Which Slam had worse organisation? 2003 US Open or 2007 Wimbledon [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Which Slam had worse organisation? 2003 US Open or 2007 Wimbledon

Action Jackson
07-03-2007, 08:38 PM
Of course we can't fight Mother Nature when it comes to inclement weather, and yes the AO and RG get effected by rain.

The organisational shenanigans of Wimbledon 2007, well they are a few to mention.

Bad long term weather forecast, not starting matches at 11am, having best of 5 set doubles for the men, not playing on Sunday, some matches taking 4 days, yes I know we are in England and tennis isn't cricket.

The weather isn't meant to be the best, so a Monday final doesn't seem unlikely.

The US Open 2003 had farcical organisation, due to weather issues, the drying of the courts and the circumstances which lead to Ferrero playing 4 best of 5 set matches in a row without a break and he wasn't playing chumps either, that should have had a Monday final given what went before. Then there is Super Saturday, but that is another topic.

Given that these are both international events, which one of these events had the worse organsiation

Andre'sNo1Fan
07-03-2007, 08:50 PM
Well USO 2003 would not have been so bad, if they hadn't favoured their home players to such an extent that it was beyond a joke. Poor Nalbandian and Ferrero :lol:

This years has been worse because the organisers and so damn stubborn to conform to "tradition" that even when they can see a problem, they won't change their ways :rolleyes: And its just gonna get worse by the end of the week, too.

aramis
07-03-2007, 08:51 PM
Of course we can't fight Mother Nature when it comes to inclement weather, and yes the AO and RG get effected by rain.

The organisational shenanigans of Wimbledon 2007, well they are a few to mention.

Bad long term weather forecast, not starting matches at 11am, having best of 5 set doubles for the men, not playing on Sunday, some matches taking 4 days, yes I know we are in England and tennis isn't cricket.

The weather isn't meant to be the best, so a Monday final doesn't seem unlikely.

The US Open 2003 had farcical organisation, due to weather issues, the drying of the courts and the circumstances which lead to Ferrero playing 4 best of 5 set matches in a row without a break and he wasn't playing chumps either, that should have had a Monday final given what went before. Then there is Super Saturday, but that is another topic.

Given that these are both international events, which one of these events had the worse organsiation

2003 US, but mainly because my favorite (JCF) got screwed over badly in that one. This year he and Roger are still on schedule. But this Wimbledon is still the more infuriating to watch, given that with all the rain delays my tennis coverage consists of one match...you guessed it, Serena. At last the Open they were able to get in some matches late at night. I remember Ferrero and Martin playing past midnight on Armstrong and nobody was there.

scarecrows
07-03-2007, 08:54 PM
both shit, although we're not finished yet with Wimbledon this year :tape:

Scotso
07-03-2007, 08:54 PM
JCF did get screwed badly, but on a whole, this Wimbledon has been the most poorly organized event I have ever witnessed. I've seen club tournaments organized far better (and those organizers don't get paid buttloads to do it).

LeChuck
07-03-2007, 08:55 PM
I would have to opt for Wimbledon 2007. As has been stated above, the stubborness and sheer denial adopted by the tournament organisers at Wimbledon this year is infuriating.

Action Jackson
07-03-2007, 08:55 PM
The US Open was too much favouritism to Roddick and Agassi by the organisers, I highly doubt that they were actively seeking it, but that was really rubbish work.

The US Open have lights and can cover itself in others way that Wimbledon can't or won't, but we all know rain is part of the Wimbledon experience, not so much of a problem if they are prepared for it, they seem to think at Wimbledon starting matches at 11am is wrong.

Burrow
07-03-2007, 08:56 PM
Well all i can say is in recent years wimbledon has been garbage, and the weather is unbelievable!

rocketassist
07-03-2007, 08:58 PM
Wimbledon easily, even the USO can't be that ridiculous despite it's crappy 5th set tie break rule and favouritism for scheduling to Americans.

guga2120
07-03-2007, 09:01 PM
both shit agreed but Wimbledon has to be worse mainly b/c they think not playing tennis on Sunday is important, what a bunch of shit.

Naranoc
07-03-2007, 09:01 PM
As long as MTF is full of bitchy entertainment for a week, it's all good :D

So far, Wimbledon does take the biscuit though :help:

aramis
07-03-2007, 09:01 PM
Why don't they cover the courts at the USO? It seems like a MUCH better idea than spending an hour using blow dryers.

