In April 2020, just after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Roger Federer thought The Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) and the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), the governing bodies of men’s and women’s tennis, respectively. Billie Jean King founded the WTA in 1973 after failing to persuade the men to form a joint venture. Nearly five decades later, the idea of introducing the progressive face of tennis, the idea of men and women competing together and competing equally and thus creating a large enough product that is financially self-sufficient, has been reshaped. is taking. This does not necessarily mean a merger of the two competitions, but rather a merger of calendars, governance structures, decision making, sponsorships, etc. A year ago, investment group CVC Capital Partners, a private equity company, bought a stake in Spanish football. Present in the IPL, along with LaLiga and Gujarat Titans, had signed a potential $600 million deal to convert the Tours into a single commercial entity. As indicated, on Tuesday, The Times (London) reported that CVC had struck a deal with the WTA for a 20% stake (about $150 million). A similar agreement is expected with ATP as well. In a discussion moderated by N. Sudarshan, Ankita Bhambri And Sundar Iyer Discuss the various aspects of a possible merger. Edited excerpt:
There are currently seven governing bodies in tennis – ATP, WTA, ITF (International Tennis Federation) and four Grand Slams. Would it be beneficial if at least ATP and WTA come together?
Sundar Iyer: Today, perhaps nine million people play tennis. And there are lots of circuits – ITF Circuit, ATP Tour, ATP Challengers, WTA Events, Davis Cup, Grand Slam etc. It is so vast that perhaps at the end of the year no one knows what happened at the beginning. I think we need a framework where everything is in one place and everyone is responsible for what they are doing. Now, something the ITF does, ATP will not accept, and vice versa. So you should get everything under one umbrella. Much of the money that goes into the administration of these associations can be put to good use by ensuring the players earn more money and the people working in these unions to receive more.
Read also | Original Nine’s One Dollar Opposite
Ankita Bhambri: Being a former professional, I can relate to a new tennis player coming to the circuit and trying to figure out what is the difference between ATP, WTA and ITF. It’s so fragmented, not just for the players, but for the journalists and fans as well. So, when Federer mentioned that it was time to bring them together, I think all the players would have given a thumbs up. This will be beneficial in the long run for women tennis players.
Tennis is one of the few sports where men and women compete together, especially in Grand Slam tournaments. Shouldn’t the game pursue this progressive aspect?
Sundar Iyer: If you look at why Grand Slams are more popular, it answers your question. These are some of the tournaments where both WTA and ATP players compete on the same platform. If you look at the overall marketing of a slam, it gives them an opportunity to make more money. This is probably the one thing that could lead to a merger of the ATP and WTA. The Grand Slam was probably the first event to offer equal prize money. It took a lot of time, but as we move forward, there can be no discrimination because the effort is the same. Perhaps it is difficult for a woman to play tennis for social, economic reasons. Therefore, the time has come for us to create equal opportunities. Even now, look how unbalanced the structure of the tournament is. The ATP has nine Masters 1000, 13 ATP 500, 39 ATP 250 events and the ATP Cup. There are also 178 ATP Challenger events. If you look at the women, there are 10 WTA 1000, 16 WTA 500 and 30 WTA 250. But there are only 15 Challenger events. Where is 178 and where is 15? And that’s because ITFs have their own events until the 125s. Hence, it is time for all to come together on one platform.
Read also | Wimbledon will no longer use ‘Miss’, ‘Mrs’ in women’s honors list: report
Ankita Bhambri: When there are a limited number of tournaments for women to play in, it is very difficult to travel around the world. We currently have a few tournaments like the City Open (Washington), Indian Wells and Miami where we see men and women competing together in addition to the Grand Slam. If we have more tournaments like this, it will be beneficial not only for the players, but also for the sponsors and the media. We’ll probably see more people playing this game. This will help the development of tennis from below. Having a structure, a set of rules and a system will make it easy and sustainable.
Will coming together help decisions that are made in the best interest of the sport, and not just the tours concerned?
Sundar Iyer: Earlier, at the start of the season, we had the Hopman Cup (in Australia). There were national parties with women in it. Everyone played together and they all benefited from the experience. But now the Hopman Cup is gone and we only have the ATP Cup for men. We were also impressed in India as our tournament (Tata Open Maharashtra ATP 250) was moved from a preliminary event to the Australian Open and lost its sheen a bit. If tennis as a sport is to be won, it needs to be united. There will be a lot of revenue, and more countries will receive money to develop their tennis activities, such as in Asia, Africa. In India we are really lucky that at least we are able to play that much tennis. There are only 35-36 countries that have tournaments for the ATP and maybe 30 for the WTA. But there are more than 100 countries where there is no major activity. You can see combined events with smaller draws, perhaps 16 players for men and 16 for women. WTA relied heavily on Asian swing in China and for two years now there has not been a single tournament there due to COVID. They found a gold mine in China but now they cannot enter it. Such cases should not happen, as players are affected. After all, aren’t the players the anchors of these associations?
