Roddick slams Tour schedule [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Roddick slams Tour schedule

nobama
10-28-2005, 10:32 AM
Roddick criticises Tour schedule (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/4380680.stm)

Former world number one Andy Roddick has called for a shorter season after the Paris Masters was hit by some high-profile withdrawals.
Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the top two in the world, are both injured and have joined Marat Safin, Andre Agassi and Carlos Moya on the sidelines.

"The various pull-outs prove that the players are tired at the end of a very long season," said Roddick.

"Everyone agrees that the season needs to be shorter."

Nadal, who won his fourth Masters title of the year in Madrid last week, is nursing a knee injury.

Federer has a torn ankle ligament that also puts his appearance at the end-of-season Masters Cup in doubt while Lleyton Hewitt is doubtful as he awaits the birth of his first child.

But Roddick, who looks set to be the only top-six player in the Paris field, believes the schedule is too demanding on the players.

"It's ridiculous to have to play for 10 and a half months of the year and there is no other sport where you have to do that," he said.

JMG
10-28-2005, 11:48 AM
"It's ridiculous to have to play for 10 and a half months of the year and there is no other sport where you have to do that," he said.

Golf. :)

Viken01
10-28-2005, 11:57 AM
every year it's the same song :o

amierin
10-28-2005, 12:03 PM
I think that the more players who complain about this the better. Right now you have challenger, satellite and main tour tournaments. The main tour is breaking into pieces now as well. For arguments sake call the split in the main tour gold and silver.

Gold would of course be the Slams, Rome, Monte Carlo, Miami, Canada(Montreal/Toronto), and some others I'm sure people will bring up. I don't mean to slight any event it's just that it's early and I'm running on fumes and can't remember them all. Most of these events take place up to the US Open, the last slam.

Davis Cup is also in the mix and while it's scheduled in between tournaments the top dogs are expected to play and its good to see most of them want to play for their country unlike certain previous generation American players who will remain nameless (cough).

The Indoor Season is suffering because by the time September rolls around the big boys are tired, nursing nagging injuries and have to pick and choose where they play so that if they are in the lucky eight they can play their best tennis at the YEC. The Indoor Season is becoming "Silver", good, but not as because the big boys can't or won't play and the men who fight it out here are seen by some fans as "not as good". This affects ticket sales.

Something has to be done to fix this. It's been argued for a long time but I think by the stars pulling out in droves (Poor Bercy!) TPTB may take a long hard look at things and try to adjust the schedule or the weight of some of the fall indoor events.

Horatio Caine
10-28-2005, 12:07 PM
So the long year is to blame for Hewitt becoming a father, Nadal insisting on playing way too many tournies than he needs to, and Federer rolling his ankle in practise? Give me a break :rolleyes:

*Ljubica*
10-28-2005, 12:10 PM
I am no fan of Roddick but I do agree with him on this occasion. The season IS too long - and the reason it is said every year is because it's the truth - so why don't the ATP accept it and do something about it for the sake of the players they're supposed to be representing?

nobama
10-28-2005, 12:20 PM
More players need to speak up for anything to be done. But can we really say Fed and Safin's injuries are because of the tour schedule? Rogelio took 6 weeks off after Wimbledon. I don't think it was playing too much that caused him to roll his ankle during practice. That was just bad luck. But for sure nothing will be done if only a handful of players complain about the schedule.

Horatio Caine
10-28-2005, 12:24 PM
I have no sympathy for Andreev either...playing every week of the season was ridiculous.

Neely
10-28-2005, 12:25 PM
"It's ridiculous to have to play for 10 and a half months of the year and there is no other sport where you have to do that," he said.
I agree that the season itself is too long, but you don't have to play every tournament, you don't have to play each week, each day, you don't have to play all the time. There are more than enough sports like MLB, NHL, NBA which a 100+ games season+playoffs where you have to play for 6 months each day, each 2nd day while travelling around thousands of miles many times each week, not only going from tournament to tournament after every week. And not every sport like tennis is that you have a brutto match time of 120 minutes, with a netto time of 15 minutes where the ball was actually in play. Yes, they also practise and it's not only on-court time they spend, but so do the other athletes of beforementioned sports also.
I can undertand the normal complaints and that players feel flat if they want to play at least the mandatory and a few more selected optional tournaments from the beginning of the season to the end, but it's not like that tennis is the most demanding sport and the schedule gives you lots of freedom to select that other athletes don't have.

