With Wimbledon just about underway, there always seems to be some controversy surrounding this, the most prestigious Grand Slam of them all.
The opening serve has come from former champion and tennis legend, John McEnroe, suggesting that while he has “great respect” for Serena Williams, the 23-time Grand Slam winner, and rates her “the best ever of her gender”, she would be “like 700 in the world” on the men’s circuit.
McEnroe’s assessment of Serena and her probable ranking in the men’s game again opens the question concerning the concept of equal remuneration.
At this year’s Wimbledon Championships, the winner of both the men’s singles and the women’s singles will walk away with a cool 2.2 million pounds each (2.85 million dollars), the runners-up, pocketing 1.1 million pounds each!
Superficially that seems fair enough, however, the men have to play the best of five sets, while the ladies only have to play the best of three sets.
Well here’s the rub. Looking at all the single’s finals played at Wimbledon, since 2000, the men’s final has taken an average time of 180 minutes to complete, with a total of 66 sets being played. On the other hand, the ladies final has taken an average time of 93 minutes to play, with a total number of 39 sets played.
In the 17 men’s finals played, only seven victories have been achieved in straight sets, 3-0, with Adelaide’s Lleyton Hewitt, claiming one of them with his 2002 victory over David Nalbandian 6-1, 6-3, 6-2.
As for the ladies, a remarkable 12 victories, out of the 17 contests, have been achieved with straight sets, 2-0, win. Serena Williams claimed five of these wins, while sister, Venus, has three
Taking into account revenue raised from television rights and advertising, in particular, it would be logical to think that the longer a match goes, the more revenue raised.
In today’s world of sexual equality, and the concept of equal pay for equal work performed, it would appear, from the Wimbledon tennis statistics, that the ladies are well and truly being adequately recompensed for the job that they are doing.
They are receiving a similar amount to the guys, and performing for approximately half the time that they do!
What do you think, Roarers? Do we need to adjust the pay rate or should we leave as is?
Roger Ramjet
Guest
The Grand slam tournaments would be 3 to 4 weeks then if all matches- singles/different doubles formats were all best of 5 sets. It's only at the Grand Slams that the men play best of 5 sets as all other tournaments are best of 3 sets - Olympics /Davis cup and year end champions series(top 8 I think seeded players only play this) are best of 5 - the only others during the season.
Michael Clare
Guest
I am certain that many male pros quietly resent the current situation, but why would the women want to change such a sweet deal. Historically, this issue is closely bound up with Women's Rights Movement of the 1970s and is not just about sport or equal work for equal pay. Ironically, since the advent of the tie-breaker set concept in the late 1960s modern women players actually play less tennis during Grand Slams than they did when skirts were ankle length. For example, in the 1919 Wimbledon final lasting over three hours, French Ace Suzanne Lenglen defeated the reigning champion Dorothea Lambert Chambers 10–8, 4–6, 9–7. I'd settle for the abolition of tie-breaker sets for Grand Slam for the women's game. Go back to the pre-1969 rule when you had to win a set by two games. Would make for more interesting women's tennis.
Dexter The Hamster
Guest
This again? I guess that's why golfers get paid so much, they are out there for 4 days. Test cricketers should get even more. MMA fighters should get next to nothing, some of their bouts last 20 seconds. Meatloaf's songs tend to be about 2 minutes longer than Bowie's. Bowie should get paid less. Can we stop comparing the length of time on the court/field/track to the amount they get paid? Anyone that understands the sports and entertainment industry knows that it is about the revenue stream. Wimbledon and other major tennis tournaments attract fans of both men's and women's tennis, and the overall revenue stream would be less without the women's event.
Maggie
Guest
Yep. And a nurse of either gender in a cancer ward is contributing much more to society than so-called supermodels such as Miranda Kerr. And probably working longer hours, under more stress and with greater responsibility. But we know who gets paid more. This pointless story comes up on The Roar every Wimbledon. Just get over it.
Duncan Smith
Guest
If TV and tournaments aren't allowing them to play five sets, isn't that discrimination? If the standard of play is poor, are you saying they should be paid less on that basis? Not taking a position here, I'm just not sure what you mean. One of the biggest problems, in the limited amount I've watched, is so many one-sided games where the better players are winning 6-0, 6-1 etc.
northerner
Guest
Pro sports are part of the entertainment industry. And in the entertainment industry, there is no such thing as equal pay for equal work. There is no way that Tom Cruise is the equal of Robert Duvall or Helen Mirren when it comes to acting, but he makes much, much more money than either. It doesn't worry me in the least that women tennis players get paid as much as male tennis players, because they're not actually being paid for the quality of tennis, any more than Cruise is being paid for the quality (?) of his acting: they're all being paid for that intangible known as entertainment value.
FrozenNorth
Guest
Lot of ignorance and misinformation here. The women say they are fine with 5 sets, it's tournament organisers and TV networks that do not want best of five as it destroys their schedule, The bigger issue, IMHO, is the standard of the womens game. It has been dire for a decade with mental frailty a borderline chronic ailment. Skill set is the other shortfall, the undisputed second best player of the past 10 years (sharapova) can barely toss the ball on her serve which is unforgivable and speak to the standard of the tour if she can occupy a near permanent top 5 place.
Howie
Roar Pro
While I generally agree - I would accept equal pay for less grunting.
Duncan Smith
Guest
They have equal pay but seem to have forgotten about the 'equal work' part. Surely they should be playing best of 5 sets by now.
jeff dustby
Guest
"Taking into account revenue raised from television rights and advertising, in particular, it would be logical to think that the longer a match goes, the more revenue raised." i think you have got it right here