Prize money wars...

Gilles Simon might have been just a toddler when divas like Sabatini, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles and Capriati held the crowds in rapture. Martina Navratilova's popularity in her prime was commendable. Throngs of people came just to watch Chris Evert,Billie Jean King and many others. Serena and Venus Williams, Maria Sharapova, Martina Hingis, Anna Kournikova attracted thousands more than Gilles Simone can ever hope for. At the Commonwealth Games 2010 when I played for India, the only major attraction was Sania Mirza. No male player there had her star power.If prize money was driven by a phase where there were "interesting" players, then I can name times when men should have gotten lesser prize money than women!!! So, at a time when women top the popularity charts, which has happened in the past and one which will surely happen again, do they just have to demand more prize money? Will that put an end to these baseless wars? There is no doubt that men's tennis is at its golden phase. Tennis has become so exciting with three top male players giving each other a run for their money. But then again, this is a phase....And prize money cannot be based on a golden era or a phase. And then the talk about 5 setters versus 3 setters. Physiologically, women are bulit different. Can a female boxer beat her male counterpart? No.Is the fastest woman faster than the fastest man? For sure not. Can a female tennis player play 5 sets?It has been done before, but it is not correct to compare them both.