Perhaps Prizes Should Be On Ticket Sales?

[cassa333]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35859791

Perhaps rather than making pay equal at the start regardless of gender they should make the prize a % of ticket sales (obviously ticket costs should be the same). IE: Wimbledon sell 1000 tickets at various prices and the total revenue, income and sponsorship comes to £10,000. The men's match has 600people and the women's 400 people. The prize would then be split 60/40. Easy.

Or is that not a sensible way to do it?

[Old_Geezer]

No not really. It doesn't relate to effort or spectacle. And one doesn't even know in advance the reward. The take should be estimatable in advance and renumeration offered settable.

[mikey4444]

I have never understood why they were paid differently from the start...its clearly a case of discrimination.

[Togo]

Pay them the same and let the women play 5 sets.

[jim360]

That's a nice argument Togo... except that in all but the Grand Slams it's completely bogus because Men and Women both play three-set matches all the time.

[Togo]

Plus Davis Cup and Olympics matches. So why not allow women to play 5 sets when men do. Equality for women surely demands it.

[Gromit]

It is disappointing that a man earning more than $21Million a year in prize money, for batting a ball about feels hard done by.
It could be he is just a greedy, mercenary, money grabbing pillock.

[youngmafbog]

//I have never understood why they were paid differently from the start.//

Because they attract bigger crowds. Simples.

If you have equality then it has to be equality across the board with no exceptions, but at present it isnt.

The idea of paying a purse based on seat revenue is a good one.

[youngmafbog]

Ah the jealous voice of the left from Gromit. Presumably you wish to tax him until her screams too?

Ever thought about moving to a Communist country? Better hurry up most are collapsing.

[Gromit]

// Wimbledon... the total revenue, income and sponsorship comes to £10,000. //

Lsat year it was £170million.

[Gromit]

Ymb,

Your jibes get more and more pathetic.
Djokovic is a Serbian so how could I tax him until he screams?
Communist countries are not the highest taxers, try Sweden, Japan Holland. Your stock answer to anyone who dares to have a different viewpoint to yourself that they should leave the country is lazy.

[Togo]

Men's sport received 61.1 per cent of the value of all sponsorship deals in the United Kingdom. Sponsorship of women's sport amounted to only 0.5 per cent of the total market, whilst mixed sports accounted for 38.4 per cent.
Also it may be worth considering that ,the men’s game is more contested at the top. 52% of men’s games went into at least the 4th set at Wimbledon, whilst only 24% of women’s matches made it to the 3rd set. This suggests a greater, and thus more exciting, contest, which feeds into popularity. But it also points to the fact that men at the height of their game have to perform and train harder, and for longer than the women do, enduring more pain, risking more injuries, and delivering higher levels of performance.
The market decides the ratio of reward – and there isn’t a fairer method of deciding than that. The male game is more popular. It’s more powerful and many find it more exciting. If that were different, the pay scale would be too. Rewards come from consumers: if women’s tennis or weightlifting or cycling were more popular than men’s, they’d be paid more than men. For the same reasons, heavyweight (male) boxers get much greater rewards than boxers in lighter weight categories.

[jim360]

In the Olympics, only the Final is five sets. And the Women don't play Davis Cup anyway (they have the Fed Cup, I suppose).

It's perhaps unfortunate that the man who currently stands to gain the most from increased prize money for men is the one making the argument. I don't think it's unreasonable to make that point. That said, at least the argument is based on a fairly reasonable idea, that prizes should be linked to ticket sales for the event and that perhaps the ticket sales should be more closely associated with who is actually playing. In general women's tennis probably attracts smaller audiences and less TV coverage.

[Ken4155]

I read the link and didn't see anything that suggested the Jokerman was feeling hard done by. He was expressing the feelings of many, if not most, of the male pro tennis players on the circuit. Does that make them all money grabbing pillocks?

[Gromit]

Tennis tournaments are sold to attendees and to broadcast stations in a package of mixed male and female matches. So prizes should be the same.

If we took premiership football, the prize money for Leicester City winning the league should be the same as if Manchester United won it even though more people paid more money to watch Manchester United, and they have more world class stars (allegedly). Likewise tennis, Federa may put more bums on seats, but withoutall the lesser opponents, including the women, there would be no tournament to sell.