The Guardian: Novak Djokovic: men’s tennis should fight for more prize money than women

[erpowers]

Novak Djokovic believes that men should be awarded more prize money than women following a row sparked by comments from the chief executive of Indian Wells, Raymond Moore.

snip

Speaking after his straight-sets win against Milos Raonic in the men’s final, the Serb said women deserved the money they got but men should fight for more because their game attracted more viewers.

snip

“As long as it’s like that and there is data and stats available upon who attracts more attention, spectators, who sells more tickets and stuff like that, in relation to that it has to be fairly distributed.”

snip

“I have had a woman that was my coach and that was a huge part of my tennis career. I’m surrounded by women. I’m very happy to be married with one and to have a child. I’m completely for women power.”

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/mar/21/novak-djokovic-indian-wells-equal-prize-money-tennis

[stopbush]

1. Well, men do have to win 3 out of 5 sets in many tournaments

while women always play 2 out of 3.

The men have to work longer and harder for the same prize money. Reverse discrimination?

[trumad]

2. Reverse Discrimination?

Only to knuckleheads who don't know what they are talking about.

With backing from the Women’s Tennis Association, another American tennis star, Venus Williams, played a key role in the final push for parity.

“Why does Wimbledon choose to place a lesser value on my championship trophy than that of the 2005 men’s winner Roger Federer?” she wrote in a 2006 article.

Responding to critics who argue that women deserve to be paid less because they play less (best-of-three sets versus men’s best-of-five), she dryly noted that, “for the record, the ladies’ final at Wimbledon in 2005 lasted 45 minutes longer than the men’s. No extra charge.”
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/sep/11/how-women-in-tennis-achieved-equal-pay-us-open

[stopbush]

3. I was only offering what the usual excuse is for why men should be paid more.

Last edited Mon Mar 21, 2016, 08:46 PM - Edit history (1)

As Serena pointed out yesterday after Indian Wells, the women's final sold out before the men's final, so saying men deserved more prize money because they are the bigger draw was specious.

These champions are being paid millions in prize money. I can't see complaining that both genders receive the same amounts. Any way you look at it, the only real reason to pay the women less is because one chooses to denigrate the women's achievement.

[bigwillq]

5. Serena lost.

[stopbush]

6. That's right. Bad multi-tasking from work.

My bad!

[hughee99]

7. I'm not sure what the Indian Wells tickets went for, but for the next tournament

you can get tickets to the women's singled and men's doubles final at $69 - $250 - $480 (for regular, and different VIP levels), or for the men's singles and women's doubles finals for $105 - $360 - $580.

http://www.miamiopen.com/daily-tickets

Now maybe the increased price for the men's final is because people are willing to pay more for the women's doubles match, I'm not sure, but at the ticket booth, mens and women's tennis doesn't seem to be equal.

I'm not arguing for women to be paid less, but if it can be clearly demonstrated that men bring in significantly more revenue (and I'm not sure if it can), then there's an argument to pay men more that isn't based in denigrating women's achievements.

[Iggo]

4. mENS.tENNIS.iS.bORING.

[bigwillq]

9. This.

[azretired]

8. terms defined: sex discrimination and equality

Q: What do you call it when women receive equal pay with men, but work 1/3 more?
Ans: Wage discrimination against women

Q: What do you call it when men receive equal pay with women, but work 1/3 more?
Ans: Gender Equality (as so hailed by Nate Kristoff of the NY Times and others)

See: Payments to both genders in tennis (US Open, Wimbledon, French Open and Australian Open Championships

Correction: 2d answer reflects misandry rampant in our civilization, including the NY Times. Correct answer should be
"Wage discrimination against men."

[azretired]

10. Hardly persuasive

Since 1980 the men's finals have averaged almost 3 hours. Federer, who has won 7, I think, averaged 3 hours 13 minutes per final.

Women's final during the same time period, which always involve t least one fewer set, are much shorter.

Even ESPN W, in its recent attempt to justify equal pay for less work for women tennis players, conceded that women play less tennis and draw smaller crowds, both live and on television, than men tennis players at all the majors.

Why, therefore, pay men tennis players the same as women tennis players who play at least 1/3 less tennis?

Misandry, the 21st century plague, is the reason. It is not "reverse discrimination." It is discrimination against a minority by the majority. It is a fundamental denigration of the worth of men's athletic achievement coupled with an exaggerated sense of value of women tennis players athletic achievement.

[Iggo]

11. You go, man!

Discrimination against a minority by the majority.

That's the best one yet.

[RockaFowler]

12. Seriously??

Is this a serious post??

Ratings for the US Open Semi-finals were higher than the Men's Finals
Why? Because Serena Williams was playing for a Grand Slam
Serena was the biggest story in tennis last year winning 3 of 4 of the Grand Slams

Djokovich did the same thing and most people didn't care (and heck after his comments I have lost all respect for him).

Oh and this thing that the Men's game is longer than the Women's - that is really only the Finals. Check out the early rounds. Most matches are less than most of the Women's.