View Single Post
Old 02-22-2007, 09:42 AM   #3
SeeGeeWhy
#1 Goaltender
 
SeeGeeWhy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

"Last year, men's champion Roger Federer received prize money worth US$1.170 million and women's winner Amelie Mauresmo got US$1.117 million."

Wow, that 53,000 difference is really a slap in the face.

Women in tennis are already getting paid at a much higher rate (nearly 60% more based on the Federer/Mauresmo numbers quoted above) than their male coutnerparts... which is fair considering the growth in popularity in the sport. If the women played 5 game matches, as the men do, then theoretically a woman champion would be getting paid nearly 1.8 million for a tournament win at Wimbeldon at today's purse sizes.

I don't get what the complaint here is. They're getting paid roughly the same for almost half of the amount of work. Sounds pretty sweet to me.

Now, women's golf is a sport where their champions are paid nowhere near the level the guys are. Then again, it's not a tour full of Wies, Creamers, Kerrs and Gulbis', so the draw is not the comparable to the attention the PGA gets.

http://www.pga.com/tournaments/money...ey_leaders.cfm (LPGA Leaders)

http://www.pga.com/tournaments/money...ey_leaders.cfm (PGA Leaders)
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
If the NHL ever needs an enema, Edmonton is where they'll insert it.

Last edited by SeeGeeWhy; 02-22-2007 at 09:50 AM.
SeeGeeWhy is offline   Reply With Quote