Pay equality

Ginger ninja

Semi-Pro
Absolutely ridiculous, the first 4 rounds of the grand slams are a total procession. I doubt Serena will drop more than 6 games prior to the semis. How you can get paid the same for 3 sets (if you're lucky) of crap tennis vs 6 hrs of nadal/Murray/djokovic/federer. It's the only major sport in the world that has pay equality, and it makes no sense. I'd be interested to see the gate receipts for women's tour tournaments vs mens - prize money in majors should be prorated accordingly.
 

uncooling

Semi-Pro
Not only that, it's more interesting to watch mens tennis!

Look how many ppl are watching in the stadium women are playing? I'm sure there will be more tickets sold at mens tennis even if womens tennis were best of 5, or mens were best of 3, vice versa.
 

Defcon

Hall of Fame
This is the result of the PC world we live in and the constant lobbying by former female pros. It has come to the point that no one dare raise this topic in a serious discussion on air. I'd love to see McEnroe rip Pam Shriver etc to shreds if they dare mention how Serena deserves equal pay etc.
 

Ginger ninja

Semi-Pro
Not only that, it's more interesting to watch mens tennis!

Look how many ppl are watching in the stadium women are playing? I'm sure there will be more tickets sold at mens tennis even if womens tennis were best of 5, or mens were best of 3, vice versa.

The only way women matches attendance could rival mens is if they had to play naked. I would probably pay the same for vika against Ana as a Murray/djokovic match. That's about the only way.
 

slowfox

Professional
Let's just make prize money based on attendance numbers. Full house is a set amount. Anything less than full attendance is pro-rated. Both men and women.
 

uncooling

Semi-Pro
Let's just make prize money based on attendance numbers. Full house is a set amount. Anything less than full attendance is pro-rated. Both men and women.

The thing is, you have to consider people watching on TV, mobile, etc. as well.

Since prize money comes from the TV commercials as well,
More hours of play= More commercial breaks = more money out of tennis matches.

who plays longer b/w men and women?
 

Pinocchio

New User
Pay equality means equal pay for equal work.

But it's also funny how tennis is a very well paid sport overall on the women's side compared to say volleyball or handball; but there's no powers behind the scenes there pushing for equal (or at least higher) pay...

Sharapova and Serena clearly need it more.
 
So many misogynists on this website, every single week some loser has to complain about the women earning equal prize money. Get over it! The women have won the battle and are ALWAYS going to get equal prize money at the grand slams from now on due to the hard work of feminists such as Billie Jean King,
Martina Navratilova, and Venus Williams.:)

Also, people saying men`s tennis is so exciting is that why people complained about that boring almost six hour snooze fest between and Nadal and Djokovic last year. The courts at the Australian Open are faster this year thank goodness. I will take a women match over a men match because I know it is going to be over most likely in less than two hours. Unless, of course, if the two men competing against each other are gorgeous then I can make an exception to my rule.
 
Last edited:

Ginger ninja

Semi-Pro
The thing is, you have to consider people watching on TV, mobile, etc. as well.

Since prize money comes from the TV commercials as well,
More hours of play= More commercial breaks = more money out of tennis matches.

who plays longer b/w men and women?

It's not just the duration, it's the excitement level too. How many watch serena steamrolling shriekapova 6-0 6-1 vs murray/djokovic/nadal/federer? I know i hardly moved for a combined 11 hrs between the semi and final - the difference in quality is enormous.

There is no other major sport that has pay equality between men and women....there's a reason for that.
 

reaper

Legend
In the workforce generally equal pay is awarded because women are equal to men at the given job. Females are not as good as males at sport. Both sexes should be paid according to the economics of their sport, not spurious misrepresentations of the equality argument.
 

Ginger ninja

Semi-Pro
So many misogynists on this website, every single week some loser has to complain about the women earning equal prize money. Get over it! The women have won the battle and are ALWAYS going to get equal prize money at the grand slams from now on due to the hard work of feminists such as Billie Jean King,
Martina Navratilova, and Venus Williams.:)

Also, people saying men`s tennis is so exciting is that why people complained about that boring almost six hour snooze fest between and Nadal and Djokovic last year. The courts at the Australian Open are faster this year thank goodness. I will take a women match over a men match because I know it is going to be over most likely in less than two hours. Unless, of course, if the two men competing against each other are gorgeous then I can make an exception to my rule.

