Equal Pay - Why The Fuss?

Tennis has been in the news a lot this year and we are still in March. 

It started at the Australian Open when the BBC and BuzzFeed made reports of match fixing which had been taking place over a number of years.  That was already well known but it was suggested that the Tennis Integrity Unit had not been taking the accusations seriously enough, did not investigate properly and the unit was too small to be effective, mainly comprising of a few part time senior ex policeman.  ATP Chief Chris Kermoode refuted this claim and promised robust actions.  However, in the last week, the Italian Authorities claim they have evidence of top 20 tennis players being involved in match fixing and accused the tennis authorities of not doing enough to bring these players to justice.

If that was not bad enough, Maria Sharapova announced to the world not her retirement which some journalists had predicted, but that she failed a drug test for meldonium which was put on the banned WADA list at the start of 2016.  What made this story curious was the fact that Maria explained she had been taking the substance for ten years initially to offset conditions that ran in the family such as heart trouble and diabetes; although it appears Maria’s conditions were ongoing if she felt the need to keep taking it for such a long period.  There has been a spate of positive tests for meldonium in the last month so Maria is now in a very difficult situation and a ban is inevitable, a blow to the WTA as Maria is their most marketable player.

That being said, the hot topic I want to focus on is the recurring issue of equal prize money which is reared its ugly head again.  Raymond Moore was forced to resign as Chief Executive Officer of the Indian Wells tournament after what seemed to be the most bizarre comments I have heard from a senior person in sports for some time.  We have seen the comments but here it is again “In my next lifetime when I come back I want to be someone in the WTA, because they ride on the coattails of the men. They don't make any decisions and they are lucky. They are very, very lucky.

“If I was a lady player, I'd go down every night on my knees and thank God that Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal were born, because they have carried this sport. They really have.” In colloquial terms, that really is a quote and a half, the sort of stuff journalists dream about having a field day over, and for any detractors to jump on right away with glee.  Perhaps Raymond Moore had been drinking, the desert heat got to him or he had some sort of strange death wish at that particular moment.  Those comments are clearly long held views and for some reason decided to make them known to the public in a press conference.  We also know since the storm didn’t pass very well for him, after the negative news reporting, inevitable social media uproar and statements by Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova and the WTA amongst others, Raymond Moore handed in his resignation as Chief Executive Officer to owner of the tournament and Oracle founder Larry Ellison. 

One thing that I fail to understand after all these years is why equal pay still exorcises the minds of so many people?  Equal pay has been around for some time at grand slam level and Wimbledon was the last of the majors to introduce it in 2007; before that the US Open and Australian Open had equal pay for some time.  Let us look at the context as well; in the late 1990s and early 2000s, women's tennis was doing very well as a product.  The stars were as well known as the top men and were putting “bums on seats” in tournaments throughout the world.  There were many great stories and rivalries; Venus v Serena, Capriati vs Serena, Davenport v Hingis, Hingis v Venus, Davenport v Venus.  Then we had Henin v Clijsters, Mauresmo v Henin, the Russians like Dementieva, Sharapova and Kuznetsova joined the party; there were rivalries and high level tennis everywhere so it seemed logical there should be equal pay.  The argument I often hear is that men play longer matches and more sets and so should get more money.  However, from what I have always understood, equal pay reflected that as a product attracting sponsorship and high television ratings, the women's game was doing just as well as the men's game at the period of time.

Now, the irony is this.  As far as I can tell, the reason why this has come up now is the level of women's tennis has no doubt dropped from the heights of 1999 to 2007.  The number 1 ranking changed a handful of times between players who never went on to win a major tournament.  Before 2008, all players who were number 1 won more than one grand slam tournament in their careers (bar Clijsters who won multiple majors on her return in 2009).  Putting injuries aside, Serena Williams has been able to dominate the tour in a way she didn’t in the early to mid-2000s.  If Serena stayed injury free she may have done so but the competition was very fierce regardless.   We have also seen since 2010 a handful of players win grand slam tournaments for the first time at the age of 29 plus which would have been unheard of ten years ago; the latest being Flavia Pennetta who won the US Open at the age of 33 in 2015. 

Therefore, I get the angst that some people may be feeling that women’s tennis is not at a current level deserving of equal pay.  I am sure however that this cannot be the only equation that should be looked at when determining equal pay.  There are still some very good women players around today and great matches.  For instance the Australian Open final between Angelique Kerber and Serena Williams was a compelling match, with both players making more winners than errors; the match was universally acclaimed with good ratings, and let's be frank far better than the drab match between Murray and Djokovic which like groundhog day continue to give us dull Australian Open final matches year on year.

