Roddick and Wertheim talk GENDER EQUALITY in TENNIS
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 апр 2024
- Excerpt from Served with Andy Roddick Episode 12 - released on 4.16.24.
With the new Saudi Deal with the WTA and the season schedule shifting in the future, Roddick and Wertheim talk about the state of gender equality in the sports industry and tennis specifically.
Listen to the full episode on your favorite audio platform:
Spotify: tinyurl.com/yc6brjwv
Apple Podcast: tinyurl.com/ysp9vjur
Amazon Music: tinyurl.com/4h3vww6h
iHeart Radio: tinyurl.com/3eutvupp 
Спорт
I appreciate the quote for how revealing it is of the guy who said it, “if the men get 10x the sponsorship, maybe there’s a way we don’t get the 50-50 model.” An absurd statement. I don’t see how you can equalize the prize money when the competitors can’t compete against each other. The WTA and ATP should stay as different entities acknowledging they are more like friends with similar goals. Both should focus on their own product.
Why is Werthiem in an airplane bathroom?? 😂
I had exactly the same thought! Don't point the camera down!! LMFAO!
because he's on an airplane
The WTA arguably reached its peak crossover appeal during the Williams era. The depth of talent on that tour was insane during their dominance. Now, it has to contend with a new normal just like the ATP does post Big Three. The Next Gen branding, however, has helped audiences understand how to process this new cohort of ATP stars (18-24 y/o).
I don't know that the WTA has achieved something similar with its leading figures, save Gauff, in part because they're not all as compelling from a personality & gameplay standpoint. I still watch both tours, but definitely find myself following the ATP more closely these days because of Shelton & other Next Gen stars. It used to be the reverse when Serena was slaying the game.
Sloane Stephens won US Open final years ago against Madison Keys in less than one hour. Any bets that people who had tickets to the men's final that year were a lot happier and got better dollar value for their entertainment.
He is arguing for equal pay for the WTA and ATP because of the Caitlin Clark effect? The Women's NCAA Basketball Championship outdrew the Men's NCAA Basketball Championship in TV ratings for the first time EVER and now we should pay men and women's tennis players equally? Neil Armstrong would be proud of that giant leap.
...we already do pay them equally, at least at tournaments they have in common. The sky hasn't fallen.
@@Dan-vo7vc They are not paid equally in all mixed events (i.e. Cincy Open). The Grand Slams they are paid the same. I was more pointing to him using the Caitlin Clark phenomenon to make his point about "equal prize money arguments are stupid" in tennis.
Guys, this is the best Served to date. Thanks for stirring the s__t!
The idea that interest varies event by event is disingenuous. Men's tennis get more viewers and generates more income, which is why ATP only events have higher prize money than equivalent WTA only events. You can make an argument that there should be equal prize money at joint events, but argument doesn't involve ratings or revenue earnings, which clearly favour the men's game.
Thank you. The delusion exhibited by some tennis fans regarding who really "drives the action" is stunning.
What is Wertheims agenda pushing for equality in prize money like this? I don't see a near future where the women pull in as much money per year as the men in tennis. I am all for promoting the women's side, I love watching tennis regardless of gender, but unless they earn the money don't give it to them. WNBA for example is heavily supported by the NBA and is writing red numbers since it exists. Men's sport is generally more dynamic let's say and therefore more interesting. A woman who is realistic knows this when she chooses a career where her salary is based on popularity. Tennis women are very lucky they get paid so much, especially at Grand Slams where their prize money is inflated in my eyes. And on top of that I think time on court matters Andy. Sure a spectator pays per match or match day, but it means a person gets less for their money and the player gets more money for less playing which is what Gilles Simon was getting at I assume.
Wertheim is a leftist conformist. You can see that also in his strident opinions regarding Djokovic and the covid vaccine.
to the guest: A - Enunciate B - Get a microphone C - you are looking at the screen, not at the camera
we don't want equality, we want equity; fairness
Then make Jessica Pegula and Emma Navarro pay to play.
