ve forgotten.
If you had read the article, you would have seen they discussed the larger audiences that Serena has drawn. This was based on American viewership ratings using statistical methods. This wasn't based on polling the attitudes of potentially biased New Yorkers.

"From 2010 to 2014, the women’s US Open final drew a larger audience in America than the men’s final. Part of that was due to Serena Williams appearing in four of those finals. But more people tuned in to watch Kim Clijsters’s win in 2010 than they did for Nadal’s victory the same year, and more than 1.5m more people watched Samantha Stosur win than Djokovic in 2011."
 
Top