Also, it was ludicrous for Raymond Moore to bring Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal into his “rant”.  If the women players are to thank anyone, it should be Billie Jean King, Gladys Heldman, Martina Navratilova, Chris Evert, Rosie Casals and the other pioneers from the early 1970s who helped set up the WTA tour and made it a big hit with public and sponsors.  I don’t think they need to get on their knees but today’s players are well aware of the sacrifices made by those women.  What makes Raymond Moore’s rant more amusing is the fact he didn’t mention the dominant number 1 player Novak Djokovic about carrying the sport, perhaps that’s why Djokovic took it upon himself to say men should fight for more (extra amusement here) and receive more money, potentially jeopardising good relations with the WTA players and organisers. 

One thing I would question Djokovic on is his comments that men matches get more spectators.  I watch a lot of tournaments and the stands in ATP events are often half empty except for finals day; I see no difference between men and women’s tournaments.  Scheduling wise, women can get a raw deal in the big events, if they schedule a match after a men's match, if it is a long match between two top players, people are satisfied and might go home after a long day, I go to many tournaments, and it can be a long day at tennis events.  This is even more pronounced at the US Open and Australian Open where women matches often start 11pm at night after a men's match, it is inevitable there will be fewer spectators. 

No doubt Raymond Moore’s supporters will point to political correctness accounting for his resignation.  However, the reason they would cite that is because they have been missing the point of equal pay from day one so it will not change now. 

As a tennis fan, one thing I would like to see is the WTA and ITF consider playing best of five set finals at grand slam level.  The players are fit enough to do that and should be mentally ready for such a challenge, I wrote an article about this in 2013 and this may be one way to placate some of the doubters amongst certain fans and some sections of tennis establishment, plus I think it will be a great spectacle.  Women played best of five set finals at the end of year championships in New York from 1984 to 1998 so should definitely be revived as a concept.

Angelique Kerber's Australian Open Triumph

The Australian Open has a habit of throwing up surprising results and brilliant stories for fans of tennis and sport in general.

In 2014 Stan Warwinka beat Novak Djokovic in the quarterfinal and Rafael Nadal in the final to win the Australian Open in dramatic fashion.  This weekend Angelique Kerber pulled off a similar feat, defeating Victoria Azarenka in the quarterfinal and Serena Williams in the final.  Like Wawrinka, Kerber found something deep inside herself, an inspiration to come up with an aggressive game plan to go for her shots and overcome players who had been dominating her in the head to head rivalry.  We were treated to a riveting final and at the end of it there was not a dry eye in the house, a very emotional victory, even Serena Williams felt emotional for Angelique! 

So, how was Angelique able to transition to grand slam champion?  Let us have a look at her progression over the last few seasons which brought her to this special moment.

It has been quite a roller coaster ride for Angelique and her fans.  After making a surprise run to the US Open semifinal in 2011, Angelique made a dramatic rise in the rankings from exactly 100 to top 10 in the space of twelve months.  I was at the Paris indoor event in 2012 when Angelique won her first ever WTA title beating Marion Bartoli in a topsy-turvy three set final.  Angelique followed that up by beating Caroline Wozniacki in Denmark to win another title two months after her first.  Everything was looking good but then hit her first real bump in Eastbourne when she lost the final after serving for the match in the 3rd set against Tamira Paszek. However, that didn’t deter her as she made a great run to the Wimbledon semifinal, beating Sabine Lisicki in a dramatic quarterfinal before losing to Agnieszka Radwanska rather easily in the semifinal.

In the 2012 Cincinnati final against Li Na, Angelique started like a house on fire, taking the first set 6:1 but eventually ran out of steam and lost in three sets.  At the US Open, Kerber defeated Venus Williams in the 2nd round but fell to Sara Errani two rounds later. Angelique qualified for the end of year championships in Istanbul and then spent much of 2013 coming to terms with her status as a top 10 player.  Angelique did win one title in 2013 towards the end of the season in Linz defeating Ana Ivanovic in an entertaining final which sealed her qualification for the season ending championships in Istanbul for the second time. 

2014 proved to be a poor year for Angelique; her performances in the majors were starting to dip dramatically. In Australia she lost to Flavia Pennetta in the fourth round and also had early losses at the French and US Open.  In Wimbledon she beat Sharapova in three sets in the fourth round but then lost to Eugenie Bouchard quite easily in the quarterfinal.  By this stage the reasons why Angelique was struggling were quite clear for everyone to see. 

