Mark Miles - Players are themselves to blame for injuries/burnout, not the schedule [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Mark Miles - Players are themselves to blame for injuries/burnout, not the schedule

Raquel
10-31-2004, 09:58 PM
This is a bit Catch 22. Maybe if there wasn't so many events, the players would not play as many. IMO with the Davis Cup, Olympics, Masters Series, Grand Slams and then all the other smaller events waving large appearance cheques around it's the season that's too long that's to blame not the players themselves.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3605812&thesection=sport&thesubsection=latest

Tennis: ATP chief says players to blame for burnout

Men's tennis chief Mark Miles says players have only themselves to blame for the fitness problems that have led to a wave of withdrawals from recent tournaments.

Organisers of the Masters Series events in Paris and Madrid have voiced concern after their tournaments were hit by big-name pullouts due to player fatigue and injuries.

Critics say there are too many tournaments on the ATP Tour but Miles, the ATP's chief executive, put the blame squarely on the players saying they were playing too many tournaments.

World No 1 Roger Federer, Australia's Lleyton Hewitt, Argentina's Guillermo Coria and Spain's Juan Carlos Ferrero, have all pulled out of tournaments in the past week.

Domino
10-31-2004, 10:07 PM
Kafelnikov had a fear of not playing a tournament during a given week, yet (Though I could be wrong) I don't remember him getting injured as much. I blame it on over practice. Some players spend as much as four to five hours a day practicing, and I disagree with that. I say a two hour session is the best for keeping everything fine-tuned, and if your not hitting something well, forget about it and return the next day-don't go bashing the same shot over and over again until you're satisfied. McEnroe's way of keeping out of injury was such. Most players are practice-holics, and end up burning themselves out in a fruitless search for the perfect feeling for a certain shot, when they should realize that if their serve is not going in, then maybe their muscles are too fatigued from trying to hit it all the time without enough rest!

This my rant, and it possibly contains flaws, but I don't care, because I believe practicing until you drop is by no ways a good way to keep in form *CoughSchuettlerCough*.

Chloe le Bopper
10-31-2004, 10:11 PM
Frankly, I think that Miles has a point. If players are going to risk their bodies by agreeing to play anywhere that will show them the money, how is this the tour's fault? If players have sponsers that will pressure them to come back too early from an injury or to pick up more tournaments then they should, how is this the tour's fault? However, I don't think that this is a problem that should be blamed just on one group of individuals, when there are obviously a number of different factors at play. If the ATP didn't have tournaments that threw a lot of money at the players, they players wouldn't have those incentives to play more often... etc. etc. It goes both ways, but he's right in the sense that the players should bear some of the responsibility.

Horatio Caine
10-31-2004, 10:33 PM
Miles is only too right. A player only needs to play 18 tournaments to have a good chance of getting a high ranking. Players like Vicente used to play 38 tournaments a year and if you think about it, that is competing about 43 weeks a year excluding David Cup. Many players still play around 30 tournaments a year (34 weeks competition excluding Davis Cup).

The simple, but hard truth, is that many of the top players are just too greedy and compete more than they need to to earn their extra tens of thousands of dollars.

Look at model players like Hewitt - they only play around 22 tournaments a year and manage to remain relatively injury free.

The simple solution is that players play no more than 22/23 tournaments year. After all, after Grand Slams and Masters Series events, a player has 5 smaller tournaments that contribute to their ranking and some players play about 12 of those which is clearly unnecessary. They should be restricted to playing no more than 8 or something.

alfonsojose
11-04-2004, 06:25 PM
It goes both ways, but he's right in the sense that the players should bear some of the responsibility.

