
« Madrid Advertising Campaign: How About We Just Focus on Present Tennis? | Main | Ana Tries To Turn Back Time, Frana Win. »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83423e30253ef0105354d3959970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who's The Fairest One Of All?:
Who's The Fairest One Of All?
As a sportsfan, it is inexplicably disappointing than when your favorite team/player loses. It's even worse when they lose when they should have won. And it's kick-you-in-the-nuts-spit-on-your-neck-fantastic when you realize your team/player is losing when it should be winning and they get the same obscene paycheck either way (I'm looking at you, Zito).
Which leads me to this interesting little analysis by Peter Bodo, comparing the player compensation systems between sports. Pete argues that tennis, with it's true performance based system, is the fairest:
Of course, it's hard to take actual dollar values and compare them across sports. Golf has larger sponsorship contracts and in America at least, is a premier ad-value sport. Therefore the numbers are inflated and misleading.
But there is something "romantic" about the "eat what you kill" mentality on the tennis tours. If you win you make money, if you lose you don't. It makes the matches, especially in smaller tourneys, more intriguing because it seems more primal. It makes me respect true "journeyman" players a whole lot more. They really are playing to put food on the table, flying from country to country, lugging their own gear, in hopes of pocketing $10-30k to pay for their travel, training, coaches, etc.
Posted by C Note on October 06, 2008 in Commentary | Permalink
Reblog (0) | |