Frooty_Bazooty
10-28-2005, 12:25 PM
i think this argument from the players is so stupid. If you think the year is too long with too many tournaments, then just cut down on the amount of tournaments you're playing and take one of the months off (july is SO easy to take off unless you're Gaudio). Apart from the master series and the grand slams, no one is forcing anyone to play, so if players overbook their seasons, then thats their fault.

NicoFan
10-28-2005, 12:25 PM
I am no fan of Roddick but I do agree with him on this occasion. The season IS too long - and the reason it is said every year is because it's the truth - so why don't the ATP accept it and do something about it for the sake of the players they're supposed to be representing?

Because the ATP doesn't really represent the players..in theory, yes - in actuality, no.

The ATP is all about MONEY. Which I guess is what all things in life are about (sadly). Tennis is a business, and business is all about MONEY. And because its all about MONEY, they really only care about their sponsors and making sure tournaments make lots of MONEY.

I really despise the ATP. They don't know how to protect their product (the players) or how to promote the game. There are no standards from tournament to tournament. TV coverage sucks. And we all could add about a few hundred more things to this list.

The entire management of the ATP needs to be fired from the top on down.

And go Andy - won't do any good, but I'm glad that you've tried at least.

Action Jackson
10-28-2005, 12:25 PM
Roddick is just stating the obvious, but good for him to speak up, though others need to do so and if something is to be done, it might need more action, though with any compromise, both parties have to concede something, whether they will do that soon is questionable.

amierin
10-28-2005, 12:27 PM
The players who complain have to be the draws. Roger, Rafa, et al voted physically by dropping out of Bercy. Andy is speaking out verbally. If the top guys just stop showing up at events and thus making the events to appear lesser tournament directors will take notice and start to complain. Look what happened when Rafa rightly (IMO) withdrew from Austria. I thought Austria was going to invade Spain or something they were so angry.

Not to diss the number 120 player in the world but no one cares if he complains. When the top five b**ch and moan or simply withdraw people take notice.

Hewitt had foot surgery btw so his not appearing while related to the impending birth of his first child is also related to a physical injury.

NicoFan
10-28-2005, 12:28 PM
For the people saying that the players don't have to play if they don't want to.

Sorry...that's BS.

Only a couple of players can get away with that...Andre and Roger.

The rest have to worry about points. Which means playing. Lots of tournaments.

And they have to worry about keeping sponsors happy. Which means playing. Lots of tournaments.

This isn't thirty years ago. There is more pressure on these guys. Which means playing. Lots of tournaments.

Galaxystorm
10-28-2005, 12:32 PM
Some weeks ago there was another thread about this topic:

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=57528

Neely
10-28-2005, 12:46 PM
The rest have to worry about points. Which means playing. Lots of tournaments.
Make the choice for yourself. Either quantity with as many results as possible or trying to achieve quality in less tournaments; and if not you are at least happier and healthy despite only being ranked #40 in the world if your body can't take more stress than playing maybe only 20 tournaments a season.

Reducing the length of the season would solve some problems, but so long until there is nothing done against that, players have to make their own toughts about their careers also to make the right decision, despite pressure of sponsors of other external circumstances.

star
10-28-2005, 01:15 PM
Roddick criticises Tour schedule (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/4380680.stm)

Former world number one Andy Roddick has called for a shorter season after the Paris Masters was hit by some high-profile withdrawals.
Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, the top two in the world, are both injured and have joined Marat Safin, Andre Agassi and Carlos Moya on the sidelines.

"The various pull-outs prove that the players are tired at the end of a very long season," said Roddick.

"Everyone agrees that the season needs to be shorter."

Nadal, who won his fourth Masters title of the year in Madrid last week, is nursing a knee injury.

Federer has a torn ankle ligament that also puts his appearance at the end-of-season Masters Cup in doubt while Lleyton Hewitt is doubtful as he awaits the birth of his first child.

But Roddick, who looks set to be the only top-six player in the Paris field, believes the schedule is too demanding on the players.

"It's ridiculous to have to play for 10 and a half months of the year and there is no other sport where you have to do that," he said.

