Wimbledon: Should the prize funds for men and women be equal?
 

So as I'm sure many of you are aware that womens prize fund was increased to a few years ago to match the mens. Is this right?

Yes, as long as they play best of 5 too.

Only if the amount of work put in is the same..I dont watch tennis, but apparently the men have to do more?

probably should have read the middle option before clicking no

The women's game is much better but the men play more sets so should get more money.

I would rather the men just play best of three sets like the women instead of the women playing best of five though

I don't really believe that women should have to play more, 3 sets for Women is just as demanding as Men playing 5 sets since Men have more stamina and are built more athletic, when you look at all the great players Womens tennis has produced over the years they deserve just about as much respect as Men

Don't really think making the women play 5 sets is a very good solution because of what Novo said, also it's only those 4 tournaments a year where the men will play extra, I know that those tournaments are obviously by far the most important but still :idc: And tennis is really the only sport where the female side is held in just as high esteem as the male and probably attracts around the same amount of interest, money, coverage etc. these things shouldn't be judged purely by time spent on the court

Give all the money to Aga

yes they should

I didnt give it much thought when I voted but these are very good points.

1) women players get over double the hourly rate
2) it should be 5 sets for women and men....the womens matches (including finals)are often over within an hour, a total joke for people paying a lot of money
3) even then Id have the male prize money higher as the standard is enormously higher and the male game simply brings much much more money into the sport....the final for example is worth 3 to 4 times the price to the corporate market

if equality means everyone gets paid the same prize money for less work and lower quality work, then the disabled champion should also be paid the same

Theyre not very good points they are totally inaccurate and incorrect....women are perfectly capable of playing 5 sets? also why is it fair that the womens champ earns double the male champ as she plays for less than half the time and therefore has time and energy to enter the doubles and win that too?

also the point about brining in money is 100% incorrect, the male game brings in much much more and the corporate market pays 3 to 4 times as much

this is the totally wrong interpretation of equality...the quality and quantity of work done is totally different.

the womens game is vastly inferior....what on earth are you talking about....the worlds top 10 women women wouldn't win a set off any male in the top 500....its been proven men ranked as low as 350 annihalated top ranked women

Novo and MTVN [2].

Always makes me laugh when people suggest 3 sets of professional world-best tennis isn't enough.

Everybody to play 3 sets tbh.

The whole point of professional sport is that you get paid for your results not for the hours that you put in, womens footballers play 90 minutes but no one would think they should equalise the men's money there. And by your logic pretty much every tour event final whether it's male or female is a total joke for spectators then seeing as they're all three sets..

The point about money and interest isn't completely inaccurate either, it's the reason that the second highest earning tennis player is Sharapova when most of her money isn't even from her winnings, she'd only be worth a fraction of what she is if there wasn't such a big interest in womens tennis

The Men's game is more about the serve as well and in the Women's game they rely less on the serve ( unless your a rare example like Serena ) so a lot of the time they have to win points in Rallies rather then depending on the serve

I pretty much agree with MTVN and Novo.

I am willing to bet Serena would take a set off this guy http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/P...icio-Neis.aspx

And the women's game is much better to watch. Go away.

wrong again

whatever an individual earns apart from prize money is entirely down to the individual and how they market themselves....but to pay one group of people the same reward for less than half as much quantity worked and much lower quantity is morally wrong and probably could be contested legally

there is no reason why on this basis that everything is equal , all womens champions in every sport, regardless of quality and quantity get the exact same prize money for everything and that goes for all disabled sports people too....it is absurd and sadly not even honest people with backbone are willing to contest this anomaly

ok how much? and why just 1 man? your claim that womens tennis is better is a lie and even the best woman wouldn't take a set off any man in the top 500.....if you prefer to watch a game of vastly inferior quality and much shorter in quantity that's your problem...don't drag the rest of us into it....the majority prefer the men which is why the game brings in vastly more money. Im dealing in facts, youre not. now go away:xyxwave:

the men have superior serves, superior volley games too...also a lot depends on the surface regardling rallies, due to superior fitness the men also have longer rallies on clay, but men actually get longer rallies overall on grass too

No. What the women have to do is equally demanding on their body and minds as the men have to.

no one here or anywhere else would be happy to go to work and work for 2 to 3 times as long as the person next to them, to work to a far higher quality and bring in much more money , yet get paid the same amount at the end of the week....youd be furious and youd probably be seeking legal advice

still I don't expect anyone here will admit to this

I remember not long ago the first set in the Men's final was longer than the Whole Women's final. Wouldn't be too shocked if that happens again this year tbh. It doesn't matter if 3 sets for women is the equivalent to Men playing 5...that isn't the Male tennis players fault. That is also pretty much saying the Women players are inferior athletes..which if is true shouodnt be paid the same surely?

As for the comparison between them, with the exception of the Williams sisters and Maria, none of the Women are close to being as big as the men tbh or generate the same interest etc. I'm all down for same prize money, but as Truth said, 5 sets should be played by both then. 5 Sets>>>3 sets anyway.