AnnaK_4ever
07-03-2007, 09:07 PM
Wimbledon.

The oprganisers reached the new level of idiocy by skipping Middle Sunday.

Chloe le Bopper
07-03-2007, 09:10 PM
The USO showed obvious nationalist favouritism. But they could. If Wimbledon was in the same situation, who is to say they wouldn't have done the same?

I want to piss on Wimbledon here, but I'm probably suffering from recency effect. The 2003 USO was pretty bloody awful.

Chloe le Bopper
07-03-2007, 09:11 PM
Why don't they cover the courts at the USO? It seems like a MUCH better idea than spending an hour using blow dryers.
Something to do with drainage, the lack there of would apparently make covering the courts a little irrelevant. Now, I'm not entirely convinced of this, but that is more or less how I remember the explanation. Why they don't work on a better drainage system, I haven't any idea.

Purple Rainbow
07-03-2007, 09:11 PM
That comes down to the question wether you are more offended by blatant jingoism or stubborn traditionalism. I am pretty annoyed by both events, luckily though there are no Brits left for the Wimby organizers to favour.

R.Federer
07-03-2007, 09:49 PM
Nothing will ever beat USO 2003.

At least there is no British person who they are scheduling in and out of the rain, to finish. When your home tournament so blatantly helps out at the detriment of others, it taints your prize. Poor andy: The 2003 USO winner*.

jmp
07-03-2007, 09:51 PM
I voted for the 2003 US Open. The thing I've noticed about the management at the US Open is that they never actually do anything about complaints. They just say whatever they have to in order to get past the moment. Two examples:

(1) It hasn't rained as hard as 2003 in recent years. But, it's obvious from the little rain at the US Open in the intervening years that they haven't changed their court maintenance during rain delays one bit.

(2) When that umpire lost control of the Serena vs. Jen match she was never reprimanded and the tournament never acknowledged that the match was poorly handled. I may be mistaken, but, I believe the umpire who called out the wrong score for Venus vs. Kirilenko (sp?) at Wimbledon was asked not to return.

Jingoism, Nalbandian, and Ferrero have already been mentioned regarding the 2003 US Open. But, Hewitt was a victim, also, along with four women who were toyed with for four days. They weren't big names who were expected to win so the organizers just had them on stand by rather than scheduling them first during dry spells. One of the four was Mary Pierce I believe.

As for 2007 Wimbledon, I agree with all who have written about middle Sunday play and the long lead time for the roof. But, at least there will be a roof. I also don't see any favoritism toward any specific group of players or individuals. The bottom half of the men's draw is at a disadvantage. It doesn't seem that the organizers crafted this result. There is still a chance that these players can give their best tennis for the remainder of the tournament. These rain delays are definitely affecting the quality and, in some cases, the outcome of the matches. But, I still believe that the 2003 US Open was far worse. I think that deep down inside I may be a little embarrassed because the US Open is my home country's tournament. I expect/desire fair play and some real acknowledgement of short comings.

Rosa Luxembourg
07-03-2007, 10:45 PM
2003 US Open because afte and between rain delyas it looked like Roddick got the best schedule. It appeared that he had a helping hand in the referee office.

AceMaker
07-03-2007, 10:49 PM
wimbledon

Geniey2g
07-03-2007, 10:49 PM
Nothing will ever beat USO 2003.

At least there is no British person who they are scheduling in and out of the rain, to finish. When your home tournament so blatantly helps out at the detriment of others, it taints your prize. Poor andy: The 2003 USO winner*.
LMAO @ the asterisk :lol:, nice touch :cool:

MusicMyst
07-03-2007, 11:47 PM
Wimbledon would show the same favoritism, if they had anybody to favor. :lol:

The thing that is really driving me insane is how long it takes them to resume play after the rain stops. I had live video of Court 18 up today, and it took about 45 minutes before the players stopped on the court to warm up. They don't have enough crews to set up the nets, and nobody seems to be hurrying at all. All the officials and crews are walking around like they have all the time in the world. It's nuts!

MusicMyst
07-03-2007, 11:53 PM
Why don't they cover the courts at the USO? It seems like a MUCH better idea than spending an hour using blow dryers.

Here's the "official" explanation: because hard courts retain heat, and when you put water-proof tarps on top of them, you get condensation which drips down onto the court. So you have to dry them anyway. So, all you would do is add the time needed to put the tarps on and off.