Yes, Andy, there's no other sport where you have to play for 10 1/2 months of the year, but that kind of overlooks the fact that tennis players can take off a month here and there in the season at their own discretion. Federer took off over a month after Wimbledon. Andy took off a significant amount of time too.

But what really gets me about these sort of complaints is that during the off season, the players just go around playing in exhibitions. It seems the complaint is that they don't have enough time to play exhibitions.

Plus, you really can't put the racket down for two months and then have your game back right away. If players have two or three months off (supossing they actually take the time off and aren't playing lucrative exhibition matches) the first part of the season is gonna be kind of ugly.

DhammaTiger
10-28-2005, 01:33 PM
Good post NicoFan,I wanted to rep you but they say, I can't.

NicoFan
10-28-2005, 01:48 PM
Reducing the length of the season would solve some problems, but so long until there is nothing done against that, players have to make their own toughts about their careers also to make the right decision, despite pressure of sponsors of other external circumstances.

Sounds good in theory...but unfortunately its not reality. Reality is sponsors and other commitments.

And if a player decdies to play only in 20 tournaments, they are going to be passed by on the points by the players who decide to do 30-32 tournaments.

Again...reality.

And can't go by Roger's schedule - Roger has points to burn.

And thanks dtiger!!! :)

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 01:59 PM
The longer the season, the less injuries there's gonna be.

Just common sense. :)

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 02:02 PM
The rest have to worry about points.

No.

Even if your ranking is low, you can enter a lot of tournaments directly and if not, oh well there's always qualifications. :)

Galaxystorm
10-28-2005, 02:07 PM
The longer the season, the less injuries there's gonna be.

Just common sense. :)

Andy Murray = the new Kournivoka = just common sense :haha: :lol: :rolls:

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 02:08 PM
Andy Murray = the new Kournivoka = just common sense :haha: :lol: :rolls:

That thread was humorous, maybe you missed that? :)

Galaxystorm
10-28-2005, 02:11 PM
That thread was humorous, maybe you missed that? :)

Don't be liar , mate ;)

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 02:15 PM
Don't be liar , mate ;)

I think it's just a case of you not understanding my posts. :)

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 02:18 PM
Plus, you really can't put the racket down for two months and then have your game back right away. If players have two or three months off (supossing they actually take the time off and aren't playing lucrative exhibition matches) the first part of the season is gonna be kind of ugly.

Players need to take regular breaks during the year. And the shorter the season is, the more difficult it is to do. If the season is packed and there's a 3 months break at the end of the year, it's gonna be very difficult for players to take a couple of breaks during the year.

So what happens if you force your body during 9 months? Oh, that's right, injuries.

What's difficult for the body is the amount of tennis you play in a row. It doesn't matter how long the break is at the end of year is.

Galaxystorm
10-28-2005, 02:20 PM
I think it's just a case of you not understanding my posts. :)

It seems your memory fails you ;)

shotgun
10-28-2005, 02:34 PM
And if a player decdies to play only in 20 tournaments, they are going to be passed by on the points by the players who decide to do 30-32 tournaments.

So you don't think that guys that play 30+ tournaments a year should climb the rankings because they have some kind of merit for enduring the whole season without complaining and/or having injuries? Don't forget we're talking here about a competitive sport.

Anyway, a top 10 player doesn't have to take part in many tournaments because he usually gets to latest rounds on every tournament he plays. He earns a good percentage of the points he could possibly get in those tournaments. As Neely said, tennis players can decide either for quality or quantity.

Tennis is one of the few sports where the guys can decide everything by themselves (apart from playing GS and TMS). They decide when they will play, where they will play, etc. So the only option would be to reduce the number of Masters Series events, but that's where ATP, TD's, sponsors and the money come in. Anyway, Andy's complaints don't make sense to me. If he's saying these things, he wouldn't stand being a football player for 3 days.

Jimnik
10-28-2005, 02:43 PM
"It's ridiculous to have to play for 10 and a half months of the year and there is no other sport where you have to do that," he said.
In footall, players have to play 11 months a year during a World Cup or European Championship year.

Andy is one of my favourite players but I have to disagree with him here. The top players - the ones getting injured - are not arranging their schedules in the right way. Nadal has been absolutely crazy this year playing tournament after tournament.

