Rafael Nadal Says Lower-ranked Players Need More Money

Backspin1183

G.O.A.T.
Melbourne: World number one Rafa Nadal voiced his support for players to demand a greater share of tennis revenues, saying that more lower-ranked professionals should be able to make a living from the sport.

Nadal's comments follow media reports this week that Novak Djokovic, the president of the Players' Council, had urged players to unionise at a pre-Australian Open meeting and revolt over the way the revenues from the four grand slams are distributed.

The 30-year-old Serb denied any threat of a boycott on Tuesday.

Nadal, a former vice-president of the Players' Council, said tennis had improved "a lot" for lower-ranked players in recent years but felt more needed to be done.

"Just to be clear, at some point, I don’t know 100 percent about what's going on or not, but at some point, it's good that the players speak between each other about what we want or what we don’t want," he told reporters after winning his second round match against Argentine Leonardo Mayer on Wednesday.

‘That’s all. (It's) not about union or not union. Forget about this ... I believe that the tennis improved a lot the last couple of years for the lower ranking players.

"One sport is bigger not only when the top guys win a lot of money. It's bigger when a sport creates a lot of jobs.

"If there is 300 people living from tennis is better than if there is only 100.

"But that’s my opinion. The real thing is if we can help at some point to the players that needs more help, will be fantastic."

https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.news18.com/amp/news/sports/rafael-nadal-says-lower-ranked-players-need-more-money-1634935.html
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Melbourne: World number one Rafa Nadal voiced his support for players to demand a greater share of tennis revenues, saying that more lower-ranked professionals should be able to make a living from the sport.

Nadal's comments follow media reports this week that Novak Djokovic, the president of the Players' Council, had urged players to unionise at a pre-Australian Open meeting and revolt over the way the revenues from the four grand slams are distributed.

The 30-year-old Serb denied any threat of a boycott on Tuesday.

Nadal, a former vice-president of the Players' Council, said tennis had improved "a lot" for lower-ranked players in recent years but felt more needed to be done.

"Just to be clear, at some point, I don’t know 100 percent about what's going on or not, but at some point, it's good that the players speak between each other about what we want or what we don’t want," he told reporters after winning his second round match against Argentine Leonardo Mayer on Wednesday.

‘That’s all. (It's) not about union or not union. Forget about this ... I believe that the tennis improved a lot the last couple of years for the lower ranking players.

"One sport is bigger not only when the top guys win a lot of money. It's bigger when a sport creates a lot of jobs.

"If there is 300 people living from tennis is better than if there is only 100.

"But that’s my opinion. The real thing is if we can help at some point to the players that needs more help, will be fantastic."

https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.news18.com/amp/news/sports/rafael-nadal-says-lower-ranked-players-need-more-money-1634935.html
very easy way to do that is for players worth 100s of millions to give some of their money to those other players
 

SinjinCooper

Hall of Fame
very easy way to do that is for players worth 100s of millions to give some of their money to those other players
Better way is to eliminate abuse of TUE's, whereby already wealthy players who want to work the system can purchase the loyalties of corrupt medical professionals, thereby artificially enhancing players' recovery curves, and artificially extending their careers well past the expiration dates.

End that nonsense, and young players advance naturally, and the only older players still around for them to contend with are those with elegant, efficient, timeless games (Federer), or serve artists (Ivo).

With the current policy, the tour is jammed up with thirty-something grindbots who recover like sixteen-year-olds, and there's no place for up and coming talent to earn their rightful share, like there was when tennis was booming.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
Given the travel/coaching/other costs, how much does it take for a pro living moderately to profit, say, $100k per year? Let's say that it takes 165k to make 100k (just using these numbers as an example, maybe they're way off, but bear with me). In your opinion, how many players per year should be making at least 165k such that tennis has an adequate depth of players making decent money after costs? The big thing for me is that earnings drop off so quickly.
 

Krish872007

G.O.A.T.
Because the other players deserve money.
Don't know if that's the right way to resolve it though. They should be allocated more prize money for smaller tournaments, but the top players have earned all their money by being superior to them. If these others were good enough, then they'd be multi-millionaires as well. Even Berdych, who we make fun of on these boards, is exceedingly rich because he's delivered on a few occasions in important tournaments.
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Don't know if that's the right way to resolve it though. They should be allocated more prize money for smaller tournaments, but the top players have earned all their money by being superior to them. If these others were good enough, then they'd be multi-millionaires as well. Even Berdych, who we make fun of on these boards, is exceedingly rich because he's delivered on a few occasions in important tournaments.
then Nadal should make up his mind, does he care about the other players or doesn't he?


