(posted by OMDQ)

I would first like to state, for the record, that I am all about equal rights for men and women. As we all learned from Ron Burgundy, diversity is NOT an old, old wooden ship, and I'm cool with that.

But answer me this: if someone does less work than you, if they are scheduled to do less work than you, should they be paid as much as you, based solely on their gender?

I would say no. But that's the way things are in the tennis world right now. Venus Williams won the women's singles title at Wimbledon today, earning the same $1.41 million that will be given to Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal tomorrow, and spoke at length about the impact that Billie Jean King had had on securing equal prize money for both men and women.

That's all well and good. I don't think any reasonable person has a problem with guys and gals receiving equal pay. The problem, in my view, is that the guys play a best-of-five, the gals a best-of-three. In all but one possible situation - the women's match goes the distance while the men's goes the minimum - the guys are going to play more, meaning they will likely make less per set than their female counterparts.

If we're really going for equality here, shouldn't Venus be fighting to have those extra two sets added to the women's game?