Tennis Related - Off Court Serious Issues

[ponchi101]

Shapo is 100% correct. The pay should be equal. Players play the same game, with the same equipment, on the same court, between the same lines. The score is kept the same with the exception of some tournaments where Men play best 3 out of 5 sets and the women stick with the 2 out of 3 sets. Other than that the game is played practically the same. The Men may hit the ball harder most of the time, but still the games strategy is there whether you are a man or woman. Fans pay to see both play and as for myself I enjoy watching them equally and I also love the doubles game as well.

And that is where the issue gets tricky.
How much are people willing to pay for, an example, Federer-Nadal? (if they were still playing). Well, they were willing to pay a lot. Nowadays, how much will people pay to see Paula Badosa/Annet Kontaveit in Tallin, compared to Medvedev/Rublev in Dubai? Personally, give me Paula/Annet, but that is me. The bulk of the people? I have no idea.
We sometimes forget that this is an entertainment industry. Yes, to me it is a sport and a passion, but for many people it is just another selection in their share of entertainment options. Assume, for a second, that the WTA decides that all 250 tournaments have to pay equal money than the ATP 250 of that week. I can assure that, for example, the Bogota open disappears. They simply will not have that amount of money, and never will. It is a small tournament.
SHOULD be is not the same as CAN be. If the WTA/ATP/ITF get together and form a single, unified tour, then they can set prize money in tandem. But let's wait and see how many tournaments, from both tours, will remain. We can be sure some will be lost.

[meganfernandez]

This isn't a free-market issue. When people insist that the equal prize money issue is purely economic, it strikes me as willfully obtuse. I can't take them seriously.

Many seem incapable of recognizing that women are disadvantaged in terms of popularity and respect in sports. They haven't been allowed to play at the same level for as long as men. They weren't encouraged and expected to play sports like men were until fairly recently (if that), and public perception responded accordingly. Men have a huge head start on being valued as athletes, and they are also more valued than women in the workplace in general (well documented). If people prefer men's tennis in general, it's at least partly a product of social inequity going back centuries - fruit of the poisoned tree. THAT is the wrong that equal prize money seeks to correct, the burden that it seeks to relieve, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's the right thing to do. Stop punishing women for being denied fairness for most of human existence, and stop acting like this is purely about a spreadsheet.

I'm aware that tour events and Slams are a different arrangement. I'm not sure where i stand on the disparity in pay between tour events. If it's a joint event at the same time and place, I think they should pay the same. Beyond that, I'm undecided. Certainly doesn't feel right to say "Hey, WTA Austin, you better pay the same as ATP Acapulco this week." I can't get there yet.

[Scoob]

Shapo is 100% correct. The pay should be equal. Players play the same game, with the same equipment, on the same court, between the same lines. The score is kept the same with the exception of some tournaments where Men play best 3 out of 5 sets and the women stick with the 2 out of 3 sets. Other than that the game is played practically the same. The Men may hit the ball harder most of the time, but still the games strategy is there whether you are a man or woman. Fans pay to see both play and as for myself I enjoy watching them equally and I also love the doubles game as well.

And that is where the issue gets tricky.
How much are people willing to pay for, an example, Federer-Nadal? (if they were still playing). Well, they were willing to pay a lot. Nowadays, how much will people pay to see Paula Badosa/Annet Kontaveit in Tallin, compared to Medvedev/Rublev in Dubai? Personally, give me Paula/Annet, but that is me. The bulk of the people? I have no idea.
We sometimes forget that this is an entertainment industry. Yes, to me it is a sport and a passion, but for many people it is just another selection in their share of entertainment options. Assume, for a second, that the WTA decides that all 250 tournaments have to pay equal money than the ATP 250 of that week. I can assure that, for example, the Bogota open disappears. They simply will not have that amount of money, and never will. It is a small tournament.
SHOULD be is not the same as CAN be. If the WTA/ATP/ITF get together and form a single, unified tour, then they can set prize money in tandem. But let's wait and see how many tournaments, from both tours, will remain. We can be sure some will be lost.

Tennis has been a passion of mine ever since I have been retrieving the tennis balls when my older brother and dad would hit the tennis ball around the court. On the rare occasion I do get to see a professional tennis match live it is still a passion but it is also for entertainment. My wife is not much into Tennis as I am as she grew up playing Lacrosse. We go to each sporting event as a purpose of entertainment. Personally, if I go see Leyah play Rebecca Marino in a Charity event, I can be entertained by it. If I go see a Djokovic versus Alcaraz match I could be equally entertained, but if Novak withdraws after the 1st set, I will be pissed.

It is true that some of the smaller WTA would not be able to handle the pay increase and would have to shut down operations. I guarantee you though that for everyone of the tournaments another new one would be ready to step right in.

Like you stated, we shall see how it all unfolds. The future awaits for the Tennis tour to step up.

[ponchi101]

This isn't a free-market issue. When people insist that the equal prize money issue is purely economic, it strikes me as willfully obtuse. I can't take them seriously.

