PDA

View Full Version : Martina Hingis made the same amount of money as Baghdatis


Jennifer North
Sep 2nd, 2006, 04:29 PM
so did Kostanic, who managed to squeeze 2 winners among 14 unforced errors in a "don't blink or you'll miss" brisk 40 minutes... and how about Virginia Ruano Pascual, Vania King, Lauren Albanese and Emilie Loit, who combined to make an amazing total of 8 games in their second round matches, they will also be taking home the same $26500 for their half-assed or unskilled displays...

fact is, that aside of staunchy defenders with little else to reason for but politically correct bs, equal pay between the tours is a joke, and only justified due to these times where a more blunt and honestly voiced opinion can hurt your PR machine and image. The paying expectators were not in Flushing Meadows to watch the Swiss Miss, like WTAworlders like to think it is, but she was merely the appetizer before the main draw... and so are Sharapova, Serena, Henin and all others for that matter. There is a marketing reason why women open the night starry session, had it been the other way around, organizers would fear that the ladies would be playing for a half empty stadium after the first 15 minutes...

Left alone to the free market forces, prize money for the wta ladies would fall to half of their current stages in grand slams, the market adjusts itself when rewarding the truly bankable players like Serena and Sharapova, with millions in outside endorsements. Those marketable players justify the reason behind the entertainment value reasoning for women's tennis, and are already fairly recompensated for their brand names, all the rest are just unfairly hitching a ride on poor excuses and flawed arguments...

Joana
Sep 2nd, 2006, 04:34 PM
So did Alessio Di Mauro and Gilles Simon.

fufuqifuqishahah
Sep 2nd, 2006, 04:37 PM
so did Kostanic, who managed to squeeze 2 winners among 14 unforced errors in a "don't blink or you'll miss" brisk 40 minutes... and how about Virginia Ruano Pascual, Vania King, Lauren Albanese and Emilie Loit, who combined to make an amazing total of 8 games in their second round matches, they will also be taking home the same $26500 for their half-assed or unskilled displays...

fact is, that aside of staunchy defenders with little else to reason for but politically correct bs, equal pay between the tours is a joke, and only justified due to these times where a more blunt and honestly voiced opinion can hurt your PR machine and image. The paying expectators were not in Flushing Meadows to watch the Swiss Miss, like WTAworlders like to think it is, but she was merely the appetizer before the main draw... and so are Sharapova, Serena, Henin and all others for that matter. There is a marketing reason why women open the night starry session, had it been the other way around, organizers would fear that the ladies would be playing for a half empty stadium after the first 15 minutes...

Left alone to the free market forces, prize money for the wta ladies would fall to half of their current stages in grand slams, the market adjusts itself when rewarding the truly bankable players like Serena and Sharapova, with millions in outside endorsements. Those marketable players justify the reason behind the entertainment value reasoning for women's tennis, and are already fairly recompensated for their brand names, all the rest are just unfairly hitching a ride on poor excuses and flawed arguments...


male's get paid so much more anyways in non Grand Slam tourneys. Just look at their year salaries and compare it to the ladies. Sure, if you are like Sharapova or Serena u'll make millions for the year... but if you are like Catalina Castano or Iveta Benesova, you don't make much money in comparison to the men.

I think its stupid of you to call their "displays" half-assed or unskilled. Remember, the scoreline itself doesn't have as much to do w/ the actual quality of play. If we look at the 2nd and 3rd set of Henin v. Sugiyama, it was entertaining, and fairly good quality from both pllayers, yet Sugiyama won only one game. Though some of the things you said were definitely interesetting, and had some validity, a lot of it was rather rude to people who work so hard trying to entertain others. So SSSSSSSSSH!!!!!!! and THINK before you open your bitter mouth. =)

tennnisfannn
Sep 2nd, 2006, 04:47 PM
so should roger and lindsay be paid the same for their 2nd round matches where they barely broke a sweat or is roger more deserving. Should roger's money be halved and given to schaivone who despite losing, went the distance? Like MartinaN says, they don't clock on, they are paid to play a match by the rules.

