Women players should NOT get paid the same as men at Wimbledon or any of the other tennis Grand Slams.
Women, the PC Brigade and feminists may not agree - but the stats certainly do.
People who argue for women tennis stars to be paid the same as men must not notice (or just ignore) one glaring fault in their argument - the fact that women play less games and less sets than the men.
Look at this year's Wimbledon.
Both singles winners - Serena Williams and Roger Federer - walked away with a cheque for £850,000.
This is despite the fact that Federer toiled his way through 946 minutes on court compared to just 586 minutes that Serena spent on court.
And look at the runners-up.
Roddick played 331 games in total and Venus a paltry 107.
Roddick played in a men's final (watched by 11 million people in Britain) which lasted 4hrs, 16 mins (and was the longest-ever final of any Grand Slam in history, comprising 77 games), whilst Venus played in a women's final (watched by just 4 million people in Britain) which lasted just 1hr, 27 mins.
But both players banked £425,000.
Which means Roddick earned, £14,655.17p per set, whereas Venus actually earned MORE - £30,357.14p per set.
How annoyed Roddick must feel if he knew that, per minute, per game and per set, he gets paid less than a female player who plays much shorter matches than him.
If women want equal pay in tennis, they should play 5 set matches like the men.
The same argument can also be used in working life in Britain - women are campaigning for equal pay with men even though that, on average, women work less hours than men.
CHAMPS ... Roger Federer and Serena Williams show off their prizes
By GEOFF SWEET
07 Jul 2009
The Sun
THE real winners at Wimbledon this year were the women.
Men's runner-up Andy Roddick had to work THREE TIMES as hard as losing women's finalist Venus Williams to earn the same amount of cash.
He flogged himself through a gruelling 331 games, while Venus jetted home having played only 107.
And men's champ Roger Federer spent almost twice as long on court - 946 minutes - as ladies' queen Serena Williams, who appeared for a total of 584.
Yet both players pocketed a cheque for £850,000.
Two years ago, WTA Tour chief Larry Scott managed to secure equal prize money at all Grand Slams.
But on the basis of the last fortnight at SW19, the girls hardly deserve it.
On Sunday, more than 11million TV viewers watched Roddick's brave men's final defeat to Federer in 4hr, 16mins.
It was THE longest ever Grand Slam final with 77 games (beating the previous record of 72 games of the 1927 Australian Open Final).
In total contrast, 4.1m armchair fans saw Venus lose the ladies' final in straight sets to sister Serena in a flop lasting just 1hr 27 mins.
American ace Roddick banked £425,000 from a tournament that saw him play 29 sets - 331 games in total - and spend 1,211 minutes on court.
That worked out at £14,655.17 per set, £1,283.99 per game and £350.95 per minute.
Nice work if you can get it - until you compare his payout with Venus'.
She played just 14 sets - 107 games - in 481 minutes.
That worked out at £30,357.14 per set, £3,971.96 per game and £883.58 per minute.
The all-Williams final made a mockery of Dinara Safina's world No 1 ranking.
The Russian, who managed to win just one game in her semi-final against Venus on Thursday, has yet to win a Grand Slam.
Incredibly, the last time a Grand Slam women's final went to three sets was Amelie Mauresmo's win over Justine Henin at the All England club three years ago. And there has not been a three-set final at the US Open since 1995.
It is also worth pointing out that corporate packages for men's quarter-finals, semi-finals and finals cost DOUBLE the amount as those for the women's clashes.
Cynics may suggest it is time SW19 was split into two tournaments, with separate prize money based on revenue raised by each event. That would really put the cat among the pigeons.
For added to the money issue, comes the little matter of entertainment.
Not one single sliced shot was played between the two Williams sisters, underlining how one-dimensional the battle was compared to the chip-and-charge tactics that Roddick added to his game to KO Andy Murray and almost unhinge Federer.
Remember: Serena and Venus had played a combined 29 sets by the time they finished - the same as Roddick hit on his own.