@@GhostofGerulaitis The Navarro family is to Charleston 500 what Ellison is to Indian Wells & what Pegula is for Miami.
@@got2bjosh Yeah, we normies call them oligarchs.
Complete BS! Coco only got more viewers because she is an American as opposed to Djok and Med. Had it been non Americans in the women's final NOBODY would have watched it.
So your argument is that women's fans have to be fans for the "right" reason? Anna Kournikova almost always outsold men's events, but she doesn't count because she's pretty? Serena fans were just there because she was going to retire? No one even likes Novak, people just went to his last major to see him break the record. See, I can do it, too.
Not nobody... but yeah, JW only pulled out ESPN data not worldwide viewership
@@Dan-vo7vc Almost outsold is not the same as outsold. Also pro tennis isn't a beauty contest, it's a professional sport - don't know if using Kournikova is the best argument for equality in women's sports.
Coco simply drew more because she was an American in the US open, that's all. They're giving random circumstances that don't show the whole picture. Honestly, to me, watching women's tennis is like slow motion compared to men's. I simply do not enjoy it as much. Props to the ladies for what they do, but they're not drawing the same crowds.
It’s not a one off where the US Open is concerned its been over a decade 😂 yes because no male attention but facts speak for themselves. And sorry, so many of the mens slam finals the past decade have been crap / shorter than the women’s, and not sure what slow “moron” means- Saba one year was hitting harder forehands than that men were, hardly slow “moron”!!!!
Also that stat is for ESPN - it doesn't include Eurosport, BBC coverage in Europe - not to mention Asia and elsewhere in the world.
Can't wait to see the interview with Dasha Kasatkina, she is just an amazing person along with her girlfriend Natalia Zabiiako. Their vlog is fantastic too
Generally, I don't want to spend 4+ hours watching tennis matches. However, for the Grand Slams I acknowledge that's the best and fairest way to decide the men's champion, and the quality of tennis does not deteriorate much in sets 4 and 5.
There's nothing more exciting in tennis than watching a 5th set -- Borg/McEnroe; Roger/Rafa; Novak/Rafa; Novak/Roger; Sinner/Alcaraz; Novak/Alcaraz; Novak/Tsitsipas; Sinner/Medvedev. The 3-setters in slams are the boring ones.
Atp's revenue increased massively and there is an 80% revenue difference since the late 2000s when the revenues were equal
The average length of matches is a better metric than the number of sets.
1) Women don't play best of 5 in majors
2) According to 2023 info, all singles matches combined on ATP/WTA tour (on shared venues/dates) men sell just under 70% of tickets
3) Women would sell even fewer tickets if they had their own itinerary (they largely piggy back onto the men's tour and benefit from cross pollination)
4) Paying women 50% prize money in majors is theft, given the above points.
Do women want charity?
To counter this:
Men play best of 5 in 4 professional tournaments in the world. If you look at the total number of tournaments, including national level domestic tournaments, there are literally HUNDREDS of tournaments played every year. And you think what represents less than 1% of the tournaments in the world should be the standard setter? The grand slams are an exception, and exceptions do not make the rule.
Personally, while I enjoy watching the mens game, I prefer watching the women play. Women are beautiful. Like a work of art. Men are utilitarian. Like a Jeep.
@@bigrobsydney you omitted the small matter of men generating more money. No money no sport
@@BOZ_11 Lets say your point is correct (and I'm not arguing it, by the way). The overall goal should be to grow the size of the pie. That way everyone gets more.
@@bigrobsydney Then tell women to sell more tickets
@@BOZ_11 Very simplistic thinking. Okay, I'm going to explain to you why you are one of the worlds biggest dopes.
Tennis as a sport returns on average around 7% of its overall revenues to the players. That means 93% go to the administrators.
