Men v Women Tennis Pay - The Results

The voting has ended. The results have been counted and verified. I can reveal that... 61% of people who voted think that women and men should get the same amount of prize money for tennis. Well, as I alluded to in my earlier post, this may be slightly flawed. If my enquiries into the people who have voted, I would say only about 10% of people who voted believe they should be paid the same, it's just that one in particular has noting better to do than voting over and over again.

So with my poll flawed, it appears that all that is left is for me to give my opinion on the matter.

I believe that in equal conditions, they (women) should be paid the same. But the conditions are far from equal. Women's matches are played over three sets, whilst mens can go on for five. If my calculations are correct, over the quarters and semis at Wimbledon this year, men played for a total of 979 mins (16 hours 19 mins), where the women's matches lasted just 621 (10 hours 21 mins). This was despite four of the six women's matches included in the stats lasting the whole three sets, as opposed to only two out of the mens six lasting all five sets (not to mention Nadal's semi being cut short due to Djokovic's retirement).

I read an interesting fact on this matter the other day. Because women's tennis is played over few sets, they often also played doubles as they feel more fresh than the men do. As a result, the top 10 women made more at Wimbledon in 2005 than the top 10 men - and that was before the equal pay came in!

Women in the 'normal' jobs do invariably the same amount of work, and the same quality of work as men. They are not paid the same and this is wrong. Therefore, surely it is wrong that women tennis players get the same pay as men when they do less work?