Wimbledon argument...

Wimbledon argument...

Author
Discussion

calibrax

Original Poster:

4,788 posts

210 months

Tuesday 30th June 2015
quotequote all
My aunt and myself have polar opposite views on many, many things, and we are both EXTREMELY stubborn.

We recently had a "discussion" on a post I put on Facebook about Wimbledon and equality. I'd be interested to know other people's opinions on this matter! Here's the discussion we had (my comments in blue, hers in red) :









toohangry

416 posts

108 months

Tuesday 30th June 2015
quotequote all
Thanks for sharing.

JNW1

7,711 posts

193 months

Tuesday 30th June 2015
quotequote all
A lot of people wouldn't walk two strides to watch a women's match and those that do need to take some ear plugs to protect themselves from the shrieking. A complete joke that they're paid the same as the men IMO but at the same time you have to give credit to those that campaigned for equal prize money; quite an achievement to convince the powers that be that it was right, proper and justified when it's clearly none of those things. Still, the genie's out of the bottle and I doubt anyone will have the stomach for a fight to try to push it back in!

Babw

886 posts

145 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
Why shouldn't it be equal prize money? The women have the beat the best in the world and do what it takes on/off the court to achieve that hence they deserve just as much prize money as the money who do the same.

It's also frankly stupid when people don't watch womens tennis because apparently it's a walk in the park/they hit the ball too soft etc I think you've got to play some tennis and be aware of the level these women play at to understand how hard it is for a mere mortal to even contemplate playing at their level even though it might be quite a few notches below where the men play.

There's plenty of rivalry, tactics, progression and general know how within the game which makes keeping tabs on the season worth it.

calibrax

Original Poster:

4,788 posts

210 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
Babw said:
Why shouldn't it be equal prize money?
The point is not that the prize money shouldn't be equal - it should be.

But when they hold it up as a victory for equality when it clearly is not (as the men have to play more games), then it's hypocritical. Sure, let's have equal pay. But it should be on equal terms - i.e. men should play the same number of sets as the women.

Babw

886 posts

145 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
calibrax said:
The point is not that the prize money shouldn't be equal - it should be.

But when they hold it up as a victory for equality when it clearly is not (as the men have to play more games), then it's hypocritical. Sure, let's have equal pay. But it should be on equal terms - i.e. men should play the same number of sets as the women.
I'm sure some women would prefer to play best of five as their increased durability/fitness would win them some matches where they might lose over best of 3.

Unfortunately it's not so much about equality but biology, taking into account the top levels of conditioning and training for both sexes; the men will come out fitter/stronger/faster majority of the time. The extra 2 sets might take the focus away from the quality of tennis and make it more a game of attrition. This works in the mens game as they have a higher threshold of hitting as their baseline so even taking into account fatigue the hitting is still big/accurate enough to make it entertaining with women there's a chance as fifth set fatigue kicks in the tennis takes a dive.

I personally would like to see women over 5 sets at least for a trial period as I feel it might bring some consistency to the season which other may like/dislike.





P1ato

340 posts

127 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
The market is prepared to pay several x higher prices for men's matches (look on Viagogo).

Some of the premium is no doubt due to the fact the top of the men's game has been exceptional since the "big four" established themselves, and you're very likely to see some of them in the semis and finals of grand slams.

Having said that, watching the Wimbledon qualifiers at close quarters makes you realise how talented even the women outside the top 100 are. I doubt I'd win many games of any of them...

ATG

20,485 posts

271 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
You're wrong about either of the Williams sisters being stronger than any of the male competitors at Wimbledon. The physical difference between elite male and female athletes is substantial.

ATG

20,485 posts

271 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
I've just read rather more of the exchange. Bad luck, you're aunt sounds like a rather sensible woman hehe ... stop digging.

JNW1

7,711 posts

193 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
Babw said:
Why shouldn't it be equal prize money? The women have the beat the best in the world and do what it takes on/off the court to achieve that hence they deserve just as much prize money as the money who do the same.

It's also frankly stupid when people don't watch womens tennis because apparently it's a walk in the park/they hit the ball too soft etc I think you've got to play some tennis and be aware of the level these women play at to understand how hard it is for a mere mortal to even contemplate playing at their level even though it might be quite a few notches below where the men play.

There's plenty of rivalry, tactics, progression and general know how within the game which makes keeping tabs on the season worth it.
I think to some extent you've answered your own question when you concede that the women play at a level which is quite a few notches below the men! That's reflected in the sort of audiences and indeed sponsorship they can command so if the reality is that they bring rather less to the party why should they be paid the same? I agree completely that the standard of professional women's tennis is very high compared to what a County never mind a good club player can produce and I don't dispute that women professionals work extremely hard to achieve the level they do. However, by your own admission that level is way below the men and for that reason I think equal prize money isn't appropriate.

In terms of why I often tend to avoid watching, it isn't because I don't think they hit the ball well, it's because the shrieking with some of them (Sharapova, Azarenka and even to some extent Serena) is truly awful and for me is borderline unsporting at times. Yes I know some of the men grunt (and I've never really liked that either) but decibels is the one area where the women are definitely at a higher level than the men!

VolvoT5

4,155 posts

173 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
I think they should have equal prize money in general. I'm sure they would be happy to play best of 5 sets but lets be honest the tournaments don't want it - it is hard enough to schedule a GS event as it is. In any case for most of the year the men play best of 3 as well. There is even a case for reducing the men GS event to best of 3 as the matches can often be too long and too many players are getting injury and burn out. The Olympics and end of year events are best of 3 and just as exciting; maybe more so as there is less room for error and more pressure.

Nobody complains that female athletics is not to the same standard/speed as the men's event, people just appreciate it for what it is. So I don't really buy that argument either.

