Why should women tennis players get paid the same as men?

[Reedybookworm]

It annoys me that women are demanding more money at Wimbledon - they don't play as many sets. Maybe if they played on equal standing versus men as well as other women they should then.

I'm not sure I really care sufficiently buffy :)
They are all amazing athletes.
They all train.
They all work hard.
But the fact remains that the men's game is 2 sets longer.
I don't know how runners get paid but I assume the farther you run the more prize money you win?
But...as I say...dont really care.

As the prize money has been the same since 2007, and only OP seems to think they are calling to be paid more than men, I think Wimbledon prize money isn't a big issue at the moment.

How about the gender pay gap in, say, football instead?

I find it really hard to feel sorry for all these poor multi millionaire tennis players tbh.
As Stella says...England's ladies team won the worlds cup did they not?
Are they being paid £500,000 per week?

No Badvoc that isn't the case. at. all. Hence the ludicrousness of the argument. It is prize money. Money for winning. Why should one person who wins get less than another?

And as NiceTabard carefully explained up thread, why should women be prevented from playing the same length of matches as men and therefore be paid less? Doesn't that sound like discrimination? Not allowed the same opportunity and being penalised for not having that opportunity too. Delightful.

And we aren't asking you to feel sorry for them They get the same prize money.

You are interested in such a range of topics OP. Threads on extended breast feeding and equal pay for women. Whatever next? I wait with baited breath.

Meh.
I can barely contain my indifference.

Also if women are getting such a 'good deal' why aren't the men campaigning to change to 3 sets so they can supposedly get paid more for less work? Because they know where the prestige and status lie. They are quite happy for that to be denied to women.

Are you suggesting the OP may have an agenda WitchOfEndor?

scallops you mean someone posting in FWR might have an agenda?

Sorry, I appear to have been misinformed about pay at Wimbledon. But, if women really want equal rights, equal pay, and yes I am a woman, then we should be prepared to do the same amount of work or training etc as the men, that way no one can say we do not deserve it as we are equal. Why not have mixed sex competitions in sport? If a woman wants to play rugby with men, then good on her - I know many a man that looks back at school days and the odd occasions they played against girls at hockey, football, netball and rugby they say that the girls were scary, they really meant it and it was not an easy match. (No finger pointing just making the point). We are not the weaker sex, in some ways we are the stronger, I don't want to be treated differently because I am a woman I want to make what I do because I am good at it! Also i am Very new to mums net joined yesterday so terribly sorry to the ranters that I have obviously annoyed with my repetitive year after year comments! There are also some abbreviations I have no idea what they mean.

Just read some more - no hidden agenda because why would I? Cannot answer football question as I don't like football and I think that they are vastly over payed anyway and it has more to do with fat at money making than the sport. Rugby and cricketers don't get paid the same as footballers as its all to do with bums on seats etc etc.

Oops no was not saying they don't work as hard to train, just back when I thought they played less but wanted more to play less sets.... :/

It's a commercial tournament, if the women's games sell out and attract equal viewing figures as the men's games then that justifies equal money. Who cares about the number of sets?

In the days of Sampras and Lendl banging the serve down the men's game was unwatchable so until the recent rise of Murray I've mostly watched women's games and I don't think I've been alone, there weren't many calls to cut the men's prizes at the time despite the awful spectacle served up.

I only ever watch Wimbledon though.

An awful lot of the men's matches don't last to five sets. Do you want their pay docked? With the length of rallies and tie breaks a lot of the time a women's three set match lasts as long as the men's.

This is all so stupid.

That's a point actually. In the men's singles semi-finals yesterday Djocovic won his match in five sets, Murray in four. Djocovic is clearly therefore the superior entertainer and should receive a higher prize. That's right, isn't it?

You could make an argument that in banning women from playing 5 sets you are discriminating against them. Look at the number of 5 set matches played this Wimbledon. In fact look only at yesterday's first semi and Murray's quarter final - the two finalists tomorrow have both had to come through 5 setters in the draw to get there. Many Wimbledon finalists have had to come through 5 setters in the past to reach the final (and to win the final - think e.g. Nadal/Federer's final in 2008, one of the greatest of all time).

For women they have no chance to come back from a two set deficit. That is discriminating again them.

There is also the argument that sports where endurance (as opposed to explosive power) becomes a factor women excel - think long distance swimming, ironman, triathlon etc.

All this argues in favour of best of five sets for women. It's the stubborn people in charge who aren't letting it happen.

Having said that I think Billie-Jean King has a point when she said that reducing the men's to best of three might keep older players in the game longer. Though given that it is only the slams that have 5 sets the difference could be marginal.

Most tennis tournaments (non GS) are single sex and the male tournaments generally pay out more than the womens.

The world's top-ranked male tennis player, Djokovic, has played 47 single matches so far this year.

2 sets = 40% (19 matches)
3 sets = 45% (21 matches)
4 sets = 9% (4 matches)
5 sets = 6% (3 matches)

He has only had to play more than 3 sets in 7 matches. Should he have received less money because he has not played "enough" sets?

Djokovic won the 2013 Dubai Tennis Championship by winning five 2-set matches. He played fewer sets than Kvitova who won the women's event. Kvitova played the same number of matches, but she needed a third set to win the final. I believe they received equal prize money. Was that fair?

"Sorry, I appear to have been misinformed about pay at Wimbledon. But, if women really want equal rights, equal pay, and yes I am a woman, then we should be prepared to do the same amount of work or training etc as the men, that way no one can say we do not deserve it as we are equal."

-FFS how many times do we have to point out that the WTA have offered to play 5 sets but it was refused due to scheduling issues? It would be better for the women to have 5 sets especially in the final because the matches could turn around more. So yes they want to play 5 sets - but they're not allowed - it's NOT THEIR FAULT.

-Women tennis players train just as hard as the men, dedicate their whole fucking lives to it , but yes men have the good fortune to be born with superior muscle strength - NOT THEIR FAULT

• and WHY oh fucking WHY the ONE time that women get a good deal and are treated with some respect do we get people coming down on them? What about male football stars who get shitloads while the women players have to fight for funding, have to get a bloody petition to get the same seats on the flight home? What about women's football being banned in the 30s because it was too popular? And men's football benefitting from their absence whilst women spend decades trying to get back in the game? WHAT ABOUT THAT?

What the fuck do you want? A random draw so that all the women go out in the first round? Would that make you happy? Think about girls who look up to the tennis players and thinking "hey I could be her!"- Is that what you want? To pat them on the head and say "Well you'll never make it past the first round and you'll never be as good as a boy!" Is that seriously what you want? To rub their inferiority in? To shit on their dreams?!

It's more than prize money - it's about symbolism - it's about telling women & girls that they should be the best in their field, in their group, without this constant assault on their confidence by telling them they can never be as good....

They deserve the equal pay for just having to put up with this shit all the time. Jesus...