Comment | Finding Contentment in the Chaos That Is Women’s Tennis
Ankita Bhambri: Imagine a scenario where a 16-year-old who started on the ITF Circuit a few years back and suddenly, after the pandemic, is lost with no tournaments. They would have lost two years of playing, improving their game, understanding what was needed to transition (to the senior circuit). So, a unified body will definitely play a big role in extending support to all. At the bottom, for those who rank in the 700s, 800s, every part of the world must have a structure so that they have enough competition to be able to advance. Likewise in the 200s to 500s, who are struggling because their tournaments are under ITF and are very difficult to maintain (financially). Integration will make these changes easier.
Currently in India you can use minimal ATP action on television and no WTA at all. How does this affect the developmental aspect of a player, and can mergers alleviate this problem?
Ankita Bhambri: How difficult is it for a young tennis player, when the only chance they have of watching a full match is when they watch a Grand Slam or WTA tournament if it happens in India? Role models for female tennis players are very difficult to follow. If a platform can get us (broadcast) rights as a result of an integration, it will make a big impact. This will also increase the fan base and more kids will want to play the game. In the last 20 years, [the number of] There has been a tremendous increase in the number of players taking up the sport professionally. We have role models like Sania Mirza. And for that we need enough tournaments and platforms that show sports other than just Grand Slams. We have seen this with cricket and badminton. Tennis is played globally and not many sports are included in many countries. We need to be able to capitalize on this and develop it further.
Sundar Iyer: Television is very important. Nowadays, there are OTT platforms (internet streaming) where the rights are sold. This is good because you can watch it on your phone. But it is also bad because in many countries the internet is now only penetrating small areas. Hence, it is restricted to big cities. Badminton is becoming more popular because every tournament that Indians are participating in is being televised. Therefore, it is very important that matches are shown. Right now, the entire Arab world is glued to television because of Ons Jaboor’s performance at Wimbledon. These are countries that never had tennis coverage. The highest level administrators have to watch more matches on television. Only then will the general public think of sending their children to play sports.
Can the ATP and WTA combine to make big television deals, which in turn will generate more money and help improve the game?
Sundar Iyer: I know what a combined event can do. Let’s say there are many tournaments going on but Federer will be able to play in only one tournament. If combined events take place, Women’s No. 1 could play in another event, such as in India during that week, which would give the tournament a substantial advantage. So, there is a similar spread of players that will really help the television get a lot of eyeballs. And this will help the tournament raise more money.
Right now, Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic are the best selling faces in men’s tennis and therefore more popular. But before them, women’s tennis was at the top with the likes of Martina Hingis, Jennifer Capriati, the Williams sisters. It is cyclic. Will the merger help the sport become less dependent on the stars and have more revenue overall rather than just making sure which tour brings in more money and is more important as a result?
Ankita Bhambri: The memory is short, as people have apparently forgotten that there was a thriving rivalry between the Williams sisters, Martina Hingis, and others. Djokovic, Nadal and Federer have achieved far more in the long run and deserve attention. But we have been dominated by female tennis players, be it Hingis, Steffi Graf and more. These rivalries will keep on coming and like the women’s tennis landscape there is always a transition period where we are seeing different winners emerge. Imagine a combined platform, with multiple levels of competition, and how accessible tennis would be. How inspiring it will be, not just for one class, but for both men and women.
Sundar Iyer: 3.4 million viewers watched the 2021 US Open final between Emma Radukanu and Leyla Fernandez. It was about 30% higher than in men. That’s why new stars are important, men or women. Experts use chess as an analogy to the women’s game – long rallies, interesting in-game tactics, changing plots, all make the game exciting. The men’s game is like checkers, where the more powerful force comes out on top, as it involves more powerful strokes, higher intensity and less time to think. It’s time to see how these two USPs of tennis are delivered on one plate. It should be a tennis player, not a man or a woman.
Ankita Bhambri is a former tennis player and most recently coached the Indian Fed Cup (now Billie Jean King Cup) team; Sundar Iyer is the secretary of the Maharashtra Lawn Tennis Association, which has hosted both ATP and WTA tournaments.