Report: Some players walked out of ATP meeting [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Report: Some players walked out of ATP meeting

nobama
03-21-2007, 10:09 PM
I wonder who walked out?
http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_tennisblog/2007/03/nadal_robredo_s.html

Nadal, Robredo Slam ATP Schedule Plans

KEY BISCAYNE -- Rafael Nadal is not happy. Neither is Tommy Robredo. Nor are about 60 players who earn a big part of their salary on clay courts and who signed a petition that Nadal and Robredo waved at ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers in an extremely noisy, extremely unpleasant meeting Tuesday night.

Things got so out of hand, according to one of my moles, that dozens of players walked out of this mandatory players meeting, which was called to go over a number of issues -- not the least of which was to explore plans to eliminate Monte Carlo as a Masters Series event in 2009 and reduce the prize money there from $2.1 million to about $500,000.

They're also not happy about plans to downgrade another Masters event in Hamburg.

Things became so contentious in the meeting that at one point Roger Federer got up from his seat at the front and moved to the back of the room because "it was quieter back there."

More than one source said that de Villiers was having trouble controlling the temperament of the meeting, which is unfortunate because what he's trying to do is the right path. If the ATP is to streamline its schedule by reducing one of the nine Masters Series events, Monte Carlo is it. It's a great site, with the courts overlooking the Mediterranean, but the revenues there are nothing to brag about.

Those clay courters who are demanding de Villiers instead eliminate one of the four North American hardcourt Masters Series events (Indian Wells, Key Biscayne, Cincinnati and Canada) are dreaming. All four of these events produce solid revenues.

Monte Carlo is a clay court event which has been won over the last several years by Nadal, Guillermo Coria, Juan Carlos Ferrero and Gustavo Kuerten. Hamburg, which is two weeks before the French Open, was won last year by Robredo. It's cold there in mid-May. It can be wet and the clay can be very heavy.

Nothing was settled at the meeting, but de Villiers got a major earful. That's something he didn't need a couple weeks after fumbling the round robin problem in Las Vegas. One thing is clear. There's a deep split among the players and de Villiers, who is a strong "people person," has to find a way to bring Robredo and Nadal and their supporters into some kind of compromise with those who either don't care about Monte Carlo and Hamburg or who make their money essentially on the hardcourts.

Another meeting like this could drive a very deep wedge not only between the players and the ATP management, but between players themselves.

gusman890
03-21-2007, 10:12 PM
*sigh* no one can win this world, it truly is a pity.

Sunset of Age
03-21-2007, 10:12 PM
^^ A very interesting question indeed. I have some suspicions on it, but I won't be as stupid as to reveal them here right now...

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 10:16 PM
Gees, I have to say get rid of it. Something has to go, that's obvious people post constantly on here about changing and getting rid of, and no one is ever happy about any of it.

Some body has to let go, this time it's the clay courters, they have enough events, it's really not that big of a deal.

Castafiore
03-21-2007, 10:19 PM
Well, getting rid of Hamburg makes sense but not Monte Carlo.
Oh right, unless you're viewing the ATP schedule from a money making angle alone.
I doubt that Monte Carlo loses money actually. It's perhaps not the biggest cash cow either but it's not a money disaster, is it?

Reducing the Masters Series tournaments on clay from 3 to 1, nothing on grass at all and the rest on HC and carpet. Yep, very balanced. :rolleyes:

R.Federer
03-21-2007, 10:20 PM
If the ATP is to streamline its schedule by reducing one of the nine Masters Series events, Monte Carlo is it. It's a great site, with the courts overlooking the Mediterranean, but the revenues there are nothing to brag about
The "non profit" A.T.P is back in the business of the bottomlines (not the bottom lines you are thinking about though)

R.Federer
03-21-2007, 10:22 PM
Reducing the Masters Series tournaments from 3 to 1, nothing on grass at all and the rest on HC and carpet. Yep, very balanced. :rolleyes:

Matter of time before Halle is upgraded to a Masters, and sort of compensates for Hamburg. That would even out in more ways than one, since Germany would surely like to be host to one of the premier events.

NicoFan
03-21-2007, 10:29 PM
VAMOS to RAFA and TOMMY R!!!

Don't give in guys!!!!

:yeah:

Castafiore
03-21-2007, 10:29 PM
At this point, Halle as an MS event is just a fantasy on tennis message boards.

As the plans are now:
1 on clay
nothing on grass
The rest on HC and carpet.
--> That's not even close to being balanced.

None of the real scheduling issues are really dealt with.
Hamburg comes too close after Rome and is too soon before RG. So getting rid of it makes sense, I guess.
However, if you use that argument, than why keep Cincy and Paris for example? Because of the money?

jitterbug
03-21-2007, 10:29 PM
Were the ones who left the claycourters who are upset about the proposed changes or the other 'neutral' players who didn't feel like remaining in such a hostile environment?

Metis
03-21-2007, 10:29 PM
Sounds like Mr. Disney is getting everyone pissed off these days. :lol:

CmonAussie
03-21-2007, 10:29 PM
I`d say downgrade Hamburg
>>
Then make China TMS a clay event
...
So they keep 3-Clay TMS`s tourneys!
...
Then they should downgrade Paris
...
That makes 8-TMS, which is enough!!

zicofirol
03-21-2007, 10:30 PM
So let me get this straight, a top 6 player cant have his opinion but you can?

he can, but he is just bitching because they(moonballers) dotn want to lose a clay TMS, when their are clearly enough clay tournaments and when the sched needs to be trimmed down, he is a selfish crybaby just thinking about where he is going to get his points if clay torunaments are cut down...

I am sure the atp is going to cut the number of clay and hard court tourneys, also wanting to cut out 4 tournaments that all make money, bad idea, besides the courts have been slowed enough already so that they can stay 10 ft behind the baseline and bore us with their game, what else do they want...

Remember hard court is suppose to be the balanced surface, or they have tried to balance it with clay court and grass being the two "extremes", just because they cant play on hard court doesnt mean they have to have more clay tourneys... and like I said, AO, Miami, IW, all have high bouncing not so fast hardcourts...

gusman890
03-21-2007, 10:31 PM
Id say a Clay AMS in South America, it only seems fitting, since thats what they are good at.

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 10:32 PM
Can some one tell me if there is an explination why are most of the tms on hard and clay.

Jaap
03-21-2007, 10:32 PM
Get rid of all the clay court events for all I care. :zzz:

Peoples
03-21-2007, 10:33 PM
Id say a Clay AMS in South America, it only seems fitting, since thats what they are good at.

Good at what, playing on clay or organizing tournaments better than Monte Carlo or Hamburg? :confused:

gusman890
03-21-2007, 10:34 PM
playing on clay.

R.Federer
03-21-2007, 10:35 PM
TMS Halle is a fantasy yes, but a Grass T.M.S is more probable than not. The current revamping (first post) is going to bring into bigger focus the disparity of surfaces in T.M.S versus the Slams.

Myself, I think Queens is a more likely candidate for TMS-ship. I don't think a grass T.M.S is out of the question in the near future. Even a year ago no one could predict a T.M.S in Asia. Things change, this current debate will underscore the grassless T.M.S. series

At this point, Halle as an MS event is just a fantasy on tennis message boards.

As the plans are now:
1 on clay
nothing on grass
The rest on HC and carpet.
--> That's not even close to being balanced.

None of the real scheduling issues are really dealt with.
Hamburg comes too close after Rome and is too soon before RG. So getting rid of it makes sense, I guess.
However, if you use that argument, than why keep Cincy and Paris for example? Because of the money?

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 10:36 PM
he can, but he is just bitching because they(moonballers) dotn want to lose a clay TMS, when their are clearly enough clay tournaments and when the sched needs to be trimmed down, he is a selfish crybaby just thinking about where he is going to get his points if clay torunaments are cut down...

I am sure the atp is going to cut the number of clay and hard court tourneys, also wanting to cut out 4 tournaments that all make money, bad idea, besides the courts have been slowed enough already so that they can stay 10 ft behind the baseline and bore us with their game, what else do they want...

Remember hard court is suppose to be the balanced surface, or they have tried to balance it with clay court and grass being the two "extremes", just because they cant play on hard court doesnt mean they have to have more clay tourneys... and like I said, AO, Miami, IW, all have high bouncing not so fast hardcourts...

Oh please everybody bitches it's like no one is capable of giving up anything that benefits them. Have you read any of the 10,000 post on this forum dedicated to this issue, 10 million scenarios and no one is happy, nothing makes sense. No one wants to give up anything.

The only person I can think of who could possibly be sitting pretty is Fed because there aren't any grass events any way and the grass season is already the shortest, so I guess he figures what the hell any way it goes I still have to win on it.

Vamos Fed

R.Federer
03-21-2007, 10:37 PM
Can some one tell me if there is an explination why are most of the tms on hard and clay.

I think it is just a consequence of history, tradition and evolution. They did not have this much contentious debates about the Super 9's (although I thikn there was some disagreements about Cincy? Or some other U.S. based one).

Then again, all clay tournaments are not played on the same surface, same wind conditions, altitude and climate. The tournaments do have their intrinsic features. Similarly for the hard tournaments

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 10:39 PM
I think it is just a consequence of history, tradition and evolution. They did not have this much contentious debates about the Super 9's (although I thikn there was some disagreements about Cincy? Or some other U.S. based one).

Then again, all clay tournaments are not played on the same surface, same wind conditions, altitude and climate. The tournaments do have their intrinsic features. Similarly for the hard tournaments

And see I would be one of those people not wanting to give up an event that benefits me. I've never seen tennis live and cincy is the only chance I'll ever get to seeing it. Lord only knows why they would have a event in cincy and not Cleveland, what the hell was that about.

Castafiore
03-21-2007, 10:42 PM
TMS Halle is a fantasy yes, but a Grass T.M.S is more probable than not. The current revamping (first post) is going to bring into bigger focus the disparity of surfaces in T.M.S versus the Slams
It's only probable on tennis message boards. The disparity of surfaces in T.M.S events has been discussed for a long time but not a grass court T.M.S event in sight.
That's just speculating in a tennis forum.

The plans as they are (not what is probable in your way of thinking but what is in the cards): 1 clay MS event, no grass, the rest on HC and carpet.

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 10:53 PM
As far as I see it, it is possible that Monte Carlo's attendance will go up handily if Hamburg is eliminated. Chances are that the tourney will see more of a foreign crowd that way with one less major clay event in the calendar. With three clay masters cups I can see potential foreign buyers taking their business to Europe, where Hamburg may be more attractive in terms of scheduling and complexity of travel. And for this very reason Monte Carlo is in the conversation.

But, seriously, just axe the freakin' Hamburg. The ATP has to respect Monte Carlo's tradition and that opinions of the countless clay courters who fight for it. The optimist must also hope that eliminating Hamburg will do more to make MC special. I think it's worth trying.

I acknowledge that Hamburg has a history but it pales in comparison to that of the other two clay events. And with the way players are treating it today (aside from Tommy Robredo who is overjoyed at the prospect of dominating it with the absence of many of the big names), it is a lame event.

Obviously, no one is thinking of a grass court masters. Most likely too many players are not fond of grass to give this a big push. Shame.

for-sure
03-21-2007, 10:54 PM
Cincy needs to go.

Peoples
03-21-2007, 10:57 PM
I wonder who was the pig who walked out... :mad:

All_Slam_Andre
03-21-2007, 10:59 PM
I would like a grass TMS but even if that doesn't happen, I still think that one more week between RG and Wimbledon is a necessity. Players like Nadal and Federer who go deep at the French Open, deserve to rest for a week before playing on a surface that is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum.
Playing on clay on Sunday and then on grass the following Wednesday is just absurd.

BTW good on the players for making their opinions clear to De Villiers. Downgrading Monte-Carlo would be a disgrace.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-21-2007, 11:00 PM
As far as I see it, it is possible that Monte Carlo's attendance will go up handily if Hamburg is eliminated. Chances are that the tourney will see more of a foreign crowd that way with one less major clay event in the calendar. With three clay masters cups I can see potential foreign buyers taking their business to Europe, where Hamburg may be more attractive in terms of scheduling and complexity of travel. And for this very reason Monte Carlo is in the conversation.

But, seriously, just axe the freakin' Hamburg. The ATP has to respect Monte Carlo's tradition and that opinions of the countless clay courters who fight for it. The optimist must also hope that eliminating Hamburg will do more to make MC special. I think it's worth trying.

I acknowledge that Hamburg has a history but it pales in comparison to that of the other two clay events.

Hamburg's history doesn't pale in comparison with the others at all. Certainly not Monte Carlo.

And with the way players are treating it today (aside from Tommy Robredo who is overjoyed at the prospect of dominating it with the absence of many of the big names), it is a lame event.

That's because of the scheduling.

Obviously, no one is thinking of a grass court masters. Most likely too many players are not fond of grass to give this a big push. Shame.

Could have a grass TMS in the US instead of one of the existing 4 hard court TMSs. The US is where the crowds and revenue are, after all. Not Monte Carlo.

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 11:01 PM
Cincy needs to go.

You wish. Heck, even I wish.

But it brings in the bucks. And to Mr. De Villiers money is the name of the game. Not tradition, not quality, not the happiness of the players. Money talks.

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 11:02 PM
You wish. Heck, even I wish.

But it brings in the bucks. And to Mr. De Villiers money is the name of the game. Not tradition, not quality, not the happiness of the players. Money talks.

No, all they need to do is move it to Cleveland, it would bring in even more bucks and publicity for that matter.

Truc
03-21-2007, 11:03 PM
As far as I see it, it is possible that Monte Carlo's attendance will go up handily if Hamburg is eliminated. Chances are that the tourney will see more of a foreign crowd that way with one less major clay event in the calendar.Monte Carlo's attendance seems great to me, it was overcrowded when I was there - the venue is just so small.

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 11:04 PM
Hamburg's history doesn't pale in comparison with the others at all. Certainly not Monte Carlo.

You mean, Hamburg - the home of champions like Roberto Carretero and where Bjorn Borg bothered to play exactly once in his career?


That's because of the scheduling.

Yes and most players can go without three consecutive clay masters events.

Could have a grass TMS in the US instead of one of the existing 4 hard court TMSs. The US is where the crowds and revenue are, after all. Not Monte Carlo.

Let's just move everything to the US. In fact, let's all get to our knees and suck George Bush's dick while we're at it.

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 11:05 PM
Monte Carlo's attendance seems great to me, it was overcrowded when I was there - the venue is just so small.

In that case, De Villiers is just plain greedy.

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 11:05 PM
No, all they need to do is move it to Cleveland, it would bring in even more bucks and publicity for that matter.

Cleveland is a hell hole.