CooCooCachoo
Sep 2nd, 2006, 04:51 PM
:weirdo:

You pick one male player who did well, but still lost in the second round and oppose him to some female players who were crushed.

The opposite can also be done, you know :shrug:

LH2HBH
Sep 2nd, 2006, 05:46 PM
WOW - let's crack open this debate again! ;) You have to look at tournament prize money as pay for their job, not just pay for time on court.

The top ladies spend just as much time in the gym and on the practice court as Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. They work every day and all day and when it's tournament time, they come to the show. Shouldn't they be getting paid equally for doing their job - which is way, way, way more time and effort spent than just the time on Aurthur Ashe.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Sep 2nd, 2006, 05:50 PM
So did Alessio Di Mauro and Gilles Simon.


And Nicolas Mahut .

Paul.
Sep 2nd, 2006, 05:57 PM
yeah, this argument doesnt work.

di mauro got as much as schiavone but schiavone played way better

baghdatis got the same as loit but baghdatis played way better


tennis players of their caliber are way overpayed in my opinion anyway. they should have lowered the mens prize money to make it equal :tape:

surely a doctor who saves lives should get more than someone who wins a few tennis tournaments. thats where the realy problems lie.

anyway, i'll shut up now before i cause WWIII

fufuqifuqishahah
Sep 2nd, 2006, 06:03 PM
yeah, this argument doesnt work.

di mauro got as much as schiavone but schiavone played way better

baghdatis got the same as loit but baghdatis played way better


tennis players of their caliber are way overpayed in my opinion anyway. they should have lowered the mens prize money to make it equal :tape:

surely a doctor who saves lives should get more than someone who wins a few tennis tournaments. thats where the realy problems lie.

anyway, i'll shut up now before i cause WWIII


lol
yah but there are a lot of corrupt doctors too..... plastic surgeons get paid way too much, but its not their fault there's a market out there just like there's a market for tennis players. tennis players also have to pay their own travelling and accomodation expenses which can be HELLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAA expensive if you don make that much. and its tiring to travel by plane every week. and then u have to pay hitting partner / coach. its expensive.

Reuchlin
Sep 2nd, 2006, 06:07 PM
A 21 year old guy losing to a 36 year old far who hasn't played a match in God knows how long--great match to use as an example to show that women should be making less...

Paul.
Sep 2nd, 2006, 06:07 PM
lol
yah but there are a lot of corrupt doctors too..... plastic surgeons get paid way too much, but its not their fault there's a market out there just like there's a market for tennis players. tennis players also have to pay their own travelling and accomodation expenses which can be HELLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAA expensive if you don make that much. and its tiring to travel by plane every week. and then u have to pay hitting partner / coach. its expensive.
yeah, you're right but im sure you'll agree that the top tennis players get a huge profit (too much IMO)

teachers should be payed more :shrug:

i dont know, but sport gets way too much money :lol:

Jennifer North
Sep 2nd, 2006, 09:00 PM
So did Alessio Di Mauro and Gilles Simon.

Gilles Simon match stats:

Unforced Errors 34

Winners (Including Service) 25

Time spent on court: 106 minutes

nice try, honey, would you like to throw Coria's match in there as well? it's not about number of games won, your opponent may be extremely talented and better than you... it's more about lack of skills or effort, and we can definitely call upon a lot of WTA matches as showcases for poor quality and/or desire...

WOW - let's crack open this debate again! You have to look at tournament prize money as pay for their job, not just pay for time on court.

The top ladies spend just as much time in the gym and on the practice court as Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. They work every day and all day and when it's tournament time, they come to the show.

is this the joke of the year? :lol: not even Navratilova would dare to say something like this with a straight face, no pun intended...

You pick one male player who did well, but still lost in the second round and oppose him to some female players who were crushed.

The opposite can also be done, you know

that is right, honey, the opposite can also be done... but as you well know, but I seriously doubt will be honest enough to admit it out, those are the exceptions to the general rule. The WTA has presented so many poor executed match-ups for quite some time now, that it's no wonder we all marvel dumbfound at those when they occasionally happen...