Should men get more prize money than women at the Grand Slams?

[WeetBixKid]

Market forces dictate that professional men are worth more than the women for the simple fact that they are more in demand from tennis fans which is backed by the revenue the mens' tour generates in comparison to the womens' outside of the Grand Slams. And by a huge margin I might add, it's not even close.

The best and most popular players subsidise everyone. I can't prove it but I think it'd be fair to say that Serena Williams brings in more fans/cash than Johnny no name ranked 500 in the world.

The standard of men's tennis is of a much higher caliber. With the exception of one or 2 women watching an average professional women's tennis match is akin to watching your average 13, 14 year old boy contest. It's all right but hardly worth lucrative money

This is probably the best case for more money, but it's still full of problems. If being the best of the best without being categorised by age/gender is what's important, why draw the line at human beings? We could just have two robots at each end playing the perfect rally. More realistically, we could have drugged up superman playing (if they aren't already).

At the end of the day there's no mathematical formula to prove who deserves to get what. It boils down to competing intuitions and there will always be inconsistencies. But if the ATP want to pay women just as much as the men I really don't see the big deal.

 

[Slippery Pete]

If women did leech off the main event, they wouldnt get near the centre courts ever. people are willing and happy to pay to watch womens tennis. it may not be the main event all the time, but attendances and ratings would be smaller without them.

Tickets for centre court are sold as session tickets, not tickets for individual matches. The day sessions feature three matches (two mens, one womens or vice versa), and the night session features one of each. There's no way to watch a mens singles match on centre court without buying a ticket for a session that also includes a womens match. Piggyback central.

If you want to talk about big crowds/tv audiences at WTA events, I'm all ears.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Tickets for centre court are sold as session tickets, not tickets for individual matches. The day sessions feature three matches (two mens, one womens or vice versa), and the night session features one of each. There's no way to watch a mens singles match on centre court without buying a ticket for a session that also includes a womens match. Piggyback central.

If you want to talk about big crowds/tv audiences at WTA events, I'm all ears.

So why dont men just play on the centre court then. if no one wants to watch the women, why do people keep buying tickets. have 2 mens matches or a doubles match, or a juniors match.

people like women tennis. they make the schedule work, they create a new point of interest and more matches. Stosur and Casey will be 1 and 2 of the media interest for the next couple of days(unless an upset happens tonight). they be the main drawcards the next couple of night sessions(more so Stosur).

and hobart sold quite well last week. a 2nd tier WTA tournament. final and semi was quite full/full. WTA is smaller, but it still is a fully pro circuit.

 

[vaughany]

Story relating to this thread in today's paper

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...lay-best-of-five/story-fni0fhh1-1226806188706

 

[Slippery Pete]

Story relating to this thread in today's paper

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...lay-best-of-five/story-fni0fhh1-1226806188706

Sums up all the points we've discussed in the thread quite well.

The only part where the writer let herself down was when she said the comparison in finals TV ratings for the Oz Open is unfair because men play on Sunday night.

That's like saying it's unfair that the Superbowl outrates Cheaters. If only Cheaters had a chance in prime time...

 

[GrandBlue]

When was the last women's QF/SF played here at night?

When was the last time a woman produced even 1/100 of the quality that was on show tonight?

When was the last time a woman played a 5 set game?

 

[pepsi]

Grand Slam tennis is one of the very few sporting contests in the world where males and females receive equal pay. I do not not necessarily agree with it, but I can accept it and see it as a positive for tennis. The fact that it happens will hopefully lead to more young girls choose tennis over other sports, which down the road will lead to better tennis players playing at the top level.

 

[Roobs321]

Despite mens tennis clearly being more outstanding, deeply competitive and popular around the globe week to week, I like that tennis is a sport which caters to female participation. It is arguably the sport which allows female glory more than any other sport, and that is cool and should be recognised.

It's not often you think of a sport and might think of a woman playing it as much as a man (netball and swimming maybe), so I don't mind that Tennis respects that. Tennis is also a sport which involves talent, and there is no doubt that some female players are far more talented than some male players.

There are great WTA matches, and poor ATP matches. Henin at her peak was a real delight to watch at times.

On the prize money thing, it can seem like a joke at this AO, when there is the BO3/BO5 thing, plus female tennis players were looked after better during the heat wave, despite shorter matches. But at the turnstiles, it seems like womens matches generally do just as well as mens matches, outside the mens semis and final.

WTA tennis has also been a little more competitive of late (especially outside Serena) compared to the ATP, where only several players have made GS finals in the last half decade.

 

[red+black]

I promise I will get back to this thread some time this week, given that I'm rather vocal against equal pay.

 

[Dipper]

So that is why Women play on main courts at grand slams unlike doubles, seniors, Juniors or wheelchair tennis.

