[ptkten]

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/tenni...002-26wh2.html

The Australian Open has announced the single biggest prizemoney jump in its long history, with a record prizemoney pool of $30 million - up $4 million from 2012 - on offer at next year's event.

The move is designed to avoid the mooted strike from the world's best men agitating for a greater share of tournament revenue, but organisers remain resolute in refusing to offer a fixed percentage share of the grand slam's income. Tennis Australia chief executive Steve Wood said the prizemoney breakdown would be released after consultation with the players. But a redistribution to give a higher percentage to those who lose in the early and qualifying rounds is guaranteed, bringing the Open into line with the other grand slams.

Wimbledon and the French Open, for example, this year lifted first-round prizemoney by 26 per cent and 20 per cent respectively.
The 2013 Australian Open will be played from January 14-27.

Wood today said the rise was the biggest single prizemoney jump in the sport’s history.

‘‘We certainly didn’t make this decision lightly,’’ he said.

‘‘Indeed, our business will suffer from pain as we go to achieve this, but we are committed to making a contribution, a major contribution, to the compensation and the conditions of the players on tour - and I think $30 million is a major contribution.’’

Wood promised ‘‘the fairest method of distribution’’ to aid lower-ranked players.



Interesting. This should really help the lower ranked WTA girls.

[sweetadri06]

It's good for all the players. (especially the men who complain alot)

[Bronx19]

Men are guaranteeing women get paid good money, wouldnt bag them too much.

The prize money for top players is ridiculous, should only increase the money for the lower ranked players.

[Wiggly]

Originally Posted by Bronx19

Men are guaranteeing women get paid good money, wouldnt bag them too much.

The prize money for top players is ridiculous, should only increase the money for the lower ranked players.

Someone who lose 1R on court 17 can't walk home with 50K. Come on.
I wonder how much doubles will get from that increase. They don't have any power.

Both Tours will have two millions to split between 128 players.

[pov]

Originally Posted by Bronx19

increase the money for the lower ranked players.

That's what the push by the players has been centered on.

[Pavstry.]

Originally Posted by Bronx19

Men are guaranteeing women get paid good money, wouldnt bag them too much.

The prize money for top players is ridiculous, should only increase the money for the lower ranked players.

The guys who are constantly playing in GS maindraw are not lower ranked or poor. There are many who dont even get into slam MD or Qualy, and this wont affect them at all.

Originally Posted by Wiggly

Someone who lose 1R on court 17 can't walk home with 50K. Come on.
I wonder how much doubles will get from that increase. They don't have any power.

Both Tours will have two millions to split between 128 players.

This. Players like Stakhovsky already milking the system with dubious 1st round matches/retirements.

Instead increasing slam prize money to the sky, what if slams would hand over X% of the prize money into an ITF fund, and ITF would distribute that among challenger tournaments to increase their prize money.
For example with $1 million they could double the prize money of 100 different 10k tournament on womens side.
4 slam x $1 million = $2M each for men's and women's tour.

[Jajaloo]

Next year Nadal will say the toilets aren't comfortable enough. Watch the AO invest $36 million into upgrading all the toilets in Olympic Park.

[.Ivan.]

The top ranked players were complaining but only to raise the prize money for the early round losers. I will say I am torn on this issue but the slams SHOULD be the best chance for a player to earn a big payday. Even if you do lose in the 1st round you either played well for 12months to have the ranking to qualify or you worked your way through the qualies to earn a spot and I feel they should get a decent payday to compensate for travel and all the other expenses traveling generates. I am only torn when I think of the WC player from the home country who will still get that same payout but even then its hard to argue against them deserving it.

[Invisible Fan]

I'm ok with this as long as the ticket prices stay the same

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Invisible Fan

I'm ok with this as long as the ticket prices stay the same

Who said it will stay the same?

[TheBoiledEgg]

Originally Posted by Invisible Fan

I'm ok with this as long as the ticket prices stay the same

Stakhovsky will pay for ticket rise

[wildemu]

I foresee a lot of tanks/ret. in the first 1r just to collect that check by people who shouldn't even be playing.

[Tenis Srbija]

poor tennis player will be able to afford some food for them and their families now.
Caro

[Pavstry.]

Darren Cahill ‏@darren_cahill

I applaud the Aussie Open for stepping up & fully support the players push for a larger share of revenue. But, not for 1st round exits.

I'd be tempted to reduce 1st rd money & give major increases to 2nd & 3rd rounds, & beyond. Reward players for performance, similar to golf.

It would help eliminate injured players turning up to a Slam event, playing a set and walking off to collect a $20K+ cheque.

[jimskeuh]

Outreagous, like these players don't earn enough money already. We live in a greedy world