Murray suggest Men play 3 or Women play 5 due to prize money in GS.

bullfan

Legend
I was watching tennis channel this morning and 2 commentators for Nadals match ( not the McEnroes), discussed Andy Murray's comments.

They said, Andy believes if men and women are going to get equal prize money, then they should play the same number of sets.

One of the idiot commentators thought men played best of 5 in M1000 final still.

Personally, I think GS would be like any other tournament if they were not best of 5. I do think the women are willing to play best of 5.
 

FreeBird

Legend
Murray is GOAT (Greatest Observer of all Time). He is frank and honest unlike the other members of Big 4 who are too much influenced by their PR work. Murray speaks his heart out. :)

*I hope Bullfan you are not finding this a 'spam'.
 

Crose

Professional
I don't see how he's wrong. More tennis should warrant more money. And I sure as heck don't want slams to be best of 3, so it's either time for women to play best of fives or accept less money. Inconsistent equality is not equality at all.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
I don't see how he's wrong. More tennis should warrant more money. And I sure as heck don't want slams to be best of 3, so it's either time for women to play best of fives or accept less money. Inconsistent equality is not equality at all.
No doubt people will find a way to justify inequality, especially when the status quo is favouring them.
 

bullfan

Legend
Murray is GOAT (Greatest Observer of all Time). He is frank and honest unlike the other members of Big 4 who are too much influenced by their PR work. Murray speaks his heart out. :)

*I hope Bullfan you are not finding this a 'spam'.

I consider spamming, when folks put gifs in match threads. I' not the only one complaining that it clogs up the bandwidth. Besides, I noticed that there were a few posters that would spam with a slew of Novak pictures that had nothing to do with a Nadal match consistently, quite annoying. Thankfully, they've started being more respectful lately.
 

tusharlovesrafa

Hall of Fame
I was watching tennis channel this morning and 2 commentators for Nadals match ( not the McEnroes), discussed Andy Murray's comments.

They said, Andy believes if men and women are going to get equal prize money, then they should play the same number of sets.

One of the idiot commentators thought men played best of 5 in M1000 final still.

Personally, I think GS would be like any other tournament if they were not best of 5. I do think the women are willing to play best of 5.

One was Luke jensen and other was Al trautwig!!:)
 

bullfan

Legend
I don't see how he's wrong. More tennis should warrant more money. And I sure as heck don't want slams to be best of 3, so it's either time for women to play best of fives or accept less money. Inconsistent equality is not equality at all.

When Venus wrote to Wimbledon requesting equal prize money she mentioned that women were willing to play 5 in GS to get equal pay.
 

nethawkwenatchee

Professional
Murray is GOAT (Greatest Observer of all Time). He is frank and honest unlike the other members of Big 4 who are too much influenced by their PR work. Murray speaks his heart out. :)

Agree. This really what makes me a fan. This guy is constantly called boring and no personaility: all crap. He doesn't let PR or his emotions dictate his answers, he simply says what he feels is correct and this is nice. I loved the way he suggested a match with Serena also. Her and anyone who understands the game knows that it's a craziness. Men and Women's games can't even be compared at this level and there's no need to.
 
If it wasn't for mixed doubles I don't think the female tennis would be held in high regard as it is nowadays (not on the forum though). Most people don't give a crap about WNBA or Female soccer but in tennis the female version is highly respected. Got to be because it's one sport where men and women can play on same court.
 

PSNELKE

Legend
The day they make men play best of three set matches at RG,USO, AO and SW19 is the day I stop watching tennis.

Here's another suggestion.
As nobody wants to see women play B05 (B03 is painful enough), simply pay women less as money. As it should be.

Hell I can already see those "femen" furys running all over Court Phillipe Chartrier in that case. :lol:
 

Thriller

Hall of Fame
He is probably still pi$$ed off that Serena got a bigger prize in Miami this year. :twisted:

ATP Winner: Andy Murray $719,160
WTA Winner: Serena Williams $724,000

Seriously, the 3 set / 5 set thing has always been a pathetic argument for awarding a richer prize to the men. In sport, the prizes reflect the commercial value of each event to the overall tournament not the amount of effort put in by the competitors.

The women have achieved equal status because the WTA has the commercial clout to get it. Put it another way, Wimbledon for example would have lost far more in revenue from the women boycotting the tournament than they lost by agreeing to equalise the prize money. If Mens doubles or wheelchair players had the same clout as the WTA they would have equal prize money too.

Money talks.
 

cknobman

Legend
The day they make men play best of three set matches at RG,USO, AO and SW19 is the day I stop watching tennis.

Here's another suggestion.
As nobody wants to see women play B05 (B03 is painful enough), simply pay women less as money. As it should be.

Hell I can already see those "femen" furys running all over Court Phillipe Chartrier in that case. :lol:

Ditto...............
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Women should play best-of-1 set or best-of-3-games so that we don't have to wait for hours when an ATP match featuring 2 good players follows.
 

Sid_Vicious

G.O.A.T.
The day they make men play best of three set matches at RG,USO, AO and SW19 is the day I stop watching tennis.

Here's another suggestion.
As nobody wants to see women play B05 (B03 is painful enough), simply pay women less as money. As it should be.

Hell I can already see those "femen" furys running all over Court Phillipe Chartrier in that case. :lol:

Absolutely. It's bad enough that they have taken away best of 5 set finals in certain Masters 1000 and WTF (YEC).
 

Devilito

Legend
women's tennis should be decided by a quick game of "rock paper scissors" so we don't have to waste time watching them play.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
best of 5-set matches for women

mother-of-god
 

LuckyR

Legend
It is funny watching folks who in non-sports ecomonic issues cry about "government regulation" every other sentance, come up with silly reasons to manipulate the tennis slam "market" based on fluffy arguments about "fairness".
 

NJ1

Professional
It is funny watching folks who in non-sports ecomonic issues cry about "government regulation" every other sentance, come up with silly reasons to manipulate the tennis slam "market" based on fluffy arguments about "fairness".

This may be an interesting post but I cannot understand it as written. Could you please explain what you are trying to say?
 

Finesse4sum

Semi-Pro
I think if we did the "more tennis more money way" just give women 85 percent of the men's winners purse. If men players get 2.6 million for winning then women would get 2,210,000 at the US Open.

Navratilova - Made a Slam final 19 years after he first final playing 20+ years.

Chris Evert - Made her last GS semifinal 28 years after making her first in 1971.

Steffi Graf - Made 2 Slam finals and won 1 of them 12 years after winning her first.

Serena Williams - Has won a slam 14 years after her first slam and can still contend for slams for at least another 3 years IMO.

I think in the long run in current times a WTA player with relatively the same success Grand Slam success as a ATP player of roughly the same age (up to 2 years apart) will end up making more money from tennis results than the ATP player as her ability to stay with the field wont diminish as fast as the male player.
 
Top