| |
 Battle of the sexes Wimbledon women don't merit equal pay
Posted: Tuesday June 29, 1999 01:39 PM
If all mankind was created equal, then why don't the men and women at Wimbledon get equal prize money? That was the issue that raised its head again recently, as the annual bout of squabbling over which millionaire gets what was revived. Among the four Grand Slam tournaments Wimbledon stands alone in its steadfast refusal to grant the women anything close to parity with the men. This year's prize money, which includes a 5.4 percent increase overall, will still leave the women trailing the men in earnings by 17 percent. The disparity, which is greater than at any of the remaining Grand Slam tournaments, prompted the inevitable cries of sexism from the women's tour. However, while in these days of political correctness it's dangerous to support any kind of discrimination, a closer look at the facts, might just suggest the Wimbledon officials are correct in their judgement. According to those holding the purse strings at the All England Club, one of the reasons they've denied the women equal pay is what they appear to see as a lack of competition for the money in women's tennis compared to men's. Wimbledon officials claim that as the titles tend to be shared among fewer players on the women's tour, the leading lights essentially have a greater earning power than their male counterparts. So does that claim hold water? Well as far as the singles events go, it does. In the last 10 years there've been just 11 different female champions at the four Grand Slams, compared to 17 different men. So essentially the top women have had a clearer run to the pot of gold than the men. Wimbledon's second reason for holding out is its claim that men's tennis is simply more popular. That contention too is supported by the statistics. For while popularity is a subjective judgement call, in terms of the number of people who actually watch tennis, the men win hands down. Outside the Grand Slams, the 1998 season saw 3.8 million fans watch the 76 events of the men's ATP tour, that's an average of 50,000 fans per tournament. Contrast that with the 1.9 million people who watched the 49 WTA events, and the difference between the audience for men's and women's tennis is 11,225 per event, in favor of the men. In my opinion however, the main reason women don't deserve the same pay as the men is the most obvious -- their matches aren't as long. At last year's Wimbledon the men played 28,256 points during the course of the championship compared to just 17,668 by the women. On an hourly rate, a minimum three-set match, as played by the men, will inevitably demand greater remuneration than the two-set minimum required of the women. So until both sexes are on court for equal time, in my opinion the argument for an equal paycheck is a non-starter. You get what you play for. The opinions expressed
here are solely those of the writer.
| |||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 1999 CNN/SI. A Time Warner Company. Terms under which this service is provided to you.
| |||||||||||||||||