Many seem incapable of recognizing that women are disadvantaged in terms of popularity and respect in sports. They haven't been allowed to play at the same level for as long as men. They weren't encouraged and expected to play sports like men were until fairly recently (if that), and public perception responded accordingly. Men have a huge head start on being valued as athletes, and they are also more valued than women in the workplace in general (well documented). If people prefer men's tennis in general, it's at least partly a product of social inequity going back centuries - fruit of the poisoned tree. THAT is the wrong that equal prize money seeks to correct, the burden that it seeks to relieve, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's the right thing to do. Stop punishing women for being denied fairness for most of human existence, and stop acting like this is purely about a spreadsheet.

I'm aware that tour events and Slams are a different arrangement. I'm not sure where i stand on the disparity in pay between tour events. If it's a joint event at the same time and place, I think they should pay the same. Beyond that, I'm undecided. Certainly doesn't feel right to say "Hey, WTA Austin, you better play the same as ATP Acapulco this week." I can't get there yet.

You have called me willfully obtuse
What is then the position on other sports where men and women have leagues and the women's pay pales in comparison? Do you think that the WNBA could pay the same salaries and contracts as the NBA? How about the soccer leagues around the world? Can the female leagues pay the same salaries, when the stadia are at 1/4 capacity?

And I believe that what Shapo was talking about is precisely what you say at the end. Austin HAS TO pay the same as Acapulco. And that is where the economics enter into play.

[JazzNU]

Okay, so I've tried to break this down a bit, believe it or not, this is an abbreviated version of what I was initially writing.

1. Institutional misogyny is at the root of a lot of this.

2. @Ponchi's situation is always a good example where tennis is concerned when comparing the WTA and the ATP. He lives in a place that doesn't place a high value on women's tennis to the point where he has limited easy access to watching women's tennis outside of the majors unless it's an SA tournament. That's not a Colombia problem, that's a problem in many countries. The women are up against a problem before they even get started.

3. There are women's sports that are more popular their male counterparts especially gymnastics and figure skating, but they get regularly ignored as reference points when comparing men's and women's sports. It depends on the country, but this is also a significant edge in popularity when there is next to no top competitor in the area from the country in the men's side but there is on the women's side. For the US, besides tennis, skiing is a very good example of this. We've had Lindsey Vonn and Mikaela Shiffrin reigning supreme for over a decade combined, so that is the marquee side of the sport here in both interest and ratings.

3. Ignoring #3, if you think about women's college and pro sports in the US, they have not been all that easy to watch until the last decade or so. And even then, it's only been very recently where they have gotten more promotion and access and better timeslots for viewing them on TV. As that has happened, viewership has slowly increased. And as it's gotten more coverage paired with that promotion, its gains have been more rapid. The gains across the board can be seen with the WNBA, the women's college basketball tournament, and women's softball tournament in particular.

4. Also, there are still challenges relating to #1 that are setbacks even as gains are earned. For instance, despite it being a legal requirement that the women's college basketball players get the same equipment, accommodations, and facilities, it was shown in truly pitiful fashion via social media posts from female players who had had enough that went viral how inequitable the situations were. NCAA got embarrassed and called to the carpet once it was known, but it should've never been the case when Title IV is already there to protect against those things.

Another thing is that institutional racism remains problematic in coverage as well. Far and away the best women's college basketball team for the last few years has been South Carolina. But ESPN has continued to aggressively push all things UConn despite their stumbles and didn't invite the best women's basketball player from South Carolina to the ESPYs until they got called out for it and issued a very late invite to her (she turned it down). This is after the year before hyping a white UConn player ad nauseum who was the best in nation and putting in a lengthy montage of her in at the awards show, but they couldn't see fit to repeat that with the black player from South Carolina. This has been a common issue in coverage that has limited growth. There is also a homophobic angle to this, where there has been a concerted push to prop up players that don't "appear lesbian". Blew up in their faces a bit when one of the players they especially zeroed in on promoting came out several years after college. It's been an uphill battle to just cover the sport by the talent.

5. Final point. People forget that the NBA wasn't a popular league back in the earlier days. There is revisionist history where their popularity is concerned by many fans. The NBA was so lacking in popularity that the Finals were not shown live, but instead tape delayed and aired after the nightly news in local markets. It wasn't until David Stern's leadership in the 80s where he decided to change the focus on the sport to the players and not the teams that the popularity began to steadily increase. It wasn't just the Lakers vs. the Celtics for the title, it was Magic vs. Bird. That was the difference and set the league on the course to where it is today, the second most popular professional sport in the country. The point is, catching on with the public and growing the sport can take time. Expecting it to happen overnight is unrealistic. It didn't happen with the NBA and they weren't facing as many multi-faceted challenges. But don't ignore the gains that have been made when accessibility to women's sports increases.


Yes, this is a shorter version. I deleted portions from several of those points.

