Men’s tennis vs women’s tennis: what game is more entertaining?
As a former “tennis mom” (my older daughter was playing beautiful games for many years and won a few United States Tennis Association (USTA) tournaments in her age categories), I continue to casually follow what’s going on in the tennis world. My continuing interest is encouraged by the fact that my daughter (now in college and not playing competitive tennis any longer) and my husband are real “fans” and often get engaged in discussions about the players and events.
As it’s the case with many sports lately, there are ongoing discussions about the male and female tennis, the attractiveness, popularity, fairness (when it comes to winning prizes) and other related topics. While both men’s and women’s professional tennis are thriving, men’s tennis generally bolsters greater physical strength and higher average match lengths. However, women’s tennis has seen a rise in popularity and engagement, with some events even outperforming their male counterparts in certain metrics.
When it comes to fair or equal pay in men’s vs women’s tennis, the issue is: are the athletes paid more if they work harder than anybody else, or do they put together a better tennis show that people feel compelled to attend, watch and enjoy. There are no questions about whether female tennis players work as hard as male counterparts, when it comes to the quality of tennis in terms of showbusiness – it’s much harder to judge. The key difference is that in men’s tennis the game engine was driven by a few mega stars for the last 20-25 years. First, there were the big three – Roger Federer, Raphael Nadal and Novak Djokovic (some can say big four by adding Any Murray) – who managed to win almost every major tournament (you literally count with fingers on one hand the ones that have been won by someone else during their rain). Now, the superstar is very much alive and driven by the big two – Carlos Alcaraz and Yannik Sinner – who have already won the last 7 major championships between them and show no signs that someone can take the next one away from them. In women’s tennis after Williams sisters retired, there are several good players where 4-5 of them have a decent chance to win every time. In fact, over the last 5 years there were no repeated (back-to-back) winners in Wimbledon and US Open tournaments, and only one occasion in Australian Open (Arina Sabalenka in 2023-2024). That is exactly the opposite to men’s tennis. In 2021 Emma Raducanu won the US Open (and didn’t drop a single set on the way to winning) while being a qualifier for the tournament and not even in the top rated 100 player. That never happened in the open era in men’s tennis and almost impossible to imagine,
The obvious conclusion is women’s game is much more unpredictable, and one can make an argument that it makes it more entertaining. On the other hand, fans traditionally like to see superstars going against each other – that usually produces unbelievable quality games that immediately become classic. Some analysts say that it’s a “golden age” of women tennis now as there are a few players that can win and none is so dominant and expected to win every time (the polish star Iga Swiatek came very close to be considered that kind of star lately, but fans are not convinced yet). The argument from the man’s side is very strong: every time Alcaraz and Sinner play vs each other (like Federer/Nada/Djokovic before) – it’s a world-wide celebration for tennis fans across the globe. But is it sustainable and good for a game when everything is likely to be decided between two great players?
There are no right or wrong sides here. It’s just a different game with different key players now, and we must enjoy it. New tennis stars come along, and the situation can even flip flop in the future. So, let’s call it both men’s and women’s tennis equally entertaining – it just depends what kind of “show” one likes more
