- Moderator
- #101
They are separate
WTA and ATP are 2 completely tours who share a bunch of tournaments. They don't share the end of year champs and yet this isn't good enough for you.
-
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Equal Prizemoney...
- Thread starter LukeParkerno1
- Start date
- Tagged users None
WTA and ATP are 2 completely tours who share a bunch of tournaments. They don't share the end of year champs and yet this isn't good enough for you.
I was referring to men and women's tennis as a whole, grand slams included.They are separate
WTA and ATP are 2 completely tours who share a bunch of tournaments. They don't share the end of year champs and yet this isn't good enough for you.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
- Thread starter
- #103
Yet the women’s grand Slams have been a lot better in the last 2 years!
Everyone is bit tired of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic just playing in the finals
So why did last years final of Fed and Nadal have one of the highest number of viewers ever (double the previous year)? The numbers suggest more and more people are watching them, yet you say everyone is sick of them, doesn't really make sense does it?
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
- Thread starter
- #105
Last year was the first time they had met in a final in quite a while. This year’s one was meh the whole tournament was really. Meanwhile the women’s tournament was open and gripping and you had 10+ players that could have won. It’s boring when you know one finalist before a ball is bounced.
I don't disagree with that, this years tournament was a letdown, the final was a 5 setter but it was very error riddled.
The fact remains though that a male based competition will outperform a female based competition, as seen in nearly every sport in the world.
It's not that the males try harder or want it more, it's just a physiological difference that means they're the best players in the world.
It's also not because males only watch males play, males are the biggest watchers of sport. Female fans generally prefer watching the male side of sport as well.
- Mar 2, 2007
- 43,126
- 61,322
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Cowboys, Packers, Scorchers
Tennis is probably the only sport where I enjoy watching the women as much as the men.
I'll admit it's partly because I have a fetish for European tennis players, but also because their physical differences - which in most sports lowers the spectacle considerable - actually provides an interesting point of difference in gamestyle in tennis.
I'll admit it's partly because I have a fetish for European tennis players, but also because their physical differences - which in most sports lowers the spectacle considerable - actually provides an interesting point of difference in gamestyle in tennis.
- Banned
- #108
Really? Are you being sarcastic?
Surely a Federer v Nadal final remains the biggest ticket in tennis. What is the match-up in the women's game that surpasses this for box office appeal?
For the record, I support equal prize money at majors. But to suggest people are "tired" of seeing Federer and Nadal face off in deciders is absurd. What would they prefer, in your sage opinion? Dimitrov v Zverev? I don't think so.
You really do talk a lot of nonsense, don't you?
Last edited:
Been thinking of an equitable solution at the Grand Slams that I would be happy with. The first thing:
- men and women play best-of-5 sets in every round of every slam
- however, a set could be either a 6-game tiebreak set (6G), a 7-point tiebreak set (7P) or a 10-point super tiebreak set (10P)
Thoughts?
- men and women play best-of-5 sets in every round of every slam
- however, a set could be either a 6-game tiebreak set (6G), a 7-point tiebreak set (7P) or a 10-point super tiebreak set (10P)
Thoughts?
Sounds dreadful to be honest. Any of these mickey mouse type sets entering grand slam tennis would be a blight on the game
The solution is already simple. Pay them the same because its a joint event. The length of the matches should have * all to do with how much they get paid
The solution is already simple. Pay them the same because its a joint event. The length of the matches should have * all to do with how much they get paid
- Jan 15, 2012
- 48,635
- 49,403
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I cannot find the full article but Nadal has recently expressed his views on equal pay (re: ATP and WTA tournaments)
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,095
- 55,334
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
I don't like it to be honest but then I am not advocating for equal pay (not opposed to it but can see why it doesn't exist in all tennis tournaments). I also don't like radical changes to the game.
- Banned
- #113
I'm not sure that's true.
The younger brigade on the men's tour have yet to demonstrate serious chops. If you took Federer, Nadal and Djokovic out of the picture, who would be the big drawcards? Given Djokovic's ordinary form of the past two years, the men's game is reliant on Federer and Nadal to a degree that is unhealthy. But for now, I think people are pretty happy to see those two great players meet in big matches, knowing that each time it could be the final act.
- Banned
- #114
But he's right, isn't he?
Replace tennis with another sport. Should female soccer players earn the same as male football players? If Messi or Ronaldo earns 500k a week, then surely the best female soccer players should get paid the same. Right?
