Equal Prizemoney...
- Thread starter LukeParkerno1
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Jan 15, 2012
- 48,639
- 49,409
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Misleading! The media gave us a different version acting like Novak is greedy but was actually talking about the lower rank players who dont earn enough money.
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,095
- 55,351
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
This has been an issue for a long time and lower ranked players have been talking about it but of course no one takes any notice of them and they have no representation. If they have managed to get Novak in their corner then that will be a great help to their cause.
Last edited:
- Moderator
- #79
Not against more help for the over 100's players. But that money has to come from the top of the game and not from the other sex. The best way to help them is to help the relative ITF events i feel. Or maybe help pay for travel or coaching costs. It is always an issue.
If you think the ATP over 100's struggle, then think of the WTA and significant lower prize money for that respective tour once you reach the WTA international level tour. great link btw about the prize money.
I always feel that men and women share the spotlight of a grand slam and other major events. It feels like a bigger event when the whole of the tennis world is watching the same event.
If you think the ATP over 100's struggle, then think of the WTA and significant lower prize money for that respective tour once you reach the WTA international level tour. great link btw about the prize money.
I always feel that men and women share the spotlight of a grand slam and other major events. It feels like a bigger event when the whole of the tennis world is watching the same event.
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,095
- 55,351
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
To me these are separate issues. The problem of lower ranked players not getting paid enough (both men and women) and the issue of whether men and women should have equal pay. You can address the first issue independent of the second one.
Hawkas1988
Norm Smith Medallist
Anyone that argues that they should have equal pay has rocks in their head.
Equality isn't equality when one standard is so much higher than the other and they play lots more tennis.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Equality isn't equality when one standard is so much higher than the other and they play lots more tennis.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Hawkas1988
Norm Smith Medallist
It is completely that black and white. The market determines your value
Nope. That is called a free market. We don’t have that anywhere with employment and remuneration.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Mar 2, 2007
- 43,126
- 61,323
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Cowboys, Packers, Scorchers
That was one of the most entertaining games of the tournament so far for me. Don't see how anyone can say they don't deserve every cent they get for that performance.
Not exactly what i meant, but it is extremely common none the less.
The more money you bring in, the more money you deserve to get paid. Skill quality or length of match only matters if it affects $$$ coming in
The only thing that saved it was the length of the third set. Hitting your first ball into the net post when under no pressure, first serve bombs at a whopping 130km and missing the return from that, if that gets you up and about then you should watch some Under 14's as it's about the same level. Only difference is the number of people at the venue (and the only reason it was full at RLA was because they thought Zverev would've started by then) and the commentators calling below average shots "unbelievable shot making" because they have to. For a match with a world #1 there was some shockingly bad tennis on display.
- Moderator
- #90
A+ for drama
C for skill.
it was still very good to watch mind you. You only have to look at the activity on bigfooty day 6 thread during the match to see that.
- Banned
- #91
At majors, they should get equal prize money. At other tournaments, where the tours are separate, prize money should be x percentage of revenue. If that means women get paid less, because their sport brings in less revenue, so be it. But at majors, where the tours are combined, there must be parity.
- Sep 27, 2014
- 34,227
- 28,858
- AFL Club
- Essendon
WTA players do get less than ATP players. Of course, the people who only know the Australian Open and maybe Wimbledon that think equal pay at the slams is oh so unfair (even though that money would just stay in the tournament's/sponsor's pockets) have no ******* idea.
Last edited:
- Moderator
- #93
As I and others have said, they share the spotlight when they share these big tournaments.
And thank god they do. Those mens semis were complete busts, especially compared to the drama and emotion of the Halep Kerber match.
And thank god they do. Those mens semis were complete busts, especially compared to the drama and emotion of the Halep Kerber match.
- Banned
- #94
Yes. Rightly so, if the WTA tour generates less revenue. However, at the majors, that argument no longer applies.
Would be interesting to see the difference in revenue if the majors were played separately
Flameboy
Norm Smith Medallist
Wouldn't really, men would dominate
What will be interesting to see is when Federer and Nadal retire, and to a lesser extent Djokovic (and far lesser extent Murray) - how will the tour cope without them. I would think that there could only be a lull.
The tour already coped without 3 of them for much of the season. By the time they actually retire Kyrgios, Zverev, Chung et al should be taking the spotlight, doubt there will be much of a lull. Kyrgios and Zverev already building a rivalry and are their nations’ #1 players. Dimitrov also is only like 26 years old. Plenty to look forward to
- Banned
- #98
Yeah, if we're inventing hypothetical universes, I can think of more "interesting" ones.
Tell me again how the game has "shifted".
- Moderator
- #99
lets look at the end of year champs, the biggest separate events on both tours.
ATP Finals series 2017 (etc the end of year champs) Prize Money: 8 mil
WTA Finals series 2017 (etc the end of year champs) Prize Money: 7 mil.
What a (small) difference. This is not counting in the fact that the WTA just signed a deal with Shenzhen, China for 10 years which will increase the prize money to 14 mil.....
oh hang on....isnt that bigger than the ATP.
http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/22138547/shenzhen-china-host-wta-finals-2028
If the two went their separate ways completely, it's quite obvious which would succeed over the other. Let's not be naive.lets look at the end of year champs, the biggest separate events on both tours.
ATP Finals series 2017 (etc the end of year champs) Prize Money: 8 mil
WTA Finals series 2017 (etc the end of year champs) Prize Money: 7 mil.
What a (small) difference. This is not counting in the fact that the WTA just signed a deal with Shenzhen, China for 10 years which will increase the prize money to 14 mil.....
oh hang on....isnt that bigger than the ATP.
http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/22138547/shenzhen-china-host-wta-finals-2028