Shrinking Violet
03-21-2007, 11:09 PM
I think it's very easy to slag off the claycourt players for being upset at this but if they had come out today and said 'by the way, Indian Wells and Cincinatti are getting cut' then a lot of other players would have been pissed off as well. Obviously the claycourters are feeling hard done by - a major source of points for them are getting done away with whilst the hard-court players who all but dismiss the claycourt season are kicking back rubbing their hands and laughing because they aren't going to have to play as many mandatory events that don't suit them.

I'm not a massive claycourt fan, and I'd love to see a TMS event on grass but I can understand fully why guys like Nadal and Robredo are upset. Monte Carlo should not be getting binned - fine, drop Hamburg but leave Monte Carlo alone. I'm sure there's another TMS hardcourt event that could get binned. Not everything should be about TV money.

MisterQ
03-21-2007, 11:09 PM
And see I would be one of those people not wanting to give up an event that benefits me. I've never seen tennis live and cincy is the only chance I'll ever get to seeing it. Lord only knows why they would have a event in cincy and not Cleveland, what the hell was that about.

The Cincinnati tournament began way back in 1899, at a time when Cincinnati had much more clout and cultural importance than it currently does. It was actually quite an important city in those days. Cincinnati has scarcely grown in population since 1900, however, while other cities (like Cleveland and Chicago) have grown significantly. (Investing in steamboats rather than railroads was a defining blunder :lol: )

Peoples
03-21-2007, 11:10 PM
Cleveland is a hell hole.

Feeling bitter for some reason? Because you're Canadian?

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 11:11 PM
Feeling bitter for some reason? Because you're Canadian?

Have you been there?

Kalliopeia
03-21-2007, 11:12 PM
No, all they need to do is move it to Cleveland, it would bring in even more bucks and publicity for that matter.

I'm going to Cincy for the week this year, but I doubt I'd pay to spend a week in Cleveland.

Peoples
03-21-2007, 11:13 PM
Have you been there?

Not to Cleveland no.

Johnny Groove
03-21-2007, 11:14 PM
De Villiers is a Fedtard, of course he wants to eliminate clay :o

Peoples
03-21-2007, 11:17 PM
RG should be moved to Halle and Hamburg to Queens. Rome should be canceled. Monte Carlo can stay.

zadle69
03-21-2007, 11:19 PM
they need to shorten the season. shorten some of the master series maybe have 6 total plus the grand slam and the main master events. i think they need to go ahead and start curtailing also prize money and appearance fees. i think this is important while the sport will eventually lose money and not make money to hold these events.

Johnny Groove
03-21-2007, 11:19 PM
RG should be moved to Halle and Hamburg to Queens. Rome should be canceled. Monte Carlo can stay.

We should also move Wimbledon to Newport :)

zicofirol
03-21-2007, 11:20 PM
You wish. Heck, even I wish.

But it brings in the bucks. And to Mr. De Villiers money is the name of the game. Not tradition, not quality, not the happiness of the players. Money talks.

cincy has more tradition than most TMS...

Regenbogen
03-21-2007, 11:22 PM
We should also move Wimbledon to Newport :)

Nah, it should be in Cleveland, for Sondra :D

CyBorg
03-21-2007, 11:22 PM
cincy has more tradition than most TMS...

If by most you mean Indian Wells, Madrid, Hamburg, Paris, Miami then yes, you are correct.

I don't mind if Cincy stays. But if the ATP insitutes a grass court masters tournament it will become a lame duck.

All_Slam_Andre
03-21-2007, 11:23 PM
I read somewhere that the ATP were considering downgrading Monte-Carlo and Hamburg, keeping Rome and adding a claycourt TMS in Spain, possibly Madrid (Ion Tiriac's idea). As well as the fact that downgrading Monte-Carlo would be one of the worst moves of all time, the current Madrid masters at the Rockodromo seems to be doing quite well so I don't see the point in relocating the event to another part of the city.

Via
03-21-2007, 11:23 PM
i'm so pleased to hear that the players' meeting had been a riot! :lol:

if de villiers' first 'experiment' had been more successful, then perhaps he'd get a better reception for his second. as it goes, why should players continue to trust him? better protest early and don't give him a chance to mess around, if something doesn't look quite right.

axing two clay TMS at one go seems rather harsh... it's the same 'big bang' style of making changes, again.

and it's obvious that money is doing all the talking, otherwise how else can china buy a TMS? i'm a little surprised that monte carlo isn't offering enough though.

zicofirol
03-21-2007, 11:24 PM
If by most you mean Indian Wells, Madrid, Hamburg, Paris, Miami then yes, you are correct.

I don't mind if Cincy stays. But if the ATP insitutes a grass court masters tournament it will become a lame duck.

another reason cincy wont be removed is because it is now part of the US open series, and I doubt they would only want to have 1 tms before USO

zicofirol
03-21-2007, 11:25 PM
I read somewhere that the ATP were considering downgrading Monte-Carlo and Hamburg, keeping Rome and adding a claycourt TMS in Spain, possibly Madrid (Ion Tiriac's idea). As well as the fact that downgrading Monte-Carlo would be one of the worst moves of all time, the current Madrid masters at the Rockodromo seems to be doing quite well so I don't see the point in relocating the event to another part of the city.

the problem is madrid is pushing for a clay event so they can have their players actually playing in the final days, lol...

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 11:27 PM
I'm going to Cincy for the week this year, but I doubt I'd pay to spend a week in Cleveland.

If you'd pay to spend any time in cincy then you'd definitely pay to be in clevleand, compared cleveland, cincy is a bore fest. And for people saying cleveland is a hell hole when is the last time you were here. We have all the major events, if it's on this part of the coast, midwest north it's coming to cleveland definitely not cincy

scoobs
03-21-2007, 11:30 PM
From a dispassionate point of view, I can understand the logic of axing Hamburg. I can see the point also of axing Monte Carlo if the tournament has essentially outgrown the venue in that it cannot cope with expansion of fans wanting to visit the event. I can see why they'd want to create a new event that has the capacity to satisfy demand, and also give Spain a major tournament on clay, which is after all the surface most of its players excel on.

Having said that...it will be a shame if Monte Carlo is downgraded.

Peoples
03-21-2007, 11:31 PM
Still no answer? Who was that PIG :o who got so pissed that he dared to walk out of the ATP meeting? :mad:

nobama
03-21-2007, 11:32 PM
You wish. Heck, even I wish.

But it brings in the bucks. And to Mr. De Villiers money is the name of the game. Not tradition, not quality, not the happiness of the players. Money talks.Which players have advocated getting rid of Cincy? When you talk about money you cannot leave the players out of it. Money talks to them too.

jayjay
03-21-2007, 11:36 PM
Some body has to let go, this time it's the clay courters, they have enough events, it's really not that big of a deal.

There are more hard court than clay court events on the calendar. The idea that clay is the most used surface through the season is a myth.

32 Hard events - inc. Shanghai (22 Outdoor, 10 Indoor)
24 Clay events

Clara Bow
03-21-2007, 11:38 PM
Well- the writer of the blog is incredibly biased. He completely sneers away the concerns of Monte Carlo being gone and looks down on it as a tournament and does not give a whit about its tradition. He says that in no way any of the North American tournaments should be touched. He fails to mention that if they downgrade MC and Hamburg that would leave one clay Masters and all of the rest hard. He is acting like those who do not want to see MC eliminated have no legitimate concerns at all – and acts as if Mr. Disney is a saint in all of this.

It is a shame that the meeting got out of hand – and I wish that it hadn’t, but I find the writer of the blog to be incredibly condescending. I imagine he is one of those folks who likes to bag on clay.

I do agree that if axing Hamburg would not be a bad idea, however.

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 11:40 PM
There are more hard court than clay court events on the calendar. The idea that clay is the most used surface through the season is a myth.

32 Hard events - inc. Shanghai (22 Outdoor, 10 Indoor)
24 Clay events

O.K well then get rid of hard or get rid of clay, there is enough for something to go. And something has to go, so let it go, as long as it's not cincy. unless they are moving it to cleveland, then that's o.k

scoobs
03-21-2007, 11:42 PM
Firstly, I don't think there's any intention of going down to 1 clay court TMS - no doubt this Madrid tournament on clay in collaboration with the WTA seems to be the preferred option for the second TMS on clay.

Secondly, no-one is talking about cancelling the Monte Carlo tournament. They're talking about downgrading it from a TMS event. It will still run, albeit with probably a reduced drawsize. In doing so it would only be reverting back to the way the event was before the Super 9, the precursor to TMS, was created in 1990.

People are free to agree or disagree with that decision but I think it's important to get those 2 facts on record.

jayjay
03-21-2007, 11:44 PM
O.K well then get rid of hard or get rid of clay, there is enough for something to go. And something has to go, so let it go, as long as it's not cincy. unless they are moving it to cleveland, then that's o.k

The point I'm making to you, is although I agree that something has to budge on the calendar, it's perfectly understandable why those who favour clay and would like to preserve it as it is, are going to be justifiably unhappy when there will be 4 Hard court Masters events, while Clay is downgraded to 2 (in addition to the disparity of there being more Hard court events than Clay anyway, which is fine, but the idea there are more Clay events than any other surface is as the facts state a complete falsehood).

Without even getting into the sentimentality that some of the players may feel for the history of Monte Carlo or Hamburg.

Clara Bow
03-21-2007, 11:47 PM
Still no answer? Who was that PIG :o who got so pissed that he dared to walk out of the ATP meeting? :mad:


Peoples - there were dozens of players who walked out, not just one. Try to see through the lens of your hatervision to see that it was more than one player.

I do hope there can be a compromise.

Can they make any additions to MC to add additional seats if the venue is small? They did that with the very traditional Wrigley Field in baseball (which is still one of the smallest parks, but is very traditional).

If they do get rid of MC and Hamburg- then they really should make Madrid clay and move it to earlier in the year, as has been suggested. I just think it would be a big slap in the face to a lot of tennis playing countires to have all but one courts be hard in Masters.

ETA- thanks scoobs for your clarification.

jayjay- you also make a very good point as well.

sondraj06
03-21-2007, 11:53 PM
The point I'm making to you, is although I agree that something has to budge on the calendar, it's perfectly understandable why those who favour clay and would like to preserve it as it is, are going to be justifiably unhappy when there will be 4 Hard court Masters events, while Clay is downgraded to 2 (in addition to the disparity of there being more Hard court events than Clay anyway, which is fine, but the idea there are more Clay events than any other surface is as the facts state a complete falsehood).

Without even getting into the sentimentality that some of the players may feel for the history of Monte Carlo or Hamburg.

Yes I know a lot of people have a lot of reason to be upset that they are downgraded or getting rid of any events. No body needs or wants are anymore importatn than anyone elses.

So it's going to happen, everybody agrees that there needs to be change to the calender but no ones wants to make any changes. Some body has to let it go, and get over it. As long as it's not cincy

Peoples
03-21-2007, 11:55 PM
Peoples - there were dozens of players who walked out, not just one. Try to see through the lens of your hatervision to see that it was more than one player.

Wasn't just the pig then?

All_Slam_Andre
03-21-2007, 11:55 PM
If there is to be a claycourt TMS in Spain, it should be in Barcelona instead of Madrid. The city already has a 56 man clay event so accomodating an extra 8 players wouldn't be a problem. Madrid would have to build a new clay facility from stratch. Also isn't Barcelona supposed to be a much better city than Madrid? That seems to be the common opinion of people that I know who have been to both cities

Johnny Groove
03-21-2007, 11:57 PM
Wasn't just the pig then?

read the title, moron. PLAYERS, meaning more than one. But of course, you must think Nadal is to blame :rolleyes:

Kalliopeia
03-22-2007, 12:00 AM
If you'd pay to spend any time in cincy then you'd definitely pay to be in clevleand, compared cleveland, cincy is a bore fest. And for people saying cleveland is a hell hole when is the last time you were here. We have all the major events, if it's on this part of the coast, midwest north it's coming to cleveland definitely not cincy

I've been to both. I prefer Cincinnati. Not that it matters, since they aren't moving it there. :)

scoobs
03-22-2007, 12:02 AM
If they're going to do anything about Cincy and Canada, it's going to be to try and put a week in between them. They're not going to can either of them. So why that's even being discussed is baffling.

MisterQ
03-22-2007, 12:04 AM
I've been to both. I prefer Cincinnati. Not that it matters, since they aren't moving it there. :)

Let's compromise.. put it in Columbus! :lol:

Kalliopeia
03-22-2007, 12:04 AM
If they're going to do anything about Cincy and Canada, it's going to be to try and put a week in between them. They're not going to can either of them. So why that's even being discussed is baffling.

I wish they would. I have this horrible fear that, after having paid a ridiculous amount of money (at least by my standards) for a ticket for the week and a hotel, half the players I want to see are going to find a way to miss it.

jayjay
03-22-2007, 12:04 AM
As long as it's not cincy

Well, haven't you just made Nadal et als point right there?

You too agree changes have to be made, as long as it is not a tournament of your liking. Whatever tournament (s) go or are downgraded, there is going to be anger and disappointment expressed by a set of players and fans one way or the other.

So I don't really understand the criticism of Nadal/Robredo and many others no doubt, who are having the same natural reaction that anyone would to tournaments being removed or downgraded that they wished would not be.

Personally, as someone who favours clay court tennis more than any other surface (I still love the other surfaces though), I could live with Madrid and Rome Clay Masters. However, I don't see why there should be 4 Hard Court Masters.

If it's true that there will be an eventual downgrade to 8 Masters events, then a split of 3-3-1-1 (Hard/Clay/Grass/Carpet) or 3-2-1-2 (Hard Outdoor/Clay/Grass/Carpet) would be more favourable in my view.

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 12:05 AM
If they're going to do anything about Cincy and Canada, it's going to be to try and put a week in between them. They're not going to can either of them. So why that's even being discussed is baffling.

I know - this discussion is ridiculous. And Cleveland isn't getting a TMS event EVER so that discussion s/b ended now.

Hopefully Madrid will be on clay.

Keep MC.

Eliminate Hamburg.

That should keep everyone happy.

Johnny Groove
03-22-2007, 12:12 AM
TMS'

IW- hard
Miami- hard
MC- clay
Madrid (or other spanish event, Barcelona maybe)- clay
Rome- clay
Hamburg- trashed
Queens- grass upgrade to TMS
Canada- hard

WEEK OF MM EVENTS

Cincy- hard
and one indoor TMS

so 8 TMS events :shrug:

scoobs
03-22-2007, 12:15 AM
Seems to me the likely schedule will be

AO
Indian Wells
Miami
Madrid (combined with WTA event)
Rome
RG
Wimbledon
Canada
Cincy
USO
China (combined with WTA event)
Paris
TMC.

Deivid23
03-22-2007, 12:16 AM
read the title, moron. PLAYERS, meaning more than one

:lol:

Poor monkey can´t even read, don´t be that harsh :sad:

sondraj06
03-22-2007, 12:17 AM
Well, haven't you just made Nadal et als point right there?

You too agree changes have to be made, as long as it is not a tournament of your liking. Whatever tournament (s) go or are downgraded, there is going to be anger and disappointment expressed by a set of players and fans one way or the other.

So I don't really understand the criticism of Nadal/Robredo and many others no doubt, who are having the same natural reaction that anyone would to tournaments being removed or downgraded that they wished would not be.

Personally, as someone who favours clay court tennis more than any other surface (I still love the other surfaces though), I could live with Madrid and Rome Clay Masters. However, I don't see why there should be 4 Hard Court Masters.

If it's true that there will be an eventual downgrade to 8 Masters events, then a split of 3-3-1-1 (Hard/Clay/Grass/Carpet) or 3-2-1-2 (Hard Outdoor/Clay/Grass/Carpet) would be more favourable in my view.

I get why they are pissed, It's democracy you can't please everyone all the time. It stills needs to be done, I mean the change of calendar, no matter how they do it some one will always be unhappy with it.

I'll be o.k with it as long as it's not cincy. And I would be o.k with columbus, I actually prefer columbus over cincy and cleveland

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 12:19 AM
Sondra - there is NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER going to be a TMS event in either Cleveland or Columbus.

NEVER EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's keep on topic here....

sondraj06
03-22-2007, 12:20 AM
Sondra - there is NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER going to be a TMS event in either Cleveland or Columbus.

NEVER EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's keep on topic here....

Maybe they will, if we start a petition. Cleveland is mighty powerful city, ask the presidential candidates

Johnny Groove
03-22-2007, 12:20 AM
Sondra - there is NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER going to be a TMS event in either Cleveland or Columbus.

NEVER EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's keep on topic here....

I think there should be 2 Miami TMS' :angel:

All_Slam_Andre
03-22-2007, 12:20 AM
Seems to me the likely schedule will be

AO
Indian Wells
Miami
Madrid (combined with WTA event)
Rome
RG
Wimbledon
Canada
Cincy
USO
China (combined with WTA event)
Paris
TMC.

Yeah that's probably how it will end up. I can't say I'm too happy with Paris getting to keep its TMS or North America having one more TMS than Europe, but never mind. I hope that the ATP puts that much needed week in-between Canada and Cincy. All they have to do is swap Washington and Canada around.

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 12:23 AM
I think there should be 2 Miami TMS' :angel:

Now we're going off topic. ;) :lol:

That's as unlikely as Cleveland or Columbus.

I would like Miami to be clay...but that's as unlikely as 2 Miami TMS events or Cleveland or Columbus.

:lol:

LaTenista
03-22-2007, 12:24 AM
You wish. Heck, even I wish.

But it brings in the bucks. And to Mr. De Villiers money is the name of the game. Not tradition, not quality, not the happiness of the players. Money talks.

Cincy has a very long respected history: since 1899 it's been there, the oldest tournament in the US still played in it's original area. :wavey:

Johnny Groove
03-22-2007, 12:25 AM
Now we're going off topic. ;) :lol:

That's as unlikely as Cleveland or Columbus.

I would like Miami to be clay...but that's as unlikely as 2 Miami TMS events or Cleveland or Columbus.

:lol:

What are you talking about? Miami alrady IS clay! :o

atheneglaukopis
03-22-2007, 12:25 AM
I think there should be 2 Miami TMS' :angel:I think there should be an LA TMS. :angel:

scoobs
03-22-2007, 12:25 AM
Yeah that's probably how it will end up. I can't say I'm too happy with Paris getting to keep its TMS or North America having one more TMS than Europe, but never mind. I hope that the ATP puts that much needed week in-between Canada and Cincy. All they have to do is swap Washington and Canada around.
Agreed.

I think if they do the schedule like this, and separate Canada and Cincy by a week, it's a schedule I can pretty much get on board with, given the real and obvious constraints that exist in the calendar. It would be sad to lose MC as a TMS and to a lesser extent Hamburg, but I think MC would still attact a quality field - it's a beautiful venue and a lot of the players live in MC so would play their "home" event. It just would no longer be compulsory. I also think that it makes sense for Spain and Italy to have a major claycourt event as well as France, given these countries' traditions on clay. The real question is what happens with Germany - it does need a quality event of its own and Germany has lost a ton of events over the years. Maybe move Paris to somewhere like Stuttgart indoors?

Johnny Groove
03-22-2007, 12:26 AM
I think there should be an LA TMS. :angel:

I think there should be a Spartan TMS :angel:

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 12:27 AM
What are you talking about? Miami alrady IS clay! :o

PURPLE CLAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:haha:

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 12:29 AM
Cincy has a very long respected history: since 1899 it's been there, the oldest tournament in the US still played in it's original area. :wavey:

So does Queen's.

Money talks.

Johnny Groove
03-22-2007, 12:29 AM
PURPLE CLAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:haha:

and Indian Wells too!!!! We need more hc TMS!!! :armed:

kundalini
03-22-2007, 12:30 AM
Well I like the clay events. There's a nice balance to them. One faster clay, one medium and one horribly slow. If anything I think I would get rid of Paris Masters and perhaps make Madrid the Masters Cup venue so as to shorten the season by a few weeks. The other idea is perhaps to use the Toronto/Montreal model of alternate years. So perhaps every other year we get say TMC in China.

If they want Nadal to be a front man for the ATP they are going to have to do a lot better than trashing the clay court Masters. In the next few years the US events may see reduced attendances due to lack of top contenders from the States. The post Agassi period is only just beginning and we don't know what impact his retirement might have.

All_Slam_Andre
03-22-2007, 12:33 AM
Agreed.

The real question is what happens with Germany - it does need a quality event of its own and Germany has lost a ton of events over the years. Maybe move Paris to somewhere like Stuttgart indoors?

Yeah you are right it would be hugely unfair for Germany not to host a big tennis event any more. While the TV coverage there is absolutely awful, the attendances at their events are generally excellent. The Halle grass TMS that many of us want is not going to happen, so Germany hosting an indoor TMS instead of Paris seems like a sensible option.

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 12:35 AM
Well I like the clay events. There's a nice balance to them. One faster clay, one medium and one horribly slow. If anything I think I would get rid of Paris Masters and perhaps make Madrid the Masters Cup venue so as to shorten the season by a few weeks. The other idea is perhaps to use the Toronto/Montreal model of alternate years. So perhaps every other year we get say TMC in China.

If they want Nadal to be a front man for the ATP they are going to have to do a lot better than trashing the clay court Masters. In the next few years the US events may see reduced attendances due to lack of top contenders from the States. The post Agassi period is only just beginning and we don't know what impact his retirement might have.

Andre hadn't been playing a lot the last couple of years anyway. And the attendence has gone up.

I don't think it will make a difference.

Tennis on the amateur level is growing in the US.

And those people have money.

And are willing to spend it to travel to the tournaments. That's why we have good attendence.

For some reason they don't turn on their TV to watch it, but that's a different story.

SBruguera
03-22-2007, 12:44 AM
Seems to me the likely schedule will be

AO
Indian Wells
Miami
Madrid (combined with WTA event)
Rome
RG
Wimbledon
Canada
Cincy
USO
China (combined with WTA event)
Paris
TMC.

This makes a lot of sense. The final schedule is probably going to be very similar to this one.

Kalliopeia
03-22-2007, 12:46 AM
For some reason they don't turn on their TV to watch it, but that's a different story.

Probably because listening to Patrick McEnroe's incessant inane chatter makes one want to stab themselves in the ears with knitting needles.

Or maybe that's just me....:scratch:

sondraj06
03-22-2007, 12:49 AM
Probably because listening to Patrick McEnroe's incessant inane chatter makes one want to stab themselves in the ears with knitting needles.

Or maybe that's just me....:scratch:

Have you noticed that pmac and some of the other commentators I can't remember their names one of them is Mary Fernadaz have a tendency to get a little catty and defensive with each other on air. It took me off guard during IW when Pmac had to literarly call the other older guy out for being some what of an ass to him for no reason, and it didn't stop there.

Johnny Groove
03-22-2007, 12:50 AM
Probably because listening to Patrick McEnroe's incessant inane chatter makes one want to stab themselves in the ears with knitting needles.

Or maybe that's just me....:scratch:

no, its not just you. Darren Cahill and Cliff "The Sex" Drysdale should do the commentating. Partly because of their tennis knowledge, and partly because the American viewers can listen to and repeat their words with their accents. :lol:

Rafa = Fed Killa
03-22-2007, 12:51 AM
Instead of balancing the tour they are unbalancing it.

Someone get rid of Mr. Disney.

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 12:51 AM
Probably because listening to Patrick McEnroe's incessant inane chatter makes one want to stab themselves in the ears with knitting needles.

Or maybe that's just me....:scratch:

It's not just you... :tape: :lol:

Yappa
03-22-2007, 12:55 AM
Agreed.
Maybe move Paris to somewhere like Stuttgart indoors?

As far as I know a german indoor Masters Series tourney would also take place in Hamburg. So it's Hamburg either way (clay or indoor).

scoobs
03-22-2007, 12:57 AM
As far as I know a german indoor Masters Series tourney would also take place in Hamburg. So it's Hamburg either way (clay or indoor).
Which would be fair enough - Hamburg also has a very long tennis tradition as it enters its 101st year this year so it would be nice if it could keep a prestigious tournament of some description.

alelysafina
03-22-2007, 12:59 AM
What I would like to see:

AO
Latin America (Argentina?)
Indian Wells (or Miami)
MC
Rome
RG
Queens
Wimbledon
Canada
Cincy
USO
China (combined with WTA event)
Madrid
TMC

1 - 3 - 4 - 1

Paris has to go and so does Hamburg.

Tzar
03-22-2007, 01:00 AM
Hamburg, cincy and paris are a waste of time!.. YOU HAVE RG! WHY A TMS in PARIS... AGAIN!

Richard_from_Cal
03-22-2007, 01:13 AM
Too bad. I'm sorry that the tourists/residents of Monaco won't support the tourney; now that Rainier is dead, maybe the (Catholic/claycourt) players don't want to appear to aid the diminishment of support to the 'old guard.'

Then too, there must be a reason that Monaco is an independant state where it is. Beautiful area, between Italy and France, tax-refugee status...(Borg, and many other players located homes there...) ...Here it is on a map. (Upper right-hand...)
.
.
.
http://www.hotels-inn-riviera.com/images/map-riviera2.png

Metis
03-22-2007, 01:19 AM
^^^ :confused: :scratch: :drink: :silly:

FanofFederer
03-22-2007, 01:21 AM
People can criticise De Villiers all they want but at least he is not static and is trying new things to motivate and rejuvenate tennis. I do agree that some claycourt tournaments should definitely go, prob Hamburg which is a big joke of a Masters Series after Robredo won it and will always have asterisk next to it to have a champion like that. There is way too much clay on tour.

Lee
03-22-2007, 01:35 AM
no, its not just you. Darren Cahill and Cliff "The Sex" Drysdale should do the commentating. Partly because of their tennis knowledge, and partly because the American viewers can listen to and repeat their words with their accents. :lol:

I love Darren Cahill's accent!!!!!! And honestly, really refreshing from PMac and Cliffy. :rocker:

Jlee
03-22-2007, 01:44 AM
Wow, sounds like there's a pretty big divide. What does Federer actually think? He's the one they listen to. :lol: He moved to the back of the room though...probably staying quiet like all the other non-claycourt players.

connectolove
03-22-2007, 01:49 AM
It should be half of the Masters on hard and the other half on clay. Even number, etc.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 01:50 AM
Too bad. I'm sorry that the tourists/residents of Monaco won't support the tourney

Again, it appears that the support is there but the venue is small.

Grüezi
03-22-2007, 02:19 AM
A hypothetical schedule:

China - H
AO
Latin America (Brazil?) - C
Indian Wells/Miami - H
Rome - C
Madrid/Barcelona - C
RG
Queen's - G
Wimbledon
Canada - H
Cincy (other US city?) - H
USO
TMC London - I

Problems:
Obviously Monte Carlo, Hamburg, and Paris would all get short shrift in this equation.

My rationale for China before AO is location. Anywhere else in the schedule China is rather inconvenient. But it would mean pushing AO back a bit. Also would players get the heat acclimation they usually get from playing in Australia or NZ? I'm not very familiar with China's climate at that time.

If Queen's received TMS status, Halle (and Federer?) would pitch a fit. The top players would have no choice but to play Queen's.

There is also the issue of combined events. Any event involving the WTA will have a trickier time making any changes, especially since they are in the midst of revamping their own calendar.

One more TMS event (Indoor?) could probably be added, possibly after USO. I don't think 9 is too many, if they are scheduled sanely (no back-to-backs, etc.).

Seems to me the ATP needs to stop with this bandaging approach. The schedule needs a major overhaul, not this cosmetic tinkering. However, we know where their priorities lie and what it is they follow. But if they can upset one, two, or three TDs, why not all of them? Just get it over with and create a truly salable, fan/player-friendlier package...

GlennMirnyi
03-22-2007, 02:22 AM
If Nadal and Boredo are pissed off, I'm for it. Anything to piss those moonballers.

Jaffas85
03-22-2007, 02:27 AM
Monte Carlo or Hamburg should be dropped so that the Grass season can have a TMS event.

Seems pretty silly that the French Open has 3 TMS events preceeding it on Clay yet Wimbledon has none leading into it.

Now that all the Masters series have first round byes and, with the exception of Miami, best of 3 finals then hopefully most players will be able to tackle the Madrd-Paris masters at the end of the year.

Otherwise I wouldn't change anything.

MaryWalsh
03-22-2007, 02:38 AM
Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to what should happen with hardcourt/grass/clay tournaments. I am proud of Rafa and Tommy and whoever else produced the petition, voiced their displeasure, and then walked out. A lot of people are passive these days. I'm glad these guys are sticking up for themselves and others who support a full claycourt schedule.

Me personally, I don't know enough to say which claycourts should stay and which should be formed to replace any that might be taken away. Also, I think that grasscourts should have more presence in the TMS schedule, but not at the expense of the overall claycourt presence. I'd like to see the compromise come at the expense of hardcourt, which to me seems over-represented, or taraflex, which, according to what I have read, is a dangerous surface.

DMNRS22
03-22-2007, 02:42 AM
Listen, if players didn't back out at every event, then there would be no reason to cut the scheldule. But if it has to be don, it has to be done...

GlennMirnyi
03-22-2007, 02:43 AM
If they take carpet from tennis, they could pretty much call if off and merge WTA with ATP.

ys
03-22-2007, 02:53 AM
My two cents.. Scrapping Monte-Carlo is the right thing to do.. Elitist, ugly event. Hamburg should also ago. Wrong place, wrong time. To get things right? Put Madrid instead of Monaco andpush it a week deeper into clay season. Madrid indoors is a joke. SHould be on clay. Give Moscow Madrid's spot. Put one Masters event on Rebound Ace before AO and give it to China or Japan or Dubai or Johannesbourg or South America- anyone willing to pick it up in early January.

nobama
03-22-2007, 02:55 AM
Do we know for sure the guys who signed that petition were the ones who walked out? The article I posted didn't say who walked out...

If I was someone who played well on grass/faster surfaces I'd be pissed as it seems most tournaments are medium-to-slow now. I remember last year Andy Roddick said something like '[Nadal] gets three months on his favorite surface, I get three weeks'. It makes no sense to me that there are 3 TMS on clay and none on grass. The way Federer described the Miami courts they might as well turn that into a clay court event.

ys
03-22-2007, 02:59 AM
I remember last year Andy Roddick said something like '[Nadal] gets three months on his favorite surface, I get three weeks'.

After Nadal has just stomped him into shit on his most successful surface, he must have shut up for now..

MaryWalsh
03-22-2007, 03:01 AM
I must admit I really don't know anything about fastness/slowness of the hardcourts. Maybe someone could post a breakdown.

ChinoRios4Ever
03-22-2007, 03:01 AM
clay: the TRUE tennis... :yeah:

again clown Disney :ras:

GlennMirnyi
03-22-2007, 03:04 AM
Do we know for sure the guys who signed that petition were the ones who walked out? The article I posted didn't say who walked out...

If I was someone who played well on grass/faster surfaces I'd be pissed as it seems most tournaments are medium-to-slow now. I remember last year Andy Roddick said something like '[Nadal] gets three months on his favorite surface, I get three weeks'. It makes no sense to me that there are 3 TMS on clay and none on grass. The way Federer described the Miami courts they might as well turn that into a clay court event.

The circuit is a big joke now. Except for the US Open, all HCs play VERY slow.

ys
03-22-2007, 03:04 AM
clay: the TRUE tennis... :yeah:

again clown Disney :ras:

Clay tennis is to real tennis is what marathon is to track and field..

MisterQ
03-22-2007, 03:08 AM
I must admit I really don't know anything about fastness/slowness of the hardcourts. Maybe someone could post a breakdown.

I imagine an objective ranking of fastness doesn't really exist (it's mostly by player comments and tournament reputations that we know about this), but if it does, it would be interesting to see it.

nobama
03-22-2007, 03:39 AM
After Nadal has just stomped him into shit on his most successful surface, he must have shut up for now..When was a slow hard court ever Roddick's most successful surface? :shrug:

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 03:47 AM
Wow, sounds like there's a pretty big divide. What does Federer actually think? He's the one they listen to. :lol: He moved to the back of the room though...probably staying quiet like all the other non-claycourt players.

Hey, he's a claycourter too :armed:

:lol:

Scotso
03-22-2007, 03:48 AM
The ATP is trying to destroy tennis. If it's up to Mr. Disney, tennis will only be played in North America on hard courts. The draws will feature only the top 8 singles players in the world who will play in round robin events. And of course, the "top 8" will be selected by Mr. Disney himself.

If they cut two of the three clay court Masters Series, they need to just get rid of the Masters Series events period. Clay is the other "major" surface besides hardcourt, and if they do this, they're going to relegate it to the French Open and a few other small events. That would be very, very sad for me.

Scotso
03-22-2007, 03:49 AM
It's time for the players who are being shafted in all this (i.e. those other than Federer) to boycott and start planning their own tour. The ATP no longer represents the players.

nobama
03-22-2007, 03:59 AM
The circuit is a big joke now. Except for the US Open, all HCs play VERY slow.Laykold cushion plus is the surface used in Miami. Are any of the other hard court tournaments played on this surface? I though IW was plexiplave and the summer HC events were decoturf. This brochure says more "texture" can be added to produce a slower court with a higher bounce.

http://www.sti-sports.com/mavista/export?docId=606&offline=true&filename=84225 Cushion Plus broch.pdf

nobama
03-22-2007, 04:07 AM
The ATP is trying to destroy tennis. If it's up to Mr. Disney, tennis will only be played in North America on hard courts. The draws will feature only the top 8 singles players in the world who will play in round robin events. And of course, the "top 8" will be selected by Mr. Disney himself.

If they cut two of the three clay court Masters Series, they need to just get rid of the Masters Series events period. Clay is the other "major" surface besides hardcourt, and if they do this, they're going to relegate it to the French Open and a few other small events. That would be very, very sad for me.Oh please. Isn't it Mr Disney who wants to create a TMS in Asia and bring TMC to Europe (most likely London)? How does that favor North America? And if having so many events in North America is such a bad thing why don't players ever complain about it? I never hear players bitching about to many events in the United States. :shrug:

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 04:08 AM
Time for another tour.

I love these bitches whining about the surfaces being too slow, of course they forget the wonderful servefests played in the late 80s up to the late 90s played with the lighest balls possible on the various ice rinks posing as tennis courts.

So the compromise was make the clay faster and the grass and other hardcourt/indoor events slower and now we have the other side of the coin complaining, proving that people will never be pleased.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 04:17 AM
And if having so many events in North America is such a bad thing why don't players ever complain about it? I never hear players bitching about to many events in the United States. :shrug:
They are not generally vocal in complaining about any tournaments anywhere, only possibly the length of the season altogether.

knightsky
03-22-2007, 05:02 AM
I am for retaining Monte Carlo.

I don't think Queens should be upgraded, because it would mean both the major grasscourt tournaments being held in the same city, which seems a bit of an overkill. Hamburg should be dropped and Halle given TMS status. That keeps the Germans and the #1 happy. Also, it would allow RG to be brought forward, giving a week's rest before the grass TMS. 4 grasscourt tournaments can be fit around the TMS.

Paris must be replaced with an Asian TMS. TMC to be rotated yearly, if not then once every 2 years.

One of the 3 US hardcourt TMS should either be dropped totally or replaced with a South American clay TMS.

TennisLurker
03-22-2007, 05:04 AM
Time for another tour.

I love these bitches whining about the surfaces being too slow, of course they forget the wonderful servefests played in the late 80s up to the late 90s played with the lighest balls possible on the various ice rinks posing as tennis courts.

So the compromise was make the clay faster and the grass and other hardcourt/indoor events slower and now we have the other side of the coin complaining, proving that people will never be pleased.

I agree on both things, if only one clay masters is left, , because of "horror vacui" what we will see is some kind of unofficial tournament, which may not give points, but with loads of prize money.


And yes, fastcourts nowadays are slower, but clay courters are also much faster than 10 or 15 years ago.

CmonAussie
03-22-2007, 05:21 AM
After more consideration:

#Aussie Open (hard)
*TMS Asia (hard) [Shanghai/Bangkok]
*TMS America (hard) [Indian Wells/Miami]
*TMS Spain (clay) [Madrid/Barcelona]
*TMS Rome (clay)
#French Open (clay)
*TMS Germany (grass) [Halle/Hamburg]
#Wimbledon (grass)
*TMS Canada (hard) [Toronto/Montreal]
#US Open (hard)
*TMS Sth America (alternate hard/clay) [Brazil/Argentina]
%TMC (indoor) [London/Paris/New York/Sydney]

mangoes
03-22-2007, 05:29 AM
Time for another tour.

I love these bitches whining about the surfaces being too slow, of course they forget the wonderful servefests played in the late 80s up to the late 90s played with the lighest balls possible on the various ice rinks posing as tennis courts.

So the compromise was make the clay faster and the grass and other hardcourt/indoor events slower and now we have the other side of the coin complaining, proving that people will never be pleased.

That's a very good point. And, as I remember the "servefests" from the past, I, personally, appreciate the fact that some courts were slowed to allow for rallies.

mangoes
03-22-2007, 05:45 AM
After reading the reason for wanting to cut Monte Carlo, my outlook on the situation has changed. A lot of posters are considering this subject from an emotional standpoint. However, finances dictate these matters. If Monte Carlo is underperforming, then cut it...............unless, Nadal, Robredo and the others are willing to take a pay cut at Monte Carlo.

ATP is a businesss.................a poorly run one...........but a business. The financial bottomline is important.

I never cease to be shocked by Mr. Disney's handling of his job responsibilities. Mr. Disney may be a "people person" but he lacks the skills for negotiation. Thus far, he has handled the Monte Carlo situation very poorly. He is always running his mouth before getting all his ducks in order. Another example of this was the Round Robin nonsense.

I get the impression this man got this job because he was friendly and engaging with the board. Strict attention was not paid to his qualifications. When a man, leading a global organization, gets backed into a corner, like an idiot, by a bunch of young players.........:shrug: Pink Slip??

Stensland
03-22-2007, 07:12 AM
i actually don't get why monte carlo ist at the forefront of the tournaments that are supposed to be cut down. how in the world are they worse than hamburg? i'm from germany, but having been in hamburg in the last two years, i don't see any future for that tournament. attendance figures are pretty poor compared to monaco, plus monaca has this special spirit of being a monarchy, tax haven, billionaire refuge etc. if you add all that up, monte carlo is definitely the best clay court tms. and what about rome? is it that much of a cahs cow to be not considered as somehow unimportant to some extent? i cannot imagine that rome is making more bucks that monte carlo, given the surrounding at monaco. how bad have they been managing their tournament in monte carlo anyways? you could charge LOADS of money and it would still be alright, because they have tons of money guys floating around that little country. what in hell have they done?!

on the other hand: i definitely do want some other ams as hamburg may go. germany (nothing less than a 80 million people market, high standard of living and therefore COULD be quite a cash cow) needs to have an ams.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:14 AM
I agree on both things, if only one clay masters is left, , because of "horror vacui" what we will see is some kind of unofficial tournament, which may not give points, but with loads of prize money.

And yes, fastcourts nowadays are slower, but clay courters are also much faster than 10 or 15 years ago.

In other words it will be like Dubai in the "horror vacui" context and the fact there is a clear discrimination against players who do well on clay and has been for ages.

Yes, for the bitches saying they can play the whole year on clay blah blah blah, well players can make their best 5 results on any surface they chose. Wow! there are only going to be 2 major events where players get points on clay compared to around 8 on hardcourts, yes that's a fair balance.

They had to do something about the surfaces at the time, but this is lost on most people.

laure xxx
03-22-2007, 07:49 AM
What the hell are this bloody clay-courters complaining about? The ATP tour is pretty much designed for their benefit. I cannot name a single important event which is played on a fast surface. Even Wimbledon is slow as hell.

I agree that there should be a Masters Series event on grass - it seems obvious to me - but I don't think Queens or Halle or Nottingham should be upgraded to Masters level because then 2 grass tournies would be trashed to make the grass season even more meaningless, and no one bar Federer would ever win a grass title.

I say keep Queens, Halle and Nottingham separate and create a new grass Masters, then Wimbledon.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:57 AM
What the hell are this bloody clay-courters complaining about? The ATP tour is pretty much designed for their benefit. I cannot name a single important event which is played on a fast surface. Even Wimbledon is slow as hell.

That first comment is hilarious, how can the tour be organised to the benefit of claycourt players? That is so funny, so clay is the dominant surface in the big 13 events at present?

The court speed issue has already been answered.

MariaV
03-22-2007, 08:03 AM
What the hell are this bloody clay-courters complaining about? The ATP tour is pretty much designed for their benefit. I cannot name a single important event which is played on a fast surface. Even Wimbledon is slow as hell.

I agree that there should be a Masters Series event on grass - it seems obvious to me - but I don't think Queens or Halle or Nottingham should be upgraded to Masters level because then 2 grass tournies would be trashed to make the grass season even more meaningless, and no one bar Federer would ever win a grass title.

I say keep Queens, Halle and Nottingham separate and create a new grass Masters, then Wimbledon.

I really don't want to hear about the grass, grass, grass stuff here all the time. Do you know how much keeping grass courts costs per year? Not talking about the climate issue which is getting worse (not going into debate about that).
If even like Monte Carlo is not managed well financially....

almouchie
03-22-2007, 08:04 AM
it will take a long time before this sort of thing is discussed, dealt with & a compromise is reached
the ATP (V-man) needs a lot more than downgrading or eluminating 2 claycourts TMS to streamline the tour
from my own little experience having worked on streamlining port transportation for near a year, starting from a small details, instead of placing a well balanced overall proposal is doomed to face more criticism & fight back.

ATP must have at east a sumblence of a plan to shorten the season, or make less the number of tournaments required
as it is the players, fans, & media arent sure what there plans are
its a good thing to have people who matter & have a say , & take their input first
if atp had done that with RR fiasco they could have done without what was a clear disasterous decision especially seeing as the CEO actually dared change the rules,
in any case
i would like to see a TMS on grass & even more tournaments on grass, & yeah to stop slowing down the surface
soon all the surfaces will play the same
giving Asia more coverage is something to be considered as well
a season from Feb to Nov is not so difficult to plan if they want to do it. a full 2 months break

my0118
03-22-2007, 08:11 AM
Is there any chace De villiers to get a heart attack while having sex then another executive to be appointed?
what he's trying is really more annoying than 4 year old children complaining without a reason.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 08:13 AM
Is there any chace De villiers to get a heart attack while having sex then another executive to be appointed?
what he's trying is really more annoying than 4 year old children complaining without a reason.

Not sure how they can get rid of him. I mean they could always have a no confidence motion against him, though at the same time with all his foibles and gaffes it could be advantageous for some to have a lame Disney Duck in charge.

maqk
03-22-2007, 08:41 AM
one AMS at grass will be good but why eliminate MonteCarlo????

Kolya
03-22-2007, 08:48 AM
Status quo please.

scoobs
03-22-2007, 08:52 AM
People need to get a grip. Nobody is trying to destroy tennis. I've yet to hear why anyone involved would be wanting to destroy tennis. Clearly they are motivated by getting more money into the sport and more fans into stadia and watching on TV.

It would be easier to have discussions on this matter if people weren't quite so irrational.

feuselino
03-22-2007, 09:08 AM
My humble opinion:

1.) The year starts with small tournies in Australia and Asia before the AO (Doha AND Dubai should be played before the AO, which should be pushed back a little bit, let's say first half of February.

After the Australian Open:

2.) Short Hardcourt season in Northern America, ends with Miami, which should be played at the time of Indian Wells, which would be cancelled (or turned into a smaller event that leads up to Miami).

3.) Turn Miami into a one-week Masters event.

4.) That should leave enough time to play one clay masters in South America with all those small South American clay tournies leading up to it.