Agassi and Hewitt have personal (not physical) reasons for withdrawing and Marat's can hardly be caused by the schedule. He's only played 38 matches this year compared with Federer who's played 80, Nadal 89, Roddick 64, Coria 76 and Ljubicic 70.

NicoFan
10-28-2005, 02:47 PM
So you don't think that guys that play 30+ tournaments a year should climb the rankings because they have some kind of merit for enduring the whole season without complaining and/or having injuries? Don't forget we're talking here about a competitive sport.

Tennis is one of the few sports where the guys can decide everything by themselves (apart from playing GS and TMS). They decide when they will play, where they will play, etc. So the only option would be to reduce the number of Masters Series events, but that's where ATP, TD's, sponsors and the money come in. Anyway, Andy's complaints don't make sense to me. If he's saying these things, he wouldn't stand being a football player for 3 days.

If a player plays 30-32 tournaments, at what cost does it come to them in the future? Look at the players that have done that and what do you find? Injuries and more injuries.

Make it a level playing field for everyone. Do the Yankees play more games than the Red Sox in order to make it to the World Series race? In most sports, everyone or team has the same # of games.

And how can you call these guys wimps? Really. :( Just the travel they have to do alone is physically tiring. Have you ever been to a tournament? The guys are there all day. And just the waiting half the time is mentally tiring.

I'm tired of the season, and I don't even play. Enough. And for some of the players, the season doesn't end after Paris. They have Shanghai or Davis Cup. And most only have about 3 weeks off before they have to start to prepare for the next season.

NicoFan
10-28-2005, 02:48 PM
In footall, players have to play 11 months a year during a World Cup or European Championship year.

But they don't play everyday like some of these guys have to do at tournaments.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

star
10-28-2005, 02:49 PM
Tennis players don't play every day either.

Neely
10-28-2005, 02:50 PM
Sounds good in theory...but unfortunately its not reality. Reality is sponsors and other commitments.

And if a player decdies to play only in 20 tournaments, they are going to be passed by on the points by the players who decide to do 30-32 tournaments.

Again...reality.
But what do you get by playing 30 or more tournaments each season? What are the longterm difficulties you can suffer from that? Just look at Schüttler's 100 match season and his consistent way downwards from that on, especially the beginning of 2004. The clever players have to see that it is worth more over long time to play a well balanced schedule in order not to burn out or being frustrated than to be overtaken for one year by a player who just plays more and who is likely to fall into a deep hole sooner or later.

I don't say you are wrong and I also think the season is too long, but the only real solution would be to drop tournaments to make the season much shorter which sounds easy in theory, but if it's ever going to happen the decision will be a long and tough one (again sponsors and money).

star
10-28-2005, 02:51 PM
Players need to take regular breaks during the year. And the shorter the season is, the more difficult it is to do. If the season is packed and there's a 3 months break at the end of the year, it's gonna be very difficult for players to take a couple of breaks during the year.

So what happens if you force your body during 9 months? Oh, that's right, injuries.

What's difficult for the body is the amount of tennis you play in a row. It doesn't matter how long the break is at the end of year is.

That's something I hadn't thought of. A compressed season might have it's own unintended result.

But you know, if Andy thinks the season is too long, he's free to skip the Masters. :) :) :)

celia
10-28-2005, 02:51 PM
So the long year is to blame for Hewitt becoming a father, Nadal insisting on playing way too many tournies than he needs to, and Federer rolling his ankle in practise? Give me a break :rolleyes:
:worship: :worship:

DJ dropshot
10-28-2005, 02:54 PM
The smaller tournaments can be crucial to a player's success in the TMS and slams. If Andy had not played Queen's, who knows if he would have gotten by Bracciali at Wimbledon. If a player sticks to 18 events, 13 required, which 5 does he pick for a warm-up and which 8 does he go in cold? I'm talking 99% of the players here that generally perform well at big events with a good warm-up tournament result under their belt.

Frederick16
10-28-2005, 03:00 PM
i guess its more the motivation at the end than real fatigue...

star
10-28-2005, 03:05 PM
We aren't really talking about 30 tournaments a year.

Federer has played 14 tournaments so far and will end up playing 15. The other guys could play 40 tournaments a year and they still wouldn't pass him.