I agree. Look at JesusFed and the Duck. What the hell were they doing at Bangkok? Does they need the money? After reaching Wimbledon final, if u are a top player and want so badly to play the olympics and the hardcourt summer swing ending at U.S. Open, It's completely :retard: to schedule a trip to Asia. Who knows how they would be doing right now, with a nice resting and ending strong at Europe Indoor season. An Andy saying he's injured and playing exhibition matches ... Well, now you're carrying a bad taste to Houston :sad: :(

Havok
11-04-2004, 06:31 PM
Meh, it's a bit of both really. The players do have to schedule their years better than they currently are, but the season is still long in itself. Plus the ATP forces players to play all the big events and that's 13 right there. Also you want to have some match practice before these events, so players who play a smart schedule should be playing anywhere between about 19-24 events I would say. If the season was even just 2-3 weeks shorter, it would make a big difference. Also the DC fucks up with schedules quite a bit and the blame can be put on that as well.

TheBoiledEgg
11-04-2004, 06:41 PM
Best of 18 is a bit much
but then again the players scheduling leaves alot to be desired.

Tennis has always been a non-stop grind
that didnt stop players of previous generations.

You cant have you cake and eat it, then puke it up all over the guys who gave it to you :o


Make ranks best of 14. but taking on Tiriac's solution, missing 2 TMS means you cant play end of year TMC.

Havok
11-04-2004, 06:45 PM
Sure it didn't stop players from previous generations, but things change. It's MUCH harder to play a full season now as it was 20 years ago. Take that into consideration ans I'm sure players take more hits/injuries to their bodies now than before. ALso before loads of events were played on grass which is easy on your feet/body whereas now the tour is dominated with hardcourt/clay surfaces.

RPH
11-04-2004, 06:46 PM
He's right

It's the players who choose there schuedles and if there getting injured then they shouldn't play as much not cos of schuedle :)

Havok
11-04-2004, 06:48 PM
Best of 18 is a bit much
but then again the players scheduling leaves alot to be desired.

Tennis has always been a non-stop grind
that didnt stop players of previous generations.

You cant have you cake and eat it, then puke it up all over the guys who gave it to you :o


Make ranks best of 14. but taking on Tiriac's solution, missing 2 TMS means you cant play end of year TMC.
Rankings best of 14 is dumb. That's way too few events and the smaller events won't be able to hold up their ends because top players will blow off even more of these events than they already do now. Also not making the TMC because you missed at least 2 TMS events is retarded. I think players should be forced to play at least 6 of the 9 TMS events because these tournaments do take a toll on you since all of them are paired with another TMS event that usually follows the very next week.

Havok
11-04-2004, 06:50 PM
He's right

It's the players who choose there schuedles and if there getting injured then they shouldn't play as much not cos of schuedle :)
So then why all the bitching and complaining when players Do pull out of events? You make your schedule at the start of the year not even knowing what kind of a year you will be having. The tour pushes players to play certain events so it is at least partly the ATP's fault as well.

TheBoiledEgg
11-04-2004, 07:05 PM
Sure it didn't stop players from previous generations, but things change. It's MUCH harder to play a full season now as it was 20 years ago. Take that into consideration ans I'm sure players take more hits/injuries to their bodies now than before. ALso before loads of events were played on grass which is easy on your feet/body whereas now the tour is dominated with hardcourt/clay surfaces.

Sampras, Becker, Edberg etc had no worries and they didnt finish 20 yrs ago.
And even 20 yrs ago there wasnt that much more grass events, just Aus Open and a couple before, but most players then played Indoors in London/Europe then flew to Australia to play Aus Open ;) :p

its got nothing to do with clay, they are just as easy on the feet, as grass.

its hard courts, just get rid of half those events and most things will be ok.

Havok
11-04-2004, 07:09 PM
Clay is as easy on the feet as grass, but the rallies last like 5 x longer, so it takes a pounding on your body. Heck even 10 years ago it was easier to play on tour than it is now. Things change, people get stronger, people hit the ball harder, first round matches aren't a piece of cake anymore. You need to be ready for battle from the start of each tournament. imo you can't just lump all of the injuries to one surface, as you are doing with the hardcourts. It's the whole entire year in general.

roisin
11-04-2004, 07:09 PM
i can see the arguments from both sides but does anyone else think its weird that miles is blaming the players when he's the head of the atp??? should he not be defending the players?

Havok
11-04-2004, 07:12 PM
All I have to say is that he's lucky he didn't have to run the WTA this year.:tape: When comparing the two, it's like night and day. The women get to do whatever they want while the men at least have guidelines and rules to follow and usually follow them to a tee.

RPH
11-04-2004, 07:19 PM
So then why all the bitching and complaining when players Do pull out of events? You make your schedule at the start of the year not even knowing what kind of a year you will be having. The tour pushes players to play certain events so it is at least partly the ATP's fault as well.

True about the ATP
Players shouldn't really pull out at the last moment IMO but I suppose it hurts the tournament before it starts if they pull out before the last moment :)

amethyst
11-04-2004, 07:23 PM
Player´s scheduling could indeed be smarter. But right now some players are reducing their schedule and skip some events to rest for others which they consider more important - like DC or TMC. And what happens? Everybody is complaining! If we want the players to make their own schedule we have to accept that they are pulling out of events - even the big ones.
And it´s certainly the atp´s fault that there are too many TMS events. 9 of them are too many considering most players want to play tune-up tournaments before such important events. And having back-to-back TMS events is insanity in my opinion.

Tennis Fool
11-04-2004, 07:56 PM
Who cares what MM thinks. He on his way out.

JennyS
11-05-2004, 04:15 AM
While Miles is correct that a lot of guys overplay, he is missing a major point. If the schedule continues to stay as long as it is, then the tournaments are going to suffer as a result. In order to get a decent break, the players have to sit out and miss important tournaments. Plus, a lot of the guys who are complaining like Hewitt, Henman and Roddick don't play an insane number of events, but they still think the year is too long.

The tournament directors are kidding themselves if they think that punishing the players is the way to get them to play all the events. Why not take some responsibility and fix the schedule? With mandatory rankings events scheduled from January through November, there is no way all the big tournaments can draw top fields.

The schedule is just so screwed up and only diehard fans really understand it. The average person can't get into Davis Cup with its ludicrous scheduling, nor can they all sit through five hour Grand Slam matches. The schedule is just too cluttered and poorly organized to attract more than a small, but loyal fanbase. Sure, some tournaments are well attended, but television ratings tell the true story and the ratings are pretty terrible at the moment.

Miles should not put all the blame on the players. The players didn't schedule Beijing right after the US Open, nor did they schedule claycourt tournaments after Wimbledon. As long as the powers that be come up with crazy scheduling, don't expect all the players to schedule perfectly.

The guys who are speaking out, are not just whinning about the season being too long. They are explaining why people are sitting out of important events. People criticize players for sitting out of Masters events and Davis Cup ties, but then when the players say the year is too long, the same folks tell them to shut up and nobody can force them to play.

JennyS
11-05-2004, 04:44 AM
A top 5 player could play the minimum number of tournaments that are counted for rankings and still have a really tough year. If you factor in all of the travel, the surface changes, the number of matches played in a week (up to 6) and the mental strength needed to compete, it's pretty exhausting.

federer_roar
11-05-2004, 06:09 AM
Miles is only too right. A player only needs to play 18 tournaments to have a good chance of getting a high ranking. Players like Vicente used to play 38 tournaments a year and if you think about it, that is competing about 43 weeks a year excluding David Cup. Many players still play around 30 tournaments a year (34 weeks competition excluding Davis Cup).


It's NOT a matter of "overplay". It's number of matches top players played!

Federer's "only" played 15 tournaments this year which are 69 matches not including David Cup and Olympic! Even count on the MC, and the pulled out Master Madrid & Paris, he's not qualified for "overplay" by all means.

Don't quickly jump into a conclusion without even looking at the situation, okay? :o

federer_roar
11-05-2004, 08:59 AM
Here are the number of matches some player played in 2004:

Federer, Roger (SUI) 69

Roddick, Andy (USA) 75

Hewitt, Lleyton (AUS) 76

Moya, Carlos (ESP) 66

Safin, Marat (RUS) 62

Agassi, Andre (USA) 50

Johansson, Joachim (SWE) 55

Ljubicic, Ivan (CRO) 53

jtipson
11-05-2004, 10:11 AM
Are you sure those are right? I know off the top of my head that Federer has a 69-6 record, so he's played 75. Andy has played at least 85 (71-14 record I think)?

Roger has certainly cut his down from last year (played over 90 singles matches alone), but if he'd played the indoor season, he may have finished with around the same number.

You're quite right that it's not so much the number of tournaments played, but the number of matches - a player who plays 30, but loses in the first round most of the time hasn't such a heavy schedule as someone who plays 16 but wins more than half of the tournaments he plays ;)

Space Cowgirl
11-05-2004, 10:12 AM
A top 5 player could play the minimum number of tournaments that are counted for rankings and still have a really tough year. If you factor in all of the travel, the surface changes, the number of matches played in a week (up to 6) and the mental strength needed to compete, it's pretty exhausting.


Very true, plus, what happens if they get knocked out in R1 of a tournament? They'll want to play the following week in order to get some points at least. I don't think any player could know at the start of the year how many tournaments he will actually play until the following November. Take Roddick for example: his season began (like everyone elses) in January and will go on until early December. That's just mad, he'll have, what, a week maybe after that before he has to start preparing again for next year. No wonder he didn't make much of an effort yesterday against Mirnyi.

WyveN
11-05-2004, 10:38 AM
Look at model players like Hewitt - they only play around 22 tournaments a year and manage to remain relatively injury free.


22 tournaments a year is a fairly large amount for top players,that is all the slams, all the TMS and 6-7 optional events

Maybe Hewitt played that many in 2001/2002 but I am sure he cut down now.

WyveN
11-05-2004, 10:43 AM
I agree. Look at JesusFed and the Duck. What the hell were they doing at Bangkok? Does they need the money?

The amount of money they got offered just to play there for week is the sort of money most people dream of earning annually. It doesnt matter how rich you are, its still very hard to ignore.

federer_roar
11-05-2004, 02:50 PM
Are you sure those are right? I know off the top of my head that Federer has a 69-6 record, so he's played 75. Andy has played at least 85 (71-14 record I think)?



69 is not included the 4 matches in David Cup and 2 in Olympic.

jtipson
11-05-2004, 02:55 PM
69 is not included the 4 matches in David Cup and 2 in Olympic.

Oh, I see. Thank you :)

Horatio Caine
11-06-2004, 12:51 PM
69 is not included the 4 matches in David Cup and 2 in Olympic.

I thought Davis Cup singles wins/losses were included in the player's win/loss record for the year?

Horatio Caine
11-06-2004, 01:10 PM
does anyone else think its weird that miles is blaming the players when he's the head of the atp??? should he not be defending the players?

:haha: Just goes to show that the ATP is a joke!

Here's a scheduling tip for them (they should speed it up as well - to be implemented by 2006) -

1. Move Australian Open back to March.

2. Start tour the 2nd week of January - don't need some of the pointless little ones that dominate the calendar between Jan and May. Remove 3 of them.

3. Remove 1 of the Cincy/Toronto (or Montreal - depending on the year!) Masters to prevent there being player burn-outs between Wimbledon and US Open. There isn't much time between those slams and there are quite a few large tournaments on the calendar e.g. Kitzbuhel, Stuttgart, Cincy, Canada TMS, Indianapolis etc. One less won't hurt.

4. Put 3 weeks between Wimbledon and Roland Garros.

5. RG - Wimbledon. Week 1 - Ordina Open. Week 2. London Masters Series sponsored by Stella Artois, Queen's Club, GRASS!!!!! We need a big tournament on grass - equality guys! Week 3. Halle and Nottingham. A top player can therefore just play the Masters event and not get too burned out for Wimby.

6. Sort out the other Masters tournaments. Separate Indian Wells and Miami so there is at least 1 weeks rest between them. Separate Rome and Hamburg (same reason). Put Madrid 1 week back thus putting 2 weeks between Madrid and Paris (indoor hard events are the toughest on the body).

7. Davis Cup format is fine - a knock-out system each year with 140-odd countries taking part is a recipe for disaster.

8. The most obvious of them all - put a god-damned quota on every player!!! A maximum of 23 tournaments per year (best 5 of 10 smaller tournaments)! Look at some of these guys - Hrbaty - 31 tournaments, Ferrer - 31, Andreev 30 etc. Do they want to get injured?!!!!

Players who get injured from playing less them this number - sympathy is due. Players who play more than this number (especially when they know they get injured easily e.g. Dent) are daft.

Sjengster
11-06-2004, 07:42 PM
You make some good points jez, but those recommendations will tread on so many people's toes. We've already heard from the AO tournament directors about how a later start would clash with the Australian Grand Prix, for instance. Sooner or later the tour is going to have to trim some of the lesser optional events here and there, things like Sopot and Delray and Palermo.

Personally I think having the clay season continue after Wimbledon when other players are preparing for the hardcourts is a little daft, but then are some large historic tournaments like Gstaad and Kitzbuhel in that mini-season. As for Davis Cup, this new scheduling of the first round in March isn't going to help matters - players who have to travel abroad to play the DC final in December will still have only a few weeks before making the long journey to Australia for the AO. They need to keep the first round in February, the quarters in April, make the semis post-Wimbledon and then have the final in September. That way the season ends with the TMC and everyone is guaranteed a few more weeks off.

Talking about workaholic players, it's interesting to note which ones have played virtually non-stop this year. As well as someone like Ferrer, who hasn't been winning much off clay, Srichaphan has actually won one more match this year than Henman because he's entered so many events (and of course he has a title under his belt, unlike Henman). They may not be going through too many physical rigours in each individual event, but the constant travelling must drain them over the course of the year.

Horatio Caine
11-06-2004, 08:38 PM
We've already heard from the AO tournament directors about how a later start would clash with the Australian Grand Prix, for instance. Sooner or later the tour is going to have to trim some of the lesser optional events here and there, things like Sopot and Delray and Palermo.

I think the time has come for some of those smaller tournaments to go - yes. I totally agree.

Personally I think having the clay season continue after Wimbledon when other players are preparing for the hardcourts is a little daft, but then are some large historic tournaments like Gstaad and Kitzbuhel in that mini-season.

That needs to be one of the first things to be sorted out. Keep the tournaments but move them to before the French Open. Get rid of Casablanca, Palermo, Houston (clay) etc - they aren't needed.

As for Davis Cup, this new scheduling of the first round in March isn't going to help matters.

Is that really the new schedule because it is pure crap! Why put it next to the two Masters tournaments??!!!!

They need to keep the first round in February, the quarters in April, make the semis post-Wimbledon and then have the final in September. That way the season ends with the TMC and everyone is guaranteed a few more weeks off.

Totally agree - if the pathetic second clay court season after Wimby is removed the Davis Cup semis can be played mid-July and then the final in late Sept.

Talking about workaholic players, it's interesting to note which ones have played virtually non-stop this year. As well as someone like Ferrer, who hasn't been winning much off clay, Srichaphan has actually won one more match this year than Henman because he's entered so many events (and of course he has a title under his belt, unlike Henman). They may not be going through too many physical rigours in each individual event, but the constant travelling must drain them over the course of the year.

That's why there sohuld be quotas on the players. Plus it would put someone like Paradorn down to the ranking he should be at i.e. 40-50. He, like many other players, has had way more tournaments to get points in. His tally would be useless if he were restricted. A quota would make the rankings fairer and reduce fatigue / stress on the players. :)

Space Cowgirl
11-06-2004, 11:25 PM
That's why there sohuld be quotas on the players. Plus it would put someone like Paradorn down to the ranking he should be at i.e. 40-50. He, like many other players, has had way more tournaments to get points in. His tally would be useless if he were restricted. A quota would make the rankings fairer and reduce fatigue / stress on the players. :)

I'm not really sure I get your reasoning here. There is a quota as such on players' results in that they can only count their GS, TMS and a few other optional tournament results (can't remember how many) for their rankings total. So it doesn't matter how many events a player takes part in, if he does crap in all of them his ranking will be crap too.

