On the one hand…I’m consistently disappointed by the extent to which Iga (and Sabalenka) seem to consistently stick their heads in the sand on these types of issues. On the other…as a black person, I understand the weight/frustration that sometimes come with being the oppressed and constantly having to have answers for why/how oppression is occurring. That in mind, it would be interesting to see reporters begin pressing the men on this issue. Especially given that many players (male and female) seem to align on the idea that they like playing early and wrapping their day up and getting rest.
How much does equal scheduling really matter compared to equal pay? I'll bet if you asked doubles players which they'd prioritize they'd say 100:1 equal pay over equal scheduling. When so many tournaments still don't have equal pay for women, I would rather praise tournaments who get the most important part right than criticize more minor inequalities.
FWIW, I also prefer day sessions as a fan! I don't think it's fair to dismiss Iga's point of view just because she's a dominant top player.
Of course players would prefer equal pay to equal scheduling, but the issues are linked. There are still people who insist that women shouldn't receive equal pay, whether it's because women don't play best-of-five at the majors or because of the perception those people have that women's tennis in general isn't -- pick one -- as "good" (whatever that means), as exciting, as interesting or as popular -- as men's tennis. (No sane person would argue that the best women's players could beat or be competitive in matches against the best men's players. Unless that's the only metric -- and it shouldn't be -- it doesn't necessarily mean that men's tennis is "better" than women's tennis, or that women's tennis isn't "good".)
Those perceptions are tied up with the issue of scheduling. Scheduling women's tennis as if it's second-class, or merely a warmup to the men's matches, will lead people to perceive it that way. And then people will rely on those perceptions to argue against equal pay or to simply denigrate the women's game.
Maybe this is beside the point, but isn’t a lot of this night session nonsense at RG — a relatively new phenomenon, in fact — related to the Amazon Prime TV deal that requires matches to begin not before 8:15/8:30 pm, essentially mandating that only one match each evening is played (unlike at AO and USO, as well as the other mixed M1000 events, where 1 men’s, 1 women’s match are standard)? I seem to recall Mauresmo admitting a couple of years ago — or maybe she was just making excuses/passing the buck — that her hands are tied when it comes to scheduling because they *can’t* really adjust the start of the evening session due to the TV rights.
This does not answer the 12:00 pm Phil Chat match, though — I agree that’s total shit.
I wonder if/when the Amazon deal is finished (??) if they’ll revisit this issue, start evening earlier, and have 2 matches. (Could be a while, though, and the other issues you mentioned still remain.)
Thanks for writing this, Ben. It’s an important issue and needs to be kept front and center. The actions and statements from the French tennis leaders are sexist—no other way to describe them. It’s the year 2025 and it’s just maddening that we are still dealing with this “dog shit!”
I prefer best of 3 all day every day, but the value proposition of best of 3 vs. best of 5 if your evening ticket only buys you one match must be considered. A best of three set match could be over in 45-50 minutes if it’s a blowout.
That being said, there isn’t anything more boring than a best of 5 blowout.
Shoutout to Danielle Collins for being the only player willing to express an actual opinion on anything!
I'm not claiming this is the entire story, but some time/words should be devoted to the statement of a few years ago (don't know exactly when) when the women, via the WTA as I understood it, expressed a preference for *not* playing the evening match. True? Still true? Not true?
As to the USOpen final with the Williams sisters, citing that is like using Simone Biles performances' viewer ratings as the baseline for judging all other gymnasts' popularity. Biles is a one-off, and astounding beyond belief, as were the Williams sisters. I'm all for data, but if Shriver has to call up a single final, from 2001 (24 years ago), I'm not sure it bolsters her overall point.
On the one hand…I’m consistently disappointed by the extent to which Iga (and Sabalenka) seem to consistently stick their heads in the sand on these types of issues. On the other…as a black person, I understand the weight/frustration that sometimes come with being the oppressed and constantly having to have answers for why/how oppression is occurring. That in mind, it would be interesting to see reporters begin pressing the men on this issue. Especially given that many players (male and female) seem to align on the idea that they like playing early and wrapping their day up and getting rest.
How much does equal scheduling really matter compared to equal pay? I'll bet if you asked doubles players which they'd prioritize they'd say 100:1 equal pay over equal scheduling. When so many tournaments still don't have equal pay for women, I would rather praise tournaments who get the most important part right than criticize more minor inequalities.
FWIW, I also prefer day sessions as a fan! I don't think it's fair to dismiss Iga's point of view just because she's a dominant top player.
Of course players would prefer equal pay to equal scheduling, but the issues are linked. There are still people who insist that women shouldn't receive equal pay, whether it's because women don't play best-of-five at the majors or because of the perception those people have that women's tennis in general isn't -- pick one -- as "good" (whatever that means), as exciting, as interesting or as popular -- as men's tennis. (No sane person would argue that the best women's players could beat or be competitive in matches against the best men's players. Unless that's the only metric -- and it shouldn't be -- it doesn't necessarily mean that men's tennis is "better" than women's tennis, or that women's tennis isn't "good".)
Those perceptions are tied up with the issue of scheduling. Scheduling women's tennis as if it's second-class, or merely a warmup to the men's matches, will lead people to perceive it that way. And then people will rely on those perceptions to argue against equal pay or to simply denigrate the women's game.
Maybe this is beside the point, but isn’t a lot of this night session nonsense at RG — a relatively new phenomenon, in fact — related to the Amazon Prime TV deal that requires matches to begin not before 8:15/8:30 pm, essentially mandating that only one match each evening is played (unlike at AO and USO, as well as the other mixed M1000 events, where 1 men’s, 1 women’s match are standard)? I seem to recall Mauresmo admitting a couple of years ago — or maybe she was just making excuses/passing the buck — that her hands are tied when it comes to scheduling because they *can’t* really adjust the start of the evening session due to the TV rights.
This does not answer the 12:00 pm Phil Chat match, though — I agree that’s total shit.
I wonder if/when the Amazon deal is finished (??) if they’ll revisit this issue, start evening earlier, and have 2 matches. (Could be a while, though, and the other issues you mentioned still remain.)
Thanks for writing this, Ben. It’s an important issue and needs to be kept front and center. The actions and statements from the French tennis leaders are sexist—no other way to describe them. It’s the year 2025 and it’s just maddening that we are still dealing with this “dog shit!”
I prefer best of 3 all day every day, but the value proposition of best of 3 vs. best of 5 if your evening ticket only buys you one match must be considered. A best of three set match could be over in 45-50 minutes if it’s a blowout.
That being said, there isn’t anything more boring than a best of 5 blowout.
Shoutout to Danielle Collins for being the only player willing to express an actual opinion on anything!
I'm not claiming this is the entire story, but some time/words should be devoted to the statement of a few years ago (don't know exactly when) when the women, via the WTA as I understood it, expressed a preference for *not* playing the evening match. True? Still true? Not true?
As to the USOpen final with the Williams sisters, citing that is like using Simone Biles performances' viewer ratings as the baseline for judging all other gymnasts' popularity. Biles is a one-off, and astounding beyond belief, as were the Williams sisters. I'm all for data, but if Shriver has to call up a single final, from 2001 (24 years ago), I'm not sure it bolsters her overall point.