Home > Tennis > Tennis pay: Men meet their equals as women get even at Wimbledon

Tennis pay: Men meet their equals as women get even at Wimbledon

The announcement by the All England Club to award equal money to both men and women competitors is a bold one. But will other major tournaments follow suit?

by Gareth Llewellyn-Stevens on 24 February 2007

Email this Article (6) Comments

62%

38%

Maria Sharapova: Thrilled at decision (gettyimages.com)

Related Bet:

Free £10 bet when you register at

This week the All England Club announced that the Wimbledon Championships will offer equal pay to women and men for the first time. The move, which sees an alignment with the Australian and US Open policies on equal prize money throughout the tournament (while the French only offers equal prizes to the winners), has proved to be unpopular with some players from the men’s circuit. Mardy Fish and Tommy Haas have already hit out at the move, and others will likely do so in the run-up to the tournament at SW19 in June.

Women have long campaigned to be paid the same as men, and you could go a long way back in history to find the beginning of their attempts to gain equality. But the All England Club had previously stated the difference in prize money was because men play a maximum of five sets while women play best-of-three -- an argument thrown up by some of the men to have spoken out against the move already.

Last year saw former champions Venus Williams and Billie-Jean King call for equal pay, as did WTA chairman Larry Scott, while British Prime Minister Tony Blair “fully endorsed” the concept.

Speaking after his win over Amer Delic at the Memphis International, Haas, the current world No.9, said: "I don't think it's really fair. I think the depth of men's tennis is much tougher than the women's, plus we play best of five sets.”

Fish also weighed in with his views: “We're all out there to put on a show for the fans. The only beef I would have with it is that we're out there for longer."

Tim Phillips, chairman of the All England Club, said in a statement on the championship’s website: “The time is right to bring this subject to a logical conclusion and eliminate the difference” following a unanimous decision by the Championship committee. He said it was “a boost for the game as a whole and recognises the enormous contribution that women players make to the game and to Wimbledon”, adding: ''We hope it will also encourage girls who want a career in sport to choose tennis as their best option. In short, good for tennis, good for women players and good for Wimbledon.”

The move has brought mixed responses. British No.1 Andy Murray, who understands the grievances of his peers, said: “It's probably the only sport in the world where women are making the same money as men. That can really only be a good thing. Guys are obviously going to be annoyed if you go and play a five-hour match and then the women play a 45-minute match and they are getting the same money."

Current world No.1 and 2004 Wimbledon winner Maria Sharapova said: “I am thrilled with Wimbledon’s decision to award equal prize money. This decision will only strengthen the bond between women’s players and one of the world’s great sporting events.”

Three-time winner Venus Williams added: “The greatest tennis tournament in the world has reached an even greater height today. I applaud the decision by Wimbledon, which recognises the value of women’s tennis. The 2007 Championships will have even greater meaning and significance to me and my fellow players.”

Women might only play best of three sets, but often those three sets offer much more than the five sets in the men's game which is dominated by big serving and powerful baseline rallies. On his way to a meeting with Murray in the final in San Jose last week, Ivo Karlovic hit 87 aces. That isn't much of a spectacle unless you like seeing line judges diving out of the way as a balls hurtle towards them.

However, this is the 21st century, and women should be earning the same as men for what they do, regardless of hours.

The French Open has yet to make the move to offer equal pay throughout the tournament, but perhaps they could if a player was to push for the right to receive equal pay through the courts. That would be a drastic step and one that shouldn't be needed; but sadly, not everyone around the world sees women as equal.

Murray probably got it spot on when he said that tennis will be the first sport in the world where equal prize money is offered for men and women in its biggest tournament, which Wimbledon undoubtedly is. I could only applaud the Championship committee of the All England Club for finally making the move; it's about time.

Do you agree with equal pay for women players, even though they play shorter matches? Send your views to Sportingo.

Comments (6)

by Charles Savoie on February 24, 2007

From the article: "women should be earning the same as men for what they do, regardless of hours." Regardless of hours? You are suggesting that a female worker who works 15 hours per week should be paid the same as a man who works 60 hours per week? Ridiculous. To even compare awards given voluntarily to tennis players to real paid work done by real people is insulting. If we really desired equality in cases like this, we would do away with "men's" and "women's" leagues and have female players compete against men. Now *that* would be entertaining -- and equal.

by GLS on February 24, 2007

60hrs a week? How many men's games have you seen that consistently last 12hrs? If they play 5 matches in 7 days that isn't 60 hours work playing largely best of 3 sets. Even in a Grand Slam they wouldn't hit 60hrs in a week.

by Andyg on February 26, 2007

I don't think they should be paid the same amount if they don't have to play 5 sets, but perhaps I'm just saying that so I can see more of Sharapova :)

by Harry Dames on March 16, 2007

I totally agree. Their cost is higher than men and they practice just as hard as men but deliver more watchable tennis

by Vicky on November 07, 2007

I think you misunderstand. Regardless of hours mean that even if you are part time you should get paid the same per hour than your mail counterpart. I hope that clears up any confusion and I think that was not clear in the article! And for your information the william sisters agree that 5 sets for women is a good idea as they believe they genuinely are equal!

by Kristian on January 26, 2008

It's simple, women are paid the same, so play five sets (tie-break in the fifth if it's too long). No-one has come up with a significant reason as to why they wouldn't.