"allocate more money" means that money goes away from the bigger tournaments- away from Nadal. So just fork it over.

Unless this is just words
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
As always, a self-serving comment from Nadal. This time looking out for his own imminent financial future.
Doesn't Federer do the same when he doesn't want things to change, or will he find himself in the challengers together with Nadal
 

Krish872007

G.O.A.T.
then Nadal should make up his mind, does he care about the other players or doesn't he?


"allocate more money" means that money goes away from the bigger tournaments- away from Nadal. So just fork it over.

Unless this is just words
Ah right, you're referring to future prize money, not his current bank balance. Yeah, that's fair.

Of course it's just words, Nadal is not on the Players' Council any more so he won't have an active role in reallocating funds
 

ibbi

Legend
Ah, the crafty devil. He just knows that he will be a lower ranked player soon, so is preparing for the future. What a *******.
 

FudgeMyn

Professional
I'm sure Nadal,fed, Murray and Novak could spare 5grand to a couple players who can't afford hotel/flights to a couple tourneys.
 

FiReFTW

Legend
I never really understood how strangely tennis works when it comes to money.
If you look at any other sport, basketball, soccer whatever.. you can be an average player and get millions easily, but in tennis you have to be top 100 or you basically almost can't make profits, its completely ridicilous to me.
 

octobrina10

G.O.A.T.
Better way is to eliminate abuse of TUE's, whereby already wealthy players who want to work the system can purchase the loyalties of corrupt medical professionals, thereby artificially enhancing players' recovery curves, and artificially extending their careers well past the expiration dates.

End that nonsense, and young players advance naturally, and the only older players still around for them to contend with are those with elegant, efficient, timeless games (Federer), or serve artists (Ivo).

With the current policy, the tour is jammed up with thirty-something grindbots who recover like sixteen-year-olds, and there's no place for up and coming talent to earn their rightful share, like there was when tennis was booming.
Fed's propaganda apparatus keeps working...
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
I never really understood how strangely tennis works when it comes to money.
If you look at any other sport, basketball, soccer whatever.. you can be an average player and get millions easily, but in tennis you have to be top 100 or you basically almost can't make profits, its completely ridicilous to me.
Those are team sports, where people are fans of clubs and where most games are in national competitions. Therefor, 500 players or more can compete at the highest level. Individual sports are a lot more star driven.
 

Zoolander

Hall of Fame
Indeed! Maybe the Nadal should give out dozens of free scholarships for all the poor players so they can train at his academy and become good rich players like him.
 

Fedinkum

Legend
Indeed! Maybe the Nadal should give out dozens of free scholarships for all the poor players so they can train at his academy and become good rich players like him.
I dont know the fact, but I would think some form of scholarship is the most obvious thing that any academy would have in place. I will be very suprised if Rafa's academy does not give out scholarship.
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Because it would be 1 player 1 vote.
How does ATP work?

Does 1P1V make sense? Would anyone who ever got a single point get a vote? Also in terms of leverage how do you enforce that, only the top players can make or break a tournaments
 

reaper

Legend
I never really understood how strangely tennis works when it comes to money.
If you look at any other sport, basketball, soccer whatever.. you can be an average player and get millions easily, but in tennis you have to be top 100 or you basically almost can't make profits, its completely ridicilous to me.
Team sports have fan affiliation over a lifetime. How many people enthusiastically support the world's 457th ranked tennis player? There's no interest in that player, no support for that player (or the tournaments he plays in), and hence no money for that player.
 
Last edited:

reaper

Legend
How does ATP work?