No. It's not right. Because male and female soccer players operate in different economies, so the slice of the pie that goes to player salaries is therefore also different.
That said, I am in favour of equal prize money at grand slams, where the two tours come together to form equal parts of the one big event. That's fine. I have no problem with that and I believe equal prize money at grand slams should be upheld.
But outside of the grand slams, the ATP and WTA tours have to set prize money according to how much revenue the various tournaments generate. They have to do their own sums independently. If that means prize money is less on the WTA tour, so be it. That is a function of the revenue generated by these tournaments.
To underline this point, why is anyone asking Nadal about how much prize money female players should get? He doesn't decide how much prize money WTA events assign. If people have a problem with the prize money on the women's tour, that's not a question for Nadal. That's a question for the WTA tour. Go and ask Mickey Lawler, the WTA president, why the women don't get paid the same as men. I imagine his response would be: "We can't afford to pay our players as much because our tour isn't as lucrative." That's not sexist. That is just the reality of how much cash the WTA events pull in, a proportion of which is then distributed among the players as prize money.
Should WTA events assign a disproportionately higher percentage of their revenue to prize money just so we have the appearance of parity? That doesn't solve anything. If anything, it would make the WTA tour less sustainable. The real question is: why is the WTA tour less lucrative than the ATP tour? Because prize money levels are merely reflections of that. And that's not Nadal's fault.
Last edited:
Could the women's final ever be played on the 3rd Sunday? Of course not, because it is not the MAIN event. The men's final is. A few stupid women complain that sometimes they play the 2nd night match, OMG, it's so unfair, so sexist, when men have been playing late for 20 years.
Something needs to be done and I wish there were a few men discussing it constantly. Not only that, I wish there were female tennis players constantly arguing for change. Even a 5-set final, is that too much to ask?
After a mere hour of the women's final last night, female commentator was suggesting that Sloane was tired. An hour!!! And this is supposed to be the top competitors on the sport. Please!
Something needs to be done and I wish there were a few men discussing it constantly. Not only that, I wish there were female tennis players constantly arguing for change. Even a 5-set final, is that too much to ask?
After a mere hour of the women's final last night, female commentator was suggesting that Sloane was tired. An hour!!! And this is supposed to be the top competitors on the sport. Please!
I think these stats indicate that women don't work hard enough:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...Most_titles_across_all_disciplines_(all_time)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...Most_titles_across_all_disciplines_(all_time)
If only how much distance you covered made one iota of difference hey
Given that women do SFA compared to men, it gives many the opportunity to supplement their income playing WD and XD.
It doesn't happen as much as it used to, but many women were in fact earning more than men because they barely raised a sweat playing for 60 minutes in Singles that they could play Doubles on their rest day.
It doesn't happen as much as it used to, but many women were in fact earning more than men because they barely raised a sweat playing for 60 minutes in Singles that they could play Doubles on their rest day.
How about the amount of sponsorship? How about the level of ratings? How about the cost of a ticket?
It costs more to watch the Men's Final than it does to watch a Women's Final.
How many of us here can honestly say they have watched as many women's finals as men's finals?
Its all about advertising and when the WTA and ATP are linked as one event the money needs to be the same.
I watch more womens matches than mens. Federer, Nadal, Djoker, Kyrgios matches are at the top of the pile but then id rather watch any WTA match. Not that it matters.
- Moderator
- #123
Serena is the biggest drawcard at the US Open i wager. (guessing btw)
There was an interesting stat or table about prize money. *found it*
The WTA needs to close that gap and have a more even money situation.
There was an interesting stat or table about prize money. *found it*
The WTA needs to close that gap and have a more even money situation.
- Moderator
- #124
(and yes, it is the Serena factor at work here. But mens tennis is not always the most popular is my viewpoint
Interesting how many nuances and angles people find on this. I don't need to go much past post one in the thread.
OK the ATP and WTA are separate things, but if they wanna do joint tournaments and split the prize pool equally that's fine; provided everyone is playing the same sport. Ie. 5-set matches.
There's literally NO counter-argument that women "can't" or "shouldn't" play 5-set games that doesn't also gun down the "equal pay" expectation.
OK the ATP and WTA are separate things, but if they wanna do joint tournaments and split the prize pool equally that's fine; provided everyone is playing the same sport. Ie. 5-set matches.
There's literally NO counter-argument that women "can't" or "shouldn't" play 5-set games that doesn't also gun down the "equal pay" expectation.