When you look at the big US sports (NFL, NHL, NBA, MLS, etc), what they did was to get together with the players unions and agree to a revenue split of 50/50. They were able to do this, because the diverse stakeholders came together with a single voice.
Tennis is fractured. There are 7 stakeholders - the 4 GS's, ATP, WTA, and ITF. And there is no single players union either. Each group is only after their own interests and doesnt give a crap about the others. Wimbledon, for example, made around £160m in revenues, yet gives less than £40 m in prizemoney. That is a lot more than 7%, but is counterbalanced by so many other tournaments where the players get SFA.
What needs to happen, is that the 7 stakeholders stop being saelfish, and come together with a single voice, and then market ALL of tennis to the big media companies, and sell it as a single package. That way, they can extract MAXIMUM revenue. Then they need to actually return 50% to the players. This way there is a bigger sized pie to begin with, AND the revenues would increase by at least 7 times on top of that.
Everybody wins, except those with small brains...
"If it rains, as it has before in London".
Gender Equality in tennis: There are 4 tennis majors a year. Women earn equal pay. Why aren't women playing the best 3 out of 5 sets in majors? Are women athletes physically more fragile than men? To win a major, you must win 7 matches in a row, that's a maximum of 28 five set matches for the entire year! Also, most tennis matches are finished in 3 or 4 sets. I bet Roddick is skirting this issue to avoid a target on his back. It's not about the time played on court. Some of the greatest tennis ever played have been Herculean men's matches where one player loses the first 2 sets and comes back to win the next three. Playing the best of 3 sets is antiquated, the last vestige of genteel tennis from the early 20th century. For women's tennis, playing the best of 3 sets must go the way of the dodo bird.
Agree. But “genteel”
Nobody wants to watch the best of 5 women's match, and that would be horrible for scheduling.
The women have offered to play best of 5 for decades in return for equal pay. They're not gonna make that change, because no one wants to watch a 5 hour tennis match on TV anymore, regardless of gender.
@@Dan-vo7vc You're kidding, right? "No one wants to watch a 5 hour tennis match?" Maybe you don't but plenty of people do. I just watched 4 straight days of Masters golf. I watch the Tour de France. People watch the Iron Man triathlon. You're calling for the dumbing down of a noble sport because you assume people won't watch. You're wrong. Furthermore, not all tennis matches go to 5 sets. Most will end in 3 to 4 sets. Conversely, watching a women's tennis match starting and finishing within an hour is ridiculous.
@@davidhunternyc1 your example aside, the ratings figures are the ratings figures.
Coming from a fan: maybe you should consider inviting at least one female person while talking about equity?
Also, so much sexism in the comments. It’s rather sad to see all of the same narratives being used over and over again. I will just say that the disparity and inbalance between the sexes in sport and in other areas of life is caused by centuries of disciminatory societal practices. Real equity, not simply equality, is the answer here.
Agreed. I am shocked by some of the comments here.
Don't confuse facts with sexism. I am a woman who has had to stand up for equal pay for equal work my whole life, but women in professional sports are selling a product for entertainment and it's not equal to the product men are selling. If men and women were equal in sports, they'd be playing against each other in the same leagues. Even Serena Williams, the GOAT of women's tennis, acknowledges that she wouldn't be able to beat the 700th ranked ATP player in her heyday. I'm sure you know all this already.
@@orchidpanda2253 I think you are missing the point here. Anyone interested in the “why” of the supposed higher entertainment value of mens sports (which is also debated in the podcast and I will not go further into this) can learn about the discriminatory practices against female athletes and reasons why, from the start, womens sports have not had equal opportunity to flourish with little or no funding. The least we can do now is to try to do better. And yes, it includes female athletes getting paid the same amout of prize money as their male counterparts at tennis majors, despite the number of sets they play.
Lol
I know that on occasion Women sports out draw mens on TV - Hoops, Soccer, tennis and that is where the bucks are. of course in the USA. NFL has like 95 of the top 100 audiences. but compared to say cricket, yes cricket worldwide....
