Indian Wells, ATP Still Divided Over Prize Money Split

Written by: Staff on 8th February 2013

Indian Wells, ATP Still Divided Over Prize Money Split

epa03151001 General view of the center court during the men's final match between John Isner (bottom) of the USA and Roger Federer of Switzerland at the BNP Paribas Open tennis tournament in Indian Wells, California, USA, 18 March 2012. EPA/MIKE NELSON |

A few decades ago when he was still a player, BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells CEO Raymond Moore was charged by then ATP Players Council head Arthur Ashe with working out what the proper prize money split should be between singles and doubles players. Eventually they came up with an 80-20 split.

Today, Moore believes that the same formula that he helped create is a bit outdated and it’s one of the bones of contention between the tournament and the ATP administration. The tournament is now ready to drop its prize money back to 2011 levels if the ATP Board of Directors does not approve a proposed prize money increase for its 2013 event, which begins on March 4.

The BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells has proposed to increase its prize money by at least $1.6 million ($800,000 to the ATP and the same to the WTA), to around $6.6 million and to distribute most of it to the winners of the first three rounds.

Not only has Indian Wells proposed a prize money increase that will dwarf the others Masters Series (for example even last year it offered $1.8 million more than Cincinnati) Moore has come up with a formula that is an 82-18% split between singles and doubles prize money. The ATP wants the tournament to stay at a 80-20 split.

“When I created this prize money breakdown [in the early 1970s] I got a focus group of players together and I said ‘explain to me on tennis merit scale where doubles winners fit in prize money wise: the same as the singles finals? They said no,” Moore told Daily Tennis. “Semifinals? No again. Quarterfinals? That’s when I began to hear some murmurs and we had a consensus on a formula where it was close to singles quarterfinalist prize money.”

But Moore’s proposal for the 2013 tournament is different from the one that ATP CEO of Americas Mark Young sent him. Moore’s proposal offers increases to every round in doubles, but the winners would split $240,000, while the singles quarterfinalists would receive somewhere between $105-110,000, slightly less than the combined earnings of the doubles winners but in range.

Young’s proposal would have the winners split $275,000 but the singles semifinalists will only get $200,000, and singles quarterfinalists only $100,000. While he says he loves doubles, he does not believe that it drives the sport.

“I said Mark are you kidding me?” said Moore. “Are you going to tell me that winners of the doubles should get more than semifinalists in singles? Frankly we don’t agree and that’s why we cannot abide by your prize money breakdown. Who sells tickets? I know who sells tickets [the singles stars]. Everyone know who sells tickets. I’d love to sit with the current player council and have them tell me where does winning the doubles fit in the tennis merit scale. I think I know the answer.”

Moore said that the ATP and WTA Players’ Councils as well as the WTA Board of Directors voted unanimously in favor of the tournament’s prize money increase, but three tournaments representatives on the ATP board: Charles Smith. Mark Webster and Gavin Forbes voted against it.

ATP CEO Brad Drewett could have cast the tiebreaking vote back in December but he abstained and the board deadlocked at 3-3, with all of the players’ reps voting in favor and tournament reps saying no.

Interestingly, Moore said that the Miami Masters Series tournament – which is owned by IMG – supports the increase, but Forbes, who works for IMG did not vote for it because he promised Webster that he would vote in line with the rest for the tournament reps. Forbes used to be involved with the Indian Wells tournament when IMG had a stake in it.

“I personally think Gavin made a mistake and I said that to his face but I think he’s entirely sympathetic to us,” Moore said.

Moore pins most of the blame of Webster, whom he said is trying to push the players back.

“The driver for this is Webster because the European tournaments don’t want to us progressing beyond what they can do,” Moore told TENNIS.com. “It’s totally anti-competitive. There is division between players and tournament representatives on the board. The players keep asking for more and more and Webster said to me: ‘We are in the middle of prize money discussions about increases and were holding firm not to increase and then you do it. We have to keep the players in tow…It’s an “us and them;” the tournament representatives against the players.”

Oracle CEO and billionaire Larry Ellison owns Indian Wells and has invested a huge amount in facility upgrades. In 2011, total prize money was $4.5 million. If the tournament eventually gets its desired increase approved, it will jump to $6.6 million, a huge 35 increase in just two years.

The ATP Board is supposed to re-vote on the issue next week but Moore says that he’s not optimistic that Indian Wells will get their desired increase and if they don’t, the tournament will go back to offering its 2011 level which was $4.5 million overall, so instead of offering $1 million to its singles winners it will be $760,000, and instead of $11 000 to first round losers they will give them $8,000.

“The key is Drewett and if he votes against it or to abstain again the players are going to go ballistic,” said Moore, who expects that the ATP will offer a compromise proposal, but one that might not be acceptable, even if the compromise is straight down the middle because that means the tournament won’t be able to offer its singles winner $1 million, which is a number they like to promote.

“I said in the future we might move to move to an 81-19%, but not now because then we have to go below $1 million,” Moore said. “The 80-20 split can be justified if you are only offering the minimum required increase, but once you go over that you should be able to spread the money where it’s deserved so long as it’s not unreasonable.”

Topics: American tennis news, Arthur Ashe, ATP tennis news, BNP Paribas Open at Indian Wells, California tennis news, Drewett, Raymond Moore, tennis prize money, WTA tennis news