You're clearly on a wind up or know nothing about tennis.
 

RodSmooth

Professional
And you are a woman hating loser on the internet. I bet anyone in the WTA top 100 can kick you ass on the tennis court. :)

I have a reason to hate female tennis right now, they are sowing women's doubles instead of a monfils match, I've been waiting two days for the match and they do this.
 
You never heard of google so many websites online are streaming the Australian Open no excuses for you buddy. Very easy to watch the Monfils match online.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
So many misogynists on this website, every single week some loser has to complain about the women earning equal prize money. Get over it! The women have won the battle and are ALWAYS going to get equal prize money at the grand slams from now on due to the hard work of feminists such as Billie Jean King,
Martina Navratilova, and Venus Williams.:) ...

There are quite a few misogynists on this website. However, stating that best-of-three women's matches should not be rewarded the same as best-of-five men's matches is not an example of misogyny.

Let's put it another way. If 2 people, with the same experience, are doing the very same job, it is fair for the one working 20-24 hours to receive the same pay as the one working 40 hours? (For this argument, we will assume that these 2 people are accomplishing the same amount per unit time).
 

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
It's funny because tennis businessman don't agree with all your ********, and it is certainly not for moral reasons. This thread is worse than any "let's dispel the myth that Y titles of Y player was not hollow".
 

RodSmooth

Professional
You never heard of google so many websites online are streaming the Australian Open no excuses for you buddy. Very easy to watch the Monfils match online.

It's called a iPad, u sound mad it's not that serious.

Btw female tennis is inferior to men's tens by far.

Nobody cares about it :)
 

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
There are quite a few misogynists on this website. However, stating that best-of-three women's matches should not be rewarded the same as best-of-five men's matches is not an example of misogyny.

Let's put it another way. If 2 people, with the same experience, are doing the very same job, it is fair for the one working 20-24 hours to receive the same pay as the one working 40 hours? (For this argument, we will assume that these 2 people are accomplishing the same amount per unit time).

On the other hand, the working time of tennis players, men or women, does not really equal the time spent on court does it? Tennis players are not office employees, they are not paid according to time spent on court.
 

reaper

Legend
It's not the number of hours that should determine the pay, it's the commercial return of the sport. If a female takes a job as a doctor, lawyer or any other profession she normally doesn't take the job according to her gender. She takes it according to her ability or qualification, and performs the task to an equal competence as a male. When females play tennis, there's a gender exclusionary clause, (Men's or women's) to allow for the fact that female players aren't as good. The inferiority of the female players undermines the argument for equal pay.
 

xan

Hall of Fame
Also, people saying men`s tennis is so exciting is that why people complained about that boring almost six hour snooze fest between and Nadal and Djokovic last year.

yeah, i agree. nothing like a womens AO final last year between,..euhm...who was in finals last year??.. hmm oh well, it doesnt matter because

it doesnt matter.
 

Mick3391

Professional
Absolutely ridiculous, the first 4 rounds of the grand slams are a total procession. I doubt Serena will drop more than 6 games prior to the semis. How you can get paid the same for 3 sets (if you're lucky) of crap tennis vs 6 hrs of nadal/Murray/djokovic/federer. It's the only major sport in the world that has pay equality, and it makes no sense. I'd be interested to see the gate receipts for women's tour tournaments vs mens - prize money in majors should be prorated accordingly.

There is no such thing as "Fair" freak, people pay FREELY WHAT THEY want, to do otherwise is totalitaianism or better known as Communism, "Fair", please, get real, people freely pay for what they want, you want people to get paid for what is not desired.
 

SLD76

G.O.A.T.
women earn less than men in regular tourny play, they only earn equal amts at slams.
h

so please stfu. they earn the same as men 4 times a year.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
On the other hand, the working time of tennis players, men or women, does not really equal the time spent on court does it? Tennis players are not office employees, they are not paid according to time spent on court.

Correct, it is not exactly the same. I was actually making an analogy. I was speaking to the fairness of the situation more than anything else.
 

ramos77

Semi-Pro
pretty sure the women get paid $10 for each fist pump, scream, or bad ball toss, hence the equal pay.
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
Only the top guys/gals and home country heroes seem to draw crowds. A lot of players would be broke if you went this way. I often see top 20 or top 30 guys play to empty stands. Are you okay with that?



Let's just make prize money based on attendance numbers. Full house is a set amount. Anything less than full attendance is pro-rated. Both men and women.
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
Also, back in the 90s women were having a lot of long rallies and the men were playing short point, power tennis on most surfaces(not clay). So they deserved equal pay back then.

Should the women play best of five? Would best of five change the outcomes and rankings?
 
I'll give a couple of counterarguments:

Firstly, you don't get what you deserve in some abstract sense, you get what you negotiate. This is why mediocre hedge fund PMs earn more than firemen...that's life, get over it.

Secondly, the top women are arguably bigger box office than all but the very top men...why? because they are the top female sports stars on the planet, whereas the top men have to compete with Tiger, Lance, Shaq, Peyton Manning etc...pretty crowded field, no :)

Thirdly, the fact that the early rounds are blowouts on the womens' side is neither here nor there; how many people do you think care about the early rounds (apart from the type of people that populate tennis forums). All that really matters from a commercial point of view happens deep in the second week.
 
Last edited:

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
I'll give a couple of counterarguments:

Firstly, you don't get what you deserve in some abstract sense, you get what you negotiate. This is why mediocre hedge fund PMs earn more than firemen...that's life, get over it.

Secondly, the top women are arguably bigger box office than all but the very top men...why? because they are the top female sports stars on the planet, whereas the top men have to compete with Tiger, Lance, Shaq, Peyton Manning etc...pretty crowded field, no :)

Thirdly, the fact that the early rounds are blowouts on the womens' side is neither here nor there; how many people do you think care about the early rounds (apart from the type of people that populate tennis forums). All that really matters from a commercial point of view happens deep in the second week.

Fordly (huh?), medias writing about women tennis are medias writing about tennis, and that's a good thing for the advertiser and sponsors, who bring the money.

Fifthly, women tennis can bring to tennis a population who otherwise wouldn't get interested, i.e. half the total population of earth, even if they end more interested in tennis.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Equal pay has nothing to do with the quality of the tennis. It has to do with the commercial value that the women's competition brings to the event as a whole.

It has nothing to do with PC. It's got to do with what tournament directors decided about the commercial value of the women's event.

The fact that women get equal pay does not imply that their tennis is as good as men's tennis. It's just different, but equally commercially valuable.


.
 
Last edited:

Feather

Legend
It should be proportional to the entertainment value.

An actor of a box office hit film can claim more money that an actor who acted in a flop. Isn't that justice? Similarly we can have WTA matches taking place in empty stadiums while that's not the case with ATP.

It's silly to have equal prize money. It's not misogyny. It's a fact
 

Warmaster

Hall of Fame
Equal pay has nothing to do with the quality of the tennis. It has to do with the commercial value that the women's competition brings to the event as a whole.

It has nothing to do with PC. It's got to do with what tournament directors decided about the commercial value of the women's event.

The fact that women get equal pay does not imply that their tennis is as good as men's tennis. It's just different, but equally commercially valuable.


.

Is it though? I don't know the numbers so I could be wrong ofcourse, but I would imagine men's matches draw a bigger crowd in general. Both in the stadium and on TV. It feels like they give equal pay to prevent getting negative publicity from feminists, which would in fact mean it's about PC.

If they are indeed equally commercially valuable, I don't mind at all.
 

LarryZhang

New User
I think male players should play no more than 3 sets in GSs as well, or maybe except the final.