Hey WTA, just be separate from the ATP and don't piggy back off the men's tour. See what happens.
No seriously, no more charity, no more equal outcome treatment. Do your own thing and see if you even survive.
This conversation is tired and old. Put up numbers. This world isn't a charity
1st: This year's ratings for women's NCAA is a one off, driven by Clark. 2nd: the only competitive ratings women's tennis even came close to the men's was due to Serena and today's women tour is unwatchable with no female superstars. 3rd: I will only agree with equal prize money when the women start playing best of 5 sets like the men do. The men spend a minimum of 3.5 hours on court per match and the women spend barely an average of 90 minutes on court per match. No reason for equal prize money with only one third of the time to earn that money.
As far as I am concerned, the two tours should, as much as possible, stand alone on their own merits. No different to me than the NFL versus the XFL or Women's Football Alliance in American football. Each one needs to justify its own existence by the interest and revenue they individually produce. All the issues about the importance of best of three versus best of five and length of matches would be reflected, ultimately, in the revenue each produced.
Personally, I like to watch both tours for slightly different reasons, but ultimately the competitiveness of the matches...
I think it's wonderful that the women's NCAA basketball games had more interest than the men's. But, should the women's revenue then be shared with the men's game?? Not in my opinion.
Andy does have a good point, however, about finding ways to increase interest in BOTH tours to grow the sport! That is something that is likely being overlooked!
Andy please don’t make a woke podcast, people will soon tune out. People liked you always genuine, if you start falling for this politically correct bs I’m afraid your podcast will not last long
Why are wheel chair players always left out?? Equal prize money for all pro players to include wheelchair professionals! Hurray! 🎉🎉😊😊. The disabled deserve more money than ATP/WTA actually since they are handicapped!!
Starting place: let market forces govern prize money
Depends where the money is coming from. . And the 3 set 5 set argument is silly as men and women are different physically
Bye bye WTA ! Do your own thing raise you own money !
❤️
Everyone here who is opposing gender equality should research the concept of luck egalitarianism.
Lol So then the majority of professional tennis players shouldn't get paid at all! There is no iteration of "luck egalitarianism" that can justify redistributing wealth to women like, for instance, Jessica Pegula or Emma Navarro based solely on the unluckiness of their gender or the morality of their individual choices. It's amazing how far you country club feminists will go to ignore class politics.
Accepting the reality that men are in general faster and stronger and better at professional sports is not opposing gender equality, it's accepting truth. Women are equal or better at a lot of other things.
@@orchidpanda2253 Luck egalitarianism holds that those sorts of unchosen differences should not factor into what one is compensated because one did not choose whether to be born male or female. If the pay is unequal, then men are being rewarded for the luck of being born male. And regardless, women tend to be paid less across the board. You know that.
women are already given enough equality in tennis, playing only 2 sets vs. 5 sets from the men with same prize money in GSs is more than enough proof of giving them advantages..however with playing in countries like Saudi should get support. there's no perfect formula for sudden equality, we've been trying for years here in the US in racial equality, but not starting anything wouldn't lead to. progress.
Exactly, it's absurd that women don't play the best of 5 sets. It's only 4 times a year! If their conditioning isn't up to par, it's their fault.
we don't want equality, we want equity; fairness
@@BOZ_11 explain how fair is 2 sets paid the same vs. men playing 4-5 sets..
@@angel91485 It's not fair! If women sell 30% of tickets, they should get 30% of prize money
To be honest equal pay for top players is not an issue, both men and women on top 10 make good money, but if you really want to make this a better product the real money should go yo the other top500 players of atp and wta to help them survive and be able to be professionals tennis players that can stay just playing tennis
Your real problem in tennis is not prize money for the top players thats stupid, is the bottom ones, anything from 100 to 500 in the rank should be subsidy
Wertheim's audio echos. Very annoying.
