On 22 November, Zverev lifted the trophy of the year-end finals in Turin, marking the end of this year's ATP Tour, with all players' points, rankings and prize money set.
After the year-end closing, we may wish to take stock of the players' prize money for this year's game. On the ATP website, we can check the amount of bonuses for players. Needless to say, the higher the ranking person, the more bonuses they will definitely earn.
It's easy to make a table of top 100 players' bonus income, but it doesn't seem to make sense. I think that instead of blindly focusing on the bonus figures of top players, it is better to change the way of thinking and look at the pattern of bonus distribution in men's tennis from different perspectives, so as to reveal the characteristics of the current bonus distribution system.
According to data released by the ATP's official website, the average annual income of players within the world ranking of 1,000 is $185,106, while monaco ranked among the highest-income countries in the world last year with a per capita income of $180,000, according to world-renowned statistics agency WorldData info. It can be seen that the per capita income of thousands of tennis players has exceeded that of the country with the highest income of residents in the world.
However, the averages are very deceptive and misleading. For example, the world's no. 1 Djokovic's bonus income is $9,069,225, while the world's 1000th Austin Rapp bonus income is only $270. This is similar to the fact that we can't average the income of ordinary people with the income of Jack Ma, so the average value obtained is obviously meaningless.
Therefore, in order to more scientifically and accurately reflect the income of all players, we have introduced a statistical median, which is more reliable than simply looking at the average. The so-called median income refers to the income of the player in the middle. For example, if we rank the top 1,000 players in order of year-end ranking from highest to lowest, the median income is the income of the 500th ranked player.
The median bonus income of the top 1,000 men's players was calculated at $22,362, just 12% of the average.
So, what about women's players?
According to the WTA's official website, only 550 female players have bonuses in their accounts this year, and their average annual income is $254,394, with a median of $75,888. If we talk about the earning gap between men and women in tennis next time, it will be an interesting statistic.
When analyzing the player income structure, we also need to focus on the income of the head personnel, that is, the number of players who earn more than $1 million in game bonuses for the whole year. To get a clearer picture of the head of the workforce, we lowered the bar to $200,000, which subdivides revenue into 6 tiers, as shown in the table below.
The next question is, what is the income of the competitions at each level?
As we all know, grand slam tournaments pay much more prize money than lower-level tour and challenge tournaments. Last year, for example, the U.S. Open singles champion prize money was $2.5 million, while the lowest-level challenge singles champion prize money was only $5,150, 485 times the former. Even after losing the first round of the U.S. Open last year, players still receive $75,000 in prize money, which is only about $20,000 less than the ATP250 championship, and even more than the combined bonus income of many players in a year.
That is to say, you only need to participate in one of the four Grand Slams of the year, even if you lose in the first round, you may earn more than many players earn in a year.
Therefore, the Grand Slam is the most valued event for players, and it is also regarded by non-well-known players as the biggest stage to prove their strength and break through their dreams, and of course, it is also a good opportunity to earn a lot of money and points. Grand Slam singles generally have 128 draws, in addition to wild cards and qualifiers, usually ranked in the top 104 players have the opportunity to participate. And to enter the top 104, how easy is it?
Speaking of which, I would like to interject a digression.
Next Monday (December 6), next year's Australian Open registration deadline will close. In the latest issue of the WTA singles rankings, a total of 7 players in China have entered the top 200, namely: Zhang Shuai (No.64), Zheng Saisai (No.80), Wang Xinyu (No.102), Wang Qiang (No.106), Zheng Qinwen (No.126), Wang Xiyu (No.131), Zhu Lin (No.142).
Or back to ATP.
In the most recent edition of the ATP Singles Rankings Standings, a total of 2184 players have rankings and points, which is one of the best people in the world to play tennis. As mentioned earlier, Djokovic has made $9.06 million this year, while the players in the ranking of 1,000 have made less than $300, and the income gap is a world of difference.
For a long time, the current prize money distribution system in the tennis world has been a huge controversy, and it is widely believed that the top players have taken most of the prize money, while the large number of low-level players have received very little. Some estimate that only players ranked in the top 100 can make a basic living on bonuses.
An extreme example is if a player is almost 30 years old and his ranking is always around 1000, do you think he still has to stick to it? Or what exactly did a career that countless people envied bring him? When this phenomenon is very common throughout the Tour, will it shake the foundations of future tennis development? We can't help but ask, should the current tennis income distribution system be reformed?
Whether it is the tennis world or the entire human society, rich and poor is always the most exciting slogan, and it is easy to get the support of the vastst number of players. The question is, if we can really achieve equal distribution of bonuses, so that those players at the bottom can also live a decent, food and clothing life on the prize money, will they lose their aggressiveness and competitive motivation?
It may be impersonal to think so, and everyone with good intentions will probably not agree.
However, without pressure, there is no motivation, and when the vast majority of players do not have the pressure to survive, will the overall level of development of tennis slow down or even regress? After all, the essence of competitive sports is competition, which encourages athletes to strive and realize their dreams, not to encourage mediocrity and ease.
Thinking of it this way, the distribution of prize money in tennis matches is inherently a social or philosophical problem, and there is a similar confusion in almost all industries.
So, what kind of bonus distribution scheme do you think is scientific, reasonable, fair and just? Feel free to post your views in the comments section. (Source: Tennis House Author: Yun Cirrus Yunshu)
Learn more