When Angelique broke out in 2011, her retrieving skills and speed around the court were hailed as plus points.  However, she also possessed the ability to hit down the lines and stretch her opponents with good enterprising play.  However, by 2014 Angelique had become too reliant on defence and not developed her offensive play or serve, which had become a liability particularly in finals.  In fact, during this period Angelique played a handful of important finals including Doha and Eastbourne but lost all of them, which in turn was draining her confidence.  After another disappointing early round loss at the 2015 Australian Open, Angelique decided to dispense with coach Benjamin Ebrahimzadeh and re-hired Torben Beltz who she had worked with when she made the semifinals of US Open and Wimbledon from 2011 to 2012. 

This appointment paid immediate dividends as Angelique started to rebuild her confidence and won her first title in over a year by beating Madison Keys in a close final in Charleston, and then another even closer final against Wozniacki in Stuttgart in May 2015.  Despite early losses at the French Open and Wimbledon, Torben Beltz was definitely trying to get Angelique to play a more enterprising game and to improve her serve which had become a liability against the best returners in the game.  Her finals record continued in the summer with three set victories against Karolina Pliskova in Birmingham on grass and in Stanford during the US Open series. Angelique played a great match against Victoria Azarenka in the 3rd round of the US Open but lost.  However, she did play well during the autumn tournaments in Asia and qualified for the season ending championships in Singapore for the fourth year in succession.

A career in sport is all about progression, and although the results at the majors were not to her liking, turning her losing record in WTA finals to a winning one gave Angelique  something tangible to work on in the off season. The best players in the world combine defence and offence to make a winning combination, the key to that is the serve.  Angelique’s racquet head speed was slow, she was not generating enough pace and the serve was not accurate in the corners, her second serve was landing in the middle of the box asking to be put away.  The ability was there to hit down the lines but she was not taking advantage of this ability by attacking the net to put her opponents under pressure. Torben Beltz knew the potential.

Angelique started 2016 well, getting to the final of Brisbane before losing to Azarenka in straight sets.  And in the 1st round of the Australian Open, Angelique was match point down against Misaki Doi of Japan in the 2nd set tiebreak and came through that.  However, the match which really turned things around was the quarterfinal against Azarenka whom she had never beaten in six attempts; what was satisfying is the way she did it.  In 1997 when Pat Rafter won the US Open, then Australian Davis cup captain John Newcombe said that Rafter had found something deep down within himself which he didn’t know he had, the same could be said of Angelique.  What was so different this time was when the score got close, Angelique pulled out an ace on the line on the deuce court on at least three occasions! 

That is a perfect example of finding something deep inside herself, a bit of magic when needed which the best players can produce.  And when Azarenka had three sets points in a row in the 2nd set, Angelique hit clean offensive winners, they were not Azarenka mistakes.  Winning the match in that fashion gave Angelique the belief that she should play that kind of tennis more often, she hit 31 winners and made 16 unforced errors which is hardly the statistics of a player perceived as a counterpuncher.  Her semifinal win over Johanna Konta was a formality once she got over early nerves against an opponent in her first major semifinal.  In the final, Angelique played the best match of her entire career to date, seizing the moment against Serena Williams, who also played a good match, not at her best but her form was good enough to beat most of the other players on that particular night. Meanwhile Angelique made 25 winners and only 13 unforced errors in three tight sets, very impressive. It was a well deserved victory and now Angelique can bask in the glory of being grand slam champion.

I think Angelique has it within her to win another grand slam tournament before her career comes to a close.  Like Stan Wawrinka and Li Na, Angelique may need a bit of time to adjust to her new status as champion and we might not see her best results again for the next few months but she certainly has the desire to improve further and win more big tournaments in years to come.

It is great to see when a player realises their potential.

Davis Cup Champions…where do we go from here? By John Cavill

First we had the answer to the annually asked question of ‘When will we have a British Wimbledon Champion?’ in July 2013 and now we have an answer to British success in the Davis Cup! British tennis is buzzing with a positive vibe felt by many across the country and the hope that this success will propel us out of the shadows we’ve been in for many years.

What Team GB achieved in the Davis Cup was something quite remarkable after only being in the Europe/Africa Zone Group 2 in 2010 with a play-off match against Turkey which decided whether they would be demoted to the bottom level of the competition. At this time, reaching the final like they did in 1978 or even going one step further like they did in 1936 where they won would have seemed a million miles away. A lot has changed since 1936 and other countries have overtaken Britain in the sporting arena, but it takes one or two exceptionally great players to change a nation’s fortune.

