Originally Posted by Boris Franz Ecker
Yes, Cincinnati .. what is it? US Open? No, Ohio Open? no..
-> low prestige... and it now has a status as a tune-up for the US Open since it became a lousy US Open Series tournament. Not a good thing for the prestige.
Please get a clue. For the last 27 years Cincinnati has been a warm-up for the US Open, played on the same surface for that reason. I already highlighted some of the winners pre-90s, since it's been Super 9/TMS: Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi (3 times each), Michael Chang and Andy Roddick (2 times each), Pat Rafter, Gustavo Kuerten, Carlos Moya, Roger Federer.
And what exactly is lousy about the US Open Series?
Players play for the chance to get bonus prize money at the US Open and here in the US we get some TV coverage of each event.
PS Don't forget Canada is also part of the US Open Series and has been a warm-up for the US Open for many years as well.
Do you know what you're talking about?
Indian Wells is a huge event, along with Miami has one of the biggest attendances among Masters Series (270,000). Way more than Cincinnati or Canada or the European ones.
Indian Wells is a 2 week event
that is combined - I am sure there are fans who go to only the WTA matches. If it was really "well attended" as you say, why does it have such financial troubles and needed saving by Sampras et al? Cincinnati is 1 week with the men and women playing different weeks and the attendence is over 150,000 for the Masters. So actually if you divide IW's attendence in half, Cincy is better attended. Also Canada is slightly better attended than Cincinnati, probably due to it being the only ATP level tournament in that large country. I will have to agree that mostly the European Masters appear to have the most empty seats when the cameras scan over the stands but I don't know the numbers.