I counted quickly, but it looks like Federer has played around 80 matches this year. That's a long way from playing every day. I don't see how his current injury has anything to do with him over playing.

Nadal has played 21 tournaments and will wind up playing 22. He's played 89 matches. And I think most people think he's kind of played a grueling schedule this year.

amierin
10-28-2005, 03:10 PM
Interesting idea of having a fixed number of tourneys per year. Each player could choose what he wanted to play to make up his thirty. For those who want to get more points maybe throw in an option for five more. The fall indoor events would count as part of the thirty in determining ranking.

Not sure how it would work but it is interesting to toss the idea about.

ETA: The thirty would include the slams and TMS events.

Frederick16
10-28-2005, 03:11 PM
sanguinetti 37... puerta 31... andreev 35... rochus 31... zib 37... kim 34... hernandez 35... marach 37... burgsmuller 35... aldi 35... :confused:

star
10-28-2005, 03:13 PM
But you must count the matches they have played.

And here's little Ollie with a fantastic number of tournaments and no injury, and Sanguinetti is also still walking without crutches.

celia
10-28-2005, 03:14 PM
But you must count the matches they have played.

And here's little Ollie with a fantastic number of tournaments and no injury, and Sanguinetti is also still walking without crutches.
the difference is how deep they make it into the draw.

amierin
10-28-2005, 03:16 PM
We aren't really talking about 30 tournaments a year.

Federer has played 14 tournaments so far and will end up playing 15. The other guys could play 40 tournaments a year and they still wouldn't pass him.

I counted quickly, but it looks like Federer has played around 80 matches this year. That's a long way from playing every day. I don't see how his current injury has anything to do with him over playing.

Nadal has played 21 tournaments and will wind up playing 22. He's played 89 matches. And I think most people think he's kind of played a grueling schedule this year.

So make it maximum of 22 required with an option to go up to 30 per year? Don't know how you would determine what is a requirement outside of Slams and TMS events. I'm sure TD's would want to make their event part of the 22 required.

Frederick16
10-28-2005, 03:16 PM
why... someone in a tournament doest train as much someone who is out...

Baseline
10-28-2005, 03:17 PM
A problem with tennis pro schedules you don't see in soccer and other sports is unpredictability. Players don't know in advance if they are going to be playing one match or up to 6. When they sign up for tournaments they also don't know if their match(es) may take about an hour, or over 5, and if the opponent might play like Roger Federer or more like Roger Rabbit.

Teams in other sports play for specific periods of time on specific days against specific opponents known in advance (except for play-offs). Also, in team sports, if a player needs to sit out they often/generally have that option. There are other players to replace them if injury forces them to skip a game or take part of a game to regain their energy.

It's prudent not to overschedule, but if a player loses first round they may need more matches and if they didn't sign up for the event in advance they might not receive a wild card or the chance to qualify. That may be especially true re: warm-up events when the surface changes, which happens several times now on the tour.

star
10-28-2005, 03:18 PM
When I count up Burgsmuller's matches I get about 40. Of course, he could have played some challengers that don't show up on the ATP site.

Frederick16
10-28-2005, 03:18 PM
roger has 87 matches ... and igor has 100

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 03:22 PM
It's prudent not to overschedule.

Or you can overschedule and tank in tournaments you don't feel like playing. ;) Yes I'm thinking about you, I.L. :devil:

star
10-28-2005, 03:23 PM
So make it maximum of 22 required with an option to go up to 30 per year? Don't know how you would determine what is a requirement outside of Slams and TMS events. I'm sure TD's would want to make their event part of the 22 required.

The problem with that is that the lower ranked guys want to play a ton of tournaments because of the money. They know they are most likely to play only about an average of two matches per tournament, so they schedule accordingly. I don't see any reason to limit the number of tournaments a player can play. It's up to them.

star
10-28-2005, 03:23 PM
roger has 87 matches ... and igor has 100

I must have miscounted. I only counted about 80 for Roger.