[Deuce]

For the sake of clear continuity, it would be best, I think, to fuse the 2 separate discussions on this subject of equal prize money, as it is happening in two separate threads, following Shapovalov's article having been posted in both threads.
I suggest that the posts in this thread be moved to the 'Tennis Related - Off Court Serious Issues' thread, as it is not an on-court issue, and it is also a serious issue - and because the discussion began in that other thread.

[Scoob]

It can be looked at the same way up here in Canada with Ice Hockey. The make up of the NHL is with Canadian players for the most part followed by European players. Those NHL players make a hell of a lot more money than any of the Canadian Women's Ice Hockey players who have accomplished a tremendous amount over the years not only for their country, but for the game of Ice Hockey itself.

Will there ever be a serious Women's Ice Professional Ice Hockey League that pays these women what they deserve? We will just have to wait and see with that and how people will embrace it. There is a league that has formed with the assistance of some NHL teams called the PWHPA, but I don't know much at all about it.

[ponchi101]

Re-posting (C/P of Ti's original post)
---0---


Alex Dolgopolov
@TheDolgo

Steve Simon, @WTA CEO to @LTsurenko
:“I don’t support the war, but it’s OK if players support it”.
Steve, instead of intimidating Ukrainian women, be a man and take this to the public. Conversation happened with you on duty,people deserve to know,it’s OK, to support genocide

[ponchi101]

If it is a direct quote:
What does "I do not support the war" mean? As opposed to: "I condemn the war". There is a difference.

And about Russians and Belarusians playing in the Olympics. The Olympics are a team event; you play and REPRESENT your country. Your medal goes to the country's tally. So, allowing Russia and Belorussia to compete would be condoning the war.
Which is the modern Olympic $pirit, but I digress.

[Deuce]

If it is a direct quote:
What does "I do not support the war" mean? As opposed to: "I condemn the war". There is a difference.

And about Russians and Belarusians playing in the Olympics. The Olympics are a team event; you play and REPRESENT your country. Your medal goes to the country's tally. So, allowing Russia and Belorussia to compete would be condoning the war.
Which is the modern Olympic $pirit, but I digress.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that allowing the Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete in the Olympics is to condone the war/invasion. But, yes, the Olympics are a team event where athletes represent their country. It's a patriotic thing. And as such, I fully agree that Russia and Belarus should be banned from the Olympics entirely.
This isn't even to mention the several cheating issues that the Russians have had at the Olympics.

Regarding Tsurenko... I have no problem with anything that she wrote in that piece. I feel bad for her, and wish her well.
She seems to be expressing herself on the subject of the invasion much better than Kostyuk is. But then, she's more than a decade older than Kostyuk, and so is handling the situation more maturely.

[ti-amie]

If it is a direct quote:
What does "I do not support the war" mean? As opposed to: "I condemn the war". There is a difference.

And about Russians and Belarusians playing in the Olympics. The Olympics are a team event; you play and REPRESENT your country. Your medal goes to the country's tally. So, allowing Russia and Belorussia to compete would be condoning the war.
Which is the modern Olympic $pirit, but I digress.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that allowing the Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete in the Olympics is to condone the war/invasion. But, yes, the Olympics are a team event where athletes represent their country. It's a patriotic thing. And as such, I fully agree that Russia and Belarus should be banned from the Olympics entirely.
This isn't even to mention the several cheating issues that the Russians have had at the Olympics.

Regarding Tsurenko... I have no problem with anything that she wrote in that piece. I feel bad for her, and wish her well.
She seems to be expressing herself on the subject of the invasion much better than Kostyuk is. But then, she's more than a decade older than Kostyuk, and so is handling the situation more maturely.

I agree 100% with the highlighted part.

Steve Simon, who replaced Stacey Allaster, who signed the WTA tour over to the Chinese, re-upped with a ten year deal, has actually been worse than Allaster. She was at least fighting to keep the WTA tour in the spotlight while he has disappeared it.

How do you fix your mouth to say something like that to a woman who is obviously having problems related to the invasion of her country? SMH.

I hope I spelled Allaster's name correctly.

[Deuce]

I agree 100% with the highlighted part.

Steve Simon, who replaced Stacey Allaster, who signed the WTA tour over to the Chinese, re-upped with a ten year deal, has actually been worse than Allaster. She was at least fighting to keep the WTA tour in the spotlight while he has disappeared it.

How do you fix your mouth to say something like that to a woman who is obviously having problems related to the invasion of her country? SMH.

^ Indeed. If that is truly how he reacted to Tsurenko, it was very much lacking in compassion, concern, comprehension, and common sense.
Also, having a man at the head of the Women's Tennis Association seems to me to be quite counter-intuitive.

[mmmm8]

I am pretty shocked to hear the WTA (nor ITF?) have provided any financial, mental health, or other support to Ukrainian players who are, essentially, displaced. Almost all global employers have put something in place.

(Russian players should be able to request and get this support as well if they can show there's a threat to them going to Russia long-term, politically, or in terms of getting drafted).

[mmmm8]

WTA response


(Via the Tennis Podcast)

[ti-amie]