It's the room he's in.
Thank you Andy and Jon for not being misogynistic jerks. 😊
"Sometimes the women will drive the action, sometimes the men will..." Wertheim is being very disingenuous here. I guess journalism degrees don't require coursework in mathematics.
I generally agree but there was a golden era of women's tennis during the first decade of this century when there were a lot of big stars competing at the same time e.g., Hingis, Henin, Capriati, Serena, Venus, Sharapova, Clijsters, Seles, Mauresmo, Safina, Dementieva, Jankovic, Ivanovic,
I remember and adore those women, particularly Monica Seles whose full potential was tragically cut short by the knife attack. But even then, with that list of talented players, would you say they "drove the action" (of tour profits)? @@chucklumb3500
How’s that disingenuous when it’s true? So many examples where the women’s events (at slams) have had more viewers than the men’s. 😊 Happy to quote examples, and I don’t have a maths degree 😂
@@chucklumb3500(and I’m not saying the men’s tour isn’t more popular on the whole, which it is, but his statement wasn’t inaccurate)
@@Petey8482You're moving the goalposts. We're not talking about viewers; we're talking about "market attention," as in paying customers of a product. ATP revenues are, year after year, much higher than they are for the WTA.
The arguments in these comment sections... if viewership or ticket sales drove prize money, then Shelton and Monfils should get more money per match than Zverev and Tsitsipas. If more time on court means more prize money, then Mathieu should've made more than Roger. Only fair, right? Women subsidize men's sports in gymnastics, skating, etc, but no one whines about it. And, if anyone bothered to Google, a stats report says the women's US open final outrated the men's in 5 out of 7 years they examined. Prize money is based on revenue, sure - but awarding it based on achievement seems like a pretty reasonable model.
Is Shelton big in Europe and Asia? I don't think Monfils outsells tickets or viewership to Tsitsipas right now. Where are you getting your data? Are gymnastics and ice skating professional sports?
Its already equal at the GS level for lesser sets played. What else do they need? They are a separate org i.e. WTA. They need to find ways to keep their tour interesting and exciting and earn their money.
I like how Andy disagreed with JW without taking a firm stance on JW's "equity" and "combine the tour and share the spoils" take. I didn't know JW was such a weird tennis analyst.
Nonsense. There is no gender equality in tennis in the facts. A tennis player woman n.1 would lose with n.100 atp player, this is so evident. And the women play GS at the best of 3, but they're weirdly paid same as men, which is a nonsense. wta tournaments have in average 1/3rd of the public of an atp tournament and moreover the public from home is hugely bigger in atp matches than wta ones, so more paid ads for atp... But they're paid the same😂😂
You overuse the word "moreover" and you can't even spell it.
@@jeblmknctmabtaldlr assume less drugs mate... Moreover gfy😉
Try #1 woman losing to #1000 atp
I think it's fine for the slams because there they can create similar interest (especially now that the women's game has become equally deep) and they work very and make huge sacrifices (family planning) behind the stage as well. Besides, Grand Slams make shitloads of money and can afford this even if just as a symbolic gesture.
@@alexlackner1945 GS WTA gets a similar (but still lower) attention than ATP GS, just because they happen in the same period. But each time that a M1000 is done in different weeks, you'll see half of public and interest for WTA compared to ATP, this happens basically for all m1000 tournaments not done in the same weeks for women and men. This is undeniable, women tennis is clearly a minor sport compared to men tennis
I couldn't even name three Top-10 WTA players.
Then you really don't know anything about tennis.
Your loss
Grand Slam champions: Swiatek, Sabalenka, Rybakina, & Gauff, duh.
hint: name ends in -ina or -ova
He keeps using the word equity but doesnt seem to know what it means... hint: its communist
I am born in Soviet union and it is fascinating to observe.
D.E.I is a plague to the world. Meritocracy should be the standard. Earn what you get, not based on your race or anything else
ATP fan only... sorry