It's just too humid on the East Coast during the summer to make tarps work on hard courts.

MusicMyst
07-03-2007, 11:57 PM
Something to do with drainage, the lack there of would apparently make covering the courts a little irrelevant. Now, I'm not entirely convinced of this, but that is more or less how I remember the explanation. Why they don't work on a better drainage system, I haven't any idea.

The courts do have a drainage system, which they need because they hose them down at night to clean them.

Geniey2g
07-04-2007, 12:02 AM
The courts do have a drainage system, which they need because they hose them down at night to clean them.
The plot thickens!

Tommy_Vercetti
07-04-2007, 12:03 AM
Please, if Roddick hasn't won the U.S. Open, no one would ever even exaggerate the rain delays that happened. It's just become a great lie for the Eurotrash now.

Also people act like Ferrero played awful or something because of the schedule. That match was as tight as it gets and only one great game from Roddick in each set decided it.

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 12:06 AM
this is a very difficult poll but i vote as bad as each other

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 12:08 AM
bullshit, Roddick was helped and i do not want to explain it again as i did several times before


Please, if Roddick hasn't won the U.S. Open, no one would ever even exaggerate the rain delays that happened. It's just become a great lie for the Eurotrash now.

Also people act like Ferrero played awful or something because of the schedule. That match was as tight as it gets and only one great game from Roddick in each set decided it.

Tommy_Vercetti
07-04-2007, 12:21 AM
That's bullshit.

Roddick might have had a slight advantage in the schedule, but it was hardly the big conspiracy that people make it out to be four years later. It's mostly bs and revisionism.

It's almost as sad as the Argentine's that defend their cheaters.

GlennMirnyi
07-04-2007, 12:28 AM
Roddick was given the match. That's a fact, wheter some people like it or not.

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 12:31 AM
do you want I list all usa cheaters in all sport???? including tennis players like Bogomolov Juniors, a doubles player named olivier whose surname i forget, and mac shitenroe one of the biggest cheater in the story who confesed he doped about three years ago





That's bullshit.

Roddick might have had a slight advantage in the schedule, but it was hardly the big conspiracy that people make it out to be four years later. It's mostly bs and revisionism.

It's almost as sad as the Argentine's that defend their cheaters.

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 12:32 AM
and btw Roddick was helped very much, deal with it

do not worry, anyway nobody can stole that Roddick title , so you can accept the help he received without problems

Tommy_Vercetti
07-04-2007, 12:39 AM
Returnwinner, who? You want to compare a nobody and some alleged junior players to nearly all the Argentine top players being dopers?

So in other words, Federer has been given Wimbledon and hasn't earned it?

robinhood
07-04-2007, 12:39 AM
I didn't watch USO 03 after Fed lost in 4th round, so I vote Wimby 07.
It is by far the most frustrating tournament I've ever watched.
I cannot believe Nadal R3 match still isn't finished after four days.

Skipping the middle Sunday is genenrally okay with me, but not when half the field is behind the SHE-dule!!!! :fiery:

Merton
07-04-2007, 12:40 AM
The 2003 US Open was a total disaster, the 3-day start and the super-Saturday are structural flaws but the scheduling suffered from the fact that the night matches slots were basically fixed due to TV networks requirements to show the most recognizable players to the public during their prime time. Therefore, on top of the difficulties due to the rain and the slow response in drying courts and getting them ready for play, the organization suffered from not having enough scheduling flexibility. As a result, Ferrero got royally $%#!.

Wimbledon this year exhibits very similar flaws, it is obvious given the weather forecast that they should have played on Sunday, the excuse that there were not many matches postponed at the time does not pass the laugh test. Similarly, setting women's matches first and not starting at the earliest possible time are wrong.

Mechlan
07-04-2007, 12:40 AM
Here's the "official" explanation: because hard courts retain heat, and when you put water-proof tarps on top of them, you get condensation which drips down onto the court. So you have to dry them anyway. So, all you would do is add the time needed to put the tarps on and off.

It's just too humid on the East Coast during the summer to make tarps work on hard courts.

I'm not sure I buy that. Wimbledon can get covers on the courts in like, 2 seconds. And I'll wager money that the courts won't get nearly as wet due to condensation as they do under a full-fledged rainstorm. I hope there's a better explanation for it than just that. Or maybe i just severely underestimate the humidity under a tarp on hardcourts.

robinhood
07-04-2007, 12:41 AM
Returnwinner, who? You want to compare a nobody and some alleged junior players to nearly all the Argentine top players being dopers?

