Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,213 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm sure I've asked this question already, but I Never got any answer to it. So maybe as the tournament names were recently named, somebody can answer. Also, I'm sure a lot of people also have this question. So please, could someone answer, why the fuck the WTA has those random points for tournaments? 900, 470 and 280? Why don't they have 250, 500 and 1000 points as any civilised person would expect?

I know that tennis is a sport strongly associated with anglo saxons, who are known to enjoy barbaric and primitive unpractical ways of measuring stuff (inches and feet? pounds?), but the ATP has rounded numbers, so I really would like to know why the WTA use those weird quantities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,049 Posts
I believe what happened is that they only intended to change the names of the classifications, for the time being at least.

Hence they kept the old points distribution system (of the tournaments) in place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,516 Posts
I'm only guessing, but maybe it's something to do with the licensing/rights type stuff?
Just like how of the WTA1000s the old PM tournaments are still mandatory whereas the P5s still aren't.

I reckon they'll probably get to a stage where the ranking points match the tournament category - but slowly, like always.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,919 Posts
Perhaps they thought they've got too much chaos happening in the rankings right now with COVID so it wouldn't be the best time to introduce a new points scale. Perhaps it will change in 2022.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,872 Posts
They'll still need to maintain the points distinction between the mandatory 1000 and non-mandatory. Either that or make them all mandatory but I don't think those tournaments want to pony up the prizemoney to be mandatory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,120 Posts
I'm sure I've asked this question already, but I Never got any answer to it. So maybe as the tournament names were recently named, somebody can answer. Also, I'm sure a lot of people also have this question. So please, could someone answer, why the fuck the WTA has those random points for tournaments? 900, 470 and 280? Why don't they have 250, 500 and 1000 points as any civilised person would expect?

I know that tennis is a sport strongly associated with anglo saxons, who are known to enjoy barbaric and primitive unpractical ways of measuring stuff (inches and feet? pounds?), but the ATP has rounded numbers, so I really would like to know why the WTA use those weird quantities.
I may know why the WTA has not not adopted the new point totals as you suggest.....which does make sense BTW...at least in part. The MASTERS 1000 for the ATP has always awarded 1,000 ranking points. The men have 9 of these tourneys i believe. The WTA had only 4 Premier Mandatory tournaments that also awarded 1,000 ranking points. Beginning this year they changed the branding to WTA 1000 level Mandatory. for the PM, WTA 1000 level non mandatory for the (5) former Premier 5s, WTA 500 for the Premiers and WTA 250 for the former 280s. The interesting thing is the ranking points awarded have not changed.

The reason for this?.......MONEY. The ladies only have equal prize money to the men at the 4 Premier Mandatory or 1000 level mandatory tourneys. Also equal money for GS. The other 5 non mandatory 1000 level WTA events are purposely awarded 900 points rather than 1000 like for the men because the tournament owners are paying SIGNIFICANTLY less prize money to the women....saying THEIR tourney is only worth 900 points instead of the 1000 points awarded to the men, thereby "justifying" the much lower prize money paid to the ladies. Of course this is total Bullshit and how they have been getting away with it is beyond me. Some of these tourneys are even played side by side during the same week, so this is just batshit crazy. Also the ladies tourneys are generating equal revenue to those of the men's for TV revenue. etc.... so this pay gap is a mystery to me.

So, why did the WTA come up with these new "LABELS" while not changing the POINTS awarded? Because the tournament owners do NOT want the ladies to argue they are now "EQUAL" in value and demand "EQUAL" money I guess. Even something as obvious as this bullshit seems to be getting through. Apparently the prize money discrepancy between ATP 500 level and WTA 500 level (former Premier level) tourneys where 470 points are still awarded to the ladies is even worse. So why change the labels at all you ask?....Maybe to make them SEEM equal on the surface, while actually changing nothing in reality.

Maybe this new player's association that Djokovic and Posposil are proposing....to merge the ATP and WTA may attempt to address some of these inequities, which is certainly needed. Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,322 Posts
Maybe this new player's association that Djokovic and Posposil are proposing....to merge the ATP and WTA may attempt to address some of these inequities, which is certainly needed. Cheers.

honestly i don't think Djokovic and Pospisil really care that much about the women's tour, they just want to use the women as leverage against Gaudenzi and the ATP, as in "see, we've got the women on our side, so you're outnumbered". Because i guess that among the men, they are just not going to be able to muster enough support to pull off their revolution. They're making an assumption that the WTA is such a mess these days that they'll go along with whatever proposal gets thrown their way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,775 Posts
:ROFLMAO:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
honestly i don't think Djokovic and Pospisil really care that much about the women's tour, they just want to use the women as leverage against Gaudenzi and the ATP, as in "see, we've got the women on our side, so you're outnumbered". Because i guess that among the men, they are just not going to be able to muster enough support to pull off their revolution. They're making an assumption that the WTA is such a mess these days that they'll go along with whatever proposal gets thrown their way.
Sorry wrong person
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
I may know why the WTA has not not adopted the new point totals as you suggest.....which does make sense BTW...at least in part. The MASTERS 1000 for the ATP has always awarded 1,000 ranking points. The men have 9 of these tourneys i believe. The WTA had only 4 Premier Mandatory tournaments that also awarded 1,000 ranking points. Beginning this year they changed the branding to WTA 1000 level Mandatory. for the PM, WTA 1000 level non mandatory for the (5) former Premier 5s, WTA 500 for the Premiers and WTA 250 for the former 280s. The interesting thing is the ranking points awarded have not changed.