Frederick16
10-28-2005, 03:24 PM
sorry star... he won 5 doubles matches and lost 2... i counted them also

Iheartandy&roger
10-28-2005, 03:25 PM
Amen Andy. Speak your mind. If we could only get the rest to now.... let's stop with all the excuses and the injuries and let's get to the bottom of all this before noone plays in these tourneys...

amierin
10-28-2005, 03:27 PM
The problem with that is that the lower ranked guys want to play a ton of tournaments because of the money. They know they are most likely to play only about an average of two matches per tournament, so they schedule accordingly. I don't see any reason to limit the number of tournaments a player can play. It's up to them.


I understand this which is why I throw in the options. And even then I'm sure some guy won't be able to support his family without playing a lot of events. I'm just trying to throw an idea out there and see if it's even plausible in peoples minds. I doubt TPTB will pay any attention to what is said here.

star
10-28-2005, 03:28 PM
sorry star... he won 5 doubles matches and lost 2... i counted them also

ok..... That's where I went wrong. :) :)

So maybe Nadal played a few more matches too. :)

shotgun
10-28-2005, 03:28 PM
Who forced Roddick to play in Lyon? He doesn't have to and he's already qualified for TMC. There's also Nadal's example. The guy commits to every tournament he can because he'll get well payed for that. Some guys should know that line for greed ends when the line for health begins. Hewitt played 9 or 10 tournaments this year (apart from DC) and still managed to keep his top 5 status for the whole year. Then there are guys like Massu, who plays every week because (I heard his former coach Gabriel Markus saying) he needs more time than other players to get used to surface, weather and game rythm. So it's normal that he loses in the first round of some tournaments before he can make a good run in one of them. The point is that some guys can assure themselves a good position in the rankings playing few tournaments, some can't, and some just want to earn the most money they can. So I don't see a point in reducing the calendar period.

star
10-28-2005, 03:29 PM
I understand this which is why I throw in the options. And even then I'm sure some guy won't be able to support his family without playing a lot of events. I'm just trying to throw an idea out there and see if it's even plausible in peoples minds. I doubt TPTB will pay any attention to what is said here.

I am sure you are right about that!!

I just took your comment as a suggestion, and was giving my opinion in return. :)

star
10-28-2005, 03:31 PM
Who forced Roddick to play in Lyon? He doesn't have to and he's already qualified for TMC. There's also Nadal's example. The guy commits to every tournament he can because he'll get well payed for that. Some guys should know that line for greed ends when the line for health begins. Hewitt played 9 or 10 tournaments this year (apart from DC) and still managed to keep his top 5 status for the whole year. Then there are guys like Massu, who plays every week because (I heard his former coach Gabriel Markus saying) he needs more time than other players to get used to surface, weather and game rythm. So it's normal that he loses in the first round of some tournaments before he can make a good run in one of them. The point is that some guys can assure themselves a good position in the rankings playing few tournaments, some can't, and some just want to earn the most money they can.

I agree completely. Andy could cut his season short right now if he wanted to. But he doesn't want to and I'm sure that's for financial reasons as well as competitive ones. I would have more sympathy for Andy's complaint if I didn't know as soon as the season is over every year he plays exhibition after exhibition. Yeah, yeah, it's for charity, but still, he's not putting his racket down. I like Andy a lot, but he's just sounding like a big :baby:

DJ dropshot
10-28-2005, 03:34 PM
Who forced Roddick to play in Lyon? He doesn't have to and he's already qualified for TMC. There's also Nadal's example. The guy commits to every tournament he can because he'll get well payed for that. Some guys should know that line for greed ends when the line for health begins. Hewitt played 9 or 10 tournaments this year (apart from DC) and still managed to keep his top 5 status for the whole year. Then there are guys like Massu, who plays every week because (I heard his former coach Gabriel Markus saying) he needs more time than other players to get used to surface, weather and game rythm. So it's normal that he loses in the first round of some tournaments before he can make a good run in one of them. The point is that some guys can assure themselves a good position in the rankings playing few tournaments, some can't, and some just want to earn the most money they can. So I don't see a point in reducing the calendar period.

When he made his schedule, he knew he'd need a warm-up for Paris TMC. He didn't schedule a warm-up for Madrid and look what happened.

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 03:37 PM
When he made his schedule, he knew he'd need a warm-up for Paris TMC. He didn't schedule a warm-up for Madrid and look what happened.