5.) Then move the clay season to Europe - leaves enough time for Monte Carlo and Rome as Masters plus a few high profile minor clay tournaments, so 3 clay masters remain, but one of the two North American spring Masters will go.

6.) Hamburg should be dropped, but Halle should become a grass Masters, obviously it should be pushed one week back, same with Wimbledon. Alternative: Hamburg should change dates with Madrid, the later becoming a clay tournament and Hamburg an indoor-event)

7.) One of the summer Hardcourt masters should be cancelled, the remaining one should alternate between the US and Canada. A lot of smaller tournies to lead up to the US Open

8.) After the US Open: Second tire in Asia with a masters event in China at the end

9.) Indoor European season with masters in Hamburg maybe (see point 6) or with masters in Paris (however, only one(!) masters tournament, meaning 8 masters during the whole season: Miami, South America, Monte Carlo, Rome, Halle/Madrid, North America, China, Hamburg/Paris/Madrid)

10.) Masters Cup in London.

Would it make sense, or am I totally wrong?

Castafiore
03-22-2007, 09:09 AM
People need to get a grip. Nobody is trying to destroy tennis. I've yet to hear why anyone involved would be wanting to destroy tennis.
I don't think that a lot of people are seriously suggesting that some people are out to destroy tennis on purpose really.
It's just that some of the decisions seem to be more about money, PR,...and not enough real issues.

They're going to eliminate events like Monte Carlo and Hamburg from the TMS list but they're keeping the Canada and Cincy TMS events back-to-back because they're better money machines? Just scrap the exciting best out of 5 sets finals so that the players have no excuse left to not play back-to-back tournaments. Problem solved. :rolleyes:

Monte Carlo has good crowds as Truc also said. It's not a big venue perhaps but it's not losing money either (at least, not that I'm aware of). But being cost-efficient is not the issue here so it seems but maximizing profit is. That's what's bothering a lot of people IMO. The fact that some of these decisions seems to be more about quantity and not enough about quality.

Stensland
03-22-2007, 09:15 AM
4.) That should leave enough time to play one clay masters in South America with all those small South American clay tournies leading up to it.



i think that won't happen mid-term and de villiers already said that in an interview. south america just isn't there yet, they got loads of problems and the spending capacity lacks behind the north americans and europeans. some smaller tournaments like costa do sauipe or vina del mar are alright, but that's pretty much it, can't go any further.

Stensland
03-22-2007, 09:20 AM
10.) Masters Cup in London.



and why would that be indispensable? :confused:

feuselino
03-22-2007, 09:25 AM
and why would that be indispensable? :confused:

You mean the location or the masters cup? :) :)

Hasn't it been decided that the cup goes to London?

Since the season would end in Europe in my scenario, it would make sense to keep the cup in Europe as well, or at least close. Could alternate between some cities - Moscow would be a good candidat... or maybe somewhere in Northern Africa - Cairo? (I know there would be the same problems as in Southern America, but hey, I just want to let everyone in on the fun! ;) )

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 09:33 AM
People need to get a grip. Nobody is trying to destroy tennis. I've yet to hear why anyone involved would be wanting to destroy tennis. Clearly they are motivated by getting more money into the sport and more fans into stadia and watching on TV.

It would be easier to have discussions on this matter if people weren't quite so irrational.

Well when the people in charge can't balance the commercial and the tennis interests of the game then there are going to pissed off about it.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 09:36 AM
I don't think that a lot of people are seriously suggesting that some people are out to destroy tennis on purpose really.
It's just that some of the decisions seem to be more about money, PR,...and not enough real issues.

They're going to eliminate events like Monte Carlo and Hamburg from the TMS list but they're keeping the Canada and Cincy TMS events back-to-back because they're better money machines? Just scrap the exciting best out of 5 sets finals so that the players have no excuse left to not play back-to-back tournaments. Problem solved. :rolleyes:

Monte Carlo has good crowds as Truc also said. It's not a big venue perhaps but it's not losing money either (at least, not that I'm aware of). But being cost-efficient is not the issue here so it seems but maximizing profit is. That's what's bothering a lot of people IMO. The fact that some of these decisions seems to be more about quantity and not enough about quality.

Disney as usual hasn't thought anything through, he just comes out with a 1000 ideas and 1001 of them are bad without taking things into consideration.

Monte Carlo isn't losing money and the Principality itself pumps a lot of money into the event and it wouldn't look so good for the base of the European section of ATP to have their event downgraded.

Stensland
03-22-2007, 01:07 PM
You mean the location or the masters cup? :) :)

Hasn't it been decided that the cup goes to London?

Since the season would end in Europe in my scenario, it would make sense to keep the cup in Europe as well, or at least close. Could alternate between some cities - Moscow would be a good candidat... or maybe somewhere in Northern Africa - Cairo? (I know there would be the same problems as in Southern America, but hey, I just want to let everyone in on the fun! ;) )

i meant the london thing. you elaborated on every point and at last said in one single sentence "masters cup in london." period. seemed to me as if this would be in your scenario the setting for all future masters cups, like no change regarding the location anymore. if it wasn't meant that way, sorry, never mind. :)

and i don't know if london's gonna host the tmc in the future. has it really already been decided? maybe i missed it.

vamosnadal
03-22-2007, 01:21 PM
I would say eliminate Hamburg and keep Monte Carlo and Rome. Eliminating both Hamburg and Monte Carlo seems incredibly unfair when you look at the entire tennis schedule. I also think the original article which was posted here is written in an incredibly biased way and doesn't fully take into account the valid argument of the clay players and why they are so angry about the entire situation.

Stensland
03-22-2007, 01:35 PM
I would say eliminate Hamburg and keep Monte Carlo and Rome. Eliminating both Hamburg and Monte Carlo seems incredibly unfair when you look at the entire tennis schedule.

and that wouldn't be incredibly unfair to germany? i mean, come on, you gotta compensate us then. europe's biggest country without any major tournament?

scoobs
03-22-2007, 01:42 PM
Personally, I don't think walking out is a smart policy, anyway - unless the decisions have already been taken and there's nothing more to be said. If there's still room for maneouvre, walking out is just gesture politics - achieves nothing.

vamosnadal
03-22-2007, 02:16 PM
and that wouldn't be incredibly unfair to germany? i mean, come on, you gotta compensate us then. europe's biggest country without any major tournament?

It probably is unfair to Germany, but the tournament doesn't seem to be highly regarded and it is scheduled too close to the FO and so out of the three, I think it is the main candidate to be chopped if any have to go.

The size of a country shouldn't be a reason for having a major tournament, it should be whether the event would generate enough interest or be successful if it took place there. I have personally always thought that there should be a major clay event in South America, I think it would be very successful, but I'm sure there are various reasons why I'd be wrong!

Stensland
03-22-2007, 02:27 PM
personally, i'd favor something like an indoor ams for germany, pretty much like paris has it these days. remember when frankfurt hosted the slam cup in the messehallen (halls of the fair trades)? that was amazing. sure, there's no more stich or becker around nowadays, but considering hard court and indoor it would probably be good for guys like kiefer, haas or the other upcoming becker. i wonder why our tennis association wants to stick with a clay tournament anyways. there've never been german players any good at it, so maybe germany could just swap it with france and instead keep monte carlo (which is french, basically)? haas would never go past the 3 rd in hamburg, so wouldn't kiefer. but getting a hard court tourney AND indoor, perfect! plus frankfurt is one of the richest cities in germany and they'll probably remember the good old days with boris in the nineties.

Saumon
03-22-2007, 02:39 PM
not so long ago Germany had an indoor TMS before Paris. It was replaced by Madrid. I think the attendance was not good enough. :o

Stensland
03-22-2007, 02:42 PM
not so long ago Germany had an indoor TMS before Paris. It was replaced by Madrid. I think the attendance was not good enough. :o

was it the attendance or the fact that germany already had one tms (hamburg)? i don't know anymore.

All_Slam_Andre
03-22-2007, 02:43 PM
Paris should be downgraded and make way for an indoor AMS in Germany, maybe in Frankfurt as Rrainer suggested. It is completely ridiculous for Paris or any city for that matter to host both a grand slam and a masters series event, while Germany deserves to retain a big tennis event.

Martin
03-22-2007, 02:44 PM
The clay courters should stop complaining and learn to play on other surfaces. There are virtually clay tournaments from February until September if players want to play on that.

Hamburg should go because it always produces poor crowds and the conditions are not good.

Clay is a specialist surface but as it stands, there are tournaments throughout the year, 3 Masters Series events and a Grand Slam. Grass is the other specialist surface but has just five weeks of tournaments and one Grand Slam. At least virtually all players can play on hard courts. For too long clay courters have had it too easy and to be honest it's quite funny to see them panic.

Castafiore
03-22-2007, 02:46 PM
If there's still room for maneouvre, walking out is just gesture politics - achieves nothing.
True.

Then again, if you're talking to a brick wall and you feel passionate about something, walking out is tempting to do sometimes.
We don't really know what happened, do we?


But I did read this in the German press:
Es gab vielleicht noch nie eine so gute Beziehung zwischen der Nummer eins der Welt und der Nummer zwei, wie es heute zwischen Ihnen und Rafael Nadal der Fall ist. Gibt es vielleicht den Willen, manche Dinge zusammen zu versuchen, gemeinsam Druck zu machen bei Themen wie beispielsweise dem umstrittenen Round-Robin-System?

Federer: «Nicht wirklich. Es ist gut, dass wir zusammen sprechen, dass wir über Probleme der Tour diskutieren. Ich freue mich für ihn, weil er sehr jung ist. Als ich so jung war, hat normalerweise keiner nach meiner Meinung gefragt, ich war viel schlechter im Ranking. Er wird in diese Position gedrängt. Und wenn er sich ein bisschen an mich anlehnen kann, da ich ein bisschen älter bin, fast eine andere Generation, ist das gut. Denn ihn werden die heutigen Entscheidungen mehr berühren als mich. Die ganzen Änderungen, die für 2009, 10, 11 kommen werden. Er wird die mehr erleben als ich, denn ich werde dann schon fast am Ende meiner Karriere sein. Und ich will ihm auch helfen, dass die Tour gut strukturiert ist, wenn ich das Spiel verlasse und er weitermacht.»
My translation:
Q: There’s perhaps never been such a good relationship between the world number one and the number two like nowadays between you and Rafael Nadal. Is there maybe the will to try things out together, to jointly put some pressure on certain issues like for example the controversial Round-Robin system?

Federer: not really. It’s good that we talk together and that we discuss the problems on tour. I’m excited for him because he’s so young. When I was so young, nobody would normally ask for my opinion because my ranking was much worse. He’s pushed into this situation. And maybe he can lean a bit on me because I’m a bit older, almost another generation. All the changes, those that will take place in 2009, 10, 11, will no longer apply to me because by that time, I will be near the end of my career. But I want to help him to make sure that the tour is well structured when I leave the game and he continues.
Source: http://www.aachener-zeitung.de/sixcms/detail.php?template=az_detail&id=159576&_wo=Sport:Aktuell

Yappa
03-22-2007, 02:47 PM
Isn't the DTB the biggest Tennis organization worldwide? Normally I'd think that it's the USTA, but I think I read that somewhere.

Anyways, the DTB just doesn't want to abandon the Rothenbaum Stadium. Of course I'd love them to have a Masters Series event instead of Paris Bercy in Hamburgs Color Line Arena since Hamburg is still the only german candidate.

Stensland
03-22-2007, 02:51 PM
Isn't the DTB the biggest Tennis organization worldwide?

Anyways, the DTB just doesn't want to abandon the Rothenbaum Stadium. Of course I'd love them to have a Masters Series event instead of Paris Bercy in Hamburs Color Line Arena.

i don't know about the size of the dtb (wahrscheinlich vertust du dich aber mit dem dFb, dem größten sportverband der welt ;) ), but i guess, if true, that most of the players play it as a hobby rather than aiming at professional level.

well, colorline arena might work as well. considering arenas, we're fully equipped. :)

*edit: and why would hamburg be the "only german candidate"? where'd you get that from?

Castafiore
03-22-2007, 02:53 PM
Clay is a specialist surface but as it stands, there are tournaments throughout the year, 3 Masters Series events and a Grand Slam. Grass is the other specialist surface but has just five weeks of tournaments and one Grand Slam. At least virtually all players can play on hard courts. For too long clay courters have had it too easy and to be honest it's quite funny to see them panic.
Currently 3 Master Series events but that's just it in case you didn't read the article: it's going to change.


Furthermore, I think that quite a few of those clay courters put in more effort to try and learn to play the game well away from clay than quite a few of those hardcourters on clay.
To move around on clay requires skill and experience. To try and learn how to move well on clay for example where you need to be able to slide takes some doing. How many hard court specialists have problems with timing for example when they have to run on clay?
In the opposite direction, when you're used to sliding, it takes time and effort to learn how to move properly on a non-clay surface.


Once again, suppose they reduce the calendar to 1 clay court TMS against no grass court TMS and the rest on HC and carpet. That puts the schedule out of balance even more than it is now IMO.
I would love to see the reaction of some of those hardcourt specialists if the situation were reverse: 1 HC TMS, no grass and the rest on clay + 2 slams on clay, one on grass and 1 on HC.

Yappa
03-22-2007, 02:58 PM
Nope, I am pretty sure that what I read, wasn't about the german football association. But yeah, of course it's about hobby players. But nevertheless I am wondering if we really have that many. If that's the case then it's even more saddening that we don't get to see the Masters Series on TV.

OT:
German Pay TV channel Premiere acquired the TV rights for Munich. It won't be shown on Free TV anymore (Seems that Bayerischer Rundfunk lost interest). Such a small tourney won't lead me to pay for a subscription though. If they at least offered full live coverage of Hamburg. But of course Munich is probably a lot cheaper.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 03:01 PM
Currently 3 Master Series events but that's just it in case you didn't read the article: it's going to change.


Furthermore, I think that quite a few of those clay courters put in more effort to try and learn to play the game well away from clay than quite a few of those hardcourters on clay.
To move around on clay requires skill and experience. To try and learn how to move well on a hard court for example where you can't slide takes some doing. How many hard court specialists have problems with timing for example when they have to run on clay?

Once again, suppose they reduce the calendar to 1 clay court TMS against no grass court TMS and the rest on HC and carpet. I would love to see the reaction of some of those hardcourt specialists if the situation were 1 HC TMS, no grass and the rest on clay + 2 slams on clay, one on grass and 1 on HC.

Stating the obvious is lost on some people. The way these people make out that there is only clay events on tour, look at how calendar is, there is only a small specific section where there are only clay events available.

When they play in Latin America, the others can play in Europe, Dubai or the US outdoors and indoors. There is the grass season of course, then after that with the summer clay events in Europe, there are hardcourt events in the North America, after Bucharest, then there are no clay events.

So put that all together, it's the tired argument about claycourt tennis getting a free ride, when the facts show otherwise and it's not like the best 5 results have to come from the 1 surface.

Saumon
03-22-2007, 03:01 PM
The clay courters should stop complaining and learn to play on other surfaces. There are virtually clay tournaments from February until September if players want to play on that.

this is :bs: Players want to earn points. There are 2 types of points: the points from the GS and MS that are ALWAYS counted because they are mandatory events and the points of the best other 5 tournaments. If they reduce to one or two the number of claycourt masters series it will reduce the number of claycourt points the players can possibly earn, no matter how many small claycourt tournaments they play. It's easy to understand, really. :)

Stensland
03-22-2007, 03:05 PM
Nope, I am pretty sure that what I read, wasn't about the german football association. But yeah, of course it's about hobby players. But nevertheless I am wondering if we really have that many. If that's the case then it's even more saddening that we don't get to see the Masters Series on TV.

OT:
German Pay TV channel Premiere acquired the TV rights for Munich. It won't be shown on Free TV anymore (Seems that Bayerischer Rundfunk lost interest). Such a small tourney won't lead me to pay for a subscription though. If they at least offered full live coverage of Hamburg. But of course Munich is probably a lot cheaper.

i doubt that the tournament in munich will be a success on premiere; these days tennis just doesn't get the audience in germany. especially munich, where even guys like rochus are seeded 5th or something :o ...

i'd love to kick munich out of the calendar and therefor keep hamburg or another tms, that's a sacrifice i'd love to make. hamburg does usually get broadcasted, doesn't it? ndr normally shows something, though i don't know about the early rounds.

at least the wtc in dusseldorf is shown, god bless the wdr...:worship: ;)

Yappa
03-22-2007, 03:12 PM
Yes, Hamburg will be shown on DSF, but the coverage, considering that this is all we get, be it Free TV or Pay TV, is again pretty miserable.

Mon 16- 18:30
Tue 16- 17:30
Wed 16- 18:30
Thu 16- 18;30
Fri 16- 18:30
Sat 13- 15:00
Sun 15-16:30

And don't expect "not before times".

NDR and the DTB aren't on good terms since the DTB gave exclusive radio broadcast rights to the local radio station "Radio Hamburg".

There were talks with german Pay TV channel Arena, but it looks like they wanted to have exclusive coverage without any Free TV broadcast, and of course that is not something what we as Tennis Fans want to have. Not a good way to promote a sport by showing the biggest tourney on Pay TV only.

Imagine Wimbledon only shown on Sky. That would never happen, I guess.

scoobs
03-22-2007, 03:16 PM
If they go down to 8 TMS tournaments then I would hope and expect they will increase the optionals accordingly so your best 6 results usually count.

If they did this, then there's a chance most clay courters would actually benefit. Remember that the more mandatory tournaments that count, the less flexibility there is for you to make use of the results in options. For example, currently, if you earn, say 5 points from a R1 loss in Hamburg, that has to count, even if you have a 6th best optional of 50 points that aren't counted. If they went down to 8 TMS and 6 optionals counting, then you're 45 points better off than you would be. This is offset by there being less overall clay points available of course.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 03:18 PM
scoobs, you expect a commonsense solution from the ATP?

scoobs
03-22-2007, 03:19 PM
scoobs, you expect a commonsense solution from the ATP?
I'm a hopeless optimist, aren't I? :)

jayjay
03-22-2007, 03:22 PM
The clay courters should stop complaining and learn to play on other surfaces. There are virtually clay tournaments from February until September if players want to play on that.

Hamburg should go because it always produces poor crowds and the conditions are not good.

Clay is a specialist surface but as it stands, there are tournaments throughout the year, 3 Masters Series events and a Grand Slam. Grass is the other specialist surface but has just five weeks of tournaments and one Grand Slam. At least virtually all players can play on hard courts. For too long clay courters have had it too easy and to be honest it's quite funny to see them panic.

I'll have to repeat, over the season there are 32 events on Hard (22 outdoor/10 indoor) and 24 on clay.

Are you suggesting that the likes of Nadal and Robredo can't play on Hard? That would be strange given that Nadal has just won Indian Wells (his 3rd Masters title on Hard - 2 outdoor/1 indoor) and Robredo has had decent results on Hard court too.

As was evidenced in another thread, clay courters of this current generation have far greater success transitioning to hard than those who prefer hard have transitioned to clay.

How many of the more recent top clay court players have been found wanting on hard? Not many. Nadal's record I just spoke of, Juan Carlos Ferrero made a USO F, AO SF and other success in Masters events, even Guillermo Coria not blessed with great power or a biting serve was still good enough to make a Masters F and 2 USO QF's. Tommy Robredo can hold his own against most players on hard (bar Roger Federer), David Ferrer likewise.

Pretty much the only recently successful clay courter who you could evidence as not being able to succeed on hard would be Gaston Gaudio.

So your assertion that "clay courters have been having it their own way" should actually read as - current clay courters have far more rounded games and have been able to achieve good results away from clay aswell as on clay, thus their high levels of success and rankings.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 03:26 PM
I'm a hopeless optimist, aren't I? :)

Yes, someone has to be.

Black Adam
03-22-2007, 03:27 PM
After Nadal has just stomped him into shit on his most successful surface, he must have shut up for now..
He said that last year and do you really think that Hardcourt season is only three weeks long? Use your brain, he is talking about the grass season.

Yappa
03-22-2007, 03:32 PM
*edit: and why would hamburg be the "only german candidate"? where'd you get that from?

Just noticed your edit.

Up to now in all articles I read (be it the DTB, tennismagazin, etc.) there was always only the mention of a possible indoor tourney in the Color Line Arena. So to me it looks like there won't be any other candidate.

fabolous
03-22-2007, 03:33 PM
i don't expect a commonsense solution. i expect a $$$$$$$$$$ solution.

besides that, it's funny that there are about one million different suggestions how the calendar should look and i'm sure de villiers will find the worst one.

Stensland
03-22-2007, 03:39 PM
Just noticed your edit.

Up to now in all articles I read (be it the DTB, tennismagazin, etc.) there was always only the mention of a possible indoor tourney in the Color Line Arena. So to me it looks like there won't be any other candidate.

makes me go hmmm...i don't get why cities like frankfurt or stuttgart (who are expanding their facilities btw; just checked wikipedia) aren't considered worthy alternatives. can't be that hard to build a one-week-event from scratch. we're not brazil or argentina (no offense!), so that should be possible.

anyways, i guess another bobbele has to come along; otherwise germany will be tennis-free country mid-term. with haas retiring in 09, kiefer not keeping up after his injury and guys like mayer never breaking through, the likelihood for germany not to have a major event by 2010 is staggering... :rolleyes:

Stensland
03-22-2007, 03:41 PM
i don't expect a commonsense solution. i expect a $$$$$$$$$$ solution.


if it was that easy, he'd have to kick out ALL south american tourneys, palermo, umag, bucharest and many others.

fabolous
03-22-2007, 03:44 PM
if it was that easy, he'd have to kick out ALL south american tourneys, palermo, umag, bucharest and many others.
ok it will not be THAT bad ;)


(hier übrigens ein link, wo das mit dem größten verband der welt drinsteht: http://www.tennismagazin.de/nncs/tennis/2007/03/19/5951000000.html)

Yappa
03-22-2007, 03:49 PM
Haas retires in 09? Did he really say that?

Stensland
03-22-2007, 03:51 PM
Haas retires in 09? Did he really say that?

well, he'll be 32 by april 2010, i don't expect him to do the agassi... ;)

Yappa
03-22-2007, 03:54 PM
So the answer is "No, he didn't". *phew*
Hey, who knows how long he'll play. We don't have any other good player, so I hope he'll continue as long as possible. :D

Stensland
03-22-2007, 03:58 PM
So the answer is "No, he didn't". *phew*
Hey, who knows how long he'll play. We don't have any other good player, so I hope he'll continue as long as possible. :D

did you edit your posting, the one with "did he say that"? i didn't read it before, sorry. no, he didn't say it, but i really don't think he's gonna play til the mid-30s.

and yep, you're right, apert from tommy, german tennis pretty much is a desert.

and kicking that last remaining tms out wouldn't necessarily jumpstart future generations...:sad:

GlennMirnyi
03-22-2007, 04:48 PM
The ATP is trying to destroy tennis. If it's up to Mr. Disney, tennis will only be played in North America on hard courts. The draws will feature only the top 8 singles players in the world who will play in round robin events. And of course, the "top 8" will be selected by Mr. Disney himself.

If they cut two of the three clay court Masters Series, they need to just get rid of the Masters Series events period. Clay is the other "major" surface besides hardcourt, and if they do this, they're going to relegate it to the French Open and a few other small events. That would be very, very sad for me.

:haha: ATP already destroying tennis making all courts slow as hell.

Laykold cushion plus is the surface used in Miami. Are any of the other hard court tournaments played on this surface? I though IW was plexiplave and the summer HC events were decoturf. This brochure says more "texture" can be added to produce a slower court with a higher bounce.

http://www.sti-sports.com/mavista/export?docId=606&offline=true&filename=84225 Cushion Plus broch.pdf

Miami is probably the slowest HC in the circuit.

not so long ago Germany had an indoor TMS before Paris. It was replaced by Madrid. I think the attendance was not good enough. :o

Stupid commercial interests took the event to that Barbarian crowd and made it a joke with that slow surface.

Paris should be downgraded and make way for an indoor AMS in Germany, maybe in Frankfurt as Rrainer suggested. It is completely ridiculous for Paris or any city for that matter to host both a grand slam and a masters series event, while Germany deserves to retain a big tennis event.

Paris is the most decent TMS.





Again, I have nothing against clay. I'd accept even 4 TMS on clay, as long as the other tournaments had really fast courts, not this joke used nowadays. It was better in the yester times when the HC were really fast, carpet was really fast and clay was slower. That's how it should be.

Merton
03-22-2007, 06:13 PM
After reading the reason for wanting to cut Monte Carlo, my outlook on the situation has changed. A lot of posters are considering this subject from an emotional standpoint. However, finances dictate these matters. If Monte Carlo is underperforming, then cut it...............unless, Nadal, Robredo and the others are willing to take a pay cut at Monte Carlo.

ATP is a businesss.................a poorly run one...........but a business. The financial bottomline is important.

I completely agree but one has to be careful calculating benefits of an event, and this does not include only the direct revenues and costs associated with the event. In this case Monte Carlo is essentially the starting tournament of the spring clay court season and as such it generates interest that carries over through the rest of the season. Furthermore, success at it is the best predictor for success at the French Open. In short, downgrading Monte Carlo generates negative externalities for the tour that are not easy to quantify in terms of revenue lost. If the event was losing money then the situation would be much more urgent, but since it apparently is not then I would imagine that being prudent is the most safe policy.

I never cease to be shocked by Mr. Disney's handling of his job responsibilities. Mr. Disney may be a "people person" but he lacks the skills for negotiation. Thus far, he has handled the Monte Carlo situation very poorly. He is always running his mouth before getting all his ducks in order. Another example of this was the Round Robin nonsense.

I get the impression this man got this job because he was friendly and engaging with the board. Strict attention was not paid to his qualifications. When a man, leading a global organization, gets backed into a corner, like an idiot, by a bunch of young players.........:shrug: Pink Slip??

In a well functioning organization the RR fiasco and Mr. Disney's handling of it would be more than enough to get him fired. However there are many constituencies in the ATP and it is hard to see Mr. Disney challenging them so far as to get his job in danger.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 06:23 PM
I completely agree but one has to be careful calculating benefits of an event, and this does not include only the direct revenues and costs associated with the event. In this case Monte Carlo is essentially the starting tournament of the spring clay court season and as such it generates interest that carries over through the rest of the season. Furthermore, success at it is the best predictor for success at the French Open. In short, downgrading Monte Carlo generates negative externalities for the tour that are not easy to quantify in terms of revenue lost. If the event was losing money then the situation would be much more urgent, but since it apparently is not then I would imagine that being prudent is the most safe policy.


Monte Carlo would still be around, just in a different form. It will still be there to spring off the clay season and it could still predict success (as if that was a true causation).
And what negative externalities for the tour are you talking about? A lot of players would like to see it stay (those who stormed out) and a lot of players are probably indifferent or frankly, are happy there is one less clay tournament. They don't do well on clay and are happy to see that there is less points for them to lose/not gain on clay.

ATP is a for-profit non-profit. Not bringing in much is treated quite similarly to losing money, especially if they perceive that there are ways in which replacing/modifying Monte Carlo could actually increase revenues.

Castafiore
03-22-2007, 06:27 PM
Monte Carlo would still be around, just in a different form.
Less ranking points to gain in Monte Carlo and in Hamburg when the TMS title is stripped.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 06:29 PM
Less ranking points to gain in Monte Carlo and in Hamburg when the TMS title is stripped.

I know (and smaller payout). This is why it would be around, but in a different form.

Are people here aware that the plans to scrap/modify/change Monte Carlo began several years ago, with Miles? As much as we villify de Villiers, and he has earned that, this discussion began under a similar guise in the 1990s.

Merton
03-22-2007, 06:48 PM
Monte Carlo would still be around, just in a different form. It will still be there to spring off the clay season and it could still predict success (as if that was a true causation).

Who talked about causation? The statement I made is about correlation and I assume that you know that I know the difference. Try these potential predictors: Winning % on clay, lagged winning % on clay, ranking, ATP race ranking, clay-only-race ranking, alternative clay tournaments performance, lagged RG performance. Monte Carlo success performs better so for example if you were in the business of predicting the RG champion that is something that you would look at.

And what negative externalities for the tour are you talking about? A lot of players would like to see it stay (those who stormed out) and a lot of players are probably indifferent or frankly, are happy there is one less clay tournament. They don't do well on clay and are happy to see that there is less points for them to lose/not gain on clay.

Suppose for example that the ATP erases the entire masters series category and instead assigns points in a pro-rata basis, according to the revenues generated. I guess that might maximize ATP revenues (assuming that they can do it, they might be binded by contracts) bur do you think it would be a good idea? There is an appeal for an event generating automatic entry for the best players and this carries spil-over effects. Of course this idea is not testable, if the ATP does erase the Monte Carlo status we will see the effects.

ATP is a for-profit non-profit. Not bringing in much is treated quite similarly to losing money, especially if they perceive that there are ways in which replacing/modifying Monte Carlo could actually increase revenues.