As for the grunting - well many of the men are just as loud and annoying as the women! Nadal, Ferrer and Murray spring to mind... I'm sure there are loads of others too......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH5r7tlPkiQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsTXv9bBSms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5irxEyYCKfo


VolvoT5

4,155 posts

173 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
ATG said:
You're wrong about either of the Williams sisters being stronger than any of the male competitors at Wimbledon. The physical difference between elite male and female athletes is substantial.
^This. And lumping them together as one unit isn't a great idea either. It is only Serena that is built like the hulk and acts like she is on roids.

Venus looks relatively average (in terms of muscles/strength) for a woman of her height and she doesn't bulldozer opponents in the same way. Plus there are a number of other women around the 6ft mark who are of similar build.... but I can't think of one who is as 'built' as Serena.

Realistically a guy from the challenger tour would easily beat any of the women. Generally the average male player rolls his arm over and serve at 120 mph with ease... where as the very best women servers are maxing out at 120 on a hot day with the following wind.



Edited by VolvoT5 on Wednesday 1st July 22:00

MiniMan64

16,863 posts

189 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
There have been a few male vs female tennis matches, might have even involved the Williams sisters, but they were absolutely hit off the court.

Substitute your sport, women get seriously involved in F1 but have to complete 10% of the laps? Fair?

0000

13,812 posts

190 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
Babw said:
Why shouldn't it be equal prize money? The women have the beat the best in the world...
Sort of, once you exclude a few billion people.

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

253 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
MiniMan64 said:
There have been a few male vs female tennis matches, might have even involved the Williams sisters, but they were absolutely hit off the court.
Yep a guy who had slipped to I think 120th in the rankings heard Serena mouthing off and took them on, slaughtered them. Women's tennis is in no way comparable to mens in the same way Women's football isnt.


But what I dont understand is why they have best of 3 sets. Women can be just as fit as men, every other sport seems to have them playing the same time, just at a lower pace. Football, marathons, Olympics etc.

ikarl

3,730 posts

198 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
RobDickinson said:
MiniMan64 said:
There have been a few male vs female tennis matches, might have even involved the Williams sisters, but they were absolutely hit off the court.
Yep a guy who had slipped to I think 120th in the rankings heard Serena mouthing off and took them on, slaughtered them. Women's tennis is in no way comparable to mens in the same way Women's football isnt.


But what I dont understand is why they have best of 3 sets. Women can be just as fit as men, every other sport seems to have them playing the same time, just at a lower pace. Football, marathons, Olympics etc.
Karsten Braasch was ranked 203rd at the time....played a round of golf in the morning, couple of shandies and a few smokes then beat them one after the other 6-1 then 6-2

Think he dropped to c.300 the following week

JNW1

7,711 posts

193 months

Wednesday 1st July 2015
quotequote all
VolvoT5 said:
Realistically a guy from the challenger tour would easily beat any of the women. Generally the average male player rolls his arm over and serve at 120 mph with ease... where as the very best women servers are maxing out at 120 on a hot day with the following wind.

Edited by VolvoT5 on Wednesday 1st July 22:00
So if you're accepting there's a huge gulf in the standard between the mens and womens games why do you think they should be paid the same? A pub chef probably tries as hard as Marco Pierre White but his food isn't as good and hence his product can't command the same price (and he isn't paid as much!). Clumsy analogy I know but it's getting late... smile

VolvoT5

4,155 posts

173 months

Thursday 2nd July 2015
quotequote all
JNW1 said:
So if you're accepting there's a huge gulf in the standard between the mens and womens games why do you think they should be paid the same?
The 'gulf' is mainly about physical ability and not talent, I think it is simply incorrect to compare directly in that way. Take Murray ranked 3rd, he is 6ft 3 and about 85kg with maybe 10% body fat. The 3rd ranked female player is 5ft 6, 60kg and being a woman probably 18% body fat. Of course the woman isn't going to be able to run as fast or hit the ball as hard as the male. However that doesn't mean she isn't as dedicated with her diet, training, practice, etc. It doesn't mean the female is less talented or somehow lesser person.

Your analogy with a pub chef is just ridiculous.

The prize money gap just highlights the massive amount of sexism that still goes on in the tennis world in general. The comments John Inverdale made last year really highlight that. Women's sport in general seems to suffer this negative cycle of lack of respect and lack of media coverage which leads to less interest and people such as yourself to point the finger and say this is proof they are 'worth less'. I just don't agree and I think if they were treated with a bit more respect and given equality in coverage they would pull in just as much money.... not that money should be the yardstick anyway.

For example, love or hate her Serena Williams as the no.1 player does a huge amount of the game and is a global megastar. IMO she is every bit the equal to Novak Djokovic in that regard. I can't see why she would get paid less for winning the same tournament.

Babw

886 posts

145 months

Thursday 2nd July 2015
quotequote all
I think what some don't seem to be grasping is that their prize money paid by Wimbledon is not an appearance fee/salary but a reward for achievement i.e for beating the person across the net.

For reasons beyond anyones control men are physically superior to women at tennis so a joint entry isn't going to happen. Why shouldn't the reward for the winner of the womens final who has achieved the same goal as the mens finalist i.e beat the next best player at this tournament in their category receive less money just because they don't have a dick/testosterone?

I think it's quite a simple concept but apparently not for some.

Dr Murdoch

3,427 posts

134 months

Thursday 2nd July 2015
quotequote all
I'm with the OP i think

Football, both play 90mins?
Hockey, the same?
Rugby?
Marathons?
Rowing?

In fact is Tennis the only discipline that has different standards? I doubt it but there appears to be many that have the same set of rules for both sexes.

And, these are professional, uber fit ladies, there is no reason why they can't do five sets.

As I said, they can run marathons all right...

They should get the same wedge, they should play the same number of sets.