You don't need a warm-up for a tournament with no importance. :)

PaulieM
10-28-2005, 03:38 PM
sure the season is long, but a lot of players don't make smart choices about their scheduling either. nobody makes some players play as much as they do, and nobody makes them play exhibitions during the free time that they do get. if players wanted to rest more, most of the time they could. every year somebody says something about the issue but nothing happens, surely if they really wanted something done now, the players could band together and take a stand, the atp is supposed to work in their interests isn't it, but they never make it. :shrug:

amierin
10-28-2005, 03:39 PM
I am sure you are right about that!!

I just took your comment as a suggestion, and was giving my opinion in return. :)

I understood. Thanks for the discussion. :D

DJ dropshot
10-28-2005, 03:47 PM
You don't need a warm-up for a tournament with no importance. :)

Well, yeah, not now. He's the man. But when he made the schedule, he's required to play and he does have a handful of points to defend.

The good news is that he has nothing to defend in Madrid next year and if he doesn't go to Paris, nothing there to defend in 2006. Then he can bail if he wants.

shotgun
10-28-2005, 03:47 PM
When he made his schedule, he knew he'd need a warm-up for Paris TMC. He didn't schedule a warm-up for Madrid and look what happened.

Then again, maybe the problem's with the number of Masters Series event we have. I don't agree with cutting off some Grand Slams, and I guess nobody does. But 13 obligatory tournaments is too much, but then again, it's all about the cash. Maybe Roddick should have gone straight to the point instead of attacking the whole ATP calendar.

binkygirl
10-28-2005, 04:54 PM
Andy is right. I think the tennis season should end after the US Open.

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 05:28 PM
Then again, maybe the problem's with the number of Masters Series event we have.

Now, that, I agree. There should be 6 or 7, not 9.

It's simple: wait until one of the 9 tournaments start having financial problems, and cancel that tournament or replace it by a "normal" ATP event.

Galaxystorm
10-28-2005, 06:11 PM
Andy is right. I think the tennis season should end after the US Open.

It's curious, after US open there's no tournament in the States :lol:

star
10-28-2005, 06:15 PM
The sisters Williams routinely end their season shortly after the USO. There's no reason others can't do the same if that's what they really want to do. The European indoor tournament directors would be crazed if that happened -- a bit like they are now.

But these tournament directors did very well all those years Sampras needed to get points to finish the year number one. :D

nobama
10-28-2005, 06:25 PM
You don't need a warm-up for a tournament with no importance. :)Ah but seeing that he hasn't won a TMS event this year I would think Madrid and Paris would be important. For a top 5 player (without injuries) to go slamless and not win a TMC to me equals a crap year.

sweetiepiedoll
10-28-2005, 06:26 PM
I bet that Andy still won't win the TMS Paris even though none of the top players are there. Maybe crybaby Coria or man man Ivan will win it.

Paul Banks
10-28-2005, 06:30 PM
Ah but seeing that he hasn't won a TMS event this year I would think Madrid and Paris would be important. For a top 5 player (without injuries) to go slamless and not win a TMC to me equals a crap year.

Ok, I was half-kidding, but really, you don't need a tournament preparation to play a non-Slam tournament.

If you say for example Roddick needs to play Lyon to prepare for Madrid, then maybe Roddick needs to play a tournament to prepare for Lyon. :scratch: When does it end?

I think playing just Madrid and Paris (then Masters) after the US Open is fine.
If Roddick doesn't win a Slam, it IS a crap year. It makes no difference if he wins Madrid or Paris (even if it's nice bonus).

shotgun
10-28-2005, 09:55 PM
Now, that, I agree. There should be 6 or 7, not 9.

It's simple: wait until one of the 9 tournaments start having financial problems, and cancel that tournament or replace it by a "normal" ATP event.

I think that the Indian Wells AMS is already having financial problems. Anyway, my suggestion would be to turn the obligatory tournaments into optional ones. I mean, players would have to choose playing one of either Indian Wells and Miami; then two of either Monte Carlo, Rome or Hamburg; one of either Montreal or Cincinatti; and one of either Paris or Madrid. I think that given the amount of top players that have withdrawn from AMS tournaments this year, for example, it wouldn't affect the tournaments in terms of revenues, and it would make things better for the players.

