By the way, that's just prize money. Most players in the top 100 probably have decent sponsorship from racket makers and apparel/shoe makers.
By the way, that's just prize money. Most players in the top 100 probably have decent sponsorship from racket makers and apparel/shoe makers.
Golf?
WTA Tour wrote:If WNBA players are able to make living from the league, why are so many of them playing overseas during the "off-season"?Perhaps because they play in the WNBA during the "off season".
Google Is Your Best Friend wrote:
By the way, that's just prize money. Most players in the top 100 probably have decent sponsorship from racket makers and apparel/shoe makers.
Outside of about a dozen players, none of the other players on that list have any name recognition
I was at the US Open last weekend, watched Caroline Wozniacki lose to Bianca Andreescu before Rafael Nadal came on and wiped the floor with Hyeon Chung.
Granted I'm no tennis expert but it was kind of embarrassing watching the women play compared to the men. Few aces, short rallies, almost no volleys, lots of unforced errors but more fundamentally they use a lot less of the court and consequently have a lot less strategy (e.g. baseline player vs rushing the net). I'd also point out they have to only win 2 sets to men's 3 but considering how low the quality is it's almost a mercy.
You really have to see it live to appreciate the full effect, to see how little of the court they're able to use, how much slower their 100 mph serves are (if that) compared to 120-130 mph serves of the men's game.
Fast women runners I can appreciate because you're just going forward but with tennis women aren't able to utilize the court, rules or equipment to really make it worthwhile, IMHO.
I'd say women's Olympics are the most successful, maybe figure skating.
I can hear the growing chorus of outrage from the Serena "Panic Room" Williams defenders.
0.02 of all athletes who begin in a sport make it professionally. Except in the NFL...I think that is 0.03%
Successful meaning widest audience, very much so. Much bigger star power from Tennis than from other sports. Martina Navratilova, The Williams Sisters, Billie Jean King, Steffi Graf, Chris Everet, Maria Sharapova ....the list goes on for miles. Some reason more people know of these sports stars than from any other sports.
Doubt it wrote:
Google Is Your Best Friend wrote:
By the way, that's just prize money. Most players in the top 100 probably have decent sponsorship from racket makers and apparel/shoe makers.
Outside of about a dozen players, none of the other players on that list have any name recognition
Obviously, you don't follow tennis. Just because you don't recognize their names, that does not mean they are unrecognizable to people in 190+ countries outside of the US.
And most track runners are less recognizable than tennis players.
Armstronglivs wrote:
I can hear the growing chorus of outrage from the Serena "Panic Room" Williams defenders.
Obsessed much?
WTA Tour wrote:
Doubt it wrote:
Outside of about a dozen players, none of the other players on that list have any name recognition
Obviously, you don't follow tennis. Just because you don't recognize their names, that does not mean they are unrecognizable to people in 190+ countries outside of the US.
And most track runners are less recognizable than tennis players.
Outside of the obvious ones (Serena, Venus, Etc) I bet you wouldn’t be able to pick many out of a crowd
Hey Armweak wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I can hear the growing chorus of outrage from the Serena "Panic Room" Williams defenders.
Obsessed much?
Obsessed much?