twodoebs

I was recently out to dinner when this lively topic came up: Is it fair that women tennis players get the same prize money as their male counterparts in Grand Slam Tennis tournaments?

I contend that it is fair, and here's why.

1. The tournament asks the same of men and women competitors. The U.S. Open women start from the same number of players as men, 128 each. They play the same number of rounds (4 Rounds of play followed by the Quarter-Finals, Semi-Finals and Finals). I can hear what some of you must be saying. "The tournament asks the same!?? That's not true!". I imagine what you're saying right now is: women only play 3 sets and men play 5- thus a higher pay is justified. I understand why this is a go-to argument because it's an easy number to point to, but I don't think it's a fair way to judge participation. Why? What if Male Champion X wins in 3 straight sets and Female Champion X wins in 3 sets. Does this mean the female champion deserves more because she played the maximum and the male deserves less because he played less than the maximum? Yes of course the opposite can happen where (as in the case this year) the women's champion handily beat her counterpart in only 2 short sets as the opponent didn't put up much of a fight. And I'm sure some readers are saying "see??--that means lower ad revenue!" To this I say: The ad rates are determined well in advance of the event itself. Ad time is purchased, planned and ads produced months in advance. The ad revenue is made well before the event happens so a 2 set match actually does generate the same as a three set match. Frankly if the US Open wants to make more money in ad revenue from women's matches, they might consider broadcasting the finals during more choice times, like perhaps, when they broadcast the men's finals- as opposed to dumping it on Saturday night when there are fewer TV viewers in general.

Now- back to the numbers question...I realize that you 'women only play 3 sets where men play 5' people are probably also doing some quick math and are readying a reply about the fact that to get to the finals, the minimum a woman has to win is 14 sets where the male counterparts must win 21 sets. This is true, but opens the doors to quantify those sets even further. What about a 6-1 set being "worth" less than a 7-6 set, is that fair? What then about number of total minutes played? If the female championship match takes longer than the male, do they deserve more because they were on TV longer? To me, the bottom line is there are too many variables to quantify what a "just" prize is. Never mind that prize money is determined well in advance of the tournament, long before any ball has bounced, makes equating set/time/minutes to prize money even funnier. What is consistent is that the male champion started from 128 players, and won 7 matches to be declared champion. The female champion started from 128 players, and won 7 matches to be declared champion.

2. The excitement and entertainment draw doesn't necessarily come from men's powerful game and fast serves. Those of you already disagreeing with me may be saying, "Be honest, men's tennis is just more exciting, thus drawing more viewers". Yes it's true- Andy Roddick has the world record for serve speed -155 mph. Yes, men hit the ball harder and faster. But since this is a co-ed tournament and TV coverage isn't scheduled that far in advance, attendees don't necessarily know who they're going to see when they buy their tickets, TV broadcasts cover whatever matches happen to be on that day - there is NO way to determine whether male or female tennis stars are drawing merchandise sales, TV viewership over the course of the tournament in New York and tournament attendance. Though it's important to note that the US Open Series is actually a 6 week tournament culminating in the US Open in NY. Over 700,000 people attend the U.S. Open tournament in NY over two weeks making it the highest attended sport in the world. Maybe viewers and fans tune in to watch Roger Federer win time after time (or perhaps they even tune out because his win is a foregone conclusion). Maybe they tune in to see Justine Henin's flawless backhand. It could be any of the major stars, but there's no way to tell whether 54.5% of the viewers are more interested in the men's championship thus making the 4.5% prize difference (at Wimbledon- the only Grand Slam still paying unequally). Frankly if we're looking at popularity, Forbes magazine ranks Maria Sharapova as the most powerful player in tennis based on her earnings in 2006 (including prize money, endorsements, and merchandise sales). In fact of the Forbes list of top ten most powerful tennis players features an equal number of men and women. And when you look at the total income of these top players, the prize difference is so meager one must wonder why the insistence on it to begin with. Which brings me to number 3.

3. It's just right. Tennis is a sport that has long supported diversity and equality. Starting with the US National Tennis Center named after Tennis' leading ladies- Billie Jean King, who coincidentally fought tirelessly for equal pay for women players. As well, the Chairman of the Board & President, USTA is also a woman, Jane Grimes. The USTA has opted to pay the winners of the US hosted tournament equally, and in doing so says all the athletes are of equal importance. To the USTA the value of the athletes- at least in this tournament- will not be determined by revenue or popularity. Though again may I remind- the Australian and French Opens also pay equally. Even leaving out the support for amazing African American athletes such as Althea Gibson and Arthur Ashe- paving the road for the Williams sisters and others, tennis has lead the way for creating opportunity for ALL people to experience their sport. Although it's interesting to note- it was 50 years ago that Althea Gibson became the first African American athlete male or female to win the US National Championships (which is now the US Open) and the first year the US National Championships was the US Open it was won by Arthur Ashe who is the namesake for the main stage at

According to the U.S. Open Series website, their mission statement reads: To Promote and Develop the Growth of Tennis. One might argue one of the best ways to do this is support growth and development for both men and women. For U.S.T.A to stand up and say that they value the women athletes the same as the male athletes supports the growth and development they strive for.