MurraysWorld  >  Tennis Talk  >  Wimbledon Pay issue
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Reply

Wimbledon Pay issue

arka
Quote

^ yes
IP Logged
TCK
Quote

Still doesn't change the fact that there's more demand for men's tennis.
IP Logged
arka
Quote

Its equally demanding if you see it in respect of women.
IP Logged
TCK
Quote

Its equally demanding if you see it in respect of women.
But you don't, you see it in respect of what the player can do.  Blame genetics here, but men can do more stuff on the court than women can.  And while it's more amazing to see a woman do a 120mph serve than it is a man, men break the general boundaries.
IP Logged
arka
Quote

Its which way you want to take it Chris. Its two sides of the same thing.

A big serve means less chances of a return and so the play is less exciting.
IP Logged
Quote

I don't agree that womens tennis is less exciting than mens. You get a lot more rallies in the womens game, it's less about serve.

I think tennis is one of the few sports where the womens version is given as much coverage as the mens.... they're considered equal by many, why should pay be any different? You can't say that about others sports.... I mean the average person on the street could probably name quite a few womens tennis players, but how many could name golfers, or ladies footballers?
IP Logged
arka
Quote

^ yes
IP Logged
Quote

i can't name any women from any sport but tennis... except for the drag racer Danicka Patrick
IP Logged
arka
Quote

I thougt Patrick was into proper racing and not drag.

I find women's hockey and women's track and field more interesting anyday.
IP Logged
Quote

maybe it was regular racing... i dont even know! all i know is that she races. i like womens ice hockey... but it only comes on during the olypics.
IP Logged
TCK
Quote

Its which way you want to take it Chris. Its two sides of the same thing.

A big serve means less chances of a return and so the play is less exciting.
Arguably, it makes a good return that more exciting.  Think back to Sampras-Agassi, noone could stop Sampras' serve consistantly apart from Agassi.  Games between the two were highly anticipated.

Truth is though, the serve has taken over both genders of tennis, including women's.  It's not something I'm all that fond of.  But these things tend to go in cycles.

Anyway, when I talk about what a player can do I don't just mean in relation to the serve, though the serve is pretty much the obvious example.

I don't agree that womens tennis is less exciting than mens. You get a lot more rallies in the womens game, it's less about serve.

I think tennis is one of the few sports where the womens version is given as much coverage as the mens.... they're considered equal by many, why should pay be any different? You can't say that about others sports.... I mean the average person on the street could probably name quite a few womens tennis players, but how many could name golfers, or ladies footballers?
Question is, could they name you the World #1 Women's player?  Most would say Sharapova.  Ask the same for the Men's, and they'd probably say Federer.
IP Logged
Quote

unless of course you follow women's tennis. i myself am not at all a strict follower of it and i dont even know. all i know is that kim clijsters was number one after the usopen and before her was davenport.
IP Logged
Quote

Surely they can't have equal pay as men play best of 5 sets and women only play best of 3. confused
IP Logged
arka
Quote


Question is, could they name you the World #1 Women's player?  Most would say Sharapova.  Ask the same for the Men's, and they'd probably say Federer.

Again two sides of the same coin, Chris.
Its which way you want to take it. More competition for the top spot means more excitement.
IP Logged
Quote

right... the top spot has switched quite a bit recently on the women's side.
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Reply