Sjengster, another workaholic this year was Schüttler. He played 30 tournaments this year and as far as I remember only skipped one week when tournaments were on, after the Aus Open. Not that it did him any good :( , but at least now he realises that he started the season totally burnt out after a long 2003.

Action Jackson
11-07-2004, 07:26 AM
I remember doing this with friends one day and I managed to get the season reduced to 39 weeks and that is including DC weeks and the TMC. For the majority of players it would be 37 as they are not going to compete in those last 2 events.

There would be some structural changes but there will be a clear surface distinction as well for example. The season would start in the first week of Feb and finish in November. The first 4 weeks would be a lead in to the Aus Open with a TMS in the 3rd week, and then once the Aus Open in March is finished. That would be 6 weeks of hardcourt/Rebound Ace.

Then Davis Cup 1st round matches and after that the claycourt season begins in week 8 and finishes in week 19 at the end of the French Open, which is the third week of June. There will be no claycourt events at ATP level after that, this would mean that there would be a two break between the TMS events, and maybe some of the other tournaments could be moved to earlier dates or have two or maybe three of them in the off weeks.

Week 20 at the end of June the grasscourt season begins. Then for the whole month of July it's grasscourt tennis with a week 21 TMS grass event, then optional event and the last two weeks are for Wimbledon.

The start of August the DC quarters which is week 25, then after that it's the lead in for the US Open on the hardcourts with an Asian/North American hardcourt circuit before heading to North America for 2 TMS events and a warm up for the US Open which would be in week 31/32 the last weeks of September.

October would have the DC semis, then after that it would be much reduced indoor season which would last 4 weeks, from week 34/37 it would have Madrid and Paris in week 35 and 37 respectively, then the TMC and Davis Cup final.

The players would half of November, all of December and January free from tennis tournaments. It would provide clear transition from surfaces, gives a TMS to grass, while taking a way a hardcourt one, making sure there is at least a 2 week gap between TMS events.

It would mean shedding a few tournaments, but it would reduce the workload and 2,5 months is comparable to many other sports, though the players could train a lot smarter than many do now.

Horatio Caine
11-07-2004, 10:53 AM
I remember doing this with friends one day and I managed to get the season reduced to 39 weeks and that is including DC weeks and the TMC. For the majority of players it would be 37 as they are not going to compete in those last 2 events.

There would be some structural changes but there will be a clear surface distinction as well for example. The season would start in the first week of Feb and finish in November. The first 4 weeks would be a lead in to the Aus Open with a TMS in the 3rd week, and then once the Aus Open in March is finished. That would be 6 weeks of hardcourt/Rebound Ace.

Then Davis Cup 1st round matches and after that the claycourt season begins in week 8 and finishes in week 19 at the end of the French Open, which is the third week of June. There will be no claycourt events at ATP level after that, this would mean that there would be a two break between the TMS events, and maybe some of the other tournaments could be moved to earlier dates or have two or maybe three of them in the off weeks.

Week 20 at the end of June the grasscourt season begins. Then for the whole month of July it's grasscourt tennis with a week 21 TMS grass event, then optional event and the last two weeks are for Wimbledon.

The start of August the DC quarters which is week 25, then after that it's the lead in for the US Open on the hardcourts with an Asian/North American hardcourt circuit before heading to North America for 2 TMS events and a warm up for the US Open which would be in week 31/32 the last weeks of September.

October would have the DC semis, then after that it would be much reduced indoor season which would last 4 weeks, from week 34/37 it would have Madrid and Paris in week 35 and 37 respectively, then the TMC and Davis Cup final.

The players would half of November, all of December and January free from tennis tournaments. It would provide clear transition from surfaces, gives a TMS to grass, while taking a way a hardcourt one, making sure there is at least a 2 week gap between TMS events.

