EDITED: ATP Says Tennis Masters Series And Slams Will Double In Ranking Points [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

EDITED: ATP Says Tennis Masters Series And Slams Will Double In Ranking Points

tennisgal_001
04-10-2007, 05:26 PM
April 10, 2007

From tennis-x.com:

If the ATP, which governs the men’s tour, and the International Tennis Federation (ITF), which governs the four Grand Slam events, had become buddy-buddy over the last few years — even joint-sponsoring the year-ending Masters Cup — that love was lost this week when the ATP announced it would elevate its Masters Series events on its new 2009 calendar to the same ranking-points status as the Australian Open, Roland Garros, the French Open and the US Open.

Currently the Slam events receive double the points on the ATP-run rankings as the ATP’s Masters Series events. In March the ATP announced it was working with the ITF to elevate the ITF-run Davis Cup competition by offering ranking points for Davis Cup play. Now it appears ATP President Etienne de Villiers was merely throwing the ITF a bone ahead of what will be devastating news for the ITF, which holds the Grand Slam events far and above any “regular tour” events.

“The Masters 1000 events will be worth the same amount of points as the grand slams,” ATP spokesman Stephen Duckitt told The Age on Monday. “I haven’t heard anything as to what the reaction from the slams has been.”

========================================

April 12, 2007

"The ATP wishes to advise that reports circulating in some sections of the media reporting that from 2009 the Grand Slams will have the same points as ATP Masters events are completely incorrect. The ATP does intend to double the points scale for the Masters Events as part of its overall 2009 plan to best position and brand the ATP World Tour events. It will, however, double the points for a Grand Slam to maintain the current relationship between winners of a Slam and a Masters event -the correct figures to be awarded from the year 2009 are 2000 points for the winner of a Grand Slam and 1000 for a Masters tournament champion.

"It is regrettable that this has occurred at a time when the relationship between the Slams and the ATP has never been closer or better," said ATP Chairman and President, Etienne de Villiers. "The ATP regards the Grand Slams as the pillars of the professional game and would not do anything to diminish their status."
=========================================

P.S. Apologies for the late update.

Snowwy
04-10-2007, 05:29 PM
From tennis-x.com:

Wow, I really don't like how the rankings are projected to be in a few years :(

rofe
04-10-2007, 05:30 PM
I am stunned but not surprised. This is worse than RR. So they are making it best of 3 and elevating it to the same # of points as slams? :(

GlennMirnyi
04-10-2007, 05:30 PM
I hope ITF then makes the slams worth more. :lol:

Corswandt
04-10-2007, 05:31 PM
Expected news.

Since the ATP doesn't control the Slams, it builds its own competing circuit of big events, some of which (or all of which?) will follow the same 2-week, 128 player draw, mixed event format.

jazar
04-10-2007, 05:32 PM
stupid idea. why cant they stop meddling and realised that the game is better now than it will be once they have implemented the changes

Andre♥
04-10-2007, 05:32 PM
WHAT THE FUCK???

Toronto worthing as much as Wimbledon???

keqtqiadv
04-10-2007, 05:32 PM
:help:

CyBorg
04-10-2007, 05:32 PM
I quit.

See you on the cricket boards.

Stensland
04-10-2007, 05:33 PM
Wow, I really don't like how the rankings are projected to be in a few years :(

where are they? can you post a link? thanx.

Andre♥
04-10-2007, 05:34 PM
to the same ranking-points status as the Australian Open, Roland Garros, the French Open and the US Open.

LOL

Corswandt
04-10-2007, 05:35 PM
WHAT THE FUCK???

Toronto worthing as much as Wimbledon???

The Grand Slams make huge money, so the ATP believes that, if it just copies the Grand Slam format and makes the Masters 1000 (sounds like the title of a bad sci-fi TV series) events compulsory, it will have a sure fire hit.

Problem is, the Slams are huge because they're the Slams, not because they're compulsory, mixed, 2-week, 128 player draw events. As Adm. Cunningham said, "You can build ships, but you can't build a tradition".

AnnaK_4ever
04-10-2007, 05:35 PM
Aren't Slams supposed to be 2000-points events since 2009???

dijus
04-10-2007, 05:36 PM
:help: :o :help:

Pfloyd
04-10-2007, 05:37 PM
Wow.

This is the pinnacle of stupidity.

Yes, it may well be true that tennis is not the most popular sport in the world, but it has a more-than-decent fan base.

I don't know about what others think about tennis here, in terms of why they like it. For me, a big chunk of what makes tennis so special is in its tradition.

I love the sweat, the blood, the tears and the history that is embedded in each and every grandslam tournament, as well as master series.

Under this train of thought, being that Master Series are new in comparrison to Grandslams, it really sadens me to see the ATP messing around with something that already works quite fine, aka Grandslam point systems and the general yearly ranking.

This is an insult to this great sport and I hope the ATP gets real and learns not to mess with these things.

partygirl
04-10-2007, 05:38 PM
:haha:

CyBorg
04-10-2007, 05:38 PM
Aaaaah!

