Top players get too big a slice of the cake? - TennisForum.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 10:01 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: usa
Posts: 750
                     
Top players get too big a slice of the cake?

Does anyone think that the prize money on tour should be a little more evenly distributed?

I mean the top players make an absolute fortune in prize money while the lower ranked players can barely pay their expenses. Its an expensive life with coaches, trainers sararies as well as travelling and accomodation etc.

I know the top players are selling most of the seats and coverage, but they also make a lot on endorsements, so they could afford to earn a lil' less in actual proze money, IMO. Also, a few top few players get pretty much ALL the TV coverage, especially in the US that the lower ranked players rarely get enough exposure to get sponsors interested.

I dont mean real even, or so much for the low ranked players that they wouldnt he hungry for more success, but a more reasonable amount..
arcus is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 10:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Dava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pau-Pau-Pau-Pau-La-La-La!
Posts: 17,733
                     
I think more money shuld be put into the sport for the lesser players now. Yes its great that the players get that load of mnoey for winning a slam, but what about those who travel arounf the world playing challengers on a shoe string budget. A lot more money should be given to qualifiers and players who go out in the early rounds of events, ESPECIALLY slams.

WTA TOUR
ELENA DEMENTIEVA
KIM CLIJSTERS
ALSO STARRING
THE GIRLS ON TOUR!

ASAGOE~BOVINA~JANKOVIC~MOLIK
MYSKINA~SCHNYDER~ZVONAREVA

THE YOUNG GUNS

BACSINSZKY~CHAKVATADZE~IVANOVIC
JACKSON~KIRILENKO~LINETSKAYA
MAKAROVA~MIRZA


THE COMEBACK KIDS

BEYGELZIMER~DOKIC~HARKLEROAD
SPREM~VAKULENKO

Dava is offline  
post #3 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 10:24 PM
Team WTAworld
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,566
 
Another subject is about pension funds and welfare in general. It gets tougher and tougher to be a full member (WTA pension funds). Before both ITF and WTA prize money were taken into account (for both associate and full members). Then only WTA prize money (both full and associate). And the amount keeps going up for full members : $45K this year, $40K previously, $35K the year before.

I believe it gets more and more difficult for lower ranked players to get a decent insurange coverage and a good retirement plan . They have to think of their life after their player professional career. The present system does not help them much in that respect .
Steveg is offline  
post #4 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 10:47 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 880
                     
I'm in favor of the players in the earlier rounds definitely getting more money, but I'm not too crazy about cutting the salaries of the top players to acheive this. I'm sure there is a lot of money flowing into tournaments, namely the Slams and larger ones, to increase the pot without taking from the winners check. In the realm of "women in sports", comparitively speaking, I think that it's somewhat of an honor for the leading money earners to largely come from the world of tennis. Keep in mind that a man on the ATP winning the same amount of tournaments Kim or Justine won last year would have made significantly more money. The top players of any professional sport will get paid large amounts of money- sports are lucrative that's old news. The WTA sholdn't be any different and there top stars should get paid like the top stars in all other sports. In comparison to atheletes of other sports and what the top player of each sport makes, the amount that the top women make isn't really that impressive.

I think another idea might be for the WTA to step up and help out in reducing the costs associated with being on tour. Or maybe applying some tax like system (membership fees or something,) that taxes more heavily the players who make more money and then use those funds to help cut cost on tour associated with traveling. The WTA needs people who can come up with different ideas, maybe even a totally brand new approach to a whole slew of problems ranging from the cost of retirement packages, welfare assistance to former players, cost associated with travel, and ways to cut cost for young players to get into the sport...

STEFWHIT'S MILLATARY RANKS:
The Commander In Chief: Steffi Graf
General: Serena Williams
Admiral: Kim Clijsters
Lieutenant General: Elena Dementieva
Major General: Myskina


nominees for Brigadier General:
Venus, Golovin, Lindsay, Petrova, and Pierce
Stefwhit is offline  
post #5 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 10:56 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In an Iglo in Canada
Posts: 4,404
                     
I agree with you. But not a drastic increase.

In the Grand Slams, the player who lost gets A LOT OF MONEY.
Of course, the player has to play for flights, etc... so they end up in deficits.

I always wondered, how much do grand slams pay for the players, accomodation, flight?????
I don't think they do, but someone correct me on this.
CanadianBoy21 is offline  
post #6 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Wendy Turnball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Oldies Circuit/WeightWatchers
Posts: 151
                     
Quote:

Top players get too big a slice of the cake?
You can never have enough cake....

