Anyone
For Tennis. Well, who would not be for tennis? The winners of this years’ Australian Open, Elena Rybakina and Carlos Alacarz (at right and left ) each took home $4.15 million dollars. In a resounding rebuke to the fellow who said, “There is no prize for second,” the Runners Up, Novak Djokovic and Aryna Sabalenka each took home $2.15 million. These four brilliant tennis players collectively walked away with $12.6 million after each had played seven games of tennis spread over two weeks. Actually, Djokovic only played five and a half games as he won on a forfeit in round four and in Round Five, his opponent retired injured while leading by two sets to love. Kimberley Inglis, (pictured left) the Western Australian who
surprise everyone with her court craft, won $450 000 for making it to the 4th
Round. She also picked up $22 000 as her share of losing the First Round of the
Ladies’ Doubles. Her fiancĂ©e, Mark Polmans collected $242 000 as his share for Runner Up
in the Men’s Doubles. Polmans also collected $40 000 for losing the First
Qualifying Round in the week prior to the Australian Open. So, this young
couple walked away from the Rod Laver Arena with a combined bankroll of $824 000. This should
ensure the couple can spend the next 12 months playing on the international circuit
and at Wimbledon, Roland Garros and Flushing Meadows.Millions of tennis lovers around the world enjoyed watching
the Australian Tennis Open earlier this year. The Australian Open pays about a $1
million less to the ultimate winners than
the English/Wimbledon and US Open. However, it is certainly much more generous
and supportive of the lower ranked players. For instance, if you were one of
the 64 players who lost the first-round match at Rod Laver
Arena this year you would have collected $150 000. If you made it into
the second round and lost, you would have been one of the 32 players who each collected
$225 000. These figures are on a par with the US Open but are about 10% higher
than what was paid in 2025 at Wimbledon (England) or Roland Garros (France).
The Australian Open has rapidly increased its overall total
prize pool in recent years. In
2002 the total prize pool was $16.5 million. In 2020 it had grown by 23% to $71
million. Since then, it has increased by a whopping 64% and the total prize
pool for 2026 was $111.5 million.
The England and US Opens will always be richer than the Australian
Open because they attract much larger crowds, collect huge television revenues and have many more
and far richer commercial sponsors. However, The Australia Open, in true blue
Aussie style, has made a conscious decision to not pay the major winners as
much as the other Grand Slam countries in order to support the lower ranked players. It does
this by awarding attractive payouts to
the losers in the early rounds.
This is similar to what happened in Australian cricket in
the player pay negotiations in the early 2000s. Though the top Australia
cricketers still received very high
remuneration, the underlying philosophy of the negotiations between Cricket
Australia and the Players’ Association was of supporting the broader playing
base rather than maximising the very top. This provided more money for
week-end grade cricketers and for
developing junior cricket Australia wide.
It makes you proud to be an Aussie. And it makes sense. You
cannot win a Wimbledon final unless there are competitors for the champion to
beast. Champions need a variety of opponents who can afford to travel with
their manager, coach, physiotherapist to
compete for the title. Similarly, you
cannot play winning test cricket if the supply of talented youngsters has dried
up because their junior associations all withered on the vine of poverty.
Hmmm. $150 grand for losing the in the first round of the Open . I might go and dig out my battered old tennis racquet and hit the practice courts. I can lose with the best of them!

Apologies that the blog is not configured as it apears in Draft form.
ReplyDelete