Serve & Volley Naresh Kumar

Every year at Wimbledon time there is a clamour from the women for bringing their prize money at par with the men. Recently, Chris Evert one of the greatest women players of all time, a winner of an amazing 18 Grand Slam singles titles, issued a statement accusing Wimbledon of clinging to Victorian standards.

During her playing years, the crowds adored Evert. Her manners, dignified bearing, style and elegance, ironically, had a rare Victorian fragrance. Since Evert’s playing days things have changed and moved forward very fast. Prize money is captive to market forces and does not differentiate between men and women.

Can you imagine Hollywood stars ? tennis stars are no less ? being forced to pay equal amounts to men and women? It is a preposterous thought. All tennis events are promoted by sponsors, who decide the payouts on the basis of return in promoting brands and other market benefits.

In due course, a level is established by market forces. This reflects what the market is willing to pay and this cannot be changed by appealing for equal rights. The prize money in a women’s Tier I tournament is 63% less than that of an ATP men’s tournament and 87% less than a men’s ‘Masters Event’ ? this is the market rating and an accurate index of comparative values.

It may be argued, and it is true, that the impact of bridging the difference of 10% or so in the women’s and men’s prize money is minuscule, considering the Wimbledon profits exceed ?30 million annually. But there is another important aspect which needs close attention and consideration.

The prize money collected by the ladies in the last eight at Wimbledon works out to an amazing ?1432 per game as compared to the men who earned only ?993 per game! The difference is due to the fact that most of the top women players also participate in the doubles and mixed doubles events because their singles matches are best of 3 sets only.

The top ten men play only in the singles as the matches are best of 5 sets and far more competitive. So, the actual ‘take home’ prize money of the top ranked ladies is more than the men. Some years ago, there was much disappointment at the monotonous boring serve and volley encounters in the men’s game on grass courts.

In one of the men’s finals it was reported that the actual time the ball was in play was an unbelievable 9? minutes! At that time women’s tennis, with a full variety of shots and long rallies was far more exciting to watch.

But the higher level of skills with more advanced rackets happily brought an end to the serve and volley saga in the men’s game. Wimbledon wisely also managed to create conditions to slow down the courts. Nowadays, the men’s matches are played mainly from the base line and are replete with breathtaking rallies using every shot in the game. Occasionally, in pressure situations like tie breakers or break points, players go to the net. The women’s game cannot compare in power or skill with the men.

The earning power for women is more than substantially enhanced by a glamorous image. At the moment, with the exception of Sharapova there is no Miss Universe lurking amongst the current top ranking players. This is one area where the women’s pulling power is far ahead of the men. Unfortunately, the top women have to train very hard physically and develop broad shoulders and muscles destroying their feminity. Nadal’s biceps are sexy but on women they seem incongruous.

Apart from Victorian indulgence, there is no case for women to get equal prize money at Wimbledon. Incidentally, Sharapova has become the highest paid women athlete of all time. One hopes that this will not spur her screamig to higher decibel levels.