Noelle
10-29-2005, 10:08 AM
I think that not only is Andy making Lyon a warm-up for Paris/Bercy, but he's also playing in it to salvage his year, sort of. :sad: It may be for monetary reasons too, but let's not forget some pride is also at stake here.

partygirl
10-29-2005, 10:19 AM
look im a greedy girl i want tennis all year round so i can watch it all the time and be in love.

but i also hope that my favorite players become well rounded people as well as rested.

then again professional sports is like modeling...your good/useful for a time but you have a shelf life and it expires quickly...especially in tennis...so do it while you can, all the time everytime they let you shut up & do it... dont stop until they throw your old ass out... and then deal with being 30.


you see im torn....

:worship: but id watch andy play everyday of the year if he were so inclined-

he's not.

Jimnik
10-29-2005, 11:23 AM
Cutting the schedule could only make things worse. Players will play 8 months of more intensive tennis as they try to cram in all the tournaments in all the locations in a much smaller space of time.

Keep the schedule as it is!

kundalini
10-29-2005, 12:14 PM
I like the schedule as it is.

Players get the choice to rest when they like. Some decide to give Wimbledon a miss (Gaudio), others make little effort to be ready for the Australian simply showing up and accepting an early defeat.

Roddick could rest during the clay court season. Already he makes no attempt to play Monte Carlo and his displays at the other events on the clay have won him very few points in recent years.

If I was a tournament director I might be concerned by the number of withdrawls but come on. Did anyone really think Nadal would play Vienna or Basle when he already has 5 strong optional scores?

Does anyone really expect Agassi to show up for the indoor Masters never mind the Stockholm Open?

Tournament directors need to be more imaginative. I am amazed that none of them invited Djokovic, Murray, Bagdatis, Monfils etc to the same event and then marketed it as the battle of the youungsters?

They don't need every single top player to appear to have an exciting tournament. Roland Garros wouldn't be any worse off if Roddick or Hewitt skipped the event. Wimbledon could cope with Coria and Gaudio being on the beach instead.

For years now Paris and Madrid have been key tournaments for players attempting to gain 7th or 8th place for the Masters Cup while those who have already secured their place either cry off or tank an early round match.

Players and tournament directors need to stop being unrealistic. Don't play more than you need to and don't expect players to play when it isn't really in their interests to do so.

Sinnet
10-29-2005, 07:20 PM
Why not just stop playing the mickey mouse tournaments and gear up for the big ones. You've been playing this long, you should be able to handle it.

croat123
10-29-2005, 07:41 PM
maybe he could skip all of the mickey mouse events he plays so that he's not so tired :)

croat123
10-29-2005, 07:41 PM
lol, i just posted without reading the post above me :o

:yeah: @ sinnet :p

binkygirl
10-30-2005, 01:01 AM
It's curious, after US open there's no tournament in the States :lol:

There's unfortunately not enough interest for there to be tournaments in the states after the Open. It was not always like that, but times have changed here in the US. Tennis was very popular in the 70s, still somewhat popular in the 80s, but totally dropped off the radar in the 90s to the present. Its not perceived as a 'cool' sport. From my perspective it seems as if the popularity of soccer has grown more than that of tennis despite the number of US tennis stars. Andre Agassi did create alot of attention for the sport over the past decade, but his peers Sampras and Courier, although just as acomplished, didn't bring alot of attention to the sport because of their unwillingness to make themselves available for media interviews, promotional photo shoots, i.e. the sort of things a sports personality has to do in order to make the public interested in them. The selfishness of those two cost the sport dearly in the US, although Jim Courier has recently started putting on a 'friendly' face when commentating. I think he now realizes what an asshole he was during his playing days, when he and Pete Sampras were the poorest ambassadors imaginable for the sport of tennis.

renee_chin
10-30-2005, 02:46 AM
I don't think Roddick is complaining, per se, but just stating the obvious.
Thing can be blown out of proportion, depending on how you slap a headline on a few statements. These has gone over and over again (I remember a similar 'complain' last year as well, at this time of the year) and it happened to be Roddick making 'statements', and it seems people are getting the wrong impression of what's said.

Players should be smart in scheduling. Injuries are unavoidable, being sportsmen. Some tournament organizers should be more tolerant with withdrawals, rather than going all out and blast players who claim that they're injured, and has to pull out. And, so do the fans.