It would mean shedding a few tournaments, but it would reduce the workload and 2,5 months is comparable to many other sports, though the players could train a lot smarter than many do now.

:worship:

Marc Rosset is Tall
11-07-2004, 10:57 AM
GWH, those points are too logical to work, but something has to give and it was fun adding something to it as well.

The thing with the clay events is it might be iffy to move a few to May, then again with the summer it was this year, it might have been better to do so.

Horatio Caine
11-07-2004, 11:00 AM
I'm not really sure I get your reasoning here. There is a quota as such on players' results in that they can only count their GS, TMS and a few other optional tournament results (can't remember how many) for their rankings total. So it doesn't matter how many events a player takes part in, if he does crap in all of them his ranking will be crap too.

Sjengster, another workaholic this year was Schüttler. He played 30 tournaments this year and as far as I remember only skipped one week when tournaments were on, after the Aus Open. Not that it did him any good :( , but at least now he realises that he started the season totally burnt out after a long 2003.


OK :) Players are only allowed 5 small tournaments on their ranking yet for some players their best results in these tournaments come in their 12th, 13th and maybe 16th attempts. If the players have a quota that they MUST NOT play more than 10 of these tournaments then obviously those good results from their theoretically late good form will not be counted towards the ranking and therefore their ranking will be lower.

Take Greg Rusedski - he hasn't played many tournaments this year but if he had played a full schedule then by Moscow and St. Petersburg he will have played more than likely more than 10 smaller events. Therefore Moscow and St. Petersburg wouldn't be on his ranking and he would have a theoretically inflated ranking. Instead he would be 80th as opposed to 45th.

The quota would ensure that players don't overplay and would also force them to get good results in a smaller number of tournaments. If they are as good as say top 50, then that should be no problem to them. If they ranked in the top 30 and most of their rankings points have come from late season charges (in their 12th, 13th or 16th tournaments say), then gerominooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooo!!!

Captain Obvious
11-10-2004, 04:33 AM
I remember doing this with friends one day and I managed to get the season reduced to 39 weeks and that is including DC weeks and the TMC. For the majority of players it would be 37 as they are not going to compete in those last 2 events.

There would be some structural changes but there will be a clear surface distinction as well for example. The season would start in the first week of Feb and finish in November. The first 4 weeks would be a lead in to the Aus Open with a TMS in the 3rd week, and then once the Aus Open in March is finished. That would be 6 weeks of hardcourt/Rebound Ace.

Then Davis Cup 1st round matches and after that the claycourt season begins in week 8 and finishes in week 19 at the end of the French Open, which is the third week of June. There will be no claycourt events at ATP level after that, this would mean that there would be a two break between the TMS events, and maybe some of the other tournaments could be moved to earlier dates or have two or maybe three of them in the off weeks.

Week 20 at the end of June the grasscourt season begins. Then for the whole month of July it's grasscourt tennis with a week 21 TMS grass event, then optional event and the last two weeks are for Wimbledon.

The start of August the DC quarters which is week 25, then after that it's the lead in for the US Open on the hardcourts with an Asian/North American hardcourt circuit before heading to North America for 2 TMS events and a warm up for the US Open which would be in week 31/32 the last weeks of September.

October would have the DC semis, then after that it would be much reduced indoor season which would last 4 weeks, from week 34/37 it would have Madrid and Paris in week 35 and 37 respectively, then the TMC and Davis Cup final.

The players would half of November, all of December and January free from tennis tournaments. It would provide clear transition from surfaces, gives a TMS to grass, while taking a way a hardcourt one, making sure there is at least a 2 week gap between TMS events.

It would mean shedding a few tournaments, but it would reduce the workload and 2,5 months is comparable to many other sports, though the players could train a lot smarter than many do now.

Very practical and good suggestions.

YulBrynnerWasBald
11-10-2004, 09:35 AM
Interesting points that everyone has made on this thread.

naiwen
11-10-2004, 09:36 PM
Mark Miles? Who is this guy?
Did he say anything when those non-American players were badly treated in Houston?