1.Some 5-sets were incredibly ugly.
2.Could be harmful for players. (And under the Aussie sunshine? That's absolutely harmful.)
3. Equal work, equal paycheck, fair n square, everybody could STFU then.

And it's not guys' problem if WTA pays less than ATP in the regular tournaments, girls can be jealous, but don't blame the guys...
 

Govnor

Professional
I really struggle with this debate. There are so many different sides and angles to it.

Ultimately, the Slams have decided it makes commercial sense to have equal prize money. The gains for them might not be obvious, but they are there, otherwise they wouldn't do it. You can bet on that.

Now as to the fairness of it, clearly, the Men are working harder for their money. Not only the level of competition, but the length of the matches. There is no way the Women will ever have to play 5 sets, but I could see a time (especially for the Aussie with the Heat), that the Men play 3 until the final to make things "fairer".
 

Devilito

Legend
You guys do realize tennis a private business right? They can pay people w/e they want. They can pay Serena one billion dollars per year for all I care. You guys act like its your tax dollars paying tennis players salary. If the men players cared so much they can break off and start their own league. But they’re not. So if they don’t care, why do you? The only thing I care about is the amount of TV coverage the WTA gets because it cuts into actually good matches on the ATP tour and that actually does affect me.
 

Clarky21

Banned
yeah, i agree. nothing like a womens AO final last year between,..euhm...who was in finals last year??.. hmm oh well, it doesnt matter because

it doesnt matter.


That final was pathetic. And what's even more pathetic is the women got paid the same money for that joke of a final as the men did. How on earth is that even remotely fair?
 

Govnor

Professional
You guys do realize tennis a private business right? They can pay people w/e they want. They can pay Serena one billion dollars per year for all I care. You guys act like its your tax dollars paying tennis players salary. If the men players cared so much they can break off and start their own league. But they’re not. So if they don’t care, why do you? The only thing I care about is the amount of TV coverage the WTA gets because it cuts into actually good matches on the ATP tour and that actually does affect me.

Oh but they do care. They made a big deal about it last year. You act like breaking off and forming "their own league" is some kind of easy option. ha.

You are right though, they can pay what they want. Like I said, I'm sure they have legitimate reasons for doing so.
 

Devilito

Legend
Oh but they do care. They made a big deal about it last year. You act like breaking off and forming "their own league" is some kind of easy option. ha.

they don't care about pay equality. They care about profit sharing percentages with the owners. That’s just part of the negotiation process

And you’re right, breaking off and forming another league would not be easy, but they’re not slaves. They have the freedom to do what they want if they don’t like it.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
It's the tournament directors that decide whether they are of equal commercial value. Perhaps its a valuation that is not entirely objective.

But a slam is a joint event run by the same organization, whereas the tours are two different events and their prize money is based on their respective commercial value.

The reality is that this is a legacy in many ways of amateur tennis as tournament directors valued all tennis at nothing so having joint events was not an issue.

Its to the benefit of the slams and tennis as a whole that it has a women's competition, but yes the women's competition is no where near as good as the men's.


Is it though? I don't know the numbers so I could be wrong ofcourse, but I would imagine men's matches draw a bigger crowd in general. Both in the stadium and on TV. It feels like they give equal pay to prevent getting negative publicity from feminists, which would in fact mean it's about PC.

If they are indeed equally commercially valuable, I don't mind at all.
 

Relinquis

Hall of Fame
you guys are so young and naive. people don't get paid what their worth in business, never mind in sport. it isn't as one-dimensional as that.

tennis is a private business, but it is a business that depends on a certain brand image and is subject to the will of big business sponsors. It is subject to real economic constraints that are culturally dependent. it has to appeal to the big TV stations, corporate sponsors and advertisers. that means there is no way they can get away with appearing like they favour men over women. so the payout numbers have to look the same at the slams otherwise...

the big banks and companies who plaster their logos on the billbords will withdraw, the TV companies who carry the sport will get hammered by the press and their own advertisers. advertisers and sponsors in all media and on tour and such will run away as they don't want their brand to be seen as misogynist. even the racquet companies will have a fit as tennis moms won't pay for "women-hater" brands. do you think nike wants to be associated with a woman hater sport? how many billions will it lose in value? that's real money. no tennis bureaucrat decision-maker is going to kill his income to try to change the way things are.

