http://www.si.com/tennis/2016/03/23/jon-wertheim-equal-pay-men-women-tennis The other day, the head of a major event that wrapped up said some things to anger some people, which forced him to step down. In essence what he said was completely true, but it wasn't stated in a very eloquent way....much like Trump. In short, men and women don't get paid the same in Tennis. Why? Men play MORE, sell far more tickets and lets face it, are far BETTER at the sport in every conceivable way. There is no opinion here. Its all factual. Serena, the best female player that ever lived would be hard pressed to beat any male in the top 20-30 or even lower. Like every sport, there is a reason you have men and women, because we all know the outcome if they weren't separate. Some women get paid more in endorsements though. Guess equality doesn't have to be "completely" =) So, should people be paid the same when they technically aren't as skilled and don't work as much? Equality for the sake of equality? For those who want manufactured equality, it makes you question why the winner of a tournament gets more money than those who lose in the first round?
It's like this in just about all sports. Men are the best at physical competition and people will pay to see the best athletes hit the ball farther, run the ball faster, or take the hardest slapshot. OTOH, women porn stars are millionaires while men earn peanuts. If women want equality in everything, then women players should play the men's players and if they win they get the big bucks. And to cover the guys point about there being more name recognition among female tennis players when compared to the WNBA, well, the best tennis players will be one of just 2 people on the court for the entire match - no passing, no substitutes, just them and their names and ONLY their names will be mentioned every 15 seconds.
The Williams sister's couldn't even beat a guy standing at the #203 rank postion, who was famous for being a drunkard and heavy smoker. At the end of the day the men put up a better show, despite the gracious skirts women wear and appealing screams they make, and that entirely justifies this "wage gap". Of course this doesn't make much sense for feminists who loathe how the market works, when it doesn't favor them that is.
Do you want to see a woman win against a man every time? Get a guy and a girl to have a fist fight; the guy might win the fight most of the time but the woman will win the court case every time. I have nothing against women, but I don't watch women's sports, not even in the Olympics unless it's gymnastics and maybe skiing. Wait, change that, I will watch women's softball from time to time, same with billiards, although I'm not sure why billiards is broken out between men and women, it's not a muscle game.
Ratings and ticket sales should drive what they earn. Women's tennis probably does better than any other women's sport and the top players make good money. They also do very well in endorsements, because there are very few women's sports stars in other sports, and there's a need for companies to market to women.
I really don't care for tennis, not even for the hotties that may play as it's just not my kind of sport. I know it is a tough sport and takes some extreme physical and mental training to get to the top, but the fact of the matter is a sport or league is going to pay out on popularity no matter what it is. And if the women can't match ticket sales like the men do or bring in the ratings men do on tv then they are simply not going to get the same salaries or same pay from sponsors. Doing so would cripple the sport. It sucks but that is just how it is and you can not force people into the stands and force them to spend money on something they are not as interested in just to make the salaries greater. If you do that then you might as well complain that Triple A ball players should get the same amount of pay as their MLB counterparts. it would be stupid, farm clubs couldn't cover the cost.
The WNBA can't even cover their costs. I guess they keep it running, because of the added value from bringing in new people to the sport. They figure that more women watching women means more women also watching the men and getting their family members to watch as well. The women in tennis can make an argument they drive up the ratings for the men, but the question is how much.
If women can fight in the infantry where it's a matter of life and death, the least they can do to show their equality is to compete against men in sports. Separating women from men in sports and marginalizing them with "Women's sports" is sexist and should be ended. #facetious
Actually with respect to drawing crowds, its rather circular. There have been times when at the four majors( the Australian, French, Wimbledon, US OPen) the women' s matches got higher viewership. It depends on which tour has the more interesting personalities and which rivalries are hot. As for 'playing longer' (ie three out of five sets as opposed to two out of three) Men used to play a lot more three out of five and women almost never did. Three out of five has fallen on more disfavor, with viewers, fans, and especially networks. Almost nobody has the patience to hang around and watch 2-3 hours of tennis anymore. Men only play three out of five in the final rounds of the majors. Few tournaments require it at all. It is never required in doubles or mixed anymore. As for 'skilled' I think that is the wrong word for what you are trying to get at. The skill level is the same, but because of enhanced athletic abilities ( strength, speed, power) among the men, they can do far more.
