Women's tennis just isn't as deep any days. Never has been.Also, the womens game just isn't as deep as the mens game these days. .
Women's tennis just isn't as deep any days. Never has been.
It's always been that once you get past the top 2 or maybe 3 the talent level drops off. That is also manifested when you see there have always been more upsets in men's draws than in the women's. Much less separation in terms of talent with the men.
That said in recent years we have seen the same men over and over again in the business end of the majors. Whereas on the womens side we have seen Schiavone get to two French Open finals (winning 1), Bartoli get to two Wimbledon Finals (winning 1). Lisicki got to a Wimbledon final - though Boom Boom's game does seem to come alive on grass with that serve and big FH. She beat Serena en route to the final too.Women's tennis just isn't as deep any days. Never has been.
Much less separation in terms of talent with the men.
Men's tennis depth is 3 deep ... When entering 2013 season began you would predict that either Nadal , Murray and Novak would win a grand slam and what happened ? Women's tennis Austrailian Final Li Na vs Azarenka in Aussie Final ... Bartoli vs Sabine Lisicki at Wimbleton .. Nadal or Novak were in every Final .My bad on typing out my post. Womens tennis was never as deep as mens tennis. I know that. I shouldn't have included the "these days". I'll do a better job of proofreading my stuff next time before clicking submit. I definitely did not think that there was a time that the womens game was as deep as the mens game. Even back in the Chrissie/Martina days the women were just rolling through their early rounds without much trouble.
Granted but even "back in the day" you still had players like Virginia Wade and Rosie Casals knocking off a top seed once in a while.That said in recent years we have seen the same men over and over again in the business end of the majors. Whereas on the womens side we have seen Schiavone get to two French Open finals (winning 1), Bartoli get to two Wimbledon Finals (winning 1). Lisicki got to a Wimbledon final - though Boom Boom's game does seem to come alive on grass with that serve and big FH. She beat Serena en route to the final too.
http://www.debate.org/opinions/shou...ons-offer-equal-prize-money-for-men-and-womenI'm all for equality, but there is no way in the world that the women deserve equal prize money to the men. (I said it. Go ahead and beat me.)
Why shouldn't there be equal prize money ? Are they charging less to watch women's tennis ie are tickets the same price ? Are sponsors paying more to show comercials on Men 's final then women's final ? IF revenue is the same then the prize money should be the same .Granted but even "back in the day" you still had players like Virginia Wade and Rosie Casals knocking off a top seed once in a while.
I think another way to look at it is that so many more of the women's matches are blow outs that are over in an hour or less. Even though the top males usually pull it out (not manly, I know) they have to work much harder i.e. longer rallies, more sets, more time on the court. The matches are more entertaining for that and also there is a bit more uncertaintly as to whether they actually will win. When the top women step it is basically a fait accomplie (accomplit?) from the get go.
I'm all for equality, but there is no way in the world that the women deserve equal prize money to the men. (I said it. Go ahead and beat me.)
Prize money is an interesting discussion. Many people on both sides of the fence on that one. It doesn't make a difference to me but the male players who say they deserve more money at the majors b/c they play best of 5 do make a good point. Entertainment-wise I will say that for me at least it has not always been the case that the men are more entertaining. Right now certainly the men are the more entertaining product. But during the early 2000s there was a window of time where for me the womens game was just as entertaining maybe more than the mens game. For the most part the mens game has been more entertaining over the years but I will say that for me personally I don't turn the TV off when womens tennis comes on. I went to the USO the last 2 years and I went to 3 sessions in 2012 and of all the matches I saw the Venus v. Kerber Baby match was the most entertaining match I saw. More entertaining than the 2 Federer matches I watched or the Andy Murray match I watched. Heck, this year I saw Serena play, I saw Murray play and yet the most exciting match I saw was Raonic v. Gasquet on court 17 - that was the day when they had the fiasco due to the rain delay. Had tix for Ashe Day Session on that Labor Day and only got to see Hantuchova/Riske. They moved Fed over to Armstrong. A few weeks later US Open gave FULL REFUNDS for Ashe ticket holders even those who bought the tix through the TicketExchange like I did at above face value.Granted but even "back in the day" you still had players like Virginia Wade and Rosie Casals knocking off a top seed once in a while.
I think another way to look at it is that so many more of the women's matches are blow outs that are over in an hour or less. Even though the top males usually pull it out (not manly, I know) they have to work much harder i.e. longer rallies, more sets, more time on the court. The matches are more entertaining for that and also there is a bit more uncertaintly as to whether they actually will win. When the top women step it is basically a fait accomplie (accomplit?) from the get go.
I'm all for equality, but there is no way in the world that the women deserve equal prize money to the men. (I said it. Go ahead and beat me.)
Yep, check post #526. I was sort of mentioning the same thing. So we are on the same page.Men's tennis depth is 3 deep ... When entering 2013 season began you would predict that either Nadal , Murray and Novak would win a grand slam and what happened ? Women's tennis Austrailian Final Li Na vs Azarenka in Aussie Final ... Bartoli vs Sabine Lisicki at Wimbleton .. Nadal or Novak were in every Final .
Men play longer/harder matches.Why shouldn't there be equal prize money ? Are they charging less to watch women's tennis ie are tickets the same price ? Are sponsors paying more to show comercials on Men 's final then women's final ? IF revenue is the same then the prize money should be the same
Men's matches generate more revenue.The men's matches draw more viewers.
I bet their clothing and equipment sponsors would agree with that as well.Men's matches generate more revenue.