-I bet no one remembers me-
Wendy Turnball is offline  
post #7 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:13 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,673
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcus
I know the top players are selling most of the seats and coverage, but they also make a lot on endorsements, so they could afford to earn a lil' less in actual proze money, IMO.
There is a VAST disparity in endorsement money among the top players. First, take the Williams sisters out of it. They're off the charts. Do you think Anastasia Myskina gets the appearance fees Jenn Capriati does? Are they painting Elena Dementieva all over the side of a building the way they did Amelie?

Quote:
Also, a few top few players get pretty much ALL the TV coverage, especially in the US that the lower ranked players rarely get enough exposure to get sponsors interested.
So get in the finals vs one of those 'top few' players. Or a semi vs one of the Williams sisters. The better lower ranked players are getting more exposure. Kuznetsova has played in two finals this year already. Zvonareva just spent a couple hours splashed on TV screens all over the world. Petrova did the same a few weeks back. That time on TV is probably worth more than top prize money, used correctly.

Proud to be an American
Not blind. Not uninformed. We are party to atrocities. But the response of the world after 9/11 is worth noting. Even our most dire enemies offered aid. We should all be so lucky.
Volcana is offline  
post #8 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:15 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 880
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendy Turnball
You can never have enough cake....
Agreed! When you start talkin' bout cutting the prize checks of the top players I think that's just taking steps backwards, no matter the intent. bigger purses all around is a better idea- cut the cost from somewhere else...

STEFWHIT'S MILLATARY RANKS:
The Commander In Chief: Steffi Graf
General: Serena Williams
Admiral: Kim Clijsters
Lieutenant General: Elena Dementieva
Major General: Myskina


nominees for Brigadier General:
Venus, Golovin, Lindsay, Petrova, and Pierce
Stefwhit is offline  
post #9 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 535
                     
I am sorry, but if A player wins Wimbledon and get 1 millions, the person who lost first round doesn't derserve to get anything above 10,000. You get what you earn. Look when Venus and Cappy won the big tournies (mostly Venus), Vee had 2.6 million, and Capster had like 2.2, so it was even for the big winners. If you can produce the wins why get the money for it. YOu would be taking away from the ones who earned it.
VRULES is offline  
post #10 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 535
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianBoy18
I agree with you. But not a drastic increase.

In the Grand Slams, the player who lost gets A LOT OF MONEY.
Of course, the player has to play for flights, etc... so they end up in deficits.

I always wondered, how much do grand slams pay for the players, accomodation, flight?????
I don't think they do, but someone correct me on this.
Tournements won't pay for it, unless they really want you to come, and then they will pay for travel and accomidation, it is a way to give women apperance fees since it is against the rule. The Oklahoma City tourny did that for Monica Seles in 2000, after Venus pulled out.
VRULES is offline  
post #11 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Virginia Wade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Centre Court, Wimbledon
Posts: 828
                     
Quote:
Top players get too big a slice of the cake?
I make excellent Victoria Sponge cake. Ask Billie Jean.

-Only in the Centenary Year-
~At 14, one is particularly vulnerable to obvious temptations of the age, boyfriends, parties, etc. (Virginia Wade in 'Courting Triumph' The best book on earth)~
Virginia Wade is offline  
post #12 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,843
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcana
So get in the finals vs one of those 'top few' players. Or a semi vs one of the Williams sisters. The better lower ranked players are getting more exposure. Kuznetsova has played in two finals this year already. Zvonareva just spent a couple hours splashed on TV screens all over the world. Petrova did the same a few weeks back. That time on TV is probably worth more than top prize money, used correctly.
Sveta, Vera and Nadia haven't been low-ranked players for quite some time... if you're in the top 50, you're making a very good living, especially with doubles factored in. The players arcus is talking about aren't the ones playing the proper WTA Tour full time - they're the ones in the Challengers scraping the pennies together just to pay tournament entry fees. Because unless you're a hyped-up junior, it's very very tough to even get to play on Tour. If your national federation overlooks you... or if it has no money... or if you come from a country with not many sponsorship options... or if your country has no home tournaments to give you WCs to... it's a miracle of achievement if you get in the top 100. If you can't afford a coach, it's up to you to work on every aspect of your game yourself. If you can't afford to travel, you don't get to improve through match play. You talk about the pressure on Kim, or Justine, or Venus and Serena (neither of whom ever had to play a Challenger - they got life on Tour handed to them on a plate)... imagine the pressure of knowing that you have to win a match to pay your hotel bill that week. Or to eat. And then imagine what injuries do to your financial situation.