Does 1P1V make sense? Would anyone who ever got a single point get a vote? Also in terms of leverage how do you enforce that, only the top players can make or break a tournaments
The specific terms of membership would be determined by the articles of association/constitution of the body. What precisely they would be is not for me to say, but that's just normal practice in setting up any institution. You're right to a point that it would require the support of leading players: Nadal and Djokovic appear to have given it in principle support.
 

swizzy

Hall of Fame
As always, a self-serving comment from Nadal. This time looking out for his own imminent financial future.
rafa is looking out for people well outside the top 100.. he is number 1.. is super rich and makes a ton of money off his fame. it might even cost the top guys if the some of the lion share in professional tennis was spread around. so it seems to be it was directed at young guys who are struggling to make a living.. something that betters the entire field. from a guy who wasn't always freakishly well off and who served as the unions vp.
 
S

santiago_rios

Guest
Lots and lots of great talent is lost, that we never get to see, because the young one cannot afford to travel and survive on the challenger/future circuit.

Rafa is right, the lower players do need more to make it survivable. Maybe not even that much more, but enough so that they are not having to string with synthetic gut and hoping it lasts all tournament and sleeping in cars, etc.

ATP should see it as positive investment in future stars, or future crop from their eyes since players are all slaves and products.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Here is an evidence-based analysis of tennis compared to golf:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ant-more-money-its-not-as-absurd-as-it-sounds

An excerpt:

One hundred and thirty men on the USPGA tour earned more than did the 50th best players on the ATP tour in 2017.

In 2017, 42 men on the ATP tour earned over US$1m, compared to 102 on the USPGA. And that is not including the European golf tour, which had 40 players earn over $1m.
 

Sudacafan

G.O.A.T.
A tennis financial institution like the IMF or the World Bank should be created for these purposes.
Top (rich) players should be financing bottom ranked (poor) players on these premises.
From time to time poor players will not be able to meet their financial obligations and will be entering in default.
 

Max G.

Legend
Absolutely agree.

The more players are fighting for the top spots, the better the top gets. The best thing for the quality of the game is to increase the number of players who can support themselves playing tennis - because the number of players who can support themselves traveling and fighting is how many players get to improve over time and push the guys above them to get better.
 

hugobosstachini

Professional
Don't know if that's the right way to resolve it though. They should be allocated more prize money for smaller tournaments, but the top players have earned all their money by being superior to them. If these others were good enough, then they'd be multi-millionaires as well. Even Berdych, who we make fun of on these boards, is exceedingly rich because he's delivered on a few occasions in important tournaments.
This logic does not work though. There are only 10 players in the top ten and only less than five that are even better ones. Statistically then, every player cannot be great players.

There is over a 1000 players on ATP tour. That's probably around 0.0010% chance of being at the top, hence having all the benefits that comes with. In which case, either they seriously reduce the amount of players in order to better distribute the prize or either they find a much better solution to distribute things as good as possible to the bottom.

It's easy to just say, "these players should have just been good", however this is a simplistic way of reasoning when you live in France or the US. Every person was not born in an area with great facilities or infrastructure to help improve their potential. War, bad political decision or a country simply not having the means to finance its athletes to begin with can explain that fact.

Well, also the lack of interest to promote a particular sport instead of another because of history can also explain such discrepancy. For instance, the carribbean has the best athletes you find but tennis is just not a preference. Infrastructures are bad because of that hence creating a big handicap for those who would have taken that sport.

It's remarkable that some players have overcome that (Ivanovic or Djokovic...) but these people are exceptions not the norm.
 
Last edited:

darrinbaker00

Professional
Here is an evidence-based analysis of tennis compared to golf:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ant-more-money-its-not-as-absurd-as-it-sounds

An excerpt:

One hundred and thirty men on the USPGA tour earned more than did the 50th best players on the ATP tour in 2017.

In 2017, 42 men on the ATP tour earned over US$1m, compared to 102 on the USPGA. And that is not including the European golf tour, which had 40 players earn over $1m.
Simple solution: put down the tennis racquets, pick up the golf clubs.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
How is that simple, o wise one, given it takes ten years to reach the top in any one sport?

You best stick to accountancy and wierd conversations over tax breaks in a code full of so many holes for cheating that it shames Swiss cheese.

Simple solution: put down the tennis racquets, pick up the golf clubs.
 

darrinbaker00

Professional
How is that simple, o wise one, given it takes ten years to reach the top in any one sport?

You best stick to accountancy and wierd conversations over tax breaks in a code full of so many holes for cheating that it shames Swiss cheese.
I will stick to whatever I please, thank you very much.
 
Top