NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - When it comes to professional tennis, the women are beating the stuffing out of the men in the match that counts -- television ratings -- but you would never know it from their paychecks.
Last year at Wimbledon, Serena beat Venus (no last names necessary) and drew a 3.4 rating in the United States. When Lleyton Hewitt beat David Nalbandian (come on, I'm sure you all remember this matchup) the next day, 30 percent fewer households tuned in.
But Hewitt took home a check for just under $1 million; Serena got about $74,000 less for her singles title.
Somewhere, Bobby Riggs must be smiling.
The winners' gap is a bit smaller at this year's tournament, which starts Monday -- just under 7 percent. But that still comes to a healthy $66,800. Earlier-round losers see an even greater disparity in their checks -- women losing in the first round will see about 20 percent less than the men, and overall prize pool for the singles championships is about 14 percent less for the women.
The French Open also has a gap, though a smaller one. The U.S. and Australian opens, the other Grand Slam tournaments, have equal pay.
All England Lawn Tennis & Croquet Club Chairman Tim Phillips, and some men's players, defend the difference, saying that women don't have to play as many sets: the women are a best-of-three format, while men are best-of-five. "We think our prize money is driven by market data and fairness," Phillips said at an April press conference.
Not only does the Women's Tennis Association object to the argument, even officials with the ATP, the organization that represents the men, believes it's a red herring.
| SportsBiz
|
|
| Click here for SI.com sports coverage
|
|
|
|
"Some players think that, but it's not a majority," said Mathew Rapp, vice president of communications for ATP. "People pay to see who they want to see, not how many sets they might get to see. They'll pick which match they want based on whether they like the style of play in men's or women's tennis, or the players in the match."
The ATP isn't specifically pushing for pay equity. Instead, it and the WTA are pushing for a general increase in prize money, especially at the Grand Slam events, where players get a puny cut of total revenue.
Estimates are that about 15 percent of Wimbledon revenue goes to prize money, while less than 10 percent of U.S. Open revenue ends up with the players. Wimbledon won't confirm that ratio, but it does confirm that the tournament's profits, which are donated to various amateur tennis programs, were nearly three times the size of the prize pool.
| Related columns
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the major team sports, where players are represented by unions, more than half the revenue stream goes to player pay. But the ATP and WTA can't serve as unions, since the players are not employees of the tournaments in which they compete.
Closing the gap between men and women pay won't put either Wimbledon or the French Open into the red, nor would giving the players a larger cut of the action.
"The gap today is so small, why not go ahead and follow the lead of other majors," asked Martha Burk, the activist who made Augusta National Country Club's male membership an international cause before this year's Master's. "But as with Augusta, sex discrimination in sports doesn't have to make sense if folks enforcing it are stubborn enough."
|
