DO men and women deserve equal prize money at the Grand Slam Tennis events

[MMC]

far faster
far stronger
far bigger serve (mainly spin-the rotation on a man's 120 MPH serve is far more severe than that on Serena's 120 MPH serve)

Serena Williams, who turns 32 on Sept. 26, raised her Grand Slam singles title count to 17, the sixth-most in history and one shy of Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert. Williams collected a $3.6 million prize, including a $1 million bonus for producing the best results during the North American summer hard-court circuit leading up to the U.S. Open.

Helped by nine aces, one at 126 mph, Williams improved to 67-4 with a career-best nine titles in 2013. Since a first-round exit at the 2012 French Open, Williams is 98-5 with 14 titles, winning four of the past six Grand Slam tournaments.....snip~


Y! SPORTS

 

[Serenity]

The US Open pays the same amount to men and women even though the men play best of five sets, while the women only play best of three. The pro equality argument is based on general views that men and women should be treated equally and the feeling that the top women draw as many fans as the top men. The counter argument is that the men's field is far deeper (Serena Williams beat her semi final opponent 6-0, 6-3 while the #1 male seed won an almost four hour slugfest with a lower ranked semi final foe) and the quality of play is far far higher (not just in terms of speed and power but there are less chokes and double faults at for the men)

Interesting topic. Females shouldn't be getting equal prize money imo. Why should men "work" more for the same amount of money as women. It wouldn't be acceptable in the general workplace and it shouldn't be acceptable in sporting circles.

I love Tennis and enjoy watching everyone play but there are a couple of things that bug me..

Why do i have to pay more to go to Rod Laver Arena to watch the mens final than i do to watch the ladies final? Equal prizemoney but no equal ticket costings?

And don't forget that the top rating female players can earn more during their career than top rating men because the three set format allows them time to participate in doubles and mixed doubles as well, which can increase the amount of money they take home.

 

[ChrisL]

Who, meee? Nah. View attachment 67153334

Your halo is crooked I think. :lol:

 

[ChrisL]

Interesting topic. Females shouldn't be getting equal prize money imo. Why should men "work" more for the same amount of money as women. It wouldn't be acceptable in the general workplace and it shouldn't be acceptable in sporting circles.

I love Tennis and enjoy watching everyone play but there are a couple of things that bug me..

Why do i have to pay more to go to Rod Laver Arena to watch the mens final than i do to watch the ladies final? Equal prizemoney but no equal ticket costings?

And don't forget that the top rating female players can earn more during their career than top rating men because the three set format allows them time to participate in doubles and mixed doubles as well, which can increase the amount of money they take home.

Well if the men are bigger and stronger, wouldn't that mean that they don't have to work as hard?

 

[ChrisL]

Okay, so the men are bigger and stronger, so that makes them better tennis players, but I don't see how that means that the women work any less hard. I'm not seeing the rationale behind the argument that they should receive less money, unless you are going to use the reason that women's tennis is less profitable.

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what would happen if Serena Williams played against a male tennis player who was small? Maybe then she'd win.

 

[DiAnna]

I'm not a huge tennis fan, but I watch occasionally. If women tennis players want equal treatment, and I agree they deserve it, then they should be paid the same for playing the same number of matches as the men. If they only play 3 when men must play 5, that is not equal and the prize money should reflect that.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm not a huge tennis fan, but I watch occasionally. If women tennis players want equal treatment, and I agree they deserve it, then they should be paid the same for playing the same number of matches as the men. If they only play 3 when men must play 5, that is not equal and the prize money should reflect that.

I suppose that's true, they should have to play the same number of matches for equal payment or else it really isn't equal at all is it?

 

[ChrisL]

Another thing I really like about Serena is that she doesn't seem to have to make all of those ridiculous moans and grunts. The woman she played against today was making those bird sounds, every single time too. Maybe Serena should slap her and tell her to shut the eff up? :lol: Just kidding!

 

[ChrisL]

I'm not a huge tennis fan, but I watch occasionally. If women tennis players want equal treatment, and I agree they deserve it, then they should be paid the same for playing the same number of matches as the men. If they only play 3 when men must play 5, that is not equal and the prize money should reflect that.

Di, what is the reason they give as to why the female players only have to play three matches and the men five matches? Do you know?

 

[DiAnna]

Di, what is the reason they give as to why the female players only have to play three matches and the men five matches? Do you know?

Nope. Like I said, I'm not a huge fan. Turtle will probably know.

 

[Redress]

The US Open pays the same amount to men and women even though the men play best of five sets, while the women only play best of three. The pro equality argument is based on general views that men and women should be treated equally and the feeling that the top women draw as many fans as the top men. The counter argument is that the men's field is far deeper (Serena Williams beat her semi final opponent 6-0, 6-3 while the #1 male seed won an almost four hour slugfest with a lower ranked semi final foe) and the quality of play is far far higher (not just in terms of speed and power but there are less chokes and double faults at for the men)

Seems like it would be based on revenue, but I am OK with any system the athletes and organizers agree on.

