Wimbledon Goes Keith Hernandez. Kinda.


Apparently, those Englishmen aren’t down with equal rights.

At a press conference today, Wimbledon announced that the men’s winner would receive 655,000 pounds while the women’s winner would receive 625,000. In US currency, that mean’s the women’s champion would receive roughly $50,000 less than Roger Federer.

Under most circumstances, I’d make the “women really need that extra cash so they can buy a few handbags to match their new Tiffany’s earrings” joke but in this case, I legitimately believe that they should collect equivalent prize money.

The television ratings are just as good, although that’s probably because of Maria Sharapova’s figure as opposed to her ability. But still, I have to assume they bring in just as much money as the men’s game.

More importantly, the field in women’s tennis is much deeper, making for more competitive tournaments. Now I watch tennis about as much as I watch paintball, but I can still say I’ve at least heard of most of the top ranked women’s players in the world where as I can name very few of the best men.

And be real. If Federer is in a tournament, the only chance he has of losing is if he’s up against Rafael Nadal. Other than that, he’s a lock to win every time. In the women’s game, you have Mauresmo, Clijsters, Sharapova, Henin-Hardenne and a handful of others that all have the potential to win.

Considering that the other Grand Slam tournaments all give out equal money, this was a bad call by Wimbledon.


Edward 3:36 PM, April 25, 2006  

Not at all. Men play five sets. Women play three. Five sets is much more gruelling and the physical toll means they can't compete as easily in other competitions like the doubles. As a result, overall women earn more than men.

This has nothing to do with equality. If women tennis players really want equality I'd be entirely with them; but that would mean them playing five set games and, even, stopping the "male - female" distinction properly and having to compete directly with the men in the same competition. I can't imagine they'd be too keen on that.


Pratyush 7:31 PM, April 25, 2006  

I have written about the issue.

The issue here is market forces by large. If women can be more saleable, then they even deserve ore pay than the men. The WTA and its players are beating the wrong way.

Read about it here: http://www.sportolysis.com/2006/04/26/the-equal-pay-issue/

StonecoldJZ 10:52 PM, May 01, 2006  

Nadal does not have a shot on grass. Federer will more than likely win, but if not then it will be an up and comer.

  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP