The "9 TMS repartition" discussion... Where should they be? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The "9 TMS repartition" discussion... Where should they be?

krakenzero
11-01-2006, 03:03 PM
As I see, there is a couple of TMS that are indisputable. Indian Wells and Miami (Hard), Montecarlo and Roma (Clay), and maybe Canada Open and Cincinnati (Hard) -even when I disagree a little about having 50% of TMS in a subcontinent- are supposed to be there. As I see, there are 3 TMS spots remaining (1 for Indoor Carpet, 1 for hard -or grass- courts, and 1 for clay -or grass- courts) and a lot of candidates. Let's see:

NOWADAYS:

-TMS París-Bercy: Good infrastructure and enviroment (french crowd is not such a big deal), the calendar doesn't help this tournament at all. Federer doesn't go there, Nadal neither. It hasn't an "indoor carpet" tour before, barely a couple of tournaments, that's negative for Paris-Bercy too. Also, I don't like a single city with a GS and a TMS... it's Safin's favourite place. Berdych will win this year again.

-TMS Madrid: I consider this tournament as one of the most "democratic" of all, because almost every style of game allows you to win (as we'll never see Volandri winning Paris or Mirnyi winning Rome, for example). The Madrid winners list (Federer, Safin, Agassi, Nadal, Ferrero) proves that to me at last, and shows that there are no "dominant players". Anyway, the lack of tradition is harmful to this TMS, and playing this hard court tournament in a country with a strong "clay-court" tradition, is at least weird. Anyway, I like this Madrid TMS, so I must admit I'm very biased at this.

-TMS Hamburg: The calendar is his worst ally. Even if Hamburg is known as a very good spot for a big tourney, you can't do it inmediatly after Rome, before Düsseldorf and RG. Federer is the "dominator" here, except in 2003 when 4 argentinian players monopolized the semis. As I see, if Hamburg wants to remain being a Masters Series, it has to do some changes: 1) looking for another good spot in the calendar, and 2) thinking about changing the surface -they could fit perfectly for a indoor court or a grass court-. I'm afraid the "Does clay deserve only 2 TMS tournaments?" thread is about to be open...

COULD BE??

-London: Good spot, good crowd, money... As I've said before, I don't like the "2 big tourneys in 1 big city" terms. The calendar is a problem too (the grass season is very short to put a TMS in there, also the indoor court). It sounds to me that the London TMS grass tournament would be a great way to put Murray artificially in the top 10. I'd prefer the TMC here, in an indoor hard court, at the end of the year (is the land of tennis after all, isn't it?).

-Shanghai: "Money makes the world go round the world go round the world go round"... anyway, it's a good way to end the Asian Tour, who is still looking for a place in the calendar (I would like the Asian tour at the beginnig of the year, mixed with the reduced Australian Open series), and also a good way to leave behind the diminished TMC in this city. The Tokyo alternative also sounds good to me... how about alternate spots, like in Canada?

-Buenos Aires or Acapulco: I think money is the main problem. None of the Latin American tournaments is the most important one in its week, and I don't see this changing soon. Any TMS in Latin America would need a lot of investment, so I see BA or Acapulco TMS very distant. Watch "Does clay deserve only 2 TMS tournaments?" thread in the future.

-Moscow or St. Petersburg: The "Russia TMS" sounds reasonable to me. They have 2 "one million dollar" tourneys and they can easily turn them into an official Indoor Carpet TMS that would replace Paris.

What do you think??

krakenzero
11-01-2006, 03:19 PM
In my case, I dont' like Cincy a lot (4 TMS to a subcontinent sounds excessive to me), but I think is more convenient than Hamburg for example beacuse of the calendar. Considering that, I like this:

January: Shanghai (or Tokyo, if they alternate)

March: Indian Wells and Miami

May: Montecarlo and Rome

August: Canada and Cincinnati (or Hamburg)

October: Madrid

November: Paris (or Russia) and TMC in London (indoor hard court)

NyGeL
11-01-2006, 10:29 PM
I think it should be:

Miami - Indian Wells - Buenos Aires - Montecarlo - Rome - Queens/Halle - Cincinatti - Tokyo - Madrid

I would remove Canada and add Tokyo for an Asia Tour. I would remove Hamburg (a very cold place for that part of the season, and Germany could host Halle's TMS on grass) and add Buenos Aires TMS to finish the Latin America clay season, so Miami and Indian Wells should be played like one week before (and maybe one or both of them with a 64 players draw?).
And I would also remove Paris TMS.

Johnny Groove
11-01-2006, 10:37 PM
Adam and Eve played tennis in Cincy, so I dont think its gonna get the boot. What they should do is keep what they have, but just space it out differently.

revolution
11-01-2006, 10:37 PM
Halle (grass).

Move Hamburg to another country for the clay one.

Take away a hard court one.

fede1111
11-01-2006, 10:38 PM
I think it should be:

Miami - Indian Wells - Buenos Aires - Montecarlo - Rome - Queens/Halle - Cincinatti - Tokyo - Madrid

I would remove Canada and add Tokyo for an Asia Tour. I would remove Hamburg (a very cold place for that part of the season, and Germany could host Halle's TMS on grass) and add Buenos Aires TMS to finish the Latin America clay season, so Miami and Indian Wells should be played like one week before (and maybe one or both of them with a 64 players draw?).
And I would also remove Paris TMS.

I like that combination, still idon´t know about a TMS played n grass

Rogiman
11-01-2006, 10:44 PM
9 is too much, that's for sure.

I'd get rid of IW or Miami (one of them), Hamburg,
Cincinnati and Madrid.

Jimnik
11-01-2006, 11:02 PM
I like the idea of Masters Series events in Moscow and Shanghai. Hamburg and Madrid could be replaced by Halle and Barcelona.

Also maybe Buenos Aires should be there. I don't think Canada deserves a TMS.

aussie12
11-01-2006, 11:02 PM
Sydney (first week of january)
Australian Open (last two weeks of January)
Moscow (first week of march)
Monte Carlo (last week of march)
Rome (2nd week of april)
French Open (last week of April, first week of May)
Hamburg (grass) (last week of May)
Wimbledon (mid two weeks of June)
Miami (last week of July)
Toronto / Montreal (2nd week of August)
US Open (last week of August/first week of September)
Tokyo (first week of October)
Madrid (last week of October)
TMC (3rd week of November)

Rogiman
11-01-2006, 11:03 PM
I like the idea of Masters Series events in Moscow and Shanghai. Hamburg and Madrid could be replaced by Halle and Barcelona.

Also maybe Buenos Aires should be there. I don't think Canada deserves a TMS.Sounds good to me :lol:

nobama
11-01-2006, 11:04 PM
9 is too much, that's for sure.

I'd get rid of IW or Miami (one of them), Hamburg,
Cincinnati and Madrid.Why IW or Miami when that's one where most of the players do show up and seem to really like. :shrug:

Jimnik
11-01-2006, 11:08 PM
Sydney (first week of january)
Australian Open (last two weeks of January)
Moscow (first week of march)
Monte Carlo (last week of march)
Rome (2nd week of april)
French Open (last week of April, first week of May)
Hamburg (grass) (last week of May)
Wimbledon (mid two weeks of June)
Miami (last week of July)
Toronto / Montreal (2nd week of August)
US Open (last week of August/first week of September)
Tokyo (first week of October)
Madrid (last week of October)
TMC (3rd week of November)
Exactly. :yeah:

I've been trying to propose this on MTF for a year now. But some people around here (especially one certain person) insist that it isn't feasible.

Rogiman
11-01-2006, 11:13 PM
Why IW or Miami when that's one where most of the players do show up and seem to really like. :shrug:Because in my opinion having 9 AMS tourneys is too much, whereas 5 is a reasonable number if these tourneys are to live up to their prestigious image and be attended by ALL of the best players, therefore having 3 of the 5 in north-america makes little sense to me, what's more it sounds logical to space them out in a two-months distance from each other, and playing 2 within a 3 weeks time slot (when no Grand Slam to warm up for is in sight) doesn't bode well with the whole idea.

Jimnik
11-01-2006, 11:28 PM
You can't get rid of IW and Miami. They are the two biggest events, outside the Grand Slams. In fact, Miami makes so much money that it could be a Grand Slam itself, which is why it's known as the 5th slam.

Whether it's fair or not isn't the issue. America is where most of the money is and their major tournaments represent three of the most famous cities in the world - New York, LA and Miami.

Rogiman
11-01-2006, 11:38 PM
I didn't say get rid of both, only one of them...

aussie12
11-01-2006, 11:42 PM
definetley keep Miami, not so sure about Indian Wells, its not actually in LA it is quite a fair way out, it just seems odd having a big tennis tournment in place not many people would of heard of.

marti_228
11-01-2006, 11:43 PM
I think it should be:

Miami - Indian Wells - Buenos Aires - Montecarlo - Rome - Queens/Halle - Cincinatti - Tokyo - Madrid

I would remove Canada and add Tokyo for an Asia Tour. I would remove Hamburg (a very cold place for that part of the season, and Germany could host Halle's TMS on grass) and add Buenos Aires TMS to finish the Latin America clay season, so Miami and Indian Wells should be played like one week before (and maybe one or both of them with a 64 players draw?).
And I would also remove Paris TMS.

I like that too. Maybe the current tournament in BsAs should move to another city in Argentina like Mendoza or Córdoba. And I would move Wimbledon, I think 2 weeks after RG is not so good, players don't have time to get used to the surface and there are some who are to tired to play 3 tournaments in a row after playing in RG.

Jimnik
11-01-2006, 11:52 PM
definetley keep Miami, not so sure about Indian Wells, its not actually in LA it is quite a fair way out, it just seems odd having a big tennis tournment in place not many people would of heard of.
But Indian Wells represents California, the 5th biggest economy in the world. I think it would be tough to get rid of it.

Cincinatti and Canada are more likely to lose their positions, but these are also major events. At the end of the day, America has a financial advantage over the rest of the world. Even if the Masters Series was reduced to 5 events, America would get at least 2 of them.

Deboogle!.
11-01-2006, 11:53 PM
But Indian Wells represents California, the 5th biggest economy in the world. I think it would be tough to get rid of it.I think the bigger issue with IW is that a lot of VERY big tennis names banded together and put up a LOT of money to keep that tournament there...

aussie12
11-01-2006, 11:59 PM
What about this then:
Australian Open (last two weeks of January)
Indian Wells (last week of february)
Miami (2nd week of march)
Monte Carlo (first week of april)
Rome (last week of april)
French Open (mid two weeks of may)
Hamburg (grass) (2nd week of june)
Wimbledon (first two weeks of july)
Toronto / Montreal (2nd week of August)
US Open (last week of August/first week of September)
Tokyo (first week of October)
Madrid (last week of October)
TMC (3rd week of November)

Merton
11-02-2006, 02:25 AM
Perhaps a bigger issue is whether the required event status carries any credibility, given that players can practically withdraw whenever they think it is to their best interests.

gomarray
11-02-2006, 02:47 AM
Doha-Indian Wells-Miami-Monte Carlo-Rome-Halle-Canada-Shanghai-Madrid

Doha
I think each slam should have one Masters Series event in the preceding weeks.

Indian Wells and Miami always attract a good field, and with the currnet drawsize being played over 2 weeks for each tournament, the top players can do well at both tournaments without risking injuries.

Monte Carlo and Rome have such great tradition and also usually attract most of the top players.

Halle gives us a grass court Masters Series tournament leading up to Wimbledon, it also stands to reason that Germany should have a tournament if Hamburg is dropped.

Canada instead of Cincinnati because the U.S. already has 2 Masters Series and a Slam, plus it's too damn hot in Cincinnati at that time of year. Also, going back to back weeks isn't a good idea.

Shanghai about three or four weeks after the US Open would be part of the Asian leg of the tour, would help to grow the huge Chinese market.

Madrid would be the last tournament in the series, with all of the Spanish players, they should get to keep the tournament over Paris, since nobody wants to play in Paris anyway and France already has a slam and Monte Carlo.

The casualties would be Hamburg, Cincinnati and Paris.
Hamburg and Paris traditionally have weaker draws, and Cincinnati needs to go because the Americans have got too many big tourneys.

aussie12
11-02-2006, 03:09 AM
doha does not deserve a masters tournament, qatar has never produced any leading players nor will it in the near future. If you need a masters event before the AO then have one in sydeny. big city, has produced heaps and heaps of champion players and has a good venue.

Hendu
11-02-2006, 03:12 AM
doha does not deserve a masters tournament, qatar has never produced any leading players nor will it in the near future. If you need a masters event before the AO then have one in sydeny. big city, has produced heaps and heaps of champion players and has a good venue.

What about Johannesburg?

A Masters Series to Africa, relatively close to Australia. And its a city that has history in tennis.

aussie12
11-02-2006, 03:17 AM
both doha and johannesburg to far away from australia, if they are meant to be a warmup for melbourne. thats why i think either brisbane or sydney should have a masters.

TMJordan
11-02-2006, 03:19 AM
I think it should be:

Miami - Indian Wells - Buenos Aires - Montecarlo - Rome - Queens/Halle - Cincinatti - Tokyo - Madrid

I would remove Canada and add Tokyo for an Asia Tour. I would remove Hamburg (a very cold place for that part of the season, and Germany could host Halle's TMS on grass) and add Buenos Aires TMS to finish the Latin America clay season, so Miami and Indian Wells should be played like one week before (and maybe one or both of them with a 64 players draw?).
And I would also remove Paris TMS.

Why the fuck remove Canada and keep Cincinatti? why have 3 in the states and take Canada's away?

aussie12
11-02-2006, 03:22 AM
yeh i think they should definetly keep canada, cincinatti doesnt need one its not even that big a city.

gomarray
11-02-2006, 03:22 AM
Sydney would be fine, the main point is there should be a Masters Series tournament before the Aussie Open.

aussie12
11-02-2006, 03:29 AM
i dream line up would be
AO - IW - Miami - Moscow - Monte Carlo - Rome - RG - Hamburg - Wimbledon - Canada - US Open - Tokyo - Madrid - TMC

aussie12
11-02-2006, 03:36 AM
So heres my dream calender:
Australian Open (last two weeks of January)
Indian Wells (last week of february)
Miami (2nd week of march)
Moscow (first week of april)
Monte Carlo (3rd week of april)
Rome (lfirst week of may)
French Open (last two weeks of may)
Hamburg (grass) (3rd week of june)
Wimbledon (mid two weeks of july)
Toronto / Montreal (3rd week of August)
US Open (first 2 weeks of September)
Tokyo (2nd week of October)
Madrid (1st week of November)
TMC (3rd week of November)

Action Jackson
11-02-2006, 07:02 AM
Hamburg (grass) (3rd week of june)

Hamburg having a grass event isn't feasible. Have you actually thought about it logistically or not? So who is going to rip up the claycourts and then have them relaid with grass? They have a facility already in Halle and that can expand, but that would require too much sense to think of that now wouldn't it.

Action Jackson
11-02-2006, 07:09 AM
both doha and johannesburg to far away from australia, if they are meant to be a warmup for melbourne. thats why i think either brisbane or sydney should have a masters.

Doha and Joburg less than 12 hour flights away and the fact that the players are already travelling from Doha already and have more than enough time to adjust to the conditions in Australia and Joburg has direct flights as well and it doesn't take that long to get used to the conditions and there is always an IS tournament the week before a Slam. There needs to be better lead in to the Aus Open.

Boris Franz Ecker
11-02-2006, 07:40 AM
As I see, there is a couple of TMS that are indisputable. Indian Wells and Miami (Hard),

Indian Wells and Miami should be shortened.
They're too long.
6-7 matches in 9 or 10 days, best of 3. Only a waste of time on the tour.
Aren't it 12-14 matches in 4 weeks?
And, empty stadium in a semi final with Dementieva because she's not American?

Action Jackson
11-02-2006, 07:42 AM
64 draws for the outdoor TMS and 48 for the indoor ones are fine.

Boris Franz Ecker
11-02-2006, 08:01 AM
Paris-Bercy is a great tournament, always a good atmosphere and a reason for Grosjean and Mathieu to fight.
Should be kept.
In the 90ies it usually had perfect draws. Since it is the last tournament of the regular tour (before Masters Cup), some players tend to skip it.

What to do?
Hm.. because of the stupid ranking system it doesn't really make sense to have an optional tournament as end of tour.
Difficult to find a solution.
It's sure, Federer and the other qualified players only focus on the Masters Cup.

nobama
11-02-2006, 11:21 AM
definetley keep Miami, not so sure about Indian Wells, its not actually in LA it is quite a fair way out, it just seems odd having a big tennis tournment in place not many people would of heard of.Not many people have heard of Palm Springs California? :lol:

nobama
11-02-2006, 11:23 AM
Perhaps a bigger issue is whether the required event status carries any credibility, given that players can practically withdraw whenever they think it is to their best interests.
I think it doesn't. The tournaments with bigger prize money and more ranking points will get the best players to show up.

stebs
11-02-2006, 05:31 PM
It would be great to have 7 AMS events. 2 on clay, 2 on hardcourt, 2 indoor and 1 on grass.

Miami, Shanghai, Canada, Rome, Monte Carlo, London (Queens Club), Paris-Bercy

Those are the ideal destinations for me. I have gotten rid of Madrid, Indian Wells, Cincinatti and Hamburg. I have put in Queens and Shanghai.I don't know how these would be arranged.

DrJules
11-02-2006, 05:39 PM
It would be great to have 7 AMS events. 2 on clay, 2 on hardcourt, 2 indoor and 1 on grass.

Miami, Shanghai, Canada, Rome, Monte Carlo, London (Queens Club), Paris-Bercy

Those are the ideal destinations for me. I have gotten rid of Madrid, Indian Wells, Cincinatti and Hamburg. I have put in Queens and Shanghai.I don't know how these would be arranged.

Tend to agree.

Miami because largest of the non-grand slam events.

Rome and Monte Carlo leading to French Open.

Queens club leading to Wimbledon, but do need extra week between FO and W.

Canada leading to US Open.

Paris leading to indoor year end masters.


One difference Shanghai on rebound ace before the Australian Open.

Jimnik
11-02-2006, 05:41 PM
It would be great to have 7 AMS events. 2 on clay, 2 on hardcourt, 2 indoor and 1 on grass.

Miami, Shanghai, Canada, Rome, Monte Carlo, London (Queens Club), Paris-Bercy

Those are the ideal destinations for me. I have gotten rid of Madrid, Indian Wells, Cincinatti and Hamburg. I have put in Queens and Shanghai.I don't know how these would be arranged.
So France and Britain get a Grand Slam and a TMS each, while Germany and Spain get nothing.
Is that fair?

DrJules
11-02-2006, 05:43 PM
So France and Britain get a Grand Slam and a TMS each, while Germany and Spain get nothing.
Is that fair?

Could substitute Halle for Queens club and Madrid for Paris.

t0x
11-02-2006, 05:43 PM
Hrmmm...

Indian Wells - Miami - Monte Carlo - Rome - Grass one (dont mind where) - Cincy - Shanghai

Then the TMC.

7 + TMC should be OK for players.... I think the main issue is that their has to be a grass one somewhere, and their should be one less clay one, and possibly one less indoor at the end of the season (players want to focus on the TMC, look at Paris this week...).

nobama
11-02-2006, 05:50 PM
It would be great to have 7 AMS events. 2 on clay, 2 on hardcourt, 2 indoor and 1 on grass.

Miami, Shanghai, Canada, Rome, Monte Carlo, London (Queens Club), Paris-Bercy

Those are the ideal destinations for me. I have gotten rid of Madrid, Indian Wells, Cincinatti and Hamburg. I have put in Queens and Shanghai.I don't know how these would be arranged.
Some former players (including Sampras and Evert I think) just spent a lot of money keeping Pacific Life Open in IW so I can't see that tournament going away - especially since it's a combined SEWTA/ATP event. Plus the stadium there is the second largest in the USA, just behind Arthur Ashe. The 2006 attendance figure was 270,453, just a couple thousand shy of Miami's attendance figure (although there was one evening session cancelled due to rain). Why would they get rid of tournaments that are popular, well attended and where the top players usually show up? This is the problem, everyone has their own idea of how many TMS events there should be and where they should be located. And there's no consensus.

stebs
11-02-2006, 05:51 PM
So France and Britain get a Grand Slam and a TMS each, while Germany and Spain get nothing.
Is that fair?

Grass AMS could be in Halle I guess. As for Spain, I guess that's just unfair. I want to get rid of one of the current indoor AMS for Shanghai and there is no doubt that Madrid should be the one to go.

Jimnik
11-02-2006, 05:56 PM
Grass AMS could be in Halle I guess. As for Spain, I guess that's just unfair. I want to get rid of one of the current indoor AMS for Shanghai and there is no doubt that Madrid should be the one to go.
How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Madrid had a very strong field this year, with all of the top 5 players playing. None of the top 5 players played in Paris.

Paris already has a Grand Slam.

aussie12
11-02-2006, 09:57 PM
Not many people have heard of Palm Springs California? :lol:

compared to rome, monte carlo, madrid, miami, toronto its not nearly as recognizable. I just dont understand why a relatively small town deserves a large tennis tournament.

stebs
11-02-2006, 10:04 PM
How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Madrid had a very strong field this year, with all of the top 5 players playing. None of the top 5 players played in Paris.

Paris already has a Grand Slam.

The field is not to do with where the tournament is, the crowd, the court or the surroundings. The lack of a good field is due to injuries and accumulated fatigue. Paris has been a much more popular tournament in the past, it has greater history of winners. Greater tradition and is more suited to indoor tennis than Madrid.

aussie12
11-02-2006, 10:13 PM
WHAT ABOUT THIS
Indian Wells
Miami
Chicago
Boston
LA
Seattle
Cincinatti
Washington
Pheonix
TMC (Houston)
or is that too many events in the USA?

Nacho
11-02-2006, 10:34 PM
The field is not to do with where the tournament is, the crowd, the court or the surroundings. The lack of a good field is due to injuries and accumulated fatigue. Paris has been a much more popular tournament in the past, it has greater history of winners. Greater tradition and is more suited to indoor tennis than Madrid.

In the past years the AMS in Madrid has become the 3rd most popular and successful tennis event in Europe. Only Wimbledon and Roland Garros generate more attendance

Paris has more history? yes, but it's been around just for 15 years more than Madrid. No big difference

And look at the Madrid winners: Agassi, Ferrero, Safin, Nadal & Federer. That's a pretty impressive list

Rogiman
11-02-2006, 11:22 PM
In the past years the AMS in Madrid has become the 3rd most popular and successful tennis event in Europe. Only Wimbledon and Roland Garros generate more attendance

Paris has more history? yes, but it's been around just for 15 years more than Madrid. No big difference

And look at the Madrid winners: Agassi, Ferrero, Safin, Nadal & Federer. That's a pretty impressive listParis is, and will always be 10 times better than Madrid.

Madrid should be cancelled altogether :)

amierin
11-03-2006, 12:54 AM
Madrid, Russia, Paris, Tokyo as long as the TMC is still in Shanghai.

Cincy and Hamburg's problem is their timing. The schedule would have to be adjusted to accomodate them.

nobama
11-03-2006, 02:56 AM
compared to rome, monte carlo, madrid, miami, toronto its not nearly as recognizable. I just dont understand why a relatively small town deserves a large tennis tournament.
Well it's never short on attendance. At least there people do play tennis and know something about it.

CmonAussie
11-03-2006, 03:24 AM
WHAT ABOUT THIS
Indian Wells
Miami
Chicago
Boston
LA
Seattle
Cincinatti
Washington
Pheonix
TMC (Houston)
or is that too many events in the USA?
:wavey: :cool: ;)

8-TMS is the maximum there should be;)
It should be:

Sydney
Shanghai
Brazil/Rio
Monte Carlo
Rome
Miami
Canada/Toronto
Madrid
TMC ~ London

Jimnik
11-03-2006, 08:50 AM
The field is not to do with where the tournament is, the crowd, the court or the surroundings. The lack of a good field is due to injuries and accumulated fatigue. Paris has been a much more popular tournament in the past, it has greater history of winners. Greater tradition and is more suited to indoor tennis than Madrid.
I agree with that last sentence, although an older tournament isn't necessarily better.

Considering that Spain is clay country, Madrid has done very well during its 5 year existence. All of its champions have been world #1, unlike Paris. Madrid is also just as popular with the Spanish fans as Paris is with the French fans. Spain's problem is that they should have their TMS on clay leading up to RG. It doesn't make much sense having their most important tournament indoors.

Paris is clearly suffering and becoming less popular with the players. The lack of stars is not just due to injuries and fatigue. Nalbandian and Roddick just couldn't be bothered to play, nor could a few lower ranked players, like Ferrero and Hewitt.

Action Jackson
11-03-2006, 08:52 AM
WHAT ABOUT THIS
Indian Wells
Miami
Chicago
Boston
LA
Seattle
Cincinatti
Washington
Pheonix
TMC (Houston)
or is that too many events in the USA?

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

DrJules
11-04-2006, 02:53 PM
I agree with that last sentence, although an older tournament isn't necessarily better.

Considering that Spain is clay country, Madrid has done very well during its 5 year existence. All of its champions have been world #1, unlike Paris. Madrid is also just as popular with the Spanish fans as Paris is with the French fans. Spain's problem is that they should have their TMS on clay leading up to RG. It doesn't make much sense having their most important tournament indoors.

Paris is clearly suffering and becoming less popular with the players. The lack of stars is not just due to injuries and fatigue. Nalbandian and Roddick just couldn't be bothered to play, nor could a few lower ranked players, like Ferrero and Hewitt.

Nadal.

Jimnik
11-04-2006, 03:31 PM
Nadal.
At some point in their careers. ;)

LaTenista
11-04-2006, 03:40 PM
yeh i think they should definetly keep canada, cincinatti doesnt need one its not even that big a city.

By that logic, Monte Carlo and Indian Wells do not deserve tournaments either. :rolleyes:

compared to rome, monte carlo, madrid, miami, toronto its not nearly as recognizable. I just dont understand why a relatively small town deserves a large tennis tournament.

I think part of the problem with IW is it doesn't fit into the current tournament schedule well. California already has 2 other tournaments - San Jose in early February and LA in July - it would make more sense to have them all back to back, right now Players fly from Las Vegas/Acapulco/Dubai or wherever they train to the middle of nowhere desert, only to have to fly directly to Miami (3 hour time difference and about 4 hour flight). :shrug: Of course the ATP couldn't pass Logic 101 even with a tutor.

Adler
11-04-2006, 03:51 PM
Some of you may be shocked, but my idea is to make 11 MS events instead of the present 9, and make ALL od them one-week long R64. It would look as follows:

Indian Wells
Miami
Buenos Aires
Barcelona
Rome
London
Stuttgart
Montreal/Toronto
Moscow
Beijing
Paris

This set gives sth to almost all continents and bigger countries, and of course it would cause some changes in the calendar (ex. additional week between FO and Wimb), but those won't be revolutionary. If any of you have any doubts, questions, accusations etc. - go on, I'd answer

Jimnik
11-04-2006, 03:54 PM
Some of you may be shocked, but my idea is to make 11 MS events instead of the present 9, and make ALL od them one-week long R64. It would look as follows:

Indian Wells
Miami
Buenos Aires
Barcelona
Rome
London
Stuttgart
Montreal/Toronto
Moscow
Beijing
Paris

This set gives sth to almost all continents and bigger countries, and of course it would cause some changes in the calendar (ex. additional week between FO and Wimb), but those won't be revolutionary. If any of you have any doubts, questions, accusations etc. - go on, I'd answer

I like it. :)

It's better than some of the suggestons we've had so far.

jazar
11-04-2006, 04:17 PM
Indian Wells
Miami
Monte Carlo
Rome
Cincinatti
Canada
Madrid
Paris
Shanghai
and TMC in London

Asia needs an event for the growing market and to compensate for losing the TMC. Hamburg is a different kinda clay to Rome and Monte Carlo and is too near other big events. They should do something similar to the US Open Series with indoor events at the end of the year and have Madrid and Paris as the marquee events. If they had double prize money for the winners, surely more of the big names would enter. But they definitly need to be more spread out so you get ALL of the top players in.

Adler
11-04-2006, 04:30 PM
Could you guys answer me to one question: why do you put so many MS tournaments in Northern America? Don't you think the rest of the world deserves such event?

TMC was always movable, so I didn't put it in my "schedule"

johnnyCanuck
11-04-2006, 04:49 PM
Looking through this thread I realized that there are a lot of good ideas floating around:worship: , but the ATP will never catch on because most of these ideas require common sense. It's unfortunate, but I think we have to accept the fact that the big tournaments will stay in the richer countries/areas even if they don't "deserve" them.

Jimnik
11-04-2006, 05:27 PM
There are some good ideas here but hardly anyone agrees. If you look at the poll, opinion is completely divided. No two people have exactly the same vision as to the ideal TMS schedule.

The ATP faces the same dilemna. It has to deal with a wide variety of demands. It's easy to get everyone to disagree with the current schedule, but it's impossible to get them to agree on a new schedule.