So in other words, Federer has been given Wimbledon and hasn't earned it?

:confused:

WF4EVER
07-04-2007, 12:41 AM
No question about it. 2007 Wimbledon has become a joke. Fine, there's nothing you can do about Mother Nature but this has been going on for years and the call for a roof has been continuous and was only recently acknowledged.

The worst part of this whole thing is that the organizers absolutely refused to use their sacred middle Sunday to try to remain on schedule.

I heard that tournament official on ESPN2 with Jim Fowler and he was a total arse. I was wondering which political party he was lobbying for because he totally dismissed the urgency of the situation. How this man could even use the word 'fun' at a time like this is beyond me. Sure, he could surely sit on his arse somewhere with a bottle of rum or whiskey and convince himself he's having fun in light of the situation, but what about these men who are expected to get out there on consecutive days and contest a best of 5 match when it's these same organizers who said to hell with it, no play on Sunday?

What was even worse was hearing him say that they didn't play on Sunday because there was no need for it. Huh? He can not be serious!

Thank God this is not a life or death situation because I'd have been sorry for the people involved.

BTW, IMO, 2003 USO was not a result of poor organization. It was a calculated effort to ensure that an American won; they just used the rain as an excuse to get away with it.

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 12:51 AM
in 2003 Usopen the organization scheduled the matches and the courts for training pretty unfairly, favoring Agassi and Roddick.


and what about the inefficiency in drying the courts with those poor towels haha that was pathetic for such a big tournament


BTW, IMO, 2003 USO was not a result of poor organization. It was a calculated effort to ensure that an American won; they just used the rain as an excuse to get away with it.

WF4EVER
07-04-2007, 12:55 AM
you should be better informed . in 2003 Usopen the organization scheduled the matches and the courts for training pretty unfairly, favoring Agassi and Roddick.


and what about the inefficiency in drying the courts with those poor towels haha that was pathetic for such a big tournament

My first language is English; is it yours?

alfonsojose
07-04-2007, 01:01 AM
Poor organization? :lol: Andy winning USO in front of your eyes was the best cover-up ever

Chip_s_m
07-04-2007, 01:30 AM
I voted Wimbledon 2007 but only because the US Open organizers have addressed the court drying problem with those zamboni-type things (I can't find a picture but here's an article on them: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E7D81F3EF933A0575BC0A9629C8B 63.) If I had to guess we'll still see no play on middle sunday and 1pm starts next year even if there's a bad forecast. I do appreciate the roof though.

goldenlox
07-04-2007, 01:36 AM
The real question is - would you rather be on your knees with a towel drying the USO courts, or waiting with the crew to pull the tarp over the grass when it rains at Wimbledon.

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 01:39 AM
sorry man I did read fastly your post and misunderstood it
I have just gave you a good rep for this mistake :hatoff:
My first language is English; is it yours?

SixPack
07-04-2007, 01:57 AM
This 2007 Wimbledon has been poorly organized. The fact that they played the 4th round match of Ferrero and Janko before finishing Nadal/Soderling boggles my mind.

cmurray
07-04-2007, 02:08 AM
Wimby by the barest of margins. Their insistence on adhering to tradition at the expense of the players is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE. This is the worst tournament EVER. :rolleyes:

tangerine_dream
07-04-2007, 02:13 AM
:lol: People still bitter about Roddick's USO win.

I see the amount of titles Roddick has won since USO'03, his incredible run during that summer, and the amount of titles Ferrero and Nalbandian have won collectively since that time and there's really no contest who earned the USO win that year.

People still carping on about some kind of backdoor USTA conspiracy theory sound more and more ridiculous as time goes on. :)

tennisace
07-04-2007, 02:55 AM
I voted USO mainly because I was there sitting through getting only drenched the whole Labor Day weekend. Oh, and that the schedule was rigged.

I think Wimby decided to put on JCF & Tipsy before some of the 3rd rds were completed so the winner wouldn't be hugely disadvantaged by perhaps having to play back to back with no rest against Fed which is what every one is so pissed about because they didn't do that at USO in 2003.

hammett
07-04-2007, 02:56 AM
Americans has no right to call a nation cheater.:lol:

Action Jackson
07-04-2007, 05:09 AM
tangernius, this isn't about Duckboy or the end result, just boneheaded organisation from these two respective events.