The majority of retirements from pro tennis don't take place around the age of 30... it's mostly before the age of 20, from the hundreds of girls who can't afford it any more. And it's not just no-talent scrubs who have to do this... it's rare that a player is anywhere near her peak by 20, or even shows her full potential. If they'd been given the same opportunities as, say, the Williams sisters... all that top-flight coaching, all those wild cards, all those endorsements before they'd even played a pro match... who knows what they could have become?
sartrista7 is offline  
post #13 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 23rd, 2004, 11:56 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 880
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by sartrista7
... You talk about the pressure on Kim, or Justine, or Venus and Serena (neither of whom ever had to play a Challenger - they got life on Tour handed to them on a plate)... imagine the pressure of knowing that you have to win a match to pay your hotel bill that week. Or to eat. And then imagine what injuries do to your financial situation.

The majority of retirements from pro tennis don't take place around the age of 30... it's mostly before the age of 20, from the hundreds of girls who can't afford it any more. And it's not just no-talent scrubs who have to do this... it's rare that a player is anywhere near her peak by 20, or even shows her full potential. If they'd been given the same opportunities as, say, the Williams sisters... all that top-flight coaching, all those wild cards, all those endorsements before they'd even played a pro match... who knows what they could have become?
In a perfect world no one would have any problems, but oh well.... Justine's mother died, Vee and Serena didn't grow up in Beverly Hills, Jelena Dokic, JCap, and Mary Peirce had to overcome obstacles in their home lives to make it- yet they all somehow found away to make it work (and yeah, of course they had help, to be a pro tennis player you need help and even the "lowely" players have someone helping them, if not they wouldn't be playing- they couldn't....) The bottom line is that most of the time the real talent finds it's way to the top, the creame of the crop always rises to the top- if a young player coming up is really showing signs of a future champ someone usually notices if not, then tennis might not be the best sport to get into. I think if you make the chose to be a professional tennis player to make a living, then you do so knowing the risks. I don't neccessarily feel it's anyone's responsibility- you gotta show first that you're worthy of the help...

Overall I do think more money should be poured back into the sport to help out with all sorts of things. And i like the idea of increasing the winning for the earlier rounds, but I'm still opposed to cutting the salaries of the top players to do any of this...

STEFWHIT'S MILLATARY RANKS:
The Commander In Chief: Steffi Graf
General: Serena Williams
Admiral: Kim Clijsters
Lieutenant General: Elena Dementieva
Major General: Myskina


nominees for Brigadier General:
Venus, Golovin, Lindsay, Petrova, and Pierce
Stefwhit is offline  
post #14 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 24th, 2004, 12:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,843
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefwhit
The bottom line is that most of the time the real talent finds it's way to the top, the creame of the crop always rises to the top- if a young player coming up is really showing signs of a future champ someone usually notices if not, then tennis might not be the best sport to get into.
Oh, I agree that the future champions will find their way to the top. If you've got it in you to even be a threat to win a Slam... you will probably get there. But you don't have to be a champion to have a worthwhile tennis career... just being a solid top 50 player is respectable, and doesn't pay badly. And it's THAT level of talent which might not get spotted, and which might fall by the wayside.
sartrista7 is offline  
post #15 of 20 (permalink) Old Apr 24th, 2004, 12:18 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: usa
Posts: 750
                     
I guess I'm thinking of ways to take the pressure off the low ranked players who are giving it a go on tour.......... Seems rough when No. 1 player might be making 20 million dollars in a year, while the No. 152 might not break 50 thou.

Maybe some kind of subsidy/scholarship for young players the first few years on the pro tour. Take a little of the heat off for a few years, allow the players to develop without the enormous financial stress. If they aren't showing any results then the support automatically tapers off.

Maybe have some kind of system making it easier for players in college to compete in the challengers while getting a degree, so at least they can be giving the tour a try and getting a backup education at the same time, in case things dont work out.
Like making a portion of the of the NCAA season say something like 8 months on tour. Like every college sponsors a team of a few players to play a certain No. of events, they travel together, share expenses, a couch, and the college gets points for how well they do......... That kind of travelling-buddies system works well for some nations, why not college players?
arcus is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome