Petition for more money for the girls

PaulM · Tennis legend

RE: Petition for more money for the girls

PaulM · Tennis legend

trying to get to 250.

239 now

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I realise that this is a very old thread and not specific to what I was posting but the title seemed relevant:

I was just noting that there are zillions of big tournaments going on in France at the moment (normal ones, not ITF) and although there is usually a small difference in prize money, here's the prize details from Hossegor (a big, staggered draw but up to pre-national level tournament):

Entry fee (men and women) : 18 euros

Prize money: Winners/ Finalist// SF/ QF/ R16 :

MEN - 1300 euros, 700, 350, 175, 75

WOMEN - 400 euros, 200, 100, 50, 0

The difference is just enormous !

It's true that there were a lot more male entries but the final table went up to about the same level (both the winners were ranked -30)

Is this just the market talking ? Is it right ?

Peter too · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
I realise that this is a very old thread and not specific to what I was posting but the title seemed relevant:

I was just noting that there are zillions of big tournaments going on in France at the moment (normal ones, not ITF) and although there is usually a small difference in prize money, here's the prize details from Hossegor (a big, staggered draw but up to pre-national level tournament):

Entry fee (men and women) : 18 euros

Prize money: Winners/ Finalist// SF/ QF/ R16 :

MEN - 1300 euros, 700, 350, 175, 75

WOMEN - 400 euros, 200, 100, 50, 0

The difference is just enormous !

It's true that there were a lot more male entries but the final table went up to about the same level (both the winners were ranked -30)

Is this just the market talking ? Is it right ?

If they don't increase pay for women at the lower levels soon there will be even less women playing tennis. We should be doing all we can to encourage more people to play sports, few girls can realistically aspire to the very high rates of pay at the top of tennis so they will look at pay at low and mid levels. What happened to the Olympic legacy?

Ratty · County player

I don't think I really agree.

The problem that most sports have, is that nobody is interested in watching "second division" matches. This means that no revenue is generated except at the top levels, and in tennis all Futures and Challenger tournaments are going to run at a loss.

Now obviously the governing bodies feel they have to have Futures and Challengers in order to get a steady stream of future elite level players through their apprenticeships. But equally obviously they want to pay the contestants - who generate no public interest, and no revenue - as little as possible.

And provided that the rewards at the top are high enough, tennis is a classic example - Acting is another - of the kind of profession described in the chapter in Freakonomics called "Why do Drug Dealers live with their Moms?" So provided that enough "contenders" are prepared to have a go at getting to the top, there's no incentive to increase the pay at the lower levels.

In fact the obvious thing to do is to increase the pay at the higher levels, which is of course exactly what has been happening.

Peter too · Tennis legend

I don't believe that increasing annual prize money for top players from $3M to $4M will make the slightest difference as regards incentive. The top players need enough to hire good trainers etc. but once the team has enough for a comfortable life style any extra does nothing to increase the desire to win. Andy didn't have an emotional response to losing and then winning at Wimbledon because of the differences in money but because of his intense desire to win and to please the supporters. However a lot of girls will give up any attempt at a professional tennis career very early because the sport is simply not financially viable without rich parents.