So introducing a masters series event in Madrid might indeed increase revenues. Would that be a good thing? It would certainly be good for Tiriac and the Madrid tennis fans. Would it be that great for Barcelona and the rest of the clay court season? We might soon find out.

zadle69
03-22-2007, 06:49 PM
who thinks there should be more fines and suspensions in tennis? I think if you walkout of a mandatory meeting you should be fined or face a suspension. There are ways of expressing your point. These players want to be pampered and have their ways but the bottom line is the bottom line. They are making money and having their endorsement. When I look at players like Borg and others, they played 5 set matches most tournaments. They showed up and played the game. I think with all the endorsement deals and other moneys out there the new players should really not complain as much. also they should realize they have it easier than people who were before them. That is my point. They need to show respect to Mr. Disney while he is the front man for the ATP.

t0x
03-22-2007, 06:53 PM
Nooo don't kill of MC!!! I love that tournament!

IMO:-
Kill Canada
Kill Paris
Kill Hamburg

Upgrade Queens or Halle
Make Shanghai a TMS

Of course they can't keep everybody happy.... but we really need a grass TMS, and everybody is keen on giving China a TMS too. Also they want to chop it down to 8 so I guess that's what I'd do.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 06:56 PM
who thinks there should be more fines and suspensions in tennis? I think if you walkout of a mandatory meeting you should be fined or face a suspension. There are ways of expressing your point. These players want to be pampered and have their ways but the bottom line is the bottom line. They are making money and having their endorsement. When I look at players like Borg and others, they played 5 set matches most tournaments. They showed up and played the game. I think with all the endorsement deals and other moneys out there the new players should really not complain as much. also they should realize they have it easier than people who were before them. That is my point. They need to show respect to Mr. Disney while he is the front man for the ATP.

How quickly do people forget.

People look at Borg as a saint today, but way back then he had many run-ins with the tennis powers over his refusal to play at the Aussie Open and penchant for taking three month vacations inclusive. In 1981 he skipped pretty much everything except for the three majors (ironically, he showed up for his 'favorite' Monte Carlo). Borg definitely handled himself with class, but under stricter rules he would have been kicked out of tennis before you could say 'jackrabbit'.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 06:58 PM
Who talked about causation? The statement I made is about correlation and I assume that you know that I know the difference.
If you know the difference, then I am not clear why you said that this correlation will "predict" success. You might also know that "predict" from correlation is like another kind of prediction (a guess).
I did not see anything about winning %on clay, and a whole host of other measures, I only saw (because that in fact is what you wrote) that MC should stay because winning in MC would predict success in Paris.

There is an appeal for an event generating automatic entry for the best players and this carries spil-over effects. Of course this idea is not testable, if the ATP does erase the Monte Carlo status we will see the effects.
Are you missing the point? Monte Carlo is not going to be erased, it is going to exist in a different form. There will still be automatic entry for the highest ranked player. The ATP wants to change its form to one in which there is greater revenue for the A.T.P (so they think).

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:04 PM
If you know the difference, then I am not clear why you said that this correlation will "predict" success. You might also know that "predict" from correlation is like another kind of prediction (a guess).
I did not see anything about winning %on clay, and a whole host of other measures, I only saw (because that in fact is what you wrote) that MC should stay because winning in MC would predict success in Paris.


Are you missing the point? Monte Carlo is not going to be erased, it is going to exist in a different form. There will still be automatic entry for the highest ranked player. The ATP wants to change its form to one in which there is greater revenue for the A.T.P (so they think).

Dude, read his post again.

A correlation suggests a relationship (a likeness) between two factors. Common wisdom suggests that there is a correlation between results at Monte Carlo and the French (and we know that the clay surface is virtually identical). I can't back this up, this is the argument brought forward. He is saying that the Monte Carlo result would therefore suggest the potential RG result.

Secondly, he said nothing about erasing Monte Carlo as a whole but erasing "the status."

Sorry to butt in - pet peeve.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:07 PM
How quickly do people forget.

People look at Borg as a saint today, but way back then he had many run-ins with the tennis powers over his refusal to play at the Aussie Open and penchant for taking three month vacations inclusive. In 1981 he skipped pretty much everything except for the three majors (ironically, he showed up for his 'favorite' Monte Carlo). Borg definitely handled himself with class, but under stricter rules he would have been kicked out of tennis before you could say 'jackrabbit'.

Borg was a mercenary and loved playing exhos. As for the AO, once he lost the US Open, he didn't bother with it. At the same time it doesn't help when the players and these organising aren't anywhere near on the same page.

This was written in 1979, it's still true.

http://soundoftennis.net/cgi-bin/soundoftennis.pl?A=ViewArchive&ID=7

Superstars and tennis administrators clash again
by Richard Evans

“What we have here”, drawled the prison warden in the movie Cool Hand Luke, “is a failure to communicate”.

You can say that again for professional tennis in 1979. Only six years after the last dust up when the ATP boycotted Wimbledon, the game’s administrators and players seem, once again, to be talking a different language.

The top five players in the world, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe , Guillermo Vilas and Vitas Gerulaitis, have all refused to sign the form committing them to the rules for the 1979 Colgate Grand Prix as drawn up by the Pro Council – the tripartite body which governs the pro game.

Why? The real clue to the problem appeared in a sad little press release issued by the pro council during the Masters. In putting back the commitment date for Grand Prix signing to March 5, it admitted to “problems of communications with leading players.”

I know it is very boring to get into the “I told you so” routine, but the fact is that I have been trying to impress this point upon the powers that be for at least three years. If you don’t communicate with people on a regular basis and establish a proper bond of trust and understanding, you are not going to enlist their cooperation when you have a problem.

And the sad fact is that there is no trust and no understanding between today’s Top Five and the game’s top brass. Tragically that includes the executive staff of the Association of Tennis Professionals – a body that was originally set up to give the players their own voice in the game. Now many players view the ATP in much the same way as their predecessors regarded the ITF back in the sixties – with suspicion and disdain.

The fact that not one of the world’s top five is a member of the ATP obviously weakens that organization’s position considerably. However I will discuss the problem in a later article.

Of more immediate importance is the fact that, according to the latest statement from the office of ITF Secretary David Gray, a pragmatic and sensible man under normal circumstances, the pro council are holding fast to their insistence on all five superstars signing by March 5. “The position is quite clear”, Gray has been quoted as saying, “If players like Borg, Connors, Vilas, McEnroe and Gerulaitis refuse to sign they will be unable to play in any of the Grand Prix events – and that includes Wimbledon, Paris and the U.S. Open”.

Now isn’t that nice? Even though I don’t believe for a moment we are all so damned foolish as to let that happen, the very fact that Wimbledon and other Grand Prix events is once again being threatened by politics is exasperating.

Why won’t people realize that each new generation has to be dealt with on its own terms? There is no use in telling Vilas and McEnroe that they are rich because Rosewall, Hoad and Laver kept the pro game alive playing one night stands on crumpled canvas in half empty stadiums. They may say “Thank you” but what else are they supposed to do? Who amongst us refuses to make use of a better contract or a modernized piece of equipment just because our parents had it tougher?

Nor is it any good preaching to them about the good of the game when they’ve been given no feel for what the sport is all about. Pro tennis isn’t just about what happens on court.

It is about the atmosphere surrounding the matches; the history, the tradition, and the characters whose special brand of individualism have given tennis its flavor.

That kind of feeling cannot be passed on to a younger generation if people won’t communicate.

During the WCT World of Doubles in London last month, John McEnroe said, “Bob Briner keeps telling us what to do, but I’ve never met the man.” That has to be rectified now, but I suspect it’s too late.


To my knowledge none of the administrators who have served on the pro council over the past three years have ever socialized in a meaningful way with any of the top players who are now rebelling against their authority – and that includes two of the ATP representatives, Briner and Pierre Darmon.

“They just hand out orders and expect us to do whatever they say without question,” Borg told me recently. “Maybe if they came to us a little sooner and talked it over it would be easier. But every year the rules are different; every year they come up with some new idea and it never works properly.”

The rules this year call for each player to give the pro council the authority to designate him for six tournaments during the year.

That in itself is not an unreasonable request, nor are the top five suggesting it is. But they are suggesting it could all have been worked out on a more amicable basis whereby most of the leading players were designated to events that fitted more or less into their planned schedule for the year.

Pro council officials maintain that attempts were made to do that. They obviously failed. In addition top players were incensed by the ridiculous incentive of 175 Grand Prix points offered to any player who signed before the original January deadline.

“That’s a bribe”, snorted McEnroe. Whatever name you wish to pin on it. It was the act of men who were so unsure of their ability to govern that they felt it necessary to hand out candy bars with the medicine.

The tough facts of the matter are that superstar millionaires don’t do anything for candy. They do things you ask of them because they respect you and understand what you are trying to achieve.

Until the executives of the game realize that, we are all going to be down there in that ditch with Paul Newman, with the warden leering down at us, digging frantically for solutions which might even confound Cool Hand Luke.

Merton
03-22-2007, 07:12 PM
If you know the difference, then I am not clear why you said that this correlation will "predict" success. You might also know that "predict" from correlation is like another kind of prediction (a guess).
I did not see anything about winning %on clay, and a whole host of other measures, I only saw (because that in fact is what you wrote) that MC should stay because winning in MC would predict success in Paris.

There are guesses that are better than others. The winner of Monte Carlo is the best guess that I can come with if you ask me who I predict to win in Paris. If you ask me, this is something valuable that I don't know if it would still hold without Monte Carlo being a masters series event.

Are you missing the point? Monte Carlo is not going to be erased, it is going to exist in a different form. There will still be automatic entry for the highest ranked player. The ATP wants to change its form to one in which there is greater revenue for the A.T.P (so they think).

No, I don't miss the point. So do you advocate abolishing all AMS tournaments and having them bid up for points? That would surely increase revenues for the ATP.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:14 PM
“The position is quite clear”, Gray has been quoted as saying, “If players like Borg, Connors, Vilas, McEnroe and Gerulaitis refuse to sign they will be unable to play in any of the Grand Prix events – and that includes Wimbledon, Paris and the U.S. Open”.

This is one of the driving forces behind Borg's retirement and his overall disenchantment with the business of tennis. Everyone brings up McEnroe; few talk about this.

Those certainly weren't the golden days. We're still waiting for them, I guess.

Thanks for the article.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 07:17 PM
Dude, read his post again.

A correlation suggests a relationship between two factors. Common wisdom suggests that there is a correlation between results at Monte Carlo and the French (and we know that the clay surface is virtually identical). I can't back this up, this is the argument brought forward. He is saying that the Monte Carlo result would therefore suggest the potential RG result.



Dude,
We are talking about subtle points in a language (Econometrics) that you may or may not be familiar with. I believe his statement was "Furthermore, success at it is the best predictor for success at the French Open."
This is correlation not causation. He knows what I'm talking about.
Being from Spain is most highly correlated with winning in Paris than being from anywhere else. This is why Robredo is going to win this year. Correlation, but not causation.

Merton
03-22-2007, 07:17 PM
Thanks for the article GWH. The more things change the more they remain the same.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:17 PM
This is one of the driving forces behind Borg's retirement and his overall disenchantment with the business of tennis. Everyone brings up McEnroe; few talk about this.

Those certainly weren't the golden days. We're still waiting for them, I guess.

Thanks for the article.

Those points I highlighted are still relevant to what's going on at the moment. Change of course can work, but it should never be for the sake of it.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:18 PM
Dude,
We are talking about subtle points in a language (Econometrics) that you may or may not be familiar with. I believe his statement was "Furthermore, success at it is the best predictor for success at the French Open."
This is correlation not causation. He knows what I'm talking about.

That's not causation and the poster denies ever stating that it is.

The result in Monte Carlo does not 'cause' the outcome of the French Open. Nobody would be so stupid to argue causation. He certainly isn't.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:21 PM
Those points I highlighted are still relevant to what's going on at the moment. Change of course can work, but it should never be for the sake of it.

Agreed. And it is very important to mention that change for the sake of purely maximizing revenue alienates players and fans alike - players like Bjorn Borg who could've been playing into their 30s if they were treated with a bit more respect.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:21 PM
That's not causation. What did they teach you in school?

The result in Monte Carlo does not 'cause' the outcome of the French Open. Nobody would be so stupid to argue causation. He certainly isn't.

Correlation, in the meantime, suggests comparable results as an outcome.

I started a thread tracking the 3 TMS winners in relation to RG success and Monte Carlo is a clear winner. It's still an excellent event and anyone who gives a toss about RG plays there and there is a reason as to why it's a big event.

Merton makes his point about Barcelona, that is one of the oldest events and with Bruguera and the guys coming through they even made it stronger and it usually has better fields than Hamburg and the Monte Carlo downgrading impacting negatively on Barcelona wouldn't surprise.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:24 PM
I started a thread tracking the 3 TMS winners in relation to RG success and Monte Carlo is a clear winner. It's still an excellent event and anyone who gives a toss about RG plays there and there is a reason as to why it's a big event.

Merton makes his point about Barcelona, that is one of the oldest events and with Bruguera and the guys coming through they even made it stronger and it usually has better fields than Hamburg and the Monte Carlo downgrading impacting negatively on Barcelona wouldn't surprise.

Thanks for the clarification.

For the record, the quoted post was edited by me after an initial misinterpretation of R. Federer's post.

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:26 PM
Thanks for the clarification.

For the record, the quoted post was edited by me after an initial misinterpretation of R. Federer's post.

I might bump it later, but the results are quite clear as to which TMS event is the best lead up to RG success.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:29 PM
I might bump it later, but the results are quite clear as to which TMS event is the best lead up to RG success.

Clearly there's an established causal relationship between Roland Garros and Hamburg.:p

1. Robredo
2. Borg
3. Lendl
4. Wilander
5. Kuerten
6. Muster
7. Nadal

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 07:36 PM
There are guesses that are better than others. The winner of Monte Carlo is the best guess that I can come with if you ask me who I predict to win in Paris. If you ask me, this is something valuable that I don't know if it would still hold without Monte Carlo being a masters series event.
Yes I agree that it is just a guess.

No, I don't miss the point. So do you advocate abolishing all AMS tournaments and having them bid up for points? That would surely increase revenues for the ATP.[/

Hey, I am not supporting the ATP in its wise decisions. But I am cognizant of the fact that their behavior is perfectly compatible with a for-profit business. They have contracts btw with these places so abolishing them is not an option. However, when the contracts come up for renewal under-performing (in the ATP's revenue definition of this) tournaments will surely get a second look. The other TMSs are evidently doing very well -- so how do you know that bidding up would not lead to the same set of TMS (minus MC) anyway?

Monte Carlo has been on the radar for TMS removal for (I think) revenue reasons for a while. It is not that one this has come up abruptly. It is one thing to say that this is a good thing by ATP, if there is anyone saying that, but it is a separate thing entirely to point out that given what the new ATP's goals are, it is completely logical with such ideas.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:37 PM
Yes I agree that it is just a guess.

