Capriati adds strength to women's game

Capriati: Happy ending of Hollywood proportion

By BBC tennis correspondent Iain Carter

Much was made of Andre Agassi adding another Grand Slam title to his list of honours within sight of his 31st birthday, but a more significant age statistic had been forgotten just 24 hours earlier.

Jennifer Capriati's triumph in the women's singles at the Australian Open has been extensively written up with regard to her comeback from her well documented teenage troubles.

In the Open era only Jana Novotna has been older when winning a major singles title for the first time

  Iain Carter

Newspaper editors appeared to relish one more chance to publish the mug-shot that has haunted the 24 year old since the mid-1990s.

Her victory provided a happy ending of Hollywood proportions to a great story.

Of more significance to tennis though is that Capriati has won a first Grand Slam title in her mid-twenties.

In the Open era only Jana Novotna has been older when winning a major singles title for the first time.

Capriati's success points to increasing strength in depth in the women's game, and that you don't have to be a teeny-bopper to triumph.

The happiest person outside the champion's close knit family must be the WTA Tour's Chief Executive Bart McGuire.

Capriati in her early years

For the first time since 1995 equal prize money was paid between the men's and women's championships at the Australian Open and McGuire is sure to seize on the twelfth seeded Capriati's title as evidence that the move was justified.

Furthermore he will use it in the Tour's campaign to make the French Open and Wimbledon adopt the same policy.

Certainly the women's case has never been stronger and the scene on the opening morning in Melbourne of Number One court packed long before Anna Kournikova came out to play her first round match spoke volumes for the current popularity of the women's game.

Traditionalists argue that the women play only best of three sets rather than the best of five of their male counterparts, but McGuire argues that it's quality not quantity that counts.

I can see where he's coming from, after all marathon runners don't get paid more than sprinters.

But where I do take issue is with what happens in the early rounds of most women's championships.

The fact is that more often than not they only be competitive from the fourth round onwards such is the gulf in class between the top eight and the rest.

The Gents have always bossed the prize money stakes

  Iain Carter

The evidence in Australia suggests that maybe changing. Capriati needed more than two hours to win her first round match in Melbourne, Lindsay Davenport and Venus Williams both needed three sets to make it through the first round as well.

If this trend continues the women's game has a case.

Wimbledon is the Grand Slam most out of kilter on this issue and the committee at the All England Club is currently discussing who will be paid what at the 2001 Championships.

Quite rightly the committee will note that the women's tour can't attract as much prize money as the men's circuit, in their opinion the marketplace doesn't lie, but don't be surprised if Capriati's Australian triumph isn't taken into consideration.

In SW19 they refer to the Gentlemen and the Ladies Championships, the Gents have always bossed the prize money stakes, but the WTA will be very disappointed if there isn't a diminished differential this summer.