Tennis
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
This VT makes me want to vomit
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 149
|
By:
thinly veiled "i am a sexist" fred
|
|
By:
Well, I am.
|
|
By:
Same sport, 2 separate events (not interchangeable), played over a different number of sets.
Of course they should get equal pay... |
|
By:
How does the BBC do an interview like this and not question that Sara Errani got paid the same amount of money as Novak Djokovic at the French Open?
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
the womens quarter finals at the french open all went longer than than the mens
should the qf losers in the mens get paid less  |
|
By:
It shows peoples priorities anyway, the male players seem to keep bringing it up yet there is a more concerning issue regarding prize money on the tour regarding futures and challengers
|
|
By:
"the womens quarter finals at the french open all went longer than than the mens
should the qf losers in the mens get paid less" Yeah, yeah. Let's calculate how long the men are on the court on average and how long the women are... More importantly, who brings in the punters? Federer and Nadal and a few other men. That's who. |
|
By:
well why do you need to feel the reason to mention Errani (because it was a short match)
|
|
By:
the clever thing to do is change the argument from the negativity concerning wanting more money to the more positive message of promoting equal conditions. If the ATP said that they promoted equality at all levels and , therefore, they would only play 3 sets, then that would be a very interesting argument. The WTA would have to support them as it would be another move towards equality but the GS orginasers would never accept it: interesting...
|
|
By:
the women were paid less when the WTA was more popular and ATP was in a mug era pre-Fed
 |
|
By:
|
|
By:
"well why do you need to feel the reason to mention Errani (because it was a short match)"
Yes. It's absurd that women who will never play more than 3 sets and could even be off in an hour get paid that compared to a man who was always likely to be in a 5 set 4 hour marathon. |
|
By:
Equality. The most dangerous idea of the 20th century.
|
|
By:
the women have said countless times that they would play 5 sets
slams would have to last 3 weeks though I'd be happy with a 1R-4R being BO3 both sides then QF-F being bo5. |
|
By:
you are paid for winning matches, not how long you are on court
a tennis match doesn't last a specific amount of time hth |
|
By:
can you imagine in athletics where the men run 10,000 meters and the ladies run 8,000? or having a shorter marathon for the ladies? it is utterly bonkers and the men should stand up for themselves rather than be such PC wooses!
|
|
By:
if we're gonna pay by popularity btw, let's just give Maria, Serena, Fed, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray 95% of the cash and **** everyone else
 |
|
By:
|
|
By:
It's positive discrimination which at best has worthy intent and at worst is very patronizing.
For a woman player to accept the same amount for winning Wimbers as a bloke and not be embarrassed shocks me. Lower standard, shorter matches. It's not a sexist view, just a fact. Patb - they could ask the women to play 5 sets and have Grand Slams played over 3 weeks. The hosts would love it as it would bring in more dosh. Would the women accept it? |
|
By:
ATP just lucky they are in a GOAT era, but when the big 4 are gone who is gonna be there to carry it on
|
|
By:
Flip City trousered a handsome 400k for her lame SF exit today
|
|
By:
Apologies aaronh, posts crossed. So they would accept it? Interesting.
Still not the same standard though  |
|
By:
if the ladies wanted equality, then their right to play matches of equal length to the men would be as big an issue as equal pay. I dont see the WTA making a massive issue and I have never heard one WTA player complaining at a press conference or similar that they demand equality of conditions. It is clearly not that important, the posturing for equality was all about cash and nothing else
|
|
By:
are you suggesting they should demand to play 5 sets
|
|
By:
tbh, mens or womens tennis.
does anyone other than tennis hardcore fans really want to or have the time to watch 5 sets over 4 and a half hours fully? |
|
By:
Yeah, if they want to be thought of as equal. And even then, they shouldn't get as much as the men.
|
|
By:
come to think of it, are there any other racket sports out there where the ladies play a shorter game than the men?
|
|
By:
it's in the slams hands if they want to take them up on that offer
|
|
By:
As it is the women have an opportunity to make more money as they can play in the doubles as well. I think they should make the women play 5 set matches and scrap the rest day on middle sunday(which is absurd) which will make up the extra time you need in the schedule. That way we get to see more tennis especially on the second tuesday, thursday and saturday
|
|
By:
And even then, they shouldn't get as much as the men.
why is that did anyone see C1 about 20% full for Janowicz vs Kubot  |
|
By:
 the fact that they play 5 sets mens doubles is stupid and needs to be changed at Wimbledon anyway |
|
By:
MAKE WOMEN play best of 5 in GS
There's no such a thing as "fair" thing. Pure invention by losers. FAIR to who? Do you pay them? I don't. If someone wants to throw the money away, I'd let them do it. As long as it's not my money! Women play on lower level than men do, for sure. That's because the nature of the sport. It has nothing to do with payment. What I suggest is: MAKE WOMEN play best of 5 in GS. Period. |
|
By:
besides the whole womens can play doubles argument too isn't as relevant as some make it out. Serena plays dubs occasionally, Errani, Vinci and Petrova the only ones who are regular doubles players from what I remember in top 20
|
|
By:
"why is that"
Because they're just piggy backing on the interest Federer and Nadal and other men have brought to the game |
|
By:
|