Geniey2g
07-04-2007, 08:30 AM
tangernius, this isn't about Duckboy or the end result, just boneheaded organisation from these two respective events.
Lol, you created a monster with this thread, mate :D.

Pea
07-04-2007, 10:19 AM
It will be something if duckboy wins both of the most unorganised slams EVER.:lol:

rrfnpump
07-04-2007, 10:19 AM
2003 Uso.

Action Jackson
07-04-2007, 10:38 AM
Lol, you created a monster with this thread, mate :D.

Tangerinus is the one who is famous for bitching about people being anti-American, yet practices the same if not worse generalisations about other places.

It's a fair question and it will be interesting to see what day the mens final will be played.

MariaV
07-04-2007, 10:52 AM
Wimbledon 2007 hands down :rolleyes:


The 1-legged man alternative is funny though.

Tzar
07-04-2007, 11:21 AM
Nalbandian And Ferrero Should give their opinions :tape:

Also Nadal and Djoko :lol:

*Ljubica*
07-04-2007, 11:33 AM
Both Wimbledon 2007 and US Open 2003 were badly organised, and produced conditions that were unfair to the players involved. I voted for US 2003 purely because of the way local players were favoured, which I admit was probably not their fault or choice, but left a bad taste in the mouth all over the world. And at least Wimbledon has covers :angel: That ridiculous court drying with towels is still the most stupid thing I have ever seen on a tennis court.

ReturnWinner
07-04-2007, 12:41 PM
its not a conspiracy, they did not create the rain but when it was delaying the game the organisation was shit favoriting agassi and Roddick as I posted above
:lol: People still bitter about Roddick's USO win.

I see the amount of titles Roddick has won since USO'03, his incredible run during that summer, and the amount of titles Ferrero and Nalbandian have won collectively since that time and there's really no contest who earned the USO win that year.

People still carping on about some kind of backdoor USTA conspiracy theory sound more and more ridiculous as time goes on. :)

CyBorg
07-04-2007, 12:49 PM
Today's schedule seals it: Wimbledon is a bloody joke.

I hope it rains all day tomorrow, because we'll be twiddling our thumbs between 3 and 8 pm today without any singles matches in perfect weather.

tangerine_dream
07-04-2007, 08:56 PM
Tangerinus is the one who is famous for bitching about people being anti-American, yet practices the same if not worse generalisations about other places.
I only do that to annoy you US-bashers and I think you know that. :p

It's a fair question and it will be interesting to see what day the mens final will be played.
At least the USO has night matches and plays on Sundays. The backlog at USO wasn't nearly as bad as it is this week at Wimby. I don't recall Agassi or Roddick having five days off at USO.

nobama
07-04-2007, 09:11 PM
I don't recall Agassi or Roddick having five days off at USO.Remind me again which one had an opponent who withdrew before the match was to be played?

Rafa = Fed Killa
07-04-2007, 09:18 PM
I don't recall Agassi or Roddick having five days off at USO.

If Federer gets outside help its divine will.

So remember only Federer should get preferrential treatment and no one else.

Hypocrites.

TheBoiledEgg
07-04-2007, 10:36 PM
nothing beats US 2003 schedule for total ineptitude.

You can guarantee that if USTA was running Wimbledon, they'd make a pig's ear out of it and it would be alot, lot worse than what Wimbledon does.

US schedules ALL of their top players for only Arthur Ashe Court, and they play no where else.

"lets get Ashe dried out cos we gonna lose advertising money" :rolleyes:
"send the foreigners home cos no one cares about them here".

Via
07-04-2007, 10:52 PM
i wish tournaments could be fined for poor organisation, just like players getting fined for poor behaviour. wait... who runs the atp? alright :tape:

btw this year the AO did poorly on the hottest first tuesday too... they were lucky that they didn't get 40 deg every day of the week :rolleyes:

Johnny Groove
07-04-2007, 10:53 PM
Remind me again which one had an opponent who withdrew before the match was to be played?

Remind me how much money the Wimbledon organizers paid off Haas to withdraw?