...

I started a thread tracking the 3 TMS winners in relation to RG success and Monte Carlo is a clear winner. It's still an excellent event and anyone who gives a toss about RG plays there and there is a reason as to why it's a big event.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 07:43 PM
For the record, the quoted post was edited by me after an initial misinterpretation of R. Federer's post.

Just as well. I was about to ask you what type of reading comprehension they taught you in school.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:45 PM
Just as well. I was about to ask you what type of reading comprehension they taught you in school.

We set our clocks by the Greenwich time zone and wore funny hats.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 07:48 PM
We set our clocks by the Greenwich time zone and wore funny hats.

Now is this the place pronounced Grenich? Or as we say, Green Witch?

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:49 PM
Now is this the place pronounced Grenich? Or as we say, Green Witch?

I'm Russian by nationality, so we said 'Green-Veech'.

TennisLurker
03-22-2007, 08:09 PM
This is one of the driving forces behind Borg's retirement and his overall disenchantment with the business of tennis. Everyone brings up McEnroe; few talk about this.

Those certainly weren't the golden days. We're still waiting for them, I guess.

Thanks for the article.

The most recent example I an think of something similar, is Kimiko Date retiring in 1996, still young, and in her best year, because the WTA changed the ranking system from one based in average results, to the one they have now.

Gulliver
03-22-2007, 08:14 PM
One has to look at this as part of the bigger picture (info from a poster on Bodo’s Blog): (Italics are added by me)

From 2009 there will be no IS Golds (currently Memphis, Rotterdam, Dubai, Acapulco, Barcelona, Stuttgart, Kitzbuhel, Tokyo, Vienna). Now we have 9 TMS and 9 IS Golds. (Adds up to 7 on clay, 6 on outdoor hard, 5 indoor).


From 2009 we will have 8 Masters including the Asian event, and ten "Open 500" tourneys (the winner gets 500 points) plus the remainder being "Open 250" events - an unspecified number, (the winner gets 250 points).

To cut a long story short, this makes the lower-tier ATP events relatively less attractive overall points-wise to the players, so any tourneys pushed down to Open 250 are losing out measurably.

From what I've gathered (and this was confirmed by someone over on Steve Tignor's blog) there is still an ongoing discussion about having the Madrid TMS effectively as part of a combined ATP/WTA event on clay, pre Roland Garros. Which may mean Rome TMS is not safe.

So, whatever happens, two current TMS get downgraded because of what is expected to be an Asian hardcourt event taking priority over them. The clay events are in the firing line - both Hamburg and Monte Carlo. If they get "Open 500" status, which will be a downgrade for them, and the current IS Golds, of which there are nine, are considered for the remaining nine places in the IS Gold series, it still means one current IS Gold gets downgraded. Unhappy tournament directors/sponsors, without a doubt.

The idea is that the TMS winners will get 1000 points, and the ATP hopes that the Slams will agree to double their Slam winner points to 2000.

Essentially this is all designed to make some tourneys disappear. I'm basing these comments on an interview I saw with deV recently, and some additional research into the ATP's plans.

Points available: currently of the 9 ISG two offer 300 to the winner (Dubai and Barcelona) and the other seven 250 to the winner.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 08:19 PM
Thanks Gulliver for that article.

The players I guess may all be in consensus with the idea that the season should be shorter. Balancing that with a reduction in certain tournaments and revenues and points and wins, well it all seemed much easier when people talked about shortening the season in abstract.

FluffyYellowBall
03-22-2007, 08:25 PM
is that article stating that Memphis, Rotterdam, Dubai, Acapulco, Barcelona, Stuttgart, Kitzbuhel, Tokyo, Vienna will be cancelled or will be the only IS gold starting from 09???

Its unacceptable that they cancel Monte Carlo:mad: :mad: Cancelling ANY masters series event is just beyond stupid:mad: This is the most frustrating thing Mr Disney has thought of after Round Robin:mad:

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 08:26 PM
is that article stating that Memphis, Rotterdam, Dubai, Acapulco, Barcelona, Stuttgart, Kitzbuhel, Tokyo, Vienna will be cancelled or will be the only IS gold starting from 09???

Its unacceptable that they cancel Monte Carlo:mad: :mad: Cancelling ANY masters series event is just beyond stupid:mad: This is the most frustrating thing Mr Disney has thought of after Round Robin:mad:

They will be renamed, the Open 250/Open 500.

I guess there will be corresponding changes in points/monies, the article seems to imply some stuff but nothing definitive.

Gulliver
03-22-2007, 08:32 PM
Well, Rome is going ahead with plans for 2009!

A NEW CENTRE COURT FOR 2009

The director general of Coni Servizi, Ernesto Albanese, has revealed details
of projects under study for the improvement of the Foro Italico tennis
complex. “For the new centre court we are studying two projects,” he said
during the press conference called to celebrate the sponsorship agreement
with Italy’s BNL bank. “In the next few days we will examine them together
with the competent authorities. The process is already underway and in the
summer of 2007, when the next tournament has drawn to a close, building work will begin on the new structure which we think will be ‘all-weather’: closed during the winter and open in summer. We have a very modern structure in mind, in line with the indications given by the International Federation, which we believe this tournament deserves. Work should last two years and before the 2009 event we plan to hand over the new stadium. For the 2008 event we will put together a temporary stadium, probably near today’s Marble Stadium or near the swimming pools.”

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 08:43 PM
Well, Rome is going ahead with plans for 2009!

If no grass TMS is instituted they could as well establish the Madrid masters on clay in place of Hamburg.

Unless of course a grass event is in the plans. Then it's a pickle.

I say the Spaniards can live with indoor tennis.

Mount Goddess
03-22-2007, 08:53 PM
oh I love a good fight and bitch. It's so much fun when the workers revoult against the leaders :devil: :devil: :devil:

It's pronounced Grenich. That's us slack English for you, can't be bothered to talk our own language right:p :p :p

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 08:58 PM
It's pronounced Grenich. That's us slack English for you, can't be bothered to talk our own language right:p :p :p

You mean speak our own language right.

Clara Bow
03-22-2007, 09:35 PM
If no grass TMS is instituted they could as well establish the Madrid masters on clay in place of Hamburg.

Unless of course a grass event is in the plans. Then it's a pickle.

I say the Spaniards can live with indoor tennis.

I still think it would be a shame if they went from three Masters levels clay to one. It sounds like they are not thinking of touching any of the hards- unless it is to make Madrid a clay but then they could eliminate all of the other three.

I do think it would be nice to add a grass. And I am all for going down to two clay if need be for that. But I don't like the idea of clay being the surface that is up for slaughter while outdoor/indoor hards are not really at all.

And no matter how often folks say hard court surfaces have been slowed- they are still hard. Clay is a different surface that requires different movement, etc.

Cervantes
03-22-2007, 09:52 PM
I wish there was a video of this on you tube, would be pretty funny to see De Villiers losing control of 'his team of stars'.

NicoFan
03-22-2007, 09:52 PM
Thanks gulliver for the info.

So basically the ATP is going to put the smaller tournaments out of business.

And make clay an irrelevant surface.

:mad:

uglyamerican
03-22-2007, 09:53 PM
I still think it would be a shame if they went from three Masters levels clay to one. It sounds like they are not thinking of touching any of the hards- unless it is to make Madrid a clay but then they could eliminate all of the other three.


If Disney touches any hard--it doesn't stay hard for long.

Jaap
03-22-2007, 09:56 PM
People that complained - Volandri, Montanes, Ramirez-Hidalgo, Almagro, Roitman, Di Mauro, Hernandez.

All these useless dirtballing mugs would be lost without the ranking points and money they get from clay court events.

Heres an idea, why don't you stop moonballing and start hitting the damn ball, then you might be able to live off the clay.

Fed=ATPTourkilla
03-22-2007, 09:58 PM
People that complained - Volandri, Montanes, Ramirez-Hidalgo, Almagro, Roitman, Di Mauro, Hernandez.

All these useless dirtballing mugs would be lost without the ranking points and money they get from clay court events.

Heres an idea, why don't you stop moonballing and start hitting the damn ball, then you might be able to live off the clay.

:haha:

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 09:59 PM
So basically the ATP is going to put the smaller tournaments out of business.

Well if the calendar had to be shortened, as players have seemed to want, it was always understood that some tournaments would have to go.

It is never going to be possible to please everyone when these changes take place. The US tournaments I have read are both great sources for revenue, but also aggressive. Couple that with the laidback attitude of many European tournament organizerse (and possibly less profits, although I am still waiting to see some numbers on this), this is the end result.

I am hoping for some followup after yesterday's meetings.

R.Federer
03-22-2007, 10:00 PM
If Disney touches any hard--it doesn't stay hard for long.

Is that what Blake said from personal intimate experiences in Vegas? :o

Mount Goddess
03-22-2007, 11:33 PM
You mean speak our own language right.
yeah:) :) :)

All_Slam_Andre
03-22-2007, 11:45 PM
Monte-Carlo will probably be downgraded to an IS 500 event to make way for the Madrid Masters on clay. If the players love Monte-Carlo so much hopefully they'll continue to sign up for in their droves. I also hope that Barcelona won't suffer to much with all these changes. I quite like this event. It has always gained strong fields over the years and is probably regarded by many players and fans as the 4th best clay tournament on the calendar ahead of Hamburg. It will be a big shame if gets completely overshadowed by the newly proposed Madrid tournament.

Merton
03-22-2007, 11:53 PM
People that complained - Volandri, Montanes, Ramirez-Hidalgo, Almagro, Roitman, Di Mauro, Hernandez.

All these useless dirtballing mugs would be lost without the ranking points and money they get from clay court events.

Heres an idea, why don't you stop moonballing and start hitting the damn ball, then you might be able to live off the clay.

:retard:

james_olympicman
03-23-2007, 01:11 AM
I think they should keep Monte Carlo as a masters, ditch hamburg as it is crap and they r always knackered after Rome.
Don't have a clay tourny in Madrid. Instead take tennis to Rio- it would be great!
If u wanna pull a masters it has to be a US one cause they have too many. Then they can make queens a masters so there is a proper warm up for Wimbledon.
The Spanish Indoors isnt great either.

R.Federer
03-23-2007, 04:39 AM
I think they should keep Monte Carlo as a masters, ditch hamburg as it is crap and they r always knackered after Rome. Don't have a clay tourny in Madrid. Instead take tennis to Rio- it would be great! If u wanna pull a masters it has to be a US one cause they have too many. Then they can make queens a masters so there is a proper warm up for Wimbledon.
The Spanish Indoors isnt great either.

It's hard to say why Hamburg has been less successful. Position in the calendar might play a role. If it appeared as the first tournament in the build up towards the French, it might have been much more successful and maybe Monte Carlo would have had less of the stars show up. By the time Hamburg has come around, players might be worn down, players might want to rest the week before the French.

Maybe if they experimented with changing the positions of the tournaments in the lineup they could get a better sense of what is working and what is not.

An option is to let Hamburg/MonteCarlo rotate their position as a TMS like Toronto/Montreal do instead of shelving one altogether.

Stensland
03-23-2007, 05:01 AM
It's hard to say why Hamburg has been less successful. Position in the calendar might play a role. If it appeared as the first tournament in the build up towards the French, it might have been much more successful and maybe Monte Carlo would have had less of the stars show up. By the time Hamburg has come around, players might be worn down, players might want to rest the week before the French.

Maybe if they experimented with changing the positions of the tournaments in the lineup they could get a better sense of what is working and what is not.

An option is to let Hamburg/MonteCarlo rotate their position as a TMS like Toronto/Montreal do instead of shelving one altogether.

i think the reason for hamburg's failure is much easier than you expect: we don't have top players who're likely to win this event, as simple as that. you don't get the people out to watch robredo vs. stepanek; you'll need someone like haas. and as long as there's no german player out there contending for the title (plus: clay's the worst for haas, kiefer etc.), this thing will fail.

but i really like the idea of rotating, that's news to me, good stuff! :)

how come nobody's ever brought that up?

Fingolfin
03-23-2007, 07:03 AM
Hey all, I'm fairly new to avid tennis following, and this might be a dumb question, but can anyone tell me why there isn't a masters' series on grass? The grass season is so short. It's like, clay clay clay clay clay, a small grass tournament, then Wimbledon, and bam, the grass season is over. Kinda stinks that the clay court specialists get all these Masters' series to get ranking points, while people who would benefit from the faster grass surfaces like Federer and Roddick get Wimbledon and that's pretty much it.

Clara Bow
03-23-2007, 07:16 AM
Hey all, I'm fairly new to avid tennis following, and this might be a dumb question, but can anyone tell me why there isn't a masters' series on grass? The grass season is so short. It's like, clay clay clay clay clay, a small grass tournament, then Wimbledon, and bam, the grass season is over. Kinda stinks that the clay court specialists get all these Masters' series to get ranking points, while people who would benefit from the faster grass surfaces like Federer and Roddick get Wimbledon and that's pretty much it.


As other folks have said- there are are a ton of tournaments on hard, Before you just bash the clay court players- realize that more tournies are played on hard than clay.

Yes- I agee there should be more faster suraces- but folks are under this illusion that there are more clay tournaments than anything else- and no- there are not.

And again- even if hard pays slow- clay and hard- shock horror!- are not the same surface.

A grass MS tournament would be good- but tell me how making it just one clay versus all of the rest of the Mastesr tournies hard would fix whatever you are complaining about?

Kalliopeia
03-23-2007, 11:05 AM
Kinda stinks that the clay court specialists get all these Masters' series to get ranking points, while people who would benefit from the faster grass surfaces like Federer and Roddick get Wimbledon and that's pretty much it.

Yeah, poor Roger. How's he supposed to get any points when there are so few grass tournaments?

FluffyYellowBall
03-23-2007, 01:14 PM
Why cant de villers just give definate suggestions?
Is this really gonna happen or do u think that changes can be made till 09?? I hope this deosnt happen. Any WHY monte carlo?? Y not Hamburg or some of the clay IS?? Oh wait, IS is also cancellled and cancelling Dubai is a VERY VERY bad idea. This tournament has the most potential to spread tennis in places other that north and south america and Europe. Monte Carlo is the BEST tms tournament. Not because of its surface but because of its place and atmosphere etc. Its brings tennis fans from switzerland france italy and more. This is not the way to control the shcedule.

The real question is if De villars well REALLY go on with these ideas and cancel Monte carlo. I hope the players do something about it becuase if its cancelled, i dont think its likely to come back..
:sad:

R.Federer
03-23-2007, 02:16 PM
but i really like the idea of rotating, that's news to me, good stuff! :)

how come nobody's ever brought that up?

Thank you :angel:
It's original to me. Thus, R.Federer (=Jamie) for ATP Chair.