So a few sexy girls drive up the viewership , but it makes no difference if the bottom line does not equal what the men bring in. A company can not survive if they pay a new hire the same as one of their top employees, you are asking to lose all your profits. Plain and simple things like the WNBA don't do well because it is really not all that exciting. They don't have the moves, the speed and the strength the men showcase. Not a single girl in the WNBA could honestly compete with NBA men, if anything they would put up great fights against top high school squads. The only womens sport that is climbing the ranks fast these days is the Legends Football League, formerly known as the Lingerie Football League. First they started out as a novelty, which is why they were first the Linegerie Football League, but they are really looked at more seriously these days and they correctly changed the name. Not only are many of these women beautiful, but they are also well built athletic specimens that put on one hell of a show. They are not powder puffs, nor will they compete with NFL players but *******n im sorry but I doubt I could keep up with these women. They are fast, strong and they do not throw like sissy girls or hit each other like they are scared. Plain and simple they are exciting to watch and the play at a very high pace. You won't find that in womens basketball. Womens soccer though is entertaining because again it is fast paced and the women are more aggressive in that sport. Womens hockey is pretty fun but there is just not a lot of marketing for it.
Men have 5 sets in the Grand Slams. Women always have 3. I mean Isner played a match that went on for 7 hours and he's not much of a mover and his feet were tore up.
Well as far as womens hockey I am sure it is much bigger in countries like in Europe or Canada since they take the sport much more seriously than they do in the USA. Hell even mens soccer is not that huge here until the World Cup comes around. But in my opinion nothing really comes close to the LFL as far as excitement and athletic ability. Sure they wear less than a Hooters waitress, which is honestly what got them noticed, but now the sport is taken rather seriously and are more than just women with hot bods and every year the game gets better and better. And now they have LFL leagues in Canada and Australia. Also the LFL is planning to expand by 3 or 4 franchises here in the USA and a video game for PS4 and Xbox is in the works I believe. Also let it be known that they also tried a Lingerie Basketball league and it only lasted 1 year. Why you say? because womens basketball is still not that fun to watch even when they are running around in underwear.
Yeah well thats an all out blood sport so its going to be. I didn't even think I would have to point that out. They will grow too, much larger because in that sport women are easily proving they can give us just as good a show as the men can. The only thing holding them back is that there are not enough Rousey types. Besides Holly Holm nobody else gave Ronda too much trouble. But if this is only the beginning then I can not wait a couple years from now when they have more divisions and even more extremely talented fighters.
Women in sports will be paid the same as men when they can fill stadiums with tickets costing over $1000. And when that happens the women can wear powder blue sweat bands as a reminder that prostate cancer is deadly.
Your'e right billiards is not a game based on physical strength.But you ask why it broken in to different classes, men and woman. Professional male players draw bigger crowds , that means, more money. The same way with pro tennis ,the men always draw bigger crowds. I have seen pro events for both men and women pool players. The men draws in more people. I prefer to watch the women play,they seem to have a better finesse game then men do.
The best male player is getting a lot of flack for agreeing with the guy. Djokovic is right though. Nadal and Fed are just pandering. Probably don't want to get yelled at by their wife/gf.
Having played the game at a high level I would pay an equal amount to watch either men or women, they're just that good. I've seen plenty of women break and run the table in 9 ball and it wouldn't not have mattered who was sitting in the opponent's chair. But I do think with physical sports people are willing to pay to see the best of the best and that's typically a man. When watching women's sports they're not seeing the best of the best, they're seeing the best women. All my apologies and sincerest respect to the women on this board, I mean no offense, it's just the way it is. Breaking away from sports for a moment, one can ask why male movie stars earn more than their female counterparts. I know it's about what they draw, but it's a better comparison, I think, than sports because women can't change the physical traits they're born with, but in acting that doesn't count as much.
