Watson was especially perplexed at the failure to get more talented girls into the game: Its the best sport for female athletes. Nine of the top 10 highest paid women athletes in the world are in tennis on Forbes. I think we do have to get that message across.

Something that amazes me as well. It's pretty much the only sport (that's not totally niche) where top end women can not only be as rich as the men, but also just as famous. If you asked 10 casual sports fans, who were by no means tennis experts, to name '10 active tennis players', then most would include women in their list, one in particular, and that just wouldn't happen in football, cricket, rugby, even golf, which is probably most similar to tennis in terms of it's calendar, majors, ranking system etc.

The Shenzhen Finals last year paid more than the London ATP equivalent, and there is such a lucrative platform available to them, particularly with the mixed slam events, and we have arguably the most famous tennis tournament in the world in our home country, an event that can lay the foundations to superstardom. People will say its less riskier to instead get involved in a team sport like football with perhaps a friendlier, less cut throat atmosphere, more of your expenses paid, and a guaranteed income etc. but if you're a really talented (female) athlete from a young age, and confident in your own ability, then tennis is by far the most lucrative option if you do go on to 'make it'.

I know it's easy for me to say, and there'll be tennis parents on here and others more involved in tennis, who know the ins and outs, who'll likely have a different opinion, but from the outside looking in, with real female trailblazers and pioneers in the sport, Wimbledon (with it's dedicated BBC coverage), one of the sports bigger governing bodies, the top end obscene finances, it really does baffle me how little players, particularly women, we actually produce.

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Watson was especially perplexed at the failure to get more talented girls into the game: Its the best sport for female athletes. Nine of the top 10 highest paid women athletes in the world are in tennis on Forbes. I think we do have to get that message across.

Something that amazes me as well. It's pretty much the only sport (that's not totally niche) where top end women can not only be as rich as the men, but also just as famous. If you asked 10 casual sports fans, who were by no means tennis experts, to name '10 active tennis players', then most would include women in their list, one in particular, and that just wouldn't happen in football, cricket, rugby, even golf, which is probably most similar to tennis in terms of it's calendar, majors, ranking system etc.

The Shenzhen Finals last year paid more than the London ATP equivalent, and there is such a lucrative platform available to them, particularly with the mixed slam events, and we have arguably the most famous tennis tournament in the world in our home country, an event that can lay the foundations to superstardom. People will say its less riskier to instead get involved in a team sport like football with perhaps a friendlier, less cut throat atmosphere, more of your expenses paid, and a guaranteed income etc. but if you're a really talented (female) athlete from a young age, and confident in your own ability, then tennis is by far the most lucrative option if you do go on to 'make it'.

I know it's easy for me to say, and there'll be tennis parents on here and others more involved in tennis, who know the ins and outs, who'll likely have a different opinion, but from the outside looking in, with real female trailblazers and pioneers in the sport, Wimbledon (with it's dedicated BBC coverage), one of the sports bigger governing bodies, the top end obscene finances, it really does baffle me how little players, particularly women, we actually produce.

---

 It's a pretty tiny number at the top though, the reality for most pros is a struggle to break even on the ITF circuit.

dodrade wrote:

---

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Watson was especially perplexed at the failure to get more talented girls into the game: Its the best sport for female athletes. Nine of the top 10 highest paid women athletes in the world are in tennis on Forbes. I think we do have to get that message across.

Something that amazes me as well. It's pretty much the only sport (that's not totally niche) where top end women can not only be as rich as the men, but also just as famous. If you asked 10 casual sports fans, who were by no means tennis experts, to name '10 active tennis players', then most would include women in their list, one in particular, and that just wouldn't happen in football, cricket, rugby, even golf, which is probably most similar to tennis in terms of it's calendar, majors, ranking system etc.

The Shenzhen Finals last year paid more than the London ATP equivalent, and there is such a lucrative platform available to them, particularly with the mixed slam events, and we have arguably the most famous tennis tournament in the world in our home country, an event that can lay the foundations to superstardom. People will say its less riskier to instead get involved in a team sport like football with perhaps a friendlier, less cut throat atmosphere, more of your expenses paid, and a guaranteed income etc. but if you're a really talented (female) athlete from a young age, and confident in your own ability, then tennis is by far the most lucrative option if you do go on to 'make it'.