RedFury
07-04-2007, 10:55 PM
Organization-wise, I think The US Oren has it as all over Wimbledon -- my five trips there were impeccable in that sense. OTOH, I find the Wimbledon draws quite a bit more impartial -- even if, as in any tourney -- some of the favorites are wont to have a cleaner road to the finals. I attribute that simply to "the luck of the draw." Whereas in the USO, "luck" doesn't quite factor in at times.

nobama
07-04-2007, 11:24 PM
Remind me how much money the Wimbledon organizers paid off Haas to withdraw?
:confused:

LocoPorElTenis
07-04-2007, 11:29 PM
nothing beats US 2003 schedule for total ineptitude.

You can guarantee that if USTA was running Wimbledon, they'd make a pig's ear out of it and it would be alot, lot worse than what Wimbledon does.

US schedules ALL of their top players for only Arthur Ashe Court, and they play no where else.

"lets get Ashe dried out cos we gonna lose advertising money" :rolleyes:
"send the foreigners home cos no one cares about them here".

I sort of agree, but keep in mind the US has a far greater number of top and/or popular local players than the UK. In fact "All of UK's top players" is an empty set with Murray out. So even if the Wimby organizers wanted to put all their top stars on centre court, it would be a moot point.

TheBoiledEgg
07-04-2007, 11:58 PM
I sort of agree, but keep in mind the US has a far greater number of top and/or popular local players than the UK. In fact "All of UK's top players" is an empty set with Murray out. So even if the Wimby organizers wanted to put all their top stars on centre court, it would be a moot point.

you didnt get my point.

Wimbledon never ever schedules its home players or any players just for Centre Court.
Federer will always play one match on Centre, then #1, Centre and #1 again in 1st few rds.

Aus Open and RG do court switches of all players.

only the US Open just schedules US players only for AA.

Can anyone remember, Agassi, Sampras, Roddick, Williams ever play on Louis Armstrong ???

Raquel
07-05-2007, 12:29 AM
At least the USO has night matches and plays on Sundays. The backlog at USO wasn't nearly as bad as it is this week at Wimby.You're right, which is why it was slightly worse than this Wimbledon for me. US Open 2003 had an extra day, lights until beyond midnight if needed, and less of a backlog, yet Ferrero still ended up playing all those days in a row. He refused to play twice in one day, which was being touted at one point after Agassi and Roddick were already through. In fairness to Roddick, I always got the impression he was favoured even less than Agassi. Agassi always seemed to be the first on at any opportunity.

MusicMyst
07-05-2007, 01:00 AM
you didnt get my point.

Wimbledon never ever schedules its home players or any players just for Centre Court.
Federer will always play one match on Centre, then #1, Centre and #1 again in 1st few rds.

Aus Open and RG do court switches of all players.

only the US Open just schedules US players only for AA.

Can anyone remember, Agassi, Sampras, Roddick, Williams ever play on Louis Armstrong ???

Well, does Lleyton Hewitt get scheduled anywhere except Rod Laver Arena at the AO? I don't think so.

Action Jackson
07-05-2007, 02:24 AM
I only do that to annoy you US-bashers and I think you know that. :p

You love it, admit it.

At least the USO has night matches and plays on Sundays. The backlog at USO wasn't nearly as bad as it is this week at Wimby. I don't recall Agassi or Roddick having five days off at USO.

The US Open have advantages that Wimbledon doesn't, well mainly the lights and the Sunday play, but why was it that Agassi/Roddick got to play their matches, while the others didn't, when play should have been scheduled to begin on all courts.

No way Ferrero should have had to play 4 days in a row and Nalbandian played 3, even though he was fit then.

Chip_s_m
07-05-2007, 02:26 AM
you didnt get my point.

Wimbledon never ever schedules its home players or any players just for Centre Court.
Federer will always play one match on Centre, then #1, Centre and #1 again in 1st few rds.

Aus Open and RG do court switches of all players.

only the US Open just schedules US players only for AA.

Can anyone remember, Agassi, Sampras, Roddick, Williams ever play on Louis Armstrong ???

nothing beats US 2003 schedule for total ineptitude.

You can guarantee that if USTA was running Wimbledon, they'd make a pig's ear out of it and it would be alot, lot worse than what Wimbledon does.

US schedules ALL of their top players for only Arthur Ashe Court, and they play no where else.

"lets get Ashe dried out cos we gonna lose advertising money" :rolleyes:
"send the foreigners home cos no one cares about them here".


:haha:

Think about what you're saying. Why, for example, would the USTA schedule Roddick for something like court 15 where only a handful of spectators can see him. The majority of people at the US Open are there to see the stars, who, in the US are obviously going to be the Americans plus Sharapova, Federer, Nadal, and Henin. Henman played only on Centre court this Wimbledon, as would have Murray if he were playing.

NYCtennisfan
07-05-2007, 04:46 AM
Wimby schedules the matches differently than the USO. The USO will try to get as many big-ticket players on AA as possible because they have more sessions. The start at 11:00 a.m. and then they have a night session as well. Wimby likes to schedule 3 matches on Centre Court so at some point even the big name players will be playing at the same time on different courts. It's rare that there will be two very big names playing at the same time at the USO.

Action Jackson
07-07-2007, 08:20 AM
Close results so far.

Seems Djokovic could be the US Open's Ferrero with the way this is going, he really needs some rain.

Action Jackson
07-08-2007, 02:06 AM
35 US Open
33 Wimbledon
18 A 1 legged man in an arse kicking contest is better than these 2 events.

Looks like they will get the event done on time.

aramis
07-08-2007, 03:05 AM
You're right, which is why it was slightly worse than this Wimbledon for me. US Open 2003 had an extra day, lights until beyond midnight if needed, and less of a backlog, yet Ferrero still ended up playing all those days in a row. He refused to play twice in one day, which was being touted at one point after Agassi and Roddick were already through. In fairness to Roddick, I always got the impression he was favoured even less than Agassi. Agassi always seemed to be the first on at any opportunity.

Wow, I never knew that :eek:
They actually wanted him to play twice in one day? As if their scheduling already wasn't bad enough :rolleyes:

I so wish Nalbandian had converted one of those match points, just to slap those USTA people in the face.

Action Jackson
07-08-2007, 03:09 AM
You're right, which is why it was slightly worse than this Wimbledon for me. US Open 2003 had an extra day, lights until beyond midnight if needed, and less of a backlog, yet Ferrero still ended up playing all those days in a row. He refused to play twice in one day, which was being touted at one point after Agassi and Roddick were already through. In fairness to Roddick, I always got the impression he was favoured even less than Agassi. Agassi always seemed to be the first on at any opportunity.

Ferrero playing twice in a day, no wonder he told them to get lost.

MaryWalsh
07-08-2007, 03:35 AM
I voted for Wimbledon 2007. I actually did not see USO 2003 but I am voicing my displeasure with some things done this year that have been unfair to the players. There seems to be obstinacy and downright idiocy in several decisions made. I liked Wimbledon til now. Now I'm disgusted.
As for the USO favoring American players, I can certainly believe it. Quite jingoistic in general, tennis here.

azza
07-08-2007, 05:57 AM
wot happened with Ferrero? in USO 03

Blue Heart24
07-08-2007, 07:01 AM
Wimbledon 2007

*bunny*
07-08-2007, 07:26 AM
wot happened with Ferrero? in USO 03
The rain wreacked havoc in the second week of USO 2003. Four days were nearly washed out, but for a few matches, most of them involving American players.
Ferrero had to resume and finish his 4th round vs Todd Martin on Thursday (5 sets), QF vs Hewitt on Friday (4 sets), SF vs Agassi on Saturday (4 sets) and the final on Sunday vs Roddick (3 sets). He was seeded 3, but didn't play on the Arthur Ashe Stadium unil the semi against Agassi. By beating him, JCF became No.1 in the entry ranking. So it was a very important match for him (and it was a great match btw!). But the exhaustion got the best of him in the finals the following day. You could argue he might have lost even if he was 100%, but there was a feeling that the match could have been a lot closer if he were fresher, just like the both Wimbledon semis this year.
Likewise, Nalbandian had to play his R4 vs Federer on Thursday (4 sets), QF vs El Aynaoui on Friday (4 sets) and SF vs Roddick on Saturday (5 sets).

What annoyed me most during those rain delays was that whenever there was a dry spell, they first towel dried the AA Stadium, where most American players were scheduled to play, then moved on to the Louis Armstrong Stadium, and then to the other courts. If they started drying all the courts at the same time, other players could've restarted their matches a lot earlier, hence the backlog would have been cleared more quickly. I understand there wasn't enough workforce to do the job this way, but it was f***ing frustrating when JC, Nalbandian, Hewitt etc. were kept waiting in the lockerroom for hours when Agassi and Rodick were out playing.

Sure this year's Wimbledon affected far more players because it was raining already in the first week, and Djokovic's hours on court without a rest day ended up longer than JC's four matches in four days. But I can't really say which was worse because the things were really poorly organised on both occasions in different ways.