What the LTA did back in 2010 when they appointed Leon Smith as the Davis Cup captain was a very smart move. By appointing Leon, Britain were able to write the tennis fairy-tale where Andy gets to play for his coach from his ‘junior days’ and share the journey with his brother. Many know that Leon worked with Andy Murray when he was 11 years old and again worked with him when he returned from the Sanchez-Casal academy in Barcelona, but that relationship between the two was the key to our success. There is no denying that if Andy wasn’t playing for GB then we would still be knocking around the lower groups of Davis Cup tennis, but Andy couldn’t have done this on his own without his brother. The nation must be very grateful that the Murray brothers represent GB and that their dedication, hardship, work rate, determination and belief has ultimately paid off so that we can celebrate the pride of being British. The demands of being a top tennis player are incredible and playing in the Davis Cup isn’t always a great reward for the players with increased matches adding to their already hectic schedules, the increased risk of injury and the lack of financial reward. Playing for your country is a privilege and an honour, which is certainly something Andy Murray prioritises. With the negatives that surround participating in this competition, they are further expanded for a top player if they are having to travel to places to compete in the world’s 3^rd division of tennis! If Britain had any chance of being a success in the competition they needed Andy Murray as with all top nations you need top 20 players in your team. At this point it is worth saying that Jamie Murray, a top doubles player in his own right, was another essential part of the puzzle as without him, those vital doubles wins would not have been possible, especially on a few occasion when he needed to carry his brother in matches.

Over the years Andy’s dedication to compete when he could, even with injury scares in certain ties, is phenomenal. Now that Andy can join Federer, Djokovic and Nadal as a Davis Cup Champion further cements his status as one of the top players in the tennis history books during what arguably is the toughest era for a male tennis player.

I’ve talked a lot about Andy Murray and his undeniable influence in the Davis Cup team but what about the others who have also contributed to our nation’s success? During this campaign I’d like to highlight James Wards outstanding performance against the US with the world number 111 beating John Isner who was ranked 20 with a tremendous fight back from a two-set disadvantage to win 6-7, 5-7. 6-3, 7-6, 15-13 in almost exactly five hours. Another notable match was in the final when Leon played his cards right with an in-form Kyle Edmond, who is ranked 100 in the world, making his debut to the competition against the world number 15, David Goffin. The competition could have been over by Saturday as Kyle took a 2 sets to 0 lead in the first match. That exposure for the young 20 year old will hopefully give him hope and belief to go on to do better but I believe that with these players rubbing shoulders with the likes of Andy Murray they are inspired and believe they can win.

What does this victory mean for British tennis? Andy Murray told the BBC on Thursday 26^th November, the day before the finals started: “This might attract new fans who can see the team and how pumped up everyone gets in a different format and different atmosphere.”

“It’s a great opportunity to promote the sport in the UK and, hopefully, if we can get the win at the weekend that would be huge for tennis.”

“But it’s not our job to capitalise on the success of the team, that’s the job of the governing body and that’s what they’ve got to do.”

Controversially David Lloyd, former GB Men’s Davis Cup Captain, criticised the top British players for not growing the game in Britain by stating: “The British players in recent years who have been good — Tim Henman, Greg Rusedski, Andy — they don’t put enough back.”

“I mean putting your heart and soul into it, a passion that is bigger than the person and even bigger than the game. “

“It’s about getting a kid who wants to play for Manchester United to want to play tennis instead. Andy is in such an incredible position with power to do that but he doesn’t.”

“I don’t think Andy does justice in presenting himself. I don’t think he goes out of his way to present the game.”

Personally I don’t think it is the sole responsibility of Andy Murray or any of the others to develop British tennis, as this is the role of the LTA, clubs and coaches in this country.

Murray dismissed the criticism as “background noise” by adding “It’s like, you know it’s there but you’re not really listening.”

“My job here is to try to win the tie, give my best effort — like me and, I believe, all of the team have done the last five years.”

“We may not get the outcome we want but it won’t be through lack of trying or lack of care.”

“It means a lot to everyone to be in this position. Five years ago we were way, way behind in this competition — I think it was the lowest position we’d ever been in, so five years later to be playing and competing in the final is a great opportunity.”

Everyone in Britain has to take responsibility for the state of our tennis. Blaming, pointing fingers or making excuses is what we have done for many years and like with the change of success for the Davis Cup team, we need to change our attitude now for a better future. If everyone looked at what they do and how they could do it better with the tenacity to keep improving over a sustained amount of period then we will be better. Even before the final we heard the pessimists saying that Federer, Djokovic and Nadal didn’t play in the competition so it’s a shallow win…or… we only have 1 player and without Murray we are nothing. I understand where they are coming from but the other players could have played if they wanted to and most Davis Cup teams are centred around one world class player. We should be using this success to inspire our top juniors to see what British success looks and feels like and continue to grow the game with the belief that future success is dependent on the efforts we put in now.

 John Cavill runs Tennis Works, a tennis developmental and resource company.  For more information check out http://www.tennisworks.net/