Should women get as much prize $ as men?

[Cynnik]

HELLZ NO!!!!!!!!!!!

Im sure this topic has been talked to death but I just cant stand people saying that women should get the same amount of prize money as men. To me, and Im pretty sure many others agree, the womens tour is the equivalent of the WNBA. Why should they get as much money as men when the level of comp is far from the men's tour and when they even play less sets? Would you give multi million dollar contracts to WNBA players so that it would be fair with the NBA? This doesnt make any sense at all. No doubt that the women are skilled and they can play, but they SHOULD NOT get the same or even close to the amount that men get. If anything, the men should recieve more money because the level of competition is so high in these grand slams and many players have a chance to win even when they arent ranked that high. Would you say the same w/ the women's tour? Another big HELLZ NO.

Im not sexist or anything but it angers me when the commentators and other people say that it would be fair for women to make the same amount of money for doing less work and playing against a much lower level of comp. If they want to make it fair, let the women compete in the men's tour and let them earn the money just like the men. That way they would make the same amount as the men.

 

[TwistServe]

the quick answer is no... tennis female athletes are already the highest paid of all female athletes.. and they simply aren't that great compared to the men

 

[Nosoupforyou]

no

2 reasons

they definitely aren't as good

they don't play as long at least in grand slams

 

[theprophe]

It doesn't really matter, that they aren't as good as the men, or don't play as long. What matters is how much money they bring in. If the tournament gets more people buying tickets and has advertisers paying more for their matches, then of course they deserve the same or more.If you think Athletes are paid according to their skill, your not seeing the big picture

 

[Free_Martha]

Why don't you check the other 56,748,992,322 threads that have already been posted about this overly-discussed subject before starting another one?

 

[Fat Boy]

Here in the UK soccer players get paid about ten times as much as any other sportsplayers. Most soccer players are stupid lazy prima donnas. I guess it's like basketball players in the US.

Problem is that the British public just can't get enough of soccer. Every newspaper has pages and pages of it every day. You can watch a match on TV every night. Most of them are stunningly tedious displays of zero skill and excitement.

Whether you like it or not (I don't), that's the free society in action. Ditto women's tennis. Yeah, of course it's nowhere near as good as men's tennis.

But that's not the point. Just like nurses get paid 10% as much as corporate lawyers. Life just ain't fair.

 

[BLiND]

Fat Boy mean's Football ;-)

 

[Pyro]

The only reason why women's tennis gets more viewers than men is because thats the only thing that they show. Since ESPN is a very nationalistic network (although you are improving, I'm proud of you guys), they don't like showing that many men.
Men:Roddick Possibly Fish or Dent
Women:S. Williams, V. Williams, Capriati(sp?), and sometimes Davenport. Also, since the williams sisters are starting to lose, and whenever they lose its a "dramatic, unfair, biased, racist, life aint fair, questionable, flinchable upset" (yeah, right) and it has to be shown over and over again and it must be blamed on the winner because of one measley point...sorry, I'm still mad. Point is women get more air time but if you have ever seen an atp match LIVE compared to a wta match LIVE you will see that the atp tour is a whole lot closer than wta and that the wta tour composes of two groups, the top 5 and the rest of the world.

 

[PrestigeClassic]

Women and man should get an equal percentage of the money they respectively bring in. But I'm afraid things will turn into a circus this way. There should be a mandatory one percent pay withholding across the board for that sex for every occurrence of an unnecessary bathroom break, etc. That money can then be evenly distributed among all the male players in the tournament.

 

[Pyro]

i just thought of a question to answer your question, Should women get as much prize money as men?, Should we become communists? =), in theory ,yes, but in reality NO.

 

[VamosRafa]

My answer to the posed question: Yes.

 

[bigserving]

The women have their own tour outside of the majors. The women deserve whatever amount of prize money their tour can raise from their sponsors whether that be less than, equal to, or more than what the men get.

At the majors, they should not get the same because the format calls for the women to do less work. That simply is not fair. If the organizers make no attempt to make all things equal, they should not make an effort to make the pay the same.

 

[PrestigeClassic]

No! Women should not be paid less just because they spend less time on the court. You can say that people today have lower attention spans, so maybe people don't care if there is a shorter match anyway. Did you ever think that playing best of three sets might be just as strenuous for women as it is for men? The players themselves don't even have sole control whether they play three sets or five sets. And during that one Wimbledon, did the men get their pay docked when they had to play best of three sets in doubles or something because of the big backlog of matches? And come on, do you really think it is only the organizers that determine how many sets is each in match? There's something called the ITF, and I believe they cater to both men and women.

If you don't want to watch women's tennis, the simple solution is to not watch! I doubt that you would really be affected either way that the pay scale moves. But if you still care, and if you don't watch, that's one less viewer that is counted among those who support those players and all the related sponsors.

 

[boris becker 1]

yes if they play 3 out of 5 sets yes. and Im being deadally serious

 

[Morpheus]

How many sets they play is irrelevant.

They should get paid whatever they command in our free market system. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[VamosRafa]

Exactly, Morpheus. It comes down to what the market will pay for, and at the slams, the women are as popular as the men, if not more so.

Yes, we can argue about this and that in terms of advertising, ratings and such. But people tune in to watch women's tennis, and the sponsors pay for it, so the women should get their share.

And they generally do.

If it can be shown that the women don't deserve the pay they get, and the men deserve more, in terms of what they bring in in terms of sponsors, fans, viewers, etc., then I'm willing to change my view. But that has never been demonstrated to me. The argument has always been who plays more tennis, rather than who brings in the money.

I think the latter is more important, and that's why the women's pay is being equalized. If they are being overpaid, I'd like to see the accounting info.

Susan

 

[Fat Boy]

Well, today at Wimbledon brought a perfect example of supply and demand.

Normally every seat on the show courts is sold months in advance, long before the order of play is known.

But today it was just queuing at the gate, and people knew the order of play.

The matches starting at 11am were ....

Federer v Johansson on Centre Court - absolutely packed out with 11,000 people.

Capriati v Dechy on Court 1 - played in front of stands which were embarrassingly empty - maybe about 1,000.

 

[bigserving]

If it can be shown that the women don't deserve the pay they get, and the men deserve more, in terms of what they bring in in terms of sponsors, fans, viewers, etc., then I'm willing to change my view. But that has never been demonstrated to me.
Susan

Look at the total annual prize money for the (men) ATP tour compared to the (women) WTA tour. Year in and year out, the men are able to raise more prize money.