 

[American]

Well if the men are bigger and stronger, wouldn't that mean that they don't have to work as hard?

So that's why we have to take out the trash. Women are going to be pissed that you gave away a 10,000 year old secret.

 

[Higgins86]

Equal pay so I don't have to listen to players like serena moan. Her behaviour in the final was pathetic. Horrible.

 

[Cameron]

The US Open pays the same amount to men and women even though the men play best of five sets, while the women only play best of three. The pro equality argument is based on general views that men and women should be treated equally and the feeling that the top women draw as many fans as the top men. The counter argument is that the men's field is far deeper (Serena Williams beat her semi final opponent 6-0, 6-3 while the #1 male seed won an almost four hour slugfest with a lower ranked semi final foe) and the quality of play is far far higher (not just in terms of speed and power but there are less chokes and double faults at for the men)

They should get paid according to how much money their matchup brings in.

 

[maquiscat]

:rofl You bad boy! I'm telling TGND you need a whipping.

Wait, wait, wait....what is it I have to do to get you to tell TGND on me?!?

 

[Medusa]

men watch these games to see female players

women deserve to be paid more:lol:

 

[MMC]

men watch these games to see female players

women deserve to be paid more:lol:

Compliments count.....Right? :mrgreen:

 

[Rainman05]

I only play tennis, i don't watch it... so i don't know.

 

[ChrisL]

Wait, wait, wait....what is it I have to do to get you to tell TGND on me?!?

Be a naughty boy I guess? :2razz:

 

[ChrisL]

So that's why we have to take out the trash. Women are going to be pissed that you gave away a 10,000 year old secret.

Must be why you guys kill spiders too.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

The US Open pays the same amount to men and women even though the men play best of five sets, while the women only play best of three. The pro equality argument is based on general views that men and women should be treated equally and the feeling that the top women draw as many fans as the top men. The counter argument is that the men's field is far deeper (Serena Williams beat her semi final opponent 6-0, 6-3 while the #1 male seed won an almost four hour slugfest with a lower ranked semi final foe) and the quality of play is far far higher (not just in terms of speed and power but there are less chokes and double faults at for the men)

Sports like that aren't 'price per set' - there are a lot of other factors, and popularity with fans is actually one of them.

So - whatever! If they want equality they should argue for playing 5 of 5. . . with the same size fields, etc. I mean - I never even knew there was such a huge difference. IT's tennis, not freaking UFC smackdown.

 

[ChrisL]

Sports like that aren't 'price per set' - there are a lot of other factors, and popularity with fans is actually one of them.

So - whatever! If they want equality they should argue for playing 5 of 5. . . with the same size fields, etc. I mean - I never even knew there was such a huge difference. IT's tennis, not freaking UFC smackdown.

Curious that's it's less money for tickets to a women's match though, yet apparently they get paid more or the same as the men and don't have to meet the same requirements. It does sound a little unfair, but I wonder if the women are only required to play 3 because they are more prone to injury perhaps? I know that tennis is a VERY physical and demanding sport, so that could be the case, but in that case they should probably not make as much as the men.

I'm also doubtful that women's tennis is as popular or pulls in the same amount of viewership that men's tennis does.

 

[ChrisL]

The US Open pays the same amount to men and women even though the men play best of five sets, while the women only play best of three. The pro equality argument is based on general views that men and women should be treated equally and the feeling that the top women draw as many fans as the top men. The counter argument is that the men's field is far deeper (Serena Williams beat her semi final opponent 6-0, 6-3 while the #1 male seed won an almost four hour slugfest with a lower ranked semi final foe) and the quality of play is far far higher (not just in terms of speed and power but there are less chokes and double faults at for the men)

So TD, what is the reason the "tennis people" (Lol - whatever they might call themselves, the tennis association? I don't know) say about this? Do they give a reason as to why the women are required to play only 3 and the men have to play 5 matches?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Curious that's it's less money for tickets to a women's match though, yet apparently they get paid more or the same as the men and don't have to meet the same requirements. It does sound a little unfair, but I wonder if the women are only required to play 3 because they are more prone to injury perhaps? I know that tennis is a VERY physical and demanding sport, so that could be the case, but in that case they should probably not make as much as the men.

I'm also doubtful that women's tennis is as popular or pulls in the same amount of viewership that men's tennis does.

Tennis is a very old sport, so I imagine it's because, forever ago, women were discouraged from playing anything on an equal level as men - with the same effort, stamina, zeal. It's all just leftovers from a bygone era and I'm surprised the women tolerate it.

In MMA the matches fluctuate depending on whether you're fighting for a championship or not, are new, headlining, etc. Pay? That relies on the individual. I just assumed that tennis and many other sports were the same.