Can't Be Fair?

[Sqad]

Tennis:

After watching a marathon game between Anderson v Isner and superb match between Djokovic v Nadal and then the damp squid of a two straight set win in the women's final, how can the women justify equal prize money with men?

[goodgoalie]

What, you think it's 'just as impressive' for Kerber to have beaten Williams 6 - 3 6 - 3 yesterday, as whatever happens in today's Men's Final?

[pixie374]

It's just entertainment. Sportspeople, comedians, musicians.... none of them get paid by "how hard they work". Why would this be different?
Even if they were... as I said before, the reason women play 3 sets and against each other is because they are not physically as strong. If they play 5 sets- they will be working much harder than men for the same pay. Which is something we have been trying(and failing) to stop.

[THECORBYLOON]

If the score is 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 to-day, both finals will have had eighteen games each.

[ichkeria]

It’s nothing to do with how impressive it is and never has been.
One of today’s finalists might withdraw but money will still be given out because one is champion and one is runner up

[New Judge]

“But what if next year it's the other way round Sqad ? Say three straight sets for the men but two tie-break sets for the women followed by a 24-game final set ? Swings and Roundabouts I feel.”

There are no swings, only roundabouts and the likelihood of such an event is extremely small. As I said earlier, to rely on the latter rounds of the tournament is extremely unwise for those supporting equal pay. Looking at the last five finals (2013 to 2017) the figures are these:

2017 Men (Federer vs Cilic) 26 games, 101 minutes
2017 Women (Mugurusa vs V. Williams) 18 games, 76 minutes

2016 Men (Murray vs Raonic) 36 games, 167 minutes
2016 Women (S. Williams vs Kerber) 21 games, 87 minutes

2015 Men (Djokovic vs Federer) 45 games, 176 minutes
2015 Women (S. Williams vs Mugurusa) 20 games. 83 minutes

2014 Men (Djokovic vs Federer) 58 games, 236 minutes
2014 Women (Kvitova vs Bouchard) 15 games, 55 minutes

2013 Men (Murray vs Djokovic) 32 games, 189 minutes
2013 Women (Bartoli vs Lisicki) 17 games, 81 minutes

So, with the exception of last year, where the Men’s final was unusually short, the women’s finals seem to last about half the time of the Men’s (and in 2014 lasted less than a quarter). I could go back further but there’s little point because I can tell you that the numbers will be similar. In 2017 the average duration of the Men’s matches was 135 minutes (and this included ten retirements, with some of those lasting less than 15 minutes). The average duration of the women’s matches (with just two retirements) was 93 minutes.

“I think that they probably won this equal pay claim on entertainment value,…”

Of course highly subjective but anybody more entertained by the yesterdays’ ladies’ final than either of the men’s semi-finals is obviously there for the “Knicker” value. :-)

“At Wimbledon, the courts will be sold out whoever is playing…”

At Wimbledon the vast majority of the tickets sold to the public are sold through the ballot. People gaining tickets do not know what day they will secure or what matches are on. And of course every day there is a mix of Men’s and Women’s matches on each court. A test would be to organise a Men's Wimbledon and then a separate Women's Wimbledon. They could then see how many bums on seats they get for each event and how much the TV companies are willing to pay for each,

Equal pay for equal work is obviously a foundation of a civilised society. However equal pay for what is blatantly unequal work is a symptom of a society that has somehow been manipulated by dark forces. By any sensible objective measure (and I have them all to hand) the Ladies contribute, at best, one third of the entertainment at Wimbledon. As I said yesterday, if they contributed two thirds but only received half the prize money they would (quite rightly) create merry hell. The gentlemen should consider doing likewise.

[New Judge]

"If the score is 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 to-day,..."

I'm not a gambling man, Corby, but I'm prepared to wager that it does not finish in three doughnuts. Even if it did, looking at my figures (which go back to 2001) such an anomaly would make virtually no impression on the overall measures.

[Sqad]

Corbyloon.....the woman'e final could have a result 6-0 6-0 6-0.

I think you mean 6-0 0-6 6-0.......don't you? OR at least one of the sets 0-6.

NJ...interesting statistics which tend to support my feelings on the subject.

[murraymints]

I kind of agree that men should be 3 sets..but selfishly enjoy the longer matches.. don't watch many women's games
..can't stand the noise...

[Butterbun]

The ladies final was very disappointing. A poor performance from Serena, maybe a match too far. Both semi finals were good.

[Metaphysicalus]

The money generated by Wimbledon is from broadcast and sponsorship, etc. Women players equally bring huge amounts of it in, just as much as the men players do.

[THECORBYLOON]

SQAD since the women's final was yesterday and it's best of three, it wouldn't be 6-0, 6-0, 6-0. The women's final was won 6-3, 6-3 meaning eighteen games were played. The score got the men could also total eighteen games to-day.

[Canary42]

/// There are no swings, only roundabouts and the likelihood of such an event is extremely small. ///

Sorry NJ, I hadn't read your stats when I made that remark - but my example was deliberately extreme just to make the point, and see what Sqad's reaction would be. Your stats have let him off the hook rather ;-)

[Sqad]

Corbyloon.......my point is.....that you said:
"If the score is 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 to-day"

and I replied that couldn't be a female score and pointed out that one of the games had to be 0-6.

I appreciate that whatever, 18 games were played.

Meta:
"Women players equally bring huge amounts of it in, just as much as the men players do."

I am not sure that you are correct.

[Sqad]

Meta:

http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/29/yes-tennis-earnings-majors-biased-men/

[THECORBYLOON]

NJ what percentage of Grand Slam matches are won in three sets for men and women?

[10ClarionSt]

Womens' sport is a joke. The England ladies football team would be well beaten by any decent Saturday/Sunday league team, as would the ladies cricket team. Womens' tennis is well below the standard of the mens' game. The PC brigade and the BBC promote equality just for the sake of it, but there is no other justification for it.

[Old_Geezer]

If it's right at Wimbledon then it's right at other Grand Slam tournaments. If it's wrong at Wimbledon then it's wrong at other Grand Slam tournaments. What the others are doing now has no relevance to whether it's right or wrong. Not even using percentages.

[gollob]

There are over a thousand tennis tournaments all over the world in a year and only 4 that could be played over 5 sets
All the ladies have to train as hard to get where they are today as the men so it's rather a storm in a teacup

[Old_Geezer]

For the record, I like watching women's sport. (How good they are at is has little to do with it.)

[Old_Geezer]

Ah equal pay for work of equal worth. A storm in a teacup apparently.