I know it's easy for me to say, and there'll be tennis parents on here and others more involved in tennis, who know the ins and outs, who'll likely have a different opinion, but from the outside looking in, with real female trailblazers and pioneers in the sport, Wimbledon (with it's dedicated BBC coverage), one of the sports bigger governing bodies, the top end obscene finances, it really does baffle me how little players, particularly women, we actually produce.

---

 It's a pretty tiny number at the top though, the reality for most pros is a struggle to break even on the ITF circuit.

---

Yeah, I know, the clue is in the phrase, but it's at least something to aspire to. It's been discussed to death on various different threads on here with people pointing to more realistic sporting alternatives for British girls etc. but even if you were top 75-100 (which is obviously still really good and hard to achieve) you'd get entry into every slam, so that would be circa £200k just like that, and more if you got, and took advantage of, a decent draw, entry into most WTA intl events, and quals for the bigger WTA events. Plus there'd be a decent chance to become a relative household name and thus possible sponsorship/endorsement opportunities.

We've obviously been a bit unlucky with injuries with a few of our better younger players, particularly Boulter who did crack the top 100, but as it stands, we literally have 2 players, one 29, the other 28 years old, inside the top 150. Fair play to other countries who may have a great system, but it really does amaze me how we have so few top 100 players considering all the above factors, even if it has been like that for years.

I wouldn't choose tennis if I was a talented young lad for a lot of the reasons you mention, but the difference between men's and women's tennis at the top 100/200 level financially compared to the difference between men and women's top end football is still atronomical, even if women's football has made some strides recently. The men and women getting the same prize money at the primary tennis events is rare, and an absolutely huge incentive for women, and simply can't be underestimated. The 80odd best female tennis player in the world will be making a comparable amount to the 80th best male (even if ATP events generally pay a bit more), so I'd expect more athletically promising girls to be tempted by that prospect straight away.

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/arsenal-fc-pay-cut-women-men-a4420756.html

Chelsea in February made Sam Kerr the best-paid player in the WSL on a reported £1million yearly salary, but the average women's professional player is thought to earn less than £35,000-a-year.

Harriet has never been ranked higher than 120 in the world, but made £111k for beating a Lucky Loser and a qualifier at Wimbledon last year, and then over £70k for reaching the AO R2 this year, even Emma made over £15k for turning up at for that one week at SGH.

Now obviously Harriet is currently the 3rd best female player in the country, nor are those slam results typical (at all) for someone of her ranking, and there'll be a lot more women earning a much safer 35k annually from football than someone among the current best 10-15 female tennis players in the country (still an impressive acheivement), circa 400, scrapping on the W15 and W25 scene, looking for any slight opportunity and good fortune (like those summer exhos), but if you were a really promising young female athlete, with confidence and ambition, then I'd still say tennis would be a good option to consider. 

I don't know, maybe I am coming from a more idealistic (and biased) perspective, and if I was actually in that position, I might be more tempted to play it safer, but I absolutely do see where Heather is coming from. 

emmsie69 wrote:

---

indiana wrote:

---

PaulM wrote:

---

For those without access to the Telegraph, the Mail also cover her comments:

www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-8786711/Heather-Watson-slams-LTA-rapid-Brexit-French-Open.html

---

 

Well said Heather re the focus on a select group of players from a young age and how later developing hard working non chosen ones can miss out. Though it is something that many have said on this forum and elsewhere for a long time and little changes - and money is thrown at little Jonny and Elsie who have been playing since 4 yo. 

Beyond say Jack Draper and Emma Radacanu, and they are still developing, as even more so is Matilda Mutavdzic, there seem very few potential top 100 players on the horizon. We must hope additionally that such as the bit older Jay Clarke, Katie Boulter and Fran Jones can stay fit and push on but it is such a small pool. The men's side younger than Kyle and Cam ( both now 25 yo ) looks especially dire. The women's side more stands up with a pool of decent still relatively young players but as to Slam level we continue to not have more than 2 or 3 top 100 women at a time. 

---

 You have a short memory, Arthur Fery and to a lesser extent Anton matusevich both under 20.  I also think there are a lot more juniors going off the the US and in some cases to top Universities where they use their tennis as a platform to other things which doesn't help our tennis stats but on a personal level is a great move IMO.

---

 Not sure people should write off Paul Jubb just yet although hes a year or three older.

Even in the US tennis is more appealing for women than men. The US is awash with women in the top 100 and is due in no part to the Williams sisters success .In the US the men can make far more money in team sports such as baseball,US football and basketball,