Less money in women's golf

[Maninblack4612]

It's just been stated that golf is one of the sports with the biggest gap between men's & women's prize money. Is this right or not? I think it's fair enough. The prize money reflects the amount of interest in the sport. Many more men than women play & watch golf and there is much more money in it. Market forces apply, there's not a lot can be done about it, is there?

 

[guest100718]

After watching the borefest that was the womens open I am not suprised.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

It's just been stated that golf is one of the sports with the biggest gap between men's & women's prize money. Is this right or not? I think it's fair enough. The prize money reflects the amount of interest in the sport. Many more men than women play & watch golf and there is much more money in it. Market forces apply, there's not a lot can be done about it, is there?

Totally agree. If the sport is worth watching then people and money will follow.

One of the great mysteries of modern sport is equal pay in the tennis majors. How many great games of womens tennis can you remember? Whoever managed that is someone I want negotiating for me in future.

 

[Qwerty]

. there's not a lot can be done about it, is there?

Bikinis during the summer months??

 

[Imurg]

Prize money, at the end of the day, comes from the Sponsors/organisers
They will "invest" their budget where they will get most return.
In golf that's in the Men's game.
Simple as that really.

In an ideal world there would be parity but if those that provide the prize money obviously dontntuink it is.
Women's tennis has a much higher profile than women's golf - hence parity, in the Grand Slams, when it comes to prizes even though they play fewer sets.
Women's golf needs to, to quote a guy on TV earlier, package their sport to make the money men take more notice, make it more appealing to a wider audience.
Doing that without "sexing" it up is going to be difficult.
Speeding up the women's pro game would be a good place to start

 

[Duckster]

It's just been stated that golf is one of the sports with the biggest gap between men's & women's prize money. Is this right or not? I think it's fair enough. The prize money reflects the amount of interest in the sport. Many more men than women play & watch golf and there is much more money in it. Market forces apply, there's not a lot can be done about it, is there?

Totally agree. If they want to carry on with equal pay, then surely they should be doing it for the same job. If that's the case, then abolish the LPGA and any woman who wants to play competitive golf (or any sport for that matter), should compete on an equal footing with the gents. So they have to try to qualify for their tour card the same, playing off the tips all the time.

I'd like to see how they go on in other sporting arena's doing the same thing with no gender bias. See how many women could compete on an equal footing with men in athletics, football, golf, tennis.... the list carries on.

Until women's sport becomes just as or more interesting than the men's, then there will always be disparity with the amount on money invested, which will in turn directly effect the amount of money paid out to the athletes.

 

[Hacker Khan]

Can I just say the argument that women should get paid less in tennis as they play fewer sets or are performing for a lesser time is mostly rubbish IMHO. Professional sports people are rarely, if ever paid per hour/minute/set/game/hole, but on their 'market value' or how far they proceed in a tournament. And someone has done the sums and worked out that in grand slams tennis tournaments women add as much value as men do.

If we are basing it on length of time performing the sport then test cricketers would be the highest paid sportspeople in the world and Usain Bolt would be penny less.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

HK - Most sports people are paid by their entertainment value, hence Usain Bolt gets paid millions despite only running for less than 10 seconds at a time. Tennis is the exception. My wife goes to Wimbledon each year with a friend. The courts will be full for the mens games and when the women come on it is time to get something to eat, get a drink etc. The crowds empty, returning when they are done. Speak to anyone who goes there, they will confirm it. The quality of mens tennis outstrips womens tennis by a million miles. That they get equal pay there is one of lifes anomolies. Well done them but it is not about value there. When womens tennis has stand alone tournaments, eg not majors, what are the payouts then compared to mens? End of season at the O2, not for women etc etc.

I am not looking to bash womens sports here, I know it sounds like it though, but sport has a market value and politicians huffing and puffing to artificially change that is plain silly. Get the product right and the money will follow.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Surely the pay in golf is determined a lot by the amount of sponsership each tournament brings in ?

Bring in more money and get paid more ?

And in tennis I believe they should play the same amount of sets of they want equal pay - everything equal

 

[Qwerty]

And someone has done the sums and worked out that in grand slams tennis tournaments women add as much value as men do.

Whoopi Do! Good for them! Well that's that sorted then.

 

[Hacker Khan]

HK - Most sports people are paid by their entertainment value, hence Usain Bolt gets paid millions despite only running for less than 10 seconds at a time. Tennis is the exception. My wife goes to Wimbledon each year with a friend. The courts will be full for the mens games and when the women come on it is time to get something to eat, get a drink etc. The crowds empty, returning when they are done. Speak to anyone who goes there, they will confirm it. The quality of mens tennis outstrips womens tennis by a million miles. That they get equal pay there is one of lifes anomolies. Well done them but it is not about value there. When womens tennis has stand alone tournaments, eg not majors, what are the payouts then compared to mens? End of season at the O2, not for women etc etc.

I am not looking to bash womens sports here, I know it sounds like it though, but sport has a market value and politicians huffing and puffing to artificially change that is plain silly. Get the product right and the money will follow.

Actually I kind of agree with most of that you said about being paid on quality/value. Although there may be an argument to say that watching 2 blokes serve aces at 120 mph gets a bit boring after a while. Technically very impressive, but dull to watch.