If women did leech off the main event, they wouldnt get near the centre courts ever. people are willing and happy to pay to watch womens tennis. it may not be the main event all the time, but attendances and ratings would be smaller without them.

But they're not creating as much income as the men are they and so don't deserve the same prize money but if you say that they do then the wheelchair folks deserve parity as well, because if we're going the equal pay route based on employment law then we can't discriminate pay on the basis of disability any more than we can on gender.

 

[BobbyMorri]

But they're not creating as much income as the men are they and so don't deserve the same prize money but if you say that they do then the wheelchair folks deserve parity as well, because if we're going the equal pay route based on employment law then we can't discriminate pay on the basis of disability any more than we can on gender.

As said previously they are creating greater income for the whole event by creating more games which people want to watch, unlike wheelchairs.

if people didnt want to watch them, then they would never play on centre court. a grand slam is a event for both male and female tennis players.

Roobs321 i thought the difference in the heat rule between men and women was based on WTA/ATP laws. that they had different rules once the temperature hits a certain spot. in any case, i reckon the ATP/AO let the men follow what the women did and hve a 10 men break after each set(or 2/3). the amount of retirements in the men side of the draw compared to the womens differed greatly. yes, men play best of 5, but people were quitting in the 3rd/4th set of matches. u compare Sharapova and the C.S.Navarro game to them, their would not be too much difference in some cases.

it is no fun seeing people retire.

EDIT: yeah it is a WTA rule for the deciding set.
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/tennis/atp-to-review-extreme-heat-policy-20140118-3113t.html

ATP should get one for at least the 3rd set i feel. could make is a 2nd/4th set thing as well.

 

[juss]

There was a 1st round women's tennis match in this open that went for 50 minutes.

My argument is the common one, the men play for significantly longer under the tough conditions and so should be paid more.

 

[half_back_flank]

Did laugh at old Bernie in the local rag weighing in on the women playing 5 sets debate.

 

[Ruck Machine]

55 minutes for a women's final ... 6-3, 6-0 is an utter disgrace. Bouchard will collect the same dollars as the loser of Fed Djoker. Unfair.

 

[TooUglyForFugly]

Did laugh at old Bernie in the local rag weighing in on the women playing 5 sets debate.

Sigh ...

 

[estibador]

Bouchard is a marketer's wet-dream, I'm sure the organisers are happy to pay her the same as the men.

 

[Beavis07]

I don't have a problem with women playing best of 3 and receiving equal pay if they generated the same revenue that the men do. Problem is they don't and therefore they shouldn't be receiving equal pay. Simple really IMO. I do think that lower ranked players deserve a bigger share of the prize money even though they don't bring in the same amount of revenue but that is for entirely different reasons that don't exist in this debate.

 

[Public Enemy No1]

Disgusting reverse sexism..

on no level should woman get the same prize money as men

 

[TooUglyForFugly]

Disgusting reverse sexism..

on no level should woman get the same prize money as men

Let's not get started on what really despicable reverse sexism is ... :shifty eyes:

 

[pepsi]

How many sports in the professional world do women receive the same amount of prizemoney as the men? I can't think of 1, only tennis players in grand slams.

I think that is a really good aspect of tennis. Now would I ever pay to watch a womens final? No I would not.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Bouchard will be beating most men in sponsor dollars soon, if not already. only the elite elite men (fed, Rafa, Novak etc) will be bigger drawcards.

and the womens final was as close than the semi Final with Fed Raonic(close as in it was a no contest). If Bouchard was 6 foot 5, then she would have won a game at least with aces. One match gets called a joke, the other a master class.

 

[pepsi]

Bouchard will be beating most men in sponsor dollars soon, if not already. only the elite elite men (fed, Rafa, Novak etc) will be bigger drawcards.

and the womens final was as close than the semi Final with Fed Raonic(close as in it was a no contest). If Bouchard was 6 foot 5, then she would have won a game at least with aces. One match gets called a joke, the other a master class.

I agree in that the Fed Raonic match was horribly one sided and pretty uninteresting.

 

[red+black]

How about at next year's Australian Open they schedule the men's final on Saturday night and the women's on Sunday night. Given that women supposedly deserve equal pay, no one should have an issue with who plays when, should they? And charge 20% extra for a ticket to the Women's final. Again, no one would complain would they? Not the fans, the sponsors, I'm sure channel 7 wouldn't mind either way.

I wish there was one woman on the tour that constantly put to the ITF that the women's final should be best-of-5. Just start with that.

As it is, I think women deserve 75-80% of what the men get. I believe that would be fair.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

Ask the broadcasters.

 

[Roobs321]

As it is, I think women deserve 75-80% of what the men get. I believe that would be fair.

Given the financial struggles of the male journeymen in the sport, that could pose issues for women in a similar position.