It's About Time

After more than a century (123 years to be exact), the All England Club at Wimbledon finally came to its senses today and announced that it would be handing out equal prize money to both men and women after years of giving women a lesser purse.

The argument that had been used that women were paid less than the men because they play fewer sets is total bunk. This is the entertainment business, and if the fans are entertained, that should be the determining factor in the bottom line. You are paid what you are worth in the market. That's the way it goes, particularly in sports. This isn't a 40 hour a week office job where overtime pay makes sense. It doesn't make sense to apply it to this situation. Does anyone say that they were cheated of an optimal spectator experience after watching a thrilling, 3-set tiebreak women's match just because they didn't play an extra two sets? Conversely, it doesn't take a whole lot longer for a dominating male player than it does a woman to blow through his opponent in straight sets. In that case, aren't you merely delaying the inevitable anyway?

I would argue as well that the women's side of the draws in majors are usually a lot more interesting to watch than the men's side. At this point in time, the men's side is basically all about battling to become the sacrificial lamb at Roger Federer's altar. There's no drama involved. On the women's side though, you get some variety, which very recently came up in a big way when Serena Williams came out of nowhere (well, that's overstating it for a player of her enormous ability, but I digress...) to win the Australian Open. So pay them what they're worth, that's all there is to it.

The other side of this is that Wimbledon was really starting to look bad after the French Open last year joined the U.S. Open and Australian Open in offering equal prize money to each of the sexes. That left Wimbledon, the most prestigious event in the sport, the venue you most closely associate with tennis, looking, rightfully so, like the old codger unwilling to let go of the old days. Anyways, I bet the All England Club is not hurting for money in the least to give as prize money.
wimbledon
serena williams
roger federer

Roger Federer: Tennis G.O.A.T.

Ho-hum. Another day, another dominating victory by tennis god Roger Federer, blasting poor Andy Roddick in straight sets, 6-4, 6-0, 6-2 in the Australian Open semifinal. I'm not usually a big tennis fan, but I have found it incredibly enjoyable the last few years watching Federer rack up major victory after major victory. It's less about the tennis than it is being in the midst of history. When authorities like Andre Agassi are saying that he may be the best player of all time, I tend to believe that.

And what a renaissance we're in now for G.O.A.T.'s (Greatest of All Time, to steal Muhammad Ali's term). We have Federer, who barring injury or abrupt retirement, will surely hold all the records there are to hold, and of course the incomparable Tiger Woods. Add in Michael Jordan, and in the last 20 years, we've seen the greatest players of all time in three different sports.

I've found that it's more fun to root for a dominating player in individual sports rather than team games. With a team game, you have a city that you identify with and unless your team is dominating, winning title after title, you're going to be resentful of any city and team that is hogging the spotlight. There's something to the civic pride that's natural to people.

But with individual sports like golf or tennis, you may root for a particular player because you like his or her personality, but there's probably not the deep attachment that you would get with your local baseball team for example. So you're more tolerant of an athlete who is preposterously head and shoulders above the rest of the competition, a la Federer. You're free to watch a feat of greatness without the cumbersome resentment of city rivalry coming into play.

In that vein, I'm not afraid to say that I'm rooting for Federer to finish the job and win his 10th major title.