Not to disagree with the broader point about the integrity of world records, but I thought this perspective was interesting:
I don’t want a five-set final at the Australian Open thinking “Shit, I wonder if this result would be different if Thiem and Djokovic could swap tennis rackets? If only my guy had a different sponsor”.
A similar dynamic already exists in many team sports, where the elites can sign all the stars and smaller teams have to try and win with better drafting, coaching, player development, etc. And in these cases, fans often seem to love watching a less-privileged team overcome those challenges to win (see Leicester City or small college basketball teams like Oral Roberts as examples.)
It is also worth noting that elite athletes aren't necessarily beholden to using their sponsor's equipment. It is easy enough to doll up e.g. a Head racket to look like a Wilson.
For basically the same reason every programmer worth 6 figures doesn't use the same keyboard. Money clearly isn't the limiting factor, neither is not wanting the best tool for the job. "Best tool for the job" though, is subjective; and by the time someone has put in the thousands of hours of practice to excel at their craft, they will undoubtedly have preferences regarding the minutiae.
Tennis players can't choose their brand of tennis balls either. So it's only a small step to enforce the type of racket or any equipment which can cast doubt on fairness.
Comments
Not to disagree with the broader point about the integrity of world records, but I thought this perspective was interesting:
A similar dynamic already exists in many team sports, where the elites can sign all the stars and smaller teams have to try and win with better drafting, coaching, player development, etc. And in these cases, fans often seem to love watching a less-privileged team overcome those challenges to win (see Leicester City or small college basketball teams like Oral Roberts as examples.)
Your example is better than the article's, as Thiem's earnings put his net worth at $30M, and Djokovic's at $220M.
That said, against the cost of racquets, each can buy -- or get from sponsors -- whatever racquets they want.
It is also worth noting that elite athletes aren't necessarily beholden to using their sponsor's equipment. It is easy enough to doll up e.g. a Head racket to look like a Wilson.
Flashback to Gal Gadot tweeting with an iPhone while having an Android sponsorship.
Agassi did exactly that, playing with an obviously painted Prince racket when he was sponsored by Donnay.
I think this still happens a lot in tennis, but this was a memorable one.
Why don't they just give all players the same official rackets before the match? Problem solved :)
For basically the same reason every programmer worth 6 figures doesn't use the same keyboard. Money clearly isn't the limiting factor, neither is not wanting the best tool for the job. "Best tool for the job" though, is subjective; and by the time someone has put in the thousands of hours of practice to excel at their craft, they will undoubtedly have preferences regarding the minutiae.
Tennis players can't choose their brand of tennis balls either. So it's only a small step to enforce the type of racket or any equipment which can cast doubt on fairness.
That's why some team sports have imposed salary cap limits.
Pretty sure it's to make sure that the profits of those that own the teams are preserved.