which matches are more boring, which stars are bigger and draw more crowds/fans/clicks/advertising is secondary to being an appropriate socially acceptable sport. why do you think tiger woods affairs were such a big scandal? he did nothing unsportsmanlike. it's his private life and between him, his family and his various women. it matters because the big business interests that are invested in him and golf need to fit in with the values of puritanical america. if golf was a french sport and tiger was french it would be a non-issue.

there is no equal-pay in tennis. yes, they prize money is similar, but the men have to compete in 5-set matches instead of 3 at the slams. that's not equal-pay, but there are real business considerations that make it tough to have different payout numbers. having 5-set matches for women at the slams (round 16 onwards at least) will go a long way to bridge the gap and make pay more equal.

now if you want to get pissed off about something you should get pissed off about the lower players at slams, masters and other tournaments not getting paid well and the low share of tournament revenue that goes to the players as opposed to the suits/business-folk overall. at least that is a fight that is winnable as you can get the fans behind you.

prize money is the issue that affects the lower and mid level players a lot (both genders). without them, you don't have a tour. just a few multimillionaires hanging out at the country club.
 
Last edited:

Govnor

Professional
I totally agree it is an issue for the lower level players. The top level players don't care as much, why would they? They won't need to get a job when they retire!

You have to hand it to the Women though, they made this happen. They are in a unique position in sports (they play at the same time and venue as the Men) and they made the most of it.
 

SLD76

G.O.A.T.
That final was pathetic. And what's even more pathetic is the women got paid the same money for that joke of a final as the men did. How on earth is that even remotely fair?

yes cuz that 2010 wimbledon final, just riveting.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
Absolutely ridiculous, the first 4 rounds of the grand slams are a total procession. I doubt Serena will drop more than 6 games prior to the semis. How you can get paid the same for 3 sets (if you're lucky) of crap tennis vs 6 hrs of nadal/Murray/djokovic/federer. It's the only major sport in the world that has pay equality, and it makes no sense. I'd be interested to see the gate receipts for women's tour tournaments vs mens - prize money in majors should be prorated accordingly.

I'm not saying this is "right" or that there's not an argument for unequal pay.

But, simply, I honestly believe that prize money isn't based on "work". It's not awarded based on number of sets played, or number of games played, or effort exerted. [If that were the case, shouldn't they scale the prize money based on the ease of the win, so it varies even between men in the same round?]

It's an award, a "prize" for winning, for acheivement. The more you win, the more you are awarded. And, the argument for equal prize money is that by winning the tournament or making it to a particular round, any given male or female player is achieving the same thing.

We acknowledge that males and females are different. We know that the best male player is better than the best female player. Accepting this difference, we have different tournaments for each gender. Equal prize money recognizes that becoming the best in the world at what you do is a remarkable accomplishment, regardless of gender.
 

SLD76

G.O.A.T.
I'm not saying this is "right" or that there's not an argument for unequal pay.

But, simply, I honestly believe that prize money isn't based on "work". It's not awarded based on number of sets played, or number of games played, or effort exerted. [If that were the case, shouldn't they scale the prize money based on the ease of the win, so it varies even between men in the same round?]

It's an award, a "prize" for winning, for acheivement. The more you win, the more you are awarded. And, the argument for equal prize money is that by winning the tournament or making it to a particular round, any given male or female player is achieving the same thing.

We acknowledge that males and females are different. We know that the best male player is better than the best female player. Accepting this difference, we have different tournaments for each gender. Equal prize money recognizes that becoming the best in the world at what you do is a remarkable accomplishment, regardless of gender.

very well said.

/thread
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
It's called a iPad, u sound mad it's not that serious.

Btw female tennis is inferior to men's tens by far.

Nobody cares about it :)

It was nearly an inverse situtation a little over a decade ago...

and who knows, once Federer and Nadal retire; men's tennis might be less popular again vs women's tennis
 
Top