1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Wimbledon equality

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Football_Bat, Feb 22, 2007.

  1. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    The Fab Fortnight to pay equally for men's and women's winners, like the U.S. and Aussie Opens:

  2. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    It's now time for the men to play a best of 3 sets or the women to play a best of 5.
  3. Idaho

    Idaho Active Member

    I'd rather watch a women's match than a men's match, and it isn't because of Sharapova's legs -- though they certainly hurt.

    I'm curious, what are the ratings like for men's finals compared to women's finals? It'd be interesting to see Wimbledon switch things and have the men play Saturday and the women on Sunday to see how the ratings change.
  4. ondeadline

    ondeadline Active Member

    I agree with heyabbott. To get equal pay, there ought to be equal effort required.
  5. Idaho

    Idaho Active Member

    In that case, drop the men to three sets. It's two fewer sets of boring tennis.
  6. ondeadline

    ondeadline Active Member

    Federer could be done with his matches in an hour under that format.
  7. Idaho

    Idaho Active Member

    Who wants to watch Roddick look lost to an extra 25 minutes anyway?
  8. ondeadline

    ondeadline Active Member

    I don't watch it at all so it doesn't matter to me. If it's not the Williams sisters or Sharapova, I usually don't watch tennis. I enjoy Agassi's matches, but he's retired.
  9. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Sadly, it depends on the nationalities involved . . . and the glamour. Gender has little to do with it. Just look at the post above. Quality of match is of zero importance.

    Federer d. Roddick 6-1, 6-2, 6-1 = good ratings.

    Federer d. Davydenko 6-7 (4), 7-5, 3-6, 6-4, 10-8 = bad ratings.

    Williams d. Sharapova 6-1, 6-2 = good ratings.

    Clijsters d. Mauresmo 3-6, 7-6 (6), 9-7 = bad ratings.

  10. keef spoon

    keef spoon Member

    Well, it was just a matter of time. And the fact that the women play best-of-3 while the men play best-of-5 doesn't matter to the PC police. Nobody -- and I mean nobody -- really cares about women's basketball, save for some get-a-lifers in Connecticut and Tennessee, and yet they get more scholarships (15) than do men's teams (13). And men's basketball, obviously, has millions and millions of fans and produces one of sport's greatest events, the NCAA Tournament, each year.
  11. Cadet

    Cadet Guest

    Hey, keef, you forgot the blue font.
  12. No, he didn't.
    He's oppressed, you see.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page