Wimbledon 2011

Brophs said:
It's all relative. Women in general aren't as physically suited to that sort of endurance as men, or at least not without the quality suffering. It would be torture watching the likes of Schiavone and Safina play four or five hours of increasingly low-quality tennis just because it was seen to the appropriate that they play the same number of sets.

There's also the fiscal argument as they don't generate even half of what the men's tour does in terms of revenue. But then you have to go down the road of giving less prize money to the less popular male players as they won't have generated the same amount as the likes of a Federer or a Nadal.
Click to expand...

This is achieved by the inherent meritocracy - the biggest tournaments pay the most.

I think if women want equal pay at Wimbledon, then they should play the same number of sets. Fair and simple.

Also, I hate how the final can be over in two sets - makes it a huge anti-climax.
 
swooshboy said:
This is achieved by the inherent meritocracy - the biggest tournaments pay the most.

I think if women want equal pay at Wimbledon, then they should play the same number of sets. Fair and simple.

Also, I hate how the final can be over in two sets - makes it a huge anti-climax.
Click to expand...

No, the point I'm making is that players like Djokovic bring in far less money for Wimbledon than say, either Murray or Federer. So if you take the argument above to its logical conclusion then he should be awarded less for winning tomorrow (if he does) than if either Federer, Murray or Nadal won it. It simply can't be judged in purely financial terms. It just doesn't work.
 
Tim Henman should've been paid double for all the people he brought to sit on that stupid hill whooping like pillocks, and the dramatic rise in strawberry sales in instigated.

Brophs said:
F... by paying them less you're holding them to standards that are impossible to achieve. I think it's impossible to imagine them ever being able to compete on an equal footing with men but the reasons for that are out of their control. They're still the best the sport has to offer and accordingly they should be paid the same (though I agree with the argument that equality of treatment should generally be premised on equality of achievement, it's far too simplistic an argument to make in a case like this).
Click to expand...

Completely. I concur doctor.
 
Zen86 said:
I think he'll be another Henman
Click to expand...

If im not mistaken the highlight of his career was semi final of wimbledon? and I'm pretty sure he never made it a grand slam final. Murrays got to 3. I'm not his greatest fan but he is considerably better than Henman so he should have a better chance. The problem with Murray is he lets silly mistakes easily frustrate him.
 
Henmans highlight was randomly making the French Open semis that one year and where he SHOULD of taken a 2 sets to love lead vs Coria as well. One of the most absurd runs in tennis ever. But it's not really a contest that Murrays better than him, by the time he's done he'll probably like 20 grand slam semis to Henmans 6.....I don't do the whole tougher era stuff(when it comes to a Sampras-Fed debate that era was tougher, but on a Murray-Henman debate this era is tougher), but still it's alreay 7 to 6, and Murray going on 3 times to Henmans 0.
 
I concur. We had a truly golden spate of Finals from 07-09...It'll probably be a formality tomorrow. Though I'd hope Djoko can take his season form into it and not come out like he did for the first set against Tsonga, on the defensive..The way that went might have given him some impetus not to.
 
What is the best men's doubles pair you have seen? Bryans? Woodies? McEnroe and Fleming? Hewitt and McMillan? Newcombe and Roche (my choice)?
 
Nadal beating Djokovic a formality? Are you'll sure you're talking about the same Djokovic who has lost just one match this season, has 7 trophies and has beaten Nadal in 4 finals?
 
Women getting equal pay at only grand slams is only really an issue because men and women are playing in the same tournament. No one cares about women golfers earning less from their grand slams or average WTA tournaments paying less than ATP tournaments.

I don't think the relative argument works because women can easily play 5 sets. Women don't run 90m instead of 100m or play 60min football games. The reason they don't play 5 sets is because no one would watch it which is where the financial argument has to come in. It's also much harder to make it in the men's tour than the women's tour because far more men play the game.
 
wr8_utd said:
Nadal beating Djokovic a formality? Are you'll sure you're talking about the same Djokovic who has lost just one game this season, has 7 trophies and has beaten Nadal in 4 finals?
Click to expand...

The four wins were on differount surfaces as well, twice on hardcourt, twice on clay as well.

I see Djokovic winning.
 
I really hope Djokovic can win today, would just be so fitting for his crazy successful 2011, replacing Rafa as No1 and winning the Wimbledon, nice.
 
I think Djokovic will win this. His record this year has been great but Nadal was devastating against Murray. Should be good.
 
I think I actually want Djokovic to win which I wouldn't have ever thought a couple of years ago. I want Nadal to beat Federer's slam record though so I won't be too dissapointed either way.
 
Alan Rickman sighting, legend.

2-1 on serve. Nadal started the stronger though.
 
Hmm..high quality but these two are too similar for the game to be that entertaining.

Doesn't help that they both take so long to serve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.