Tennis Forum banner

41 - 60 of 101 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,344 Posts
Why in the world would they offer sub 150 ranked players 85k for 8 months of inactivity ?!? Those girls don't make close to that in a full year......tennis doesn't have that kind of money to begin with.
I'm thinking that the highest ranked will get that amount, and the sum will go down from there. No way they'll give that much money to players outside of the top 100
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,115 Posts
I imagine most tournaments will have reduced prize money in 2021 to make up for the losses.
I guess it's not just the players losing their income - it's coaches, physios, hitting partners, umpires, etc.

Maybe some of the millionaire players could create a fund that they all contribute to that can help protect their sport.
It would be an investment... and maybe they could forego any prize money they make in 2021 also.
The millionaire players may look everywhere to help out the lower ranked players but they're unlikely to open their own wallets.

It will be interesting to see how they decide to divide the emergency fund. I feel like players like Leylah Fernandez or Kaja Juvan need it more than Cirstea, Flipkens or Stosur. They could actually keep afloat declining players while hurting the next gen's careers which isn't the ideal scenario.

Bouzkova is the world number 50 and would just miss out but a multimillionaire like Hsieh could get $2500 a week with little expenses. You have to draw the line at some point but that's rough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,728 Posts
The millionaire players may look everywhere to help out the lower ranked players but they're unlikely to open their own wallets.

It will be interesting to see how they decide to divide the emergency fund. I feel like players like Leylah Fernandez or Kaja Juvan need it more than Cirstea, Flipkens or Stosur. They could actually keep afloat declining players while hurting the next gen's careers which isn't the ideal scenario.

Bouzkova is the world number 50 and would just miss out but a multimillionaire like Hsieh could get $2500 a week with little expenses. You have to draw the line at some point but that's rough.
Also what will be the ranking cut off ? We will see when they announce it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,728 Posts
Ahn, and her fellow council members, have been busy going through weekly meetings, and daily WhatsApp group chats, searching for ways to raise funds to relieve some of the pressure weighing down on the players.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,771 Posts
It seems like the logical decision for who gets the funding should not be on ranking, but rather on prize money earned in the previous year.


Looking at 2018 prize money, there are 121 players who made at least $300,000 that year. Even if you assume 30% of it goes to taxes and they spend $150,000 to travel, have a full-time coach and cover living expenses at their training bases, that still leaves $60,000+. Most of these players have been at this level for a few years. It's possible some players are bad at managing their finances, but there's no reason why they shouldn't have money saved at that income level.

IMO, the money should be allocated to anyone who made between $50,000-300,000 last year, with more funding at the lower end of that spectrum and less at the higher end. There are 162 players who fall in that bracket and they're the ones who are active at WTA level/top ITF level, but could be wiped out if they lose all their income for 6-12 months.

Anyone who made less than that would only qualify for funding unless they had a valid medical reason like recovering from surgery or a severe long-term illness/injury.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,450 Posts
It seems like the logical decision for who gets the funding should not be on ranking, but rather on prize money earned in the previous year.
That's probably fair enough.


Looking at 2018 prize money, there are 121 players who made at least $300,000 that year. Even if you assume 30% of it goes to taxes and they spend $150,000 to travel, have a full-time coach and cover living expenses at their training bases, that still leaves $60,000+. Most of these players have been at this level for a few years. It's possible some players are bad at managing their finances, but there's no reason why they shouldn't have money saved at that income level.
Anyone at that income level, even if they're reasonably new to the tour (like Andreescu, for example), does not need immediate help. Since the tours stopped, they don't have to worry about travel costs (or coaching, in many/most cases), and many of them are locked down in their own homes, with minimal day-to-day expenses other than food. Most of the younger ones still live at home with their parents anyway. Maybe some of the remainder have mortgages, but most will have already paid off their homes.

IMO, the money should be allocated to anyone who made between $50,000-300,000 last year, with more funding at the lower end of that spectrum and less at the higher end. There are 162 players who fall in that bracket and they're the ones who are active at WTA level/top ITF level, but could be wiped out if they lose all their income for 6-12 months.
You appear to have a bias against those players on the ITF tour. Why? Giving a subsidy to someone who earnt $300,000 last year is too generous. You have to start from the bottom and work up, not the other way around.

Anyone who made less than that would only qualify for funding unless they had a valid medical reason like recovering from surgery or a severe long-term illness/injury.
Presumably you mean "if," not "unless." It's the people who earnt less than $50,000 who desperately need the help now, even if it's only a couple of thousand to pay their most pressing bills. Many of them are new to the circuit, and simply haven't had time to play enough ITF tournaments to get any real prize money and their rankings high enough to play WTA events. If they aren't looked after now most will never come back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,728 Posts
It seems like the logical decision for who gets the funding should not be on ranking, but rather on prize money earned in the previous year.
You have to look at multiple factors: year end ranking & prize money. career prize money, age, national tennis federation(for example british players will have financial help)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
I imagine most tournaments will have reduced prize money in 2021 to make up for the losses.
I guess it's not just the players losing their income - it's coaches, physios, hitting partners, umpires, etc.

Maybe some of the millionaire players could create a fund that they all contribute to that can help protect their sport.
It would be an investment... and maybe they could forego any prize money they make in 2021 also.
They have bills to pay too. Their mansions, expensive sport cars, and coaching team and etc do not come free.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,526 Posts
Discussion Starter #56
After all that hooha about the ITF rankings and how that was going to cull the players, it seems that coronavirus is going to cull a lot more. I am guessing that the WTA/ITF is only going to bother with giving support to players around the top 100-300 in the world in singles and 80-200 in doubles.

Tennis is general is going to be struggling, because of the loss of revenue due to the cancellation of events during the virus period and the economic depression will have a knock on effect on tournament sponsorship after the virus subsides, so we have to expect that the whole structure of WTA/slam/ITF circuits we had before the virus cannot be maintained and there will be major shrinkage. The slams and major WTAs will survive for the most part but it will be harder for international events and I expect the ITF circuit to be massively reduced. There may be some effects on prize money as well - can the same prize money be sustained or will it go down in order to save the tour?

I think that players ranked below 400 who are not current or recent top juniors or ex-top 100 players coming back from injury will struggle to find a place in this reduced tennis world, and I am guessing that the WTA/ATP/ITF probably realise this and won't bother to support them. That group will depend on rich federations, family wealth or whatever sponsorship they can muster, to resume their tennis careers, but I am guessing that many will give up and become coaches or just play part time when the tour hits near where they are living.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,728 Posts
ITF chief advises players to seek local support during shutdown




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
41 - 60 of 101 Posts
Top