The equal pay debate in tennis is just great.

The reason the debate is so entertaining is because there is one very strong point that sits on the tip of the tongue yet goes unmentioned.

That is, women’s tennis is boring.

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Reddit Email Share

And maybe this point is avoided largely by the male population through fear of receiving a parliamentary lambasting about their crippling misogyny, sexism and chauvinism. But that just shouldn’t be the case.

Women’s tennis is boring. It’s the bit in between the real deal.

It’s the 6-1 6-1 steamrolling that only etches itself into the brains of tennis fans as the unfortunate stop-gap between Federer v. Nadal and Djokovic v. Murray.

Now this isn’t to say that the women’s game doesn’t have its moments. It does. But it will always lack the dog-fight. There is no narrative to a three-set match. To this point, those in favour of equal pay suggest five-set matches for both men and women. This just prolongs the agony.

It’s slower, less powerful and less relaxing to watch. What is most unfortunate is that it’s less graceful. One would think that what they lack in speed and power they would make up in grace and elegance. They don’t.

They compensate for the reduced strength and speed by grunting; sapping every ounce of elegance out of what is a beautiful game.



Pay should be determined by the outcome, not the work. Men make more money for the game through the increased exposure of sponsorship and advertising through five set matches. On this alone, they deserve to earn more than the female competitors.

I’m not trying to write a sexist rant, I’m trying to be thought provoking. I don’t think the women’s game shouldn’t exist in its current form and I don’t think it’s altogether terrible though, there is no question then men deserve more money.

A similar story was published in The Punch yesterday.

The comments make for classic reading.