My point is that the lazy argument that they are only on court for say 1.5 hours instead of 2.5 hours is not really a valid reason to pay them less.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

My point is that the lazy argument that they are only on court for say 1.5 hours instead of 2.5 hours is not really a valid reason to pay them less.

Agreed. 9.6 seconds of Usain Bolt is far more exciting than 2 hours of F1 to me. Exciting womens sport is as good as exciting mens sport, it just doesn't seem to happen as much. It is the quality and excitement that counts, not the amount of time spent watching or playing. For most sports that quality gap is huge, hence the disparity.

 

[ScienceBoy]

I would assume the difference is based mainly upon the fact that the mens professional game is far more established and far reaching.

So lets compare like with like (disregarding the influences of media in the last 20 years for a moment).

Compare the tour ages:

PGA: Founded 1929 = 85 years

LPGA: Founded 1950 = 64 years

Difference is 21 years

1993 US Open Prize = $290k then about $500k now

2014 Womens US Open Prize Money $720k

OK so without factoring in the explosion of media in the last 20 years the womens game is about $220K (44%) ahead of the mens game!

If we factor in the assistance the womens game has had by the media compared to the mens game, ie the internet, global media improvements, increases in womens spending power in the last 50 years etc they go even further ahead.

In conclusion I still don't agree men and women should be paid different for the same job! The statistics does say they are well on the way to rectifying the situation!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Having been to wimbledon a number of times if they split up the slams and played the women's a week later the crowds for the men would be the same but for the ladies half - three years ago we had no 1 tickets and Sharapova was first and the court was half empty - then it was Evans vs Fish - full then Kitova vs someone half empty

People go imo to slams to watch the men mainly

 

[Hobbit]

Its not just about gender, its also dependent on the what comp they're playing in. Men's Czech Open 'v' the Ladies US Open. Should the men playing in the Czech Open be paid more? Should those on the Europro tour be paid equivalent sums as the Ladies PGA tour?

And then there's the performance aspect. Men hitting up to 350-375yds or women hitting less than 300yds - which do you prefer watching?

More men play/watch men's golf. Sponsors will want the biggest audience they can get...

 

[User20205]

It's not about women's golf, it's about market forces. The same could be said about the Europro tour (or whatever the satellite tour is called)

It's interesting to see the usual mysogynistic nonsense being rolled out though. I don't see anyone making the argument for equal pay. The woman's game couldn't support it.

 

[Birchy]

It the same in any sport really, the ones that attract most viewers & sponsors will have the chance to get paid most if they can also be successful on top of that.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

As others have said purely down to market forces and the quantity of money being offered by the organisers and sponsoring partners. To be fair though, the womens game especially in the UK still suffers from a lack of media attention across the board and even the British Open is hugely under promoted.

The US LPGA tour is far more actively promoted and has bigger purses and attracts the best players which is why their tour, in comparison to the meagre pickings on the European equivalent, continues to be a viable option and has sponsors paying reasonable purses

 

[rksquire]

I find that the relative success of a sport is whether or not there is consistently dominant stars; people complain the sport gets boring if there’s only one winner but the reality is this is how you build interest and fan bases – in’our’ sport Woods is credited with bringing the truckloads of money and growing the game; previously the marketing of Palmer, Player and Nicklaus had a tremendous effect. In my mind the game could explode to another level, if for example, McIlroy, Fowler & Day stamped their superiority and won more often than not (there would of course be other winners and they would be embraced & celebrated, their achievement all the greater in the era of, say, McIlroy, Fowler & Day).

In a long winded way, this is what attracts television audiences and people through the gates. This is what attracts punters to buy branded gear, accessories & clothes.

I like womens golf, but I like it because I think I have more to learn from their techniques and ability than from the men. I’ll never be able to drive the ball 350yards, unless I actually stick it my 7 year old Renault and drive it. But I still watch it, and whilst my wife tolerates me watching mens golf (just) she will query why I’m watching women’s golf in an incredulous tone. The reality is, it may be the same game, but it’s not the same product.

As for tennis, again it comes down to dominance and consistency of player. I doubt Wimbledon would be half full for a Williams sister (would be full), but the womens game changes so fast now I’ve no interest in keeping up. I looked at the BBC list of disparity – in sports where the prize money is 100k or more in either gender I can name competitors from that discipline; that’s 11 male sports against 5 female sports (after engaging brain). What does this tell me? As a consumer I’m interested in sports, but more interested in the male side of those sports and it’s not sexist to suggest that female consumers are of a similar mind-set, so it’s totally fair for a cost disparity to exist.

 

[Mark_Aged_42]

But it is also about character.
How many men players can you name right now? And what characteristics do you remember. Bubba - mad, Furyk - mad swing, Westy - cant win Majors, Poulter - Ryder Cup hero etc, etc
And then women? Michelle Wie, Charlie Hull, er that American blonde, and oh yes, the procession of identikit Koreans.
And they are interesting becauzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Sponsors ask how these people would enhance the exposure of their products. Deafing silence when it comes to the ladies.

And the one time they did have a true heroine, and I'm talking Major winner, multiple tournament winner, Laura Davies here for the benefit of young people, she got snubbed over and over because of her shape.