Bilbo
04-10-2007, 05:38 PM
:help: :help: :help: :help: :help:

Denaon
04-10-2007, 05:38 PM
:rolleyes: We need jayjay to make another petition :help:

tennisgal_001
04-10-2007, 05:38 PM
LOL

hehe good catch.

And so the hideousness that is the ATP board continues to ramble, truly shameful. You'd think they'd learn something, anything, from the Round Robin "experiment".

Loremaster
04-10-2007, 05:42 PM
Maybe MTF should raise a money from every poster and hire a hitman to take Mr.Disney down ??

CyBorg
04-10-2007, 05:43 PM
I smell a lawsuit by Wimbledon and maybe three more. Enjoy the lawyer fees, ATP.

tennisgal_001
04-10-2007, 05:43 PM
That and if you have more than four tournaments with the same mixed, two-week, 128-player formats and they're all the same point value, the value of each tournament under that format becomes diminished. What's the point of having a big, Slam-like tourney if there is a whole slew of other tourneys with the same format/draw/point value?

Exactly. Player turnover at the many 'big ones' will decrease and instead BOTH the Slams and the Masters will lose their essence and significance. Add to that, the whole point of the 2009 calendar is to make the season less strenuous for players. I don't see that happening with 4 Slams and 128-field draw Masters. It defeats the purpose in a way.

Bremen
04-10-2007, 05:45 PM
Is this some sort of late april fools joke? please tell me that it is. Please.

mangoes
04-10-2007, 05:45 PM
OH MY GOODNESS.........I swear, this man comes up with his ideas while sitting on the toilet.

Is there a problem with the present structure?? Mr. Disney needs to stop wasting time changing the things that work, and focus on the things that need enhancing.

For goodness sake, come up with a fucking, realistic, marketing plan to improve the popularity of the sport. Instead, time has to be spent re-educating committed tennis fans to all these silly changes instead of introducing newbies to the sport.

I get the distinct feeling that Mr. Disney is under the impression that the reason Tennis isn't popular, in places like the US, is because there is something wrong with the infrastructure of the sport. He couldn't be more wrong.

The other day, my sister wondered aloud as to who Mr. Disney fucked to get this job.................it's looking more and more doubtful he got this job on merit.

nobama
04-10-2007, 05:45 PM
Don't the players have any say in this? I can't imagine many (if any) would be in favor of this. It's bad enough that the WTA is demanding equal prize money in all the combined events in 2009, but now this? :o

nobama
04-10-2007, 05:48 PM
The other day, my sister wondered aloud as to who Mr. Disney fucked to get this job.................it's looking more and more doubtful he got this job on merit.Well remember where he came from.....nothing to do with sports. I'm :scratch: as to why they need to mess around with ranking points.....I wasn't aware there was a problem with the ranking system. :shrug:

prima donna
04-10-2007, 05:51 PM
Deplorable ....

Merton
04-10-2007, 05:53 PM
I don't believe the ATP is serious, this is just a firework that is not going to materialize. But why antagonize the ITF at this point?

Castafiore
04-10-2007, 05:54 PM
Okay...this can't be real. It just can't be.
:help: :banghead:

David Kenzie
04-10-2007, 06:00 PM
De Villiers knows he is getting the sack so why not just make the most ridiculous decisions just to make people talk about him ?

*Viva Chile*
04-10-2007, 06:00 PM
Mr. Disney must be buried alive :mad:

greatkingrat
04-10-2007, 06:04 PM
Just for interest, here is how the current ATP rankings would look if all Slam points were halved.


1 (-) Federer, Roger 5440
2 (-) Nadal, Rafael 3775
3 (-) Roddick, Andy 2365
4 (+2) Robredo, Tommy 2352.5
5 (-1) Davydenko, Nikolay 2347.5
6 (-1) Gonzalez, Fernando 2312.5
7 (-) Djokovic, Novak 2227.5
8 (-) Ljubicic, Ivan 2002.5
9 (+2) Murray, Andy 1897.5
10 (-1) Blake, James 1875
11 (-1) Haas, Tommy 1710
12 (-) Nalbandian, David 1450
13 (-) Ancic, Mario 1450
14 (+1) Gasquet, Richard 1450
15 (-1) Berdych, Tomas 1415
16 (-) Ferrer, David 1390
17 (-) Youzhny, Mikhail 1227.5
18 (+3) Ferrero, Juan Carlos 1120
19 (+1) Nieminen, Jarkko 1102.5
20 (+2) Chela, Juan Ignacio 1080
21 (-3) Baghdatis, Marcos 1037.5
22 (+6) Melzer, Jurgen 1025
23 (+6) Canas, Guillermo 1007
24 (+1) Hrbaty, Dominik 1003
25 (+5) Soderling, Robin 978
26 (+1) Safin, Marat 937.5
27 (-4) Tursunov, Dmitry 932.5
28 (-4) Fish, Mardy 929
29 (+2) Almagro, Nicolas 915
30 (+3) Calleri, Agustin 890.5
31 (-12) Hewitt, Lleyton 887.5
32 (-) Malisse, Xavier 875
33 (-7) Stepanek, Radek 870
34 (-) Moya, Carlos 832.5
35 (+2) Acasuso, Jose 827.5
36 (+3) Simon, Gilles 825
37 (-1) Wawrinka, Stanislas 760
38 (-3) Verdasco, Fernando 747.5
39 (-1) Rochus, Olivier 720
40 (+1) Mayer, Florian 715
41 (+8) Lee, Hyung-Taik 682.5
42 (+4) Ginepri, Robby 670
43 (+5) Henman, Tim 667.5
44 (+6) Clement, Arnaud 652.5
45 (+6) Vliegen, Kristof 650
46 (+7) Volandri, Filippo 647
47 (-3) Becker, Benjamin 646
48 (-5) Gaudio, Gaston 642.5
49 (-7) Benneteau, Julien 634.5
50 (+2) Monaco, Juan 632.5

amierin
04-10-2007, 06:05 PM
Let's not forget they're making clay court events almost worthless so the European(minus the Brits) and South American players are getting the royal shaft. The rankings are going to really be skewed after 2009.

Kitty de Sade
04-10-2007, 06:07 PM
It's official then, Armageddon is upon us. OH. MY. FLYING F***ING RICE KRISPIES TREATS....:fiery: I really need a stiff drink....

croat123
04-10-2007, 06:08 PM
:o

nobama
04-10-2007, 06:12 PM
Let's not forget they're making clay court events almost worthless so the European(minus the Brits) and South American players are getting the royal shaft.Really, how so? I though someone else did an analysis and posted here that the impact would be quite small. :shrug:

scoobs
04-10-2007, 06:16 PM
What an outrageous, ridiculous idea.

The idea the Paris Masters = Wimbledon in points value. Please. Someone needs to lie down in a dark room until this...abortion of a plan....is recognised for the lousy piece of incredible shit it is.

Won't somebody stop the madness?

amierin
04-10-2007, 06:18 PM
Isn't part of "Brave New World" removing two TMS clay events from MS status and that is why MC and Hamburg are suing the ATP for racketeering?

Burrow
04-10-2007, 06:21 PM
wow...marat you have to play well at bercy!!!!

reece
04-10-2007, 06:22 PM
Please, please say it isn't so. This is the worst yet of all the ridiculous changes being made to the game.

Metis
04-10-2007, 06:23 PM
I can't imagine the players/tournaments/fans agreeing with this...

Mateya
04-10-2007, 06:23 PM
:fiery: :smash:
Stop, ATP pleeease stooooooop! I hope they forget about this crap soon...

What more? :confused:

scoobs
04-10-2007, 06:23 PM
I can't imagine the players/tournaments/fans agreeing with this...
If they seriously plan to go ahead with this I will start some drama if nobody else will.

Burrow
04-10-2007, 06:26 PM
Mr. Disney must be buried alive :mad:

why do you call him that? Walt Disney was a highly respected man and an American icon.

Allez
04-10-2007, 06:29 PM
This has uncle Toni written all over it ;) Seriously heads need to roll. This is a ridiculous idea. These guys are making changes for the sake of change rather than letting the game evolve naturally. They want to be seen to be doing something. Anything. :mad:

gusman890
04-10-2007, 06:33 PM
wow, winning a masters = winning a GS?

are they pissed that the top players pull out or something?

you cant put wimbledon on the same level as toronto or rome.

rofe
04-10-2007, 06:35 PM
What they *should* be doing is increase their marketing budget, create programs to get more children interested in tennis and negotiate with TV broadcasters to get more coverage. That would be too complicated for morons like Mr. Disney and others to handle however.

Instead they will be slapped with lawsuit after lawsuit and say that all their budget is being used to deal with these lawsuits.

What a waste.

Pfloyd
04-10-2007, 06:35 PM
Mr. Disney is on coke.

decrepitude
04-10-2007, 06:39 PM
If they seriously plan to go ahead with this I will start some drama if nobody else will.

Count on my signature, scoobs.

What a completely ridiculous idea!

LocoPorElTenis
04-10-2007, 06:47 PM
Unfuckingbelievable. This is outrageous. RR is nothing compared with this utmost unreal crap :help:.

Yappa
04-10-2007, 06:47 PM
I can't imagine that a tourney calendar with the same points for GS tourneys and Masters Series events will actually ever happen. Maybe there are some other things which haven't been mentioned yet, I don't know.
Of course the Slams remain the most important tourneys due to their prestige, no matter how many points you can win, but it would be laughable for someone to get to play in the Year End Tourney only because he performed well in two Masters Series tourneys while totally sucking in the Slams.

The next logical step would be for Top 20 players to automatically qualify for Shanghai/London/whatever if they win a Masters Series 1000 tourney. ;)

CooCooCachoo
04-10-2007, 06:49 PM
OMG.

Are they trying to kill the sport's fans?

CooCooCachoo
04-10-2007, 06:50 PM
Mr. Disney is on coke.

I am fearing it's even stronger.

Mechlan
04-10-2007, 06:51 PM
This is a joke, right?

Looks like Disney is making a major power grab. Only reason I can think of for this horrendous idea. The casual tennis fans probably don't give a shit about the points. And not one of the hardcore tennis fans on this board has a positive thing about it. I just hope the players put Disney in his place before he permanently screws up the sport.

Snowwy
04-10-2007, 06:53 PM
where are they? can you post a link? thanx.

There was a thread on here about a week ago talking about points for certain events. I dont like how it looks like its gonna be, maybe someone else can find the thread though.

mallorn
04-10-2007, 06:57 PM
:haha: :help:

I had a foreboding this was coming when I saw the name "Masters 1000".

gusman890
04-10-2007, 07:00 PM
they just want Federer's lead to go away by increasing the number of points so a guy like Djokovic will be closing to Federer's total by winning a TMS.

Bull shit, everyone loves the GS's more then the TMS, they should count 2X, for god's sake you play more rounds.

Norrage
04-10-2007, 07:14 PM
Even if there will be allocated more points to the TMS's, the Grand Slams will always be more important for the player..I doubt they'll really care about it. Only thing that might happen is that they feel the need to play the TMS more..

Saumon
04-10-2007, 07:16 PM
This can't be true, right? :sobbing: I don't know if I should laugh or cry :tape:

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/2737/riptennislf9.jpg

*Ljubica*
04-10-2007, 07:17 PM
Oh my :rolleyes: As someone once said ............... they canNOT be serious :banghead: What a perfectly ridiculous idea.

Sofyaxo
04-10-2007, 07:26 PM
:lol: fantastic

16681
04-10-2007, 07:27 PM
Oh my :rolleyes: As someone once said ............... they canNOT be serious :banghead: What a perfectly ridiculous idea.
Great post Rosie :D Maybe this idea will go the way of the Round Robin :p

LaTenista
04-10-2007, 07:28 PM
:scratch: Why would a 2 week tournament be worth the same amount of points as a one week one? Because the schedule doesn't allow for all the Masters events to be 2 weeks. Even if they did make that change, there would be almost no other tournaments except Masters and slams. :o :help:

scarecrows
04-10-2007, 07:30 PM
Robredo would get the same amount of points as Federer respectively for their wins in hamburg and Wimbledon :haha:

RonE
04-10-2007, 07:32 PM
To steal McEnroe's favourite phrase: You cannot be serious :o :help: :smash:

Clara Bow
04-10-2007, 07:34 PM
I am dismayed by this. What a joke. I think that instead of making the MS more important in the casual sports fans' minds- it could reduce the importance of the GSs. Which is not something we want to do.

Is Mr. Disney even a fan of the sport??? I fail to see how he is.

Castafiore
04-10-2007, 07:34 PM
I didn't notice this at first but somebody else pointed the attention to a mistake in the original article
the ATP announced it would elevate its Masters Series events on its new 2009 calendar to the same ranking-points status as the Australian Open, Roland Garros, the French Open and the US Open.

Roland Garros, The French Open and no mention of Wimbledon?

Right.
You don't suppose that the journalist was drunk when typing this article?

Jimnik
04-10-2007, 07:39 PM
If they seriously plan to go ahead with this I will start some drama if nobody else will.
You're definately not alone, mate.

Count me in.

Maybe MTF should raise a money from every poster and hire a hitman to take Mr.Disney down ??
This is the best idea I've heard so far.

Mr. Disney must be buried alive :mad:
:haha: :haha: :haha:

Saumon
04-10-2007, 07:40 PM
Btw to all the people who think it's the most retarded thing they've ever heard:
Let's just agree to disagree. I am not going to justify my decisions or philosophy. What I'd like you to do is reserve judgement for a couple of years and let's see if tennis has grown. Then let's talk.
:retard:

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 07:40 PM
I read on this forum (to a question I asked about a week ago) that the Slams would give 2000. Is that not correct?

mangoes
04-10-2007, 07:40 PM
If they seriously plan to go ahead with this I will start some drama if nobody else will.

I'm with you on this one and I'm committed to making a statement that will reach Mr. Disney.

I've made a note to give this more thought over the weekend.

cmurray
04-10-2007, 07:43 PM
I'm with you on this one and I'm committed to making a statement that will reach Mr. Disney.

I've made a note to give this more thought over the weekend.

You two need help, you let me know. I'm serious. This is absolute bullshit.

Yappa
04-10-2007, 07:46 PM
You two need help, you let me know. I'm serious. This is absolute bullshit.

How about hiring a streaker for Wimbledon? :D We'll give him a banner with which he'll cover his lower half of the body. Maybe with "Save Tennis" written on it. ;)

Damita
04-10-2007, 07:52 PM
o... k.... a brilliant idea comes after another I see :o :retard:

:awww: :sobbing: :help:
Wow, just... Wow. :o

Someone needs to stick a Federer stamp on de Villiers' ass and mail him back to where he came from - beyond the Ninth Circle.:lol: I have a major problem with you J'torian, I can't rep you everyday :p

What they *should* be doing is increase their marketing budget, create programs to get more children interested in tennis and negotiate with TV broadcasters to get more coverage. That would be too complicated for morons like Mr. Disney and others to handle however.

Instead they will be slapped with lawsuit after lawsuit and say that all their budget is being used to deal with these lawsuits.

What a waste.Totally agree.

Btw to all the people who think it's the most retarded thing they've ever heard:

:retard:stoooooooop it! :sobbing: :sobbing: :sobbing:

mongo
04-10-2007, 07:54 PM
Wow, sounds like the ATP is trying to bury the ITF once and for all. I suppose once they get total control of the tour, i.e, including the slams, they may alter the tennis calendar for the better. Or, maybe they are using what leverage they have to force the ITF to change their slam calendar to better accomodate the ATP events. If so, that could benefit the players and possibly create a legitimate grass court season leading up to Wimbledon. But who knows what misadventure de Villiers will concoct next. At this point, however, it's cards-on-the-table-time.

mecir72
04-10-2007, 08:00 PM
It will be a sad day for the sport if this ever happens. No more historical comparisons etc.

Castafiore
04-10-2007, 08:04 PM
Grand Slams will continue to be worth more ranking points than Masters Series events, according to the ATP's Greg Sharko. The winner of a Grand Slam will receive 2,000 ranking points, with the winner of the new 'Masters 1000' events presumably receiving 1,000 points.

Currently, the winner of a Grand Slam receives 1,000 points while the winner of a Masters Series event receives 500 points.
Source: http://www.tennis.com/news/ticker.aspx

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 08:05 PM
Here is the piece:


Grand slam points to be reduced by governing body
April 11, 2007

WHAT value a Wimbledon title? According to a revised rankings system being planned by the men's governing body, the ATP, the winner of the world's most prestigious tournament will earn no more points than the titleholder in Cincinnati or Montreal. :rolleyes:

At present, each of the four grand slam singles champions collects 2000 rankings points, compared with the 1000 on offer at each of the nine Masters Series events. That is likely to change for 2009, by when there will be eight tournaments — including newcomer Shanghai — on the ATP's top tier, to be known as the Masters 1000.

The overhaul is the latest in a series of changes overseen by ATP president Etienne de Villiers under the "Brave New World" banner. Another is likely to involve points being awarded for Davis Cup ties.

But not all the innovations have been warmly received, with the round-robin experiment that began in Adelaide in January having been scrubbed after less than three months, and the tour now facing lawsuits from the Hamburg and Monte Carlo events, whose Masters status is imperilled by the calendar restructure.

"The Masters 1000 events will be worth the same amount of points as the grand slams," ATP spokesman Stephen Duckitt confirmed yesterday. " I haven't heard anything as to what the reaction from the slams has been." Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley could not be contacted for comment.

Duckitt said there had been regular discussions between the sport's major stakeholders, with further announcements likely after ATP board meetings at the French Open and Wimbledon. De Villiers has repeatedly said that his aim is to streamline the ATP schedule to reduce injuries and involve more of the top players, more often.

But Monte Carlo organisers have joined Hamburg as objectors, this week filing an anti-trust lawsuit alleging that the ATP is conspiring to restrain competition by downgrading the status of the 110-year-old tournament through cutting prizemoney and halving ranking points from 2009

http://www.theage.com.au/news/tennis/grand-slam-points-to-be-reduced-by-governing-body/2007/04/10/1175971100300.html#

scoobs
04-10-2007, 08:06 PM
Can you imagine the sort of ridiculousness that could go on?

You could get players deciding to skip the Australian Open again because it's too much hassle to go down there - and they know they can make up the 0 points at Miami, or Rome, or Toronto or whatever.

Mr Disney has called the slams the Pillars of the Tennis calendar - all else is built on their legacy. I can't think of a worse way to undermine that legacy.

Brego
04-10-2007, 08:08 PM
Another earlier article:

ATP boss imposes strict pull-out sanctions for 2009
Wed 21 Feb, 03:21 PM
And on the new system of allocating ranking points, de Villiers added: "We will probably call them "1,000 pointers," because that's what they will be worth to players."

The doubling of ranking points - de Villiers hopes the four Grand Slam will obligingly lift their own awards from 1,000 to 2,000 point to maintain separation - is the carrot part of an equation designed to address the plague of mounting player pullouts.

source: http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/21022007/3/atp-boss-imposes-strict-pull-sanctions-2009.html

Black Adam
04-10-2007, 08:21 PM
Simple, we have to make a petition for ITF in order for the slams to be worth 2000 points then we would be back where we are. Do they realise that anybody can be number one winning only TMS and no slams :help: :help:

What else will we have on the Disney Tennis Tour by the come 2009 comes around?
Hawk eye to completely replace umpires?
Coaches on the bench?

Saumon
04-10-2007, 08:34 PM
I would LOVE to hear what Rod Laver and the likes think about those changes. :o

RickDaStick
04-10-2007, 08:39 PM
GREAT news for Ljubo. Another great move by Mr.Disney :yeah:

Johnny Groove
04-10-2007, 08:48 PM
Sweet Jesus, what a retarded plan :help:

The Freak
04-10-2007, 08:51 PM
Slams will continue to be worth more points:

http://www.tennis.com/news/ticker.aspx

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 08:55 PM
Thanks for that, Agent Zero. They are going to have to reconcile Duckitt's statement with Greg Sharko's --they're saying opposite things on the same day.

So essentially, when everything just doubles its points, how has it provided real incentives to not withdraw?! It keeps the rank ordering basically the same (not exactly, because optionals did go up a bit more, but not a huge lot more).

Castafiore
04-10-2007, 08:56 PM
Here is the piece:
...
At present, each of the four grand slam singles champions collects 2000 rankings points, compared with the 1000 on offer at each of the nine Masters Series events. That is likely to change for 2009, by when there will be eight tournaments — including newcomer Shanghai — on the ATP's top tier, to be known as the Masters 1000.

...
:scratch:
At present, the winner of a slam singles event gets 1000 points and a TMS winner gets 500 points. Right?

It would help to make the situation less confusing if these journalists get some basic facts straight.

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 08:56 PM
Update: the Grand Slams continue to be worth more ranking points, according to a later statement from the ATP. See above. (from tennis.com)

scoobs
04-10-2007, 08:56 PM
I should bloody hope so.

I still don't know why we need to tinker with the frigging rankings system yet again, but whatever.

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 08:57 PM
Everyone heave a sigh of relief (until the next bombshell)

Slams to get double the points as TMS. Phew.

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 08:59 PM
:scratch:
At present, the winner of a slam singles event gets 1000 points and a TMS winner gets 500 points. Right?

It would help to make the situation less confusing if these journalists get some basic facts straight.

I saw that too. I think the article wrote it poorly, but meant that 2000 points for Slams relative to 1000 for the Masters (ie, if Masters were hypothetically currently 1000) -- ie, Slams receive 1000 points when the Masters are 500. At least that is how I interpreted it.

Jimnik
04-10-2007, 08:59 PM
It looks like the ATP wanted to double the importance of all AMS and Grand Slam events. They really are determined to get all the top players to show up to every single Masters Series tournament.

Johnny Groove
04-10-2007, 09:01 PM
but its the principle of the thing. The fact that EDV actually considered this and was true for a few hrs is complete BS. Someone needs to can this :retard: before he destroys the sport.

Kitty de Sade
04-10-2007, 09:02 PM
Update: the Grand Slams continue to be worth more ranking points, according to a later statement from the ATP. See above. (from tennis.com)

Thank goodness, now I can put down my bottle of vodka. ;) Any more info you find is greatly appreciated, thank you.

Mechlan
04-10-2007, 09:03 PM
That makes at least a little sense. What a mess they've made of this.

scoobs
04-10-2007, 09:05 PM
That makes at least a little sense. What a mess they've made of this.
They are just PATHETIC at media management - they even manage to create a controversy when there isn't one.

Tennis continues to get publicity for all the wrong reasons.

LaTenista
04-10-2007, 09:05 PM
:scratch:
At present, the winner of a slam singles event gets 1000 points and a TMS winner gets 500 points. Right?

It would help to make the situation less confusing if these journalists get some basic facts straight.

Don't you know the only reporters who can write about tennis know absolutely nothing about it? :rolleyes: I don't even have a journalism degree and I could write more accurate and interesting articles than all of them.

It looks like the ATP wanted to double the importance of all AMS and Grand Slam events. They really are determined to get all the top players to show up to every single Masters Series tournament.

:shrug: Could be true but then again they are planning on lengthening the season which means more injuries, no? :o

mr_burns
04-10-2007, 09:13 PM
worst news for tennis in months...slams are the best, the only thing that really counts


Don't wanna look and the rankings


When the woman do the same we will have petrova at 1 or something like that

alfonsojose
04-10-2007, 09:15 PM
Etienne :inlove: :inlove:

alfonsojose
04-10-2007, 09:16 PM
but its the principle of the thing. The fact that EDV actually considered this and was true for a few hrs is complete BS. Someone needs to can this :retard: before he destroys the sport.

:mad: Leave him alone. He's a genious :drool:

mangoes
04-10-2007, 09:18 PM
That still doesn't explain his need to waste time tinkering with ranking points.

Johnny Groove
04-10-2007, 09:26 PM
That still doesn't explain his need to waste time tinkering with ranking points.

Exactly. Instead of tinkering with all of the things that need fixing, he feels the need to mess with the one thing that nobody is bitching about :rolleyes:

Damita
04-10-2007, 09:29 PM
I should bloody hope so.

I still don't know why we need to tinker with the frigging rankings system yet again, but whatever.yeah :scratch:


Great communication skills once again from the ATP :yeah:

Dusk Soldier
04-10-2007, 09:47 PM
So essentially, when everything just doubles its points, how has it provided real incentives to not withdraw?! It keeps the rank ordering basically the same (not exactly, because optionals did go up a bit more, but not a huge lot more).

I think their idea is to make the slams and masters series worth more, but everything else worth the same. I guess making it harder for players to inflate their rankings using results from lesser tournaments.

bavaria100
04-10-2007, 10:05 PM
It's really time that Dewhatever takes a seat in the space mountain, gets inserted into orbit and never comes back. :mad:

R.Federer
04-10-2007, 10:16 PM
I think their idea is to make the slams and masters series worth more, but everything else worth the same. I guess making it harder for players to inflate their rankings using results from lesser tournaments.

Slams and TMS's are doubling (ie, 100%), but 5 best optionals are going up by 145% I think (on average), so it's the optionals not the slams/TMS which are getting more points.

Raquel
04-10-2007, 10:24 PM
Why is DeVilliers seemingly intent on changing everything and wrecking the game? He was insistent that fan power was behind RR until the Las Vegas fiasco. We need to do something here on MTF (the biggest collection of genuine mens tennis fans online) to protest against this, right?

Raquel
04-10-2007, 10:28 PM
I've seen the later statement now, so ignore that ^^^^ :lol:

Still, the fact we all thought this might happen sadly is not a shock anymore under the current director.

NicoFan
04-10-2007, 10:31 PM
Still, the fact we all thought this might happen sadly is not a shock anymore under the current director.

For a second, I thought you wrote "dictator", not director. ;) :lol: I think dictator would be better...since he doesn't appear to care what anyone else thinks. :shrug:

casabe
04-10-2007, 10:34 PM
ohh this man is likea Palpatine that enter with the dark force to the republic and is killing tennis from within

sigmagirl91
04-10-2007, 10:40 PM
The village, paging Mr. Disney...."we need our idiot back."

Gulliver
04-10-2007, 11:28 PM
So, to summarise, these are the plans for 2009:

4 GS each worth 2000 pts.

8 Masters each worth 1000 pts (IW/Miami/Madrid?/Rome?/Canada/Cincy/Asia/Paris) which means 5 HC, 2 Clay, 1 Indoor.

10 “Open 500” each worth 500 pts (from the following):
2 demoted TMS + 8 of the 9 current ISGs Memphis/Rotterdam/Dubai/Acapulco/Barcelona/Stuttgart/Kitzbuhel/Tokyo/Vienna.

“Open 250” each worth 250 points, unspecified number but will include a demoted ISG as well as the current IS.

Currently some ISGs are worth 300/250 points so they're going up, and ISs are worth between 175 - 225 so they go up too.

What this might do, with the increased prize money supposed to be on offer is put some of the smaller tourneys out of business. One way of decreasing the number on offer, but none of this addresses the main problem which is the PLACING OF THE GS AND TMS IN THE CALENDAR!!!!!

Sunset of Age
04-10-2007, 11:29 PM
Me Speechless.

MaryWalsh
04-11-2007, 01:44 AM
This is a really really really bad idea. So many bad ideas, so little time. If anyone wants to make petitions I will gladly sign any and all about these proposed disasters affecting the fine sport of mens professional tennis. :smash: :help:

kobulingam
04-11-2007, 01:53 AM
ATP just pissed that they don't control the Majors.

fenomeno2111
04-11-2007, 02:17 AM
This is just going to ruin some smaller torunaments...I mean the fields on the open 500 are going to look like the current IS and the fields of Open 250 are goin g to look like Challengers because none of the top players are going to play these events.

tripb19
04-11-2007, 02:28 AM
There's been a cockup from the ATP. There's no way GS and M1000 will have the same points.

MarieS
04-11-2007, 02:42 AM
wow, just wow.
BRILLIANT! :hatoff:

federerfan7465
04-11-2007, 02:49 AM
what the fuck.


and stop saying "expected news" - no one expected this. you are an idiot.

W!MBLEDON
04-11-2007, 03:01 AM
Say it isn't so. X__x I hate this Mr Disney guy...

Lucinda
04-11-2007, 04:14 AM
This is just going to ruin some smaller torunaments...I mean the fields on the open 500 are going to look like the current IS and the fields of Open 250 are goin g to look like Challengers because none of the top players are going to play these events.

Exactly. Why should top players show up for any of the dinky tournaments when their points will barely dent the rankings? There will be nothing left except MS and GS and the rankings will seperate the players even further.

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 04:23 AM
This won't go through, but it just proves my theory about Mr.Disney is accurate. He has a 1000 ideas a day and 1001 of them are bad.

Well the ITF are still the ones in control of the major events and I think Ricci Bitti would like to beat up on Mr.Disney.

Sean.J.S.
04-11-2007, 04:35 AM
Message to ATP: Stop fucking up tennis.

Metis
04-11-2007, 04:37 AM
Okay, so at least for the time being we can all go back to discussing how many Federer stamps we're going to lick. :D

:secret: I heard those stamps will be like stickers, not ...lickable. :p

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 04:44 AM
I reckon when Mr. Disney was at school, he got beaten up a lot.