It's a hard life on the tennis circuit. But harder still if you're a bloke.
thesun.co.uk
Women, the PC Brigade and feminists may not agree - but the stats certainly do.
People who argue for women tennis stars to be paid the same as men must not notice (or just ignore) one glaring fault in their argument - the fact that women play less games and less sets than the men.
Look at this year's Wimbledon.
Both singles winners - Serena Williams and Roger Federer - walked away with a cheque for £850,000.
This is despite the fact that Federer toiled his way through 946 minutes on court compared to just 586 minutes that Serena spent on court.
And look at the runners-up.
Roddick played 331 games in total and Venus a paltry 107.
Roddick played in a men's final (watched by 11 million people in Britain) which lasted 4hrs, 16 mins (and was the longest-ever final of any Grand Slam in history, comprising 77 games), whilst Venus played in a women's final (watched by just 4 million people in Britain) which lasted just 1hr, 27 mins.
But both players banked £425,000.
Which means Roddick earned, £14,655.17p per set, whereas Venus actually earned MORE - £30,357.14p per set.
How annoyed Roddick must feel if he knew that, per minute, per game and per set, he gets paid less than a female player who plays much shorter matches than him.
If women want equal pay in tennis, they should play 5 set matches like the men.
The same argument can also be used in working life in Britain - women are campaigning for equal pay with men even though that, on average, women work less hours than men.
CHAMPS ... Roger Federer and Serena Williams show off their prizes
By GEOFF SWEET
07 Jul 2009
The Sun
THE real winners at Wimbledon this year were the women.
Men's runner-up Andy Roddick had to work THREE TIMES as hard as losing women's finalist Venus Williams to earn the same amount of cash.
He flogged himself through a gruelling 331 games, while Venus jetted home having played only 107.
And men's champ Roger Federer spent almost twice as long on court - 946 minutes - as ladies' queen Serena Williams, who appeared for a total of 584.
Yet both players pocketed a cheque for £850,000.
Two years ago, WTA Tour chief Larry Scott managed to secure equal prize money at all Grand Slams.
But on the basis of the last fortnight at SW19, the girls hardly deserve it.
On Sunday, more than 11million TV viewers watched Roddick's brave men's final defeat to Federer in 4hr, 16mins.
It was THE longest ever Grand Slam final with 77 games (beating the previous record of 72 games of the 1927 Australian Open Final).
In total contrast, 4.1m armchair fans saw Venus lose the ladies' final in straight sets to sister Serena in a flop lasting just 1hr 27 mins.
American ace Roddick banked £425,000 from a tournament that saw him play 29 sets - 331 games in total - and spend 1,211 minutes on court.
That worked out at £14,655.17 per set, £1,283.99 per game and £350.95 per minute.
Nice work if you can get it - until you compare his payout with Venus'.
She played just 14 sets - 107 games - in 481 minutes.
That worked out at £30,357.14 per set, £3,971.96 per game and £883.58 per minute.
The all-Williams final made a mockery of Dinara Safina's world No 1 ranking.
The Russian, who managed to win just one game in her semi-final against Venus on Thursday, has yet to win a Grand Slam.
Incredibly, the last time a Grand Slam women's final went to three sets was Amelie Mauresmo's win over Justine Henin at the All England club three years ago. And there has not been a three-set final at the US Open since 1995.
It is also worth pointing out that corporate packages for men's quarter-finals, semi-finals and finals cost DOUBLE the amount as those for the women's clashes.
Cynics may suggest it is time SW19 was split into two tournaments, with separate prize money based on revenue raised by each event. That would really put the cat among the pigeons.
For added to the money issue, comes the little matter of entertainment.
Not one single sliced shot was played between the two Williams sisters, underlining how one-dimensional the battle was compared to the chip-and-charge tactics that Roddick added to his game to KO Andy Murray and almost unhinge Federer.
Remember: Serena and Venus had played a combined 29 sets by the time they finished - the same as Roddick hit on his own.
It's a hard life on the tennis circuit. But harder still if you're a bloke.
thesun.co.uk
Last edited: