Why does the ATP Tour have 3 tournies in the same geographical area in the same week? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Why does the ATP Tour have 3 tournies in the same geographical area in the same week?

the cat
10-31-2004, 04:22 PM
I just don't see any reason for having Stockholm, St. Petersburg and Basel played in the same week since these cities are in close proximity to each other. It seems like overkill to me. Stockholm is only a stones throw from St. Petersburg and it doesn't make any sense to have these 2 tournaments played in the same week. :confused: It would be like if there were ATP tournaments in Munich and Linz in the same week.

Can someone logically explain to me why the ATP Tour needs to have Stockholm, St. Petersburg and Basel played in the same week?

Fondueischguät
10-31-2004, 04:25 PM
What do you suggest then cat?

Deboogle!.
10-31-2004, 04:26 PM
:shrug: The fields were all pretty strong, though...b/c most of the top players are in the region for the abutting TMS events. The only time it seems to be a problem is when there are three tourneys all over the place and one or two of them are really weak fields

Fondueischguät
10-31-2004, 04:30 PM
Ok, the ATP have to agree on the calendar, and they probably have a set number of tournaments they play in a year. Some times there are 2 tournaments in the same week and others there are three.

Considering Basel and Stockholm are old established tournaments and next year they won't be competing in the same week. The Olympics changed the schedule slightly and the tournament organisers want their tournaments at a certain time. But what if 10 of them are asking for the same week, what would be solution?

the cat
10-31-2004, 04:36 PM
Good replies Deb and Fond. I don't know what to suggest, Fond. But I have a better understanding of the scheduling now after reading yours and Deb's replies. Sometimes I think there is too much money in men's tennis and that's why situations like Stockholm, St. Petersburg and Basel being played the same week occur. This would never happen in women's tennis because the money is not available.

Wulfram
10-31-2004, 04:40 PM
The tournaments are geographically close together because the top players would be unwilling to go very far from the two Masters tournaments in Madrid and Paris in the previous and next weeks. They don't want to get tired travelling or pick up jet lag.

This also goes some way to explaining why Moscow had the worst field this week, when it's got the same prize money and points on offer as Basel and more than Stockholm.

Fondueischguät
10-31-2004, 04:43 PM
This would never happen in women's tennis because the money is not available.

We're dealing with men's tennis here and you better not say that around fans of the WTA, they will get shitty. I remember one of my friends used this as justification for differing prize money at the Slams, and it was interesting to say the least.

Ok, the thing is now that the ATP are going to have to cut the tournaments down in the future, as their principle product ie the players are having problems fulfilling their committments and therefore if they continually are going to be injured, then they won't get as much revenue.

There is more depth on the men's tour, but you knew that already.

Horatio Caine
10-31-2004, 04:44 PM
Because the ATP is a joke.

Action Jackson
10-31-2004, 04:49 PM
Because the ATP is a joke.

As big a joke as the GB Davis Cup team.

TheBoiledEgg
10-31-2004, 04:51 PM
the season used to be a few weeks longer, these events were more spaced out.
plus you cant have a tourn alongside the TMS events now.
even back in 2000/01 the tourns ran until mid Nov, extra 2 weeks helped.

Also these indoor events are few of the biggest events there are outside the TMS.

Indoor season really only takes place in Europe ;)


.

Action Jackson
10-31-2004, 04:55 PM
These IS indoor events are quite lucrative and TBE has explained it as has Fond, Wulfram as well it makes geographical sense as well.

the cat
10-31-2004, 04:58 PM
Fond, why would women's tennis fans be upset with my saying the WTA Tour doesn't have the kind of money the ATP Tour has? And I like women's tennis and I support it. But the women don't deserve to paid equal prize money to the men in the grand lsams because the men play best of 5 set matches while the women only play best of 3 set matches. I think that difference is significant thus the men should make more money than the women in the grand slams. Outside of the grand slams I think women deserve equal pay to men in any field in the world if they have equal job experience to men in the same position.

Action Jackson
10-31-2004, 05:02 PM
Fond, why would women's tennis fans be upset with my saying the WTA Tour doesn't have the kind of money the ATP Tour has? And I like women's tennis and I support it. But the women don't deserve to paid equal prize money to the men in the grand lsams because the men play best of 5 set matches while the women only play best of 3 set matches. I think that difference is significant thus the men should make more money than the women in the grand slams. Outside of the grand slams I think women deserve equal pay to men in any field in the world if they have equal job experience to men in the same position.

I used all those arguments and those clowns still thought I was a sexist pig and I said Ok, if they are that confident go and ask the WTA to release the marketing and revenue generation of their tour compared to the ATP and how that money flows through into the Slams.

If it's equal what is generated between the respective tours into the Slams then I am all for equal pay, but it's not and won't be for a while.

Fondueischguät
10-31-2004, 05:05 PM
I used all those arguments and those clowns still thought I was a sexist pig and I said Ok, if they are that confident go and ask the WTA to release the marketing and revenue generation of their tour compared to the ATP and how that money flows through into the Slams.

If it's equal what is generated between the respective tours into the Slams then I am all for equal pay, but it's not and won't be for a while.

Don't let facts get in the way of a valid point.

TBE, thanks for that clarification of the former schedule.

athie
10-31-2004, 05:09 PM
Interesting comments. So far as I know there were no Challengers this past week on top of Basel, Stockholm & St. Petersburg. No great surprise really but there’s 4 this coming week including Paris! Crazy schedule! On the other hand if there were few tournaments each week I’d complain there’s wasn’t enough going on.

the cat
10-31-2004, 05:25 PM
You're not a sexist pig, Fond. You're a rational tennis fan.

There are 4 ATP tournaments this week, Athie? :eek: :confused:

TheBoiledEgg
10-31-2004, 05:32 PM
4 ATP Challengers this week :)

athie
10-31-2004, 05:38 PM
Yeah soz cat should have been more specific. I was referring to the Challenger circuit on top of the ‘main’ ATP tournies. Course there’s always the Futures/Satellites too! Only 3 of those this week. Never ending :)

the cat
10-31-2004, 07:58 PM
LOL @ us, Athie. :p But that kind of a mixup can happen on a tennis board.

As fat as men's tennis goes. I would think a player who has played alot of tennis this year like Marat Safin is very tired this late in the year. I hope Safin can avoid an injury the rest of this year.

Deboogle!.
10-31-2004, 08:36 PM
As fat as men's tennis goes. I would think a player who has played alot of tennis this year like Marat Safin is very tired this late in the year. I hope Safin can avoid an injury the rest of this year.

Well, yes, he's played 63 matches, plus doubles... He's the only top player who hasn't taken some period of an extended break (unless I'm forgetting something?), but there are players who've played even more matches and either HAVE ended up injured or have taken breaks to avoid as such. Andy (has played 84 matches :eek: plus doubles) had some nagging little injuries so he took a month off to make sure. Maybe he could've played, but there's no point. Roger (75 matches plus doubles) was tired and took about 3 weeks off, but then was unfortunately injured in Basel. Hewitt (78 matches) took a couple of periods of a few weeks off this. Moya (73 matches) played a ton of tennis earlier in the season and ended up injured. It's tough, that's why these guys need to really think about their schedules so carefully.

the cat
10-31-2004, 08:44 PM
Good post, Deb. It's worrisome that some of the top players play so much tennis. It seems to me that there are too many tennis tournaments to be played and the players have a great choice of tournaments like hungry people at a buffet table. :lick: And the players tend to gorge themselves by playing too many tournaments the way hungry people gorge themselves at a buffet table. ;)

Deboogle!.
10-31-2004, 08:52 PM
Yep, I agree with that. you especially have the issue of the optional tourneys. there are tourneys that all these players are loyal to (for Roger, it's the Swiss tourneys, for Marat it's the Russian tourneys, for Andy it's the small US tournies that gave him the wildcards when he was 18, etc.), so they play these and because they're the biggest draws for these small tourneys, they're paid huge sums of money. I'd play too if I knew the crowd loved me and I'd get a couple hundred grand for a week's worth of work. Problem is when they cut into the more important tourneys, so the players either pull out of THOSE, which is bad, or they play them anyway, and then it gets to be too much. There are definitely things that can be improved about the schedule, but it's up to the players ultimately. Andy shouldn't be playing Houston instead of Monte Carlo, even though he loves it. Roger maybe shouldn't be playing Gstaad immediately after Wimby, even though he loves it, maybe Marat should've pulled out of St. Petersburg after he won Madrid, but it's a hometown tourney.

Tough decisions.

Horatio Caine
10-31-2004, 08:52 PM
As big a joke as the GB Davis Cup team.

Yeah you're provoking me and I'm rising to the bait! :)

The GB Davis Cup team was at its strongest :eek: in Austria (Henman, Rusedski, Murray and Bogdanovic). We British are weak on clay - everyone knows that. In fact, if we played Australia on clay for instance, it would be a very good tie and i think we would win.

Bogdanovic has had a very good season and will be pushing for top 100 next year.
Murray is doing really well having spent 5 months out with knee surgery and then 2 weeks later winning US Open boys singles.
Henman, although weak at the moment, is on the verge of qualifying for the MC.
Rusedski - what can i say - the guy is back in the top 50 and looking really dangerous again.

You have to have a little sympathy GWH (I know you do have feelings!) - we have had rotten WG Qualifying matches - Ecuador (A) 2001 (don't even think about mentioning the Ecuador grass at Wimbledon saga...) Morocco (A) 2003 and Austria (A) 2004. A lot of the current WG teams would struggle to play them away on clay....well maybe not Ecuador at the moment...or Morocco who seem devoid of El Aynaoui and Arazi. But anyway, Austria was just plain cruel!

merle
10-31-2004, 10:00 PM
Yep, I agree with that. you especially have the issue of the optional tourneys. there are tourneys that all these players are loyal to (for Roger, it's the Swiss tourneys, for Marat it's the Russian tourneys, for Andy it's the small US tournies that gave him the wildcards when he was 18, etc.), so they play these and because they're the biggest draws for these small tourneys, they're paid huge sums of money. I'd play too if I knew the crowd loved me and I'd get a couple hundred grand for a week's worth of work. Problem is when they cut into the more important tourneys, so the players either pull out of THOSE, which is bad, or they play them anyway, and then it gets to be too much. There are definitely things that can be improved about the schedule, but it's up to the players ultimately. Andy shouldn't be playing Houston instead of Monte Carlo, even though he loves it. Roger maybe shouldn't be playing Gstaad immediately after Wimby, even though he loves it, maybe Marat should've pulled out of St. Petersburg after he won Madrid, but it's a hometown tourney.

Tough decisions.

Well said Deb! And these are tough decisions indeed! I know you're unhappy with Andy's scheduling, Marat's scheduling hasn't been ideal either! I hope Marat will think his schedule through better for next year. Just a note - Marat took also 3 weeks off after Wimby, and with 1st rd loss at Wimby he got a whole month off! And as his head was a mess in summer and he didn't get many matches his number of played matches is not that high. And BTW I don't think it should be higher! OK Fed winning everything has got so many matches but Andy's number is just plain scary, absolutely no wonder he's got injuries!

Deboogle!.
10-31-2004, 10:15 PM
I know you're unhappy with Andy's scheduling,

That's an understatement. I started whining as soon as his 2004 schedule was released and based on his early 2005 commitments he's still making the same mistakes IMO

Marat's scheduling hasn't been ideal either! I hope Marat will think his schedule through better for next year. Just a note - Marat took also 3 weeks off after Wimby, and with 1st rd loss at Wimby he got a whole month off!

Ahhhhh I didn't know that, thanks for telling me. Good that he at least got some rest then :) And no, he's now going to have played 4 big weeks in a row, that's a lot of matches without much rest. But as two of the tourneys are TMS tourneys and the other two are in his home country, what's he to do? It puts him or Andy or Roger or Lleyton or whomever in a very tough predicament.

OK Fed winning everything has got so many matches but Andy's number is just plain scary, absolutely no wonder he's got injuries!

Yea, and he's not done yet but I'm just happy his injuries were nothing that rest couldn't take care of. And Roger isn't done yet either, most likely. Or Moya or Hewitt or Marat.. none of them are done yet. Last year I think it was Rainer that played the most matches on tour, look what's happened to him this year, I don't know if they're directly related but it's not good.

the cat
11-01-2004, 02:24 PM
Deb, I agree with you that Roddick's schedule is an abomination! :mad: He plays too much and that's how the injuries start to mount up. It's time he puts tournaments like Houston and Indianapolis behind him and played a schedule that allows him alot of rest. Because he's such a physical tennis player Roddick is vulnerable to alot of wear and tear on his body and especially right arm and shoulder over the years. I'm surprised Brad Gilbert hasn't gotten Andy to play a wiser schedule.

Safin needs to play a better schedule too. He has to be tired at the end of 2004. But atleast he's playing some good tennis again. :)