If I remember correctly, at Wimbledon 2001, when Goran and Henman needed three days to finish their SF due to bad weather, which ended on the third Sunday, both players and Rafter, who was already through to the final, were asked whether they preferred to play the finals on Sunday or Monday. I think the organisers also should have asked the the semifinalists this year, particularly Djokovic and Rafa who had to play virtually everyday, whether they were OK to play the final on Sunday.

pascal'rG
07-08-2007, 09:07 AM
Clearly wimbledon 2007.... they make the semis not very entertaining. It could be so different had they manage to give a rest to Djokovic and Gasquet... Ok there was a bit of bad luck with the rain but they have to adapt. I think it's somewhat dangerous because players can hurt themselves with such an organisation.
What about the match gasquet-roddick which was first to play on the Monday and finally was played Friday evening just before the semi !!

BgStallion
07-08-2007, 10:40 AM
I think that the 2003 uso was worse :) Still JCF is a hero to play the way he did though :)

Chris Seahorse
07-08-2007, 10:55 AM
Certainly Wimbledon has made some mistakes this year with the scheduling. However I have to defend them regarding the decision not to play on Sunday. As of the 1st Friday all Singles matches were completely up to date. To organise play for Sunday would have been a huge undertaking and would have been impossible to arrange on such short notice. Hell, It was only clear Saturday's matches wouldn't be completed on time sometime during Saturday afternoon.

Getting Council premission to play, arranging for police, along with the 100's upon 100's who work at Wimbledon to be ready for work at such short notice would have been a non-starter at that point. To have play on the 1st Sunday, they would have had to have everything arranged by Friday Afternoon at the very latest and why would they have arranged for Sunday play at that point when they were close to being back on schedule at that point. The way things turned was unfortunate but in this regard totally understandable. I'm sure had the tournament been two or more days behind on the first Friday there would have indeed been play on Sunday, however this was not the case this time.

Having said all that, it would have been a good idea to have posponed the tournament to the 3rd Sunday when it became clear certain players on the bottom half of the draw would have to play several days in a row.

my0118
07-08-2007, 11:50 AM
Wimbledon this year sucks but never beat US open oraganization handling when it comes to rain.

Action Jackson
07-09-2007, 04:02 AM
Final results are in

Wimbledon 2007 was the winner and at least it had a better final than the US Open 2003.

ys
07-09-2007, 04:04 AM
Final results are in

Wimbledon 2007 was the winner and at least it had a better final than the US Open 2003.

Playing 7 days in a row on grass is tough. Playing 4 best-of-five matches on hardcourts in 4 days will make you a dead meat..

Action Jackson
07-09-2007, 04:06 AM
Playing 7 days in a row on grass is tough. Playing 4 best-of-five matches on hardcourts in 4 days will make you a dead meat..

Obviously, the shit Ferrero and Nalbandian had to go through was ludicrous.

tennisace
07-09-2007, 04:51 PM
you didnt get my point.

Wimbledon never ever schedules its home players or any players just for Centre Court.
Federer will always play one match on Centre, then #1, Centre and #1 again in 1st few rds.

Aus Open and RG do court switches of all players.

only the US Open just schedules US players only for AA.

Can anyone remember, Agassi, Sampras, Roddick, Williams ever play on Louis Armstrong ???

Yes, I saw Pete play Gag Rusedski on Louie in 2002. I was at the Agassi - kucera infamous ball catching match which was on Louie and I know I saw Venus on Louie play Pierce one year. I also saw Monica play there numerous times.

Fedex
07-10-2007, 03:33 AM
Hmm, this is not an easy one. The Open clearly showed favoritism towards Roddick and Agassi as far as scheduling. Both were run poorly, but given the end result of the 03 US Open, I'd have to go with that one.

Fedex
07-10-2007, 04:21 AM
Well, atleast this years Wimbledon did finish on time. For awhile there, it looked like we were destined to play into a third week. One thing I did not understand is why the men's matches that were already in progress were pushed back behind the women's matches? The men play best of 5 sets, so it would seem, that it would be more important to get those matches over with before the women's matches. I had a problem with that, even more than not playing on the first Sunday.

Fedex
07-10-2007, 04:46 AM
That ridiculous court drying with towels is still the most stupid thing I have ever seen on a tennis court.
Rosie, dont forget about the blow dryers they used that year. :) ;)