The reason for this?.......MONEY. The ladies only have equal prize money to the men at the 4 Premier Mandatory or 1000 level mandatory tourneys. Also equal money for GS. The other 5 non mandatory 1000 level WTA events are purposely awarded 900 points rather than 1000 like for the men because the tournament owners are paying SIGNIFICANTLY less prize money to the women....saying THEIR tourney is only worth 900 points instead of the 1000 points awarded to the men, thereby "justifying" the much lower prize money paid to the ladies. Of course this is total Bullshit and how they have been getting away with it is beyond me. Some of these tourneys are even played side by side during the same week, so this is just batshit crazy. Also the ladies tourneys are generating equal revenue to those of the men's for TV revenue. etc.... so this pay gap is a mystery to me.

So, why did the WTA come up with these new "LABELS" while not changing the POINTS awarded? Because the tournament owners do NOT want the ladies to argue they are now "EQUAL" in value and demand "EQUAL" money I guess. Even something as obvious as this bullshit seems to be getting through. Apparently the prize money discrepancy between ATP 500 level and WTA 500 level (former Premier level) tourneys where 470 points are still awarded to the ladies is even worse. So why change the labels at all you ask?....Maybe to make them SEEM equal on the surface, while actually changing nothing in reality.

Maybe this new player's association that Djokovic and Posposil are proposing....to merge the ATP and WTA may attempt to address some of these inequities, which is certainly needed. Cheers.
Are you joking? Since 2005 ATP year by year is outnumbering WTA when it comes to revenue they generate. Its data that is not hard to find.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,872 Posts
The reason for this?.......MONEY. The ladies only have equal prize money to the men at the 4 Premier Mandatory or 1000 level mandatory tourneys. Also equal money for GS. The other 5 non mandatory 1000 level WTA events are purposely awarded 900 points rather than 1000 like for the men because the tournament owners are paying SIGNIFICANTLY less prize money to the women....saying THEIR tourney is only worth 900 points instead of the 1000 points awarded to the men, thereby "justifying" the much lower prize money paid to the ladies. Of course this is total Bullshit and how they have been getting away with it is beyond me. Some of these tourneys are even played side by side during the same week, so this is just batshit crazy. Also the ladies tourneys are generating equal revenue to those of the men's for TV revenue. etc.... so this pay gap is a mystery to me.
Of course you have a source to support this claim.

Maybe this new player's association that Djokovic and Posposil are proposing....to merge the ATP and WTA may attempt to address some of these inequities, which is certainly needed. Cheers.
The proposed merger is actually separate to the new player's association which came later and the WTA weren't even considered when they created PPTA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,120 Posts
Of course you have a source to support this claim.



The proposed merger is actually separate to the new player's association which came later and the WTA weren't even considered when they created PPTA.
So you believe the differences in prize money are justified then?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,329 Posts
Of course this is total Bullshit and how they have been getting away with it is beyond me. Some of these tourneys are even played side by side during the same week, so this is just batshit crazy. Also the ladies tourneys are generating equal revenue to those of the men's for TV revenue. etc.... so this pay gap is a mystery to me.

So, why did the WTA come up with these new "LABELS" while not changing the POINTS awarded? Because the tournament owners do NOT want the ladies to argue they are now "EQUAL" in value and demand "EQUAL" money I guess. Even something as obvious as this bullshit seems to be getting through. Apparently the prize money discrepancy between ATP 500 level and WTA 500 level (former Premier level) tourneys where 470 points are still awarded to the ladies is even worse. So why change the labels at all you ask?....Maybe to make them SEEM equal on the surface, while actually changing nothing in reality.

Maybe this new player's association that Djokovic and Posposil are proposing....to merge the ATP and WTA may attempt to address some of these inequities, which is certainly needed. Cheers.
I think WTA rather have the events available at lesser prize money than no events at all so they came up with the Premier 5 branding in 2009. Still, that doesn't excuse the fact the 470-280 nonsense can be fixed. The product is not worth the $, Roland Garros just proved to you that they rather have 1 ATP match in the night session of CPC. All the 250 events on ATP is worth more than any international events on the WTA side without prize money increase for top players.

...and no I don't think Djokovic or Pospisil cares about WTA in general. They are only lumping WTA in to get their organization started.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vogus_emeritus

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,919 Posts
They'll still need to maintain the points distinction between the mandatory 1000 and non-mandatory. Either that or make them all mandatory but I don't think those tournaments want to pony up the prizemoney to be mandatory.
ATP already has this distinction with Monte Carlo so I don't think it's a big deal really
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,120 Posts
If there's a difference in revenue generation? Yes.
Ok ....fair enough....checking it out the tourneys where the revenue generation seems to be equal are the joint tourneys where they are played side by side....so I don't get differences in prize money there. The "stand alone" tourneys do seem to show higher revenue generation for ATP over WTA ....got it....my bad on that on that part. Whether the prize money discrepancies should be as high as they are currently? I don't think so....especially at the higher profile tourneys. Now throw 2020 and 2021 out the window in covid times....as everything is off. I guess an even bigger subject of money is whether the tournament owners should be paying out a larger % of the revenue generated to the players....both men and women at the LOWER levels, so that not just the top 50-100 makes a good living. Cheers.
 

·
EXPRESS YOURSELF
Joined
·
8,088 Posts
Do we not have already enough problems with the frozen rankings? Let the wta figure that out first
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,213 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I saw some interesting points being made, but still, doesn't fully answer my question, so let me address it

1) I understand they not want to change points with the frozen rankings, but why were the points so irregular in the first place?

2) The mandatory point distinction seems unnecessary, because Monte Carlo has a similar issue, but it's still 1000 points regardless

3) Okay, even accepting the PM P5 distinction as a cause for the 900 1000 difference, why the heck are Premiers worth 470 and Internationals 280?
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top