Merton
04-11-2007, 04:50 AM
So what is the point of scaling up the ATP entry points? Now it seems that the winner of an AMS tournament would get 1000 points and the winner of a slam 2000 points. This is just multiplying by 2 the current entry points. What is next? "The Masters 100,000" sounds more rich :lol:

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 04:51 AM
So what is the point of scaling up the ATP entry points? Now it seems that the winner of an AMS tournament would get 1000 points and the winner of a slam 2000 points. This is just multiplying by 2 the current entry points. What is next? "The Masters 100,000" sounds more rich :lol:

Time to bump another thread.

Saumon
04-11-2007, 06:12 AM
So what is the point of scaling up the ATP entry points? Now it seems that the winner of an AMS tournament would get 1000 points and the winner of a slam 2000 points. This is just multiplying by 2 the current entry points. What is next? "The Masters 100,000" sounds more rich :lol:

exactly... I just don't see the point :shrug: :retard: How will they make the transition? They'll just double the points of every player at the start of 2009? :confused:

I still think "Masters 1000", "Open 500" are stupid names in a sport played by people of so many different nationalities. I'm not sure people around the world will bother saying the 1000/500 part in English. :rolleyes:

And who's the idiot who came up with the Brave new world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World) name for the campaign? :help:

Scotso
04-11-2007, 06:24 AM
Nice try, Mr. Disney.

But the ATP will never, ever be able to create a tournament that will rival the four majors. I don't care how many points or how much money they give out, the four majors will always be the pinnacle of the tennis world.

We need to either find some way to get Mr. Disney out of office or start a new tour led by competent people. Or even by chimps, which would be much more effective than Mr. Disney.

Scotso
04-11-2007, 06:32 AM
Even if the slams also raise the points... it's worrisome. They're making is so the small events are going to be worth absolutely nothing. They're trying to kill off most of the events on the tour so that only a few survive, in markets that the ATP deems worthy.

Brave New World indeed :rolleyes:

Via
04-11-2007, 06:35 AM
Exactly. Why should top players show up for any of the dinky tournaments when their points will barely dent the rankings? There will be nothing left except MS and GS and the rankings will seperate the players even further.

but this is already existing and the whole point of using appearance money... for small tournaments to circumvent a system controlled by the atp :lol:

So what is the point of scaling up the ATP entry points? Now it seems that the winner of an AMS tournament would get 1000 points and the winner of a slam 2000 points. This is just multiplying by 2 the current entry points. What is next? "The Masters 100,000" sounds more rich :lol:

tennis inflation :tape:

JBdV
04-11-2007, 06:36 AM
This would be even worse than RR :retard:

The_Nadal_effect
04-11-2007, 06:36 AM
The Grand Slams make huge money, so the ATP believes that, if it just copies the Grand Slam format and makes the Masters 1000 (sounds like the title of a bad sci-fi TV series) events compulsory, it will have a sure fire hit.

Problem is, the Slams are huge because they're the Slams, not because they're compulsory, mixed, 2-week, 128 player draw events. As Adm. Cunningham said, "You can build ships, but you can't build a tradition"

Nice post!
I was thinking something on similar lines too.
the difference between the GS format and MS format is comparable to the difference between a well-promoted motion picture from Hollywood and a top director's TV series. The number of points awarded in a GS are directly proportional to the significance and the tradition of the tournaments, which not all MS tournaments can be compared with.

Off-the-court: Going by the theory, if D-joke wins two more MS titles back-to-back, then he should get ahead of Rafzilla in the rankings having scored more than 4000 pts. Kind of scary!

Conclusion: de Villie has an attitude problem.:lol:

nobama
04-11-2007, 07:37 AM
Why are they even messing with ranking points anyway? There's so many more important things they should be concerned with. I fear we're getting to a point where the ATP will start mandating what a top players schedule can look like.

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 07:52 AM
Why are they even messing with ranking points anyway? There's so many more important things they should be concerned with. I fear we're getting to a point where the ATP will start mandating what a top players schedule can look like.

Use your brains and you can see why they are doing this?

Chris Seahorse
04-11-2007, 07:53 AM
I reckon when Mr. Disney was at school, he got beaten up a lot.

Somehow, it kind of puts a warm smile on my face the thought of De Villiers getting beaten up a school alot. It is just a shame this practice hasn't continued into his adult life.

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 07:57 AM
Somehow, it kind of puts a warm smile on my face the thought of De Villiers getting beaten up a school alot. It is just a shame this practice hasn't continued into his adult life.

Well his beloved RR went down the toilet, when he refused to listen to reason and even then he still can't admit he got it wrong.

Do you understand why I made that particular comment?

Saumon
04-11-2007, 09:01 AM
You know you've fucked up when people start thinking Mark Miles was not that bad.
Well, Mr Disney would not know because he can't understand that people have a different point of view than his and believe he's right whatever he does.

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 09:02 AM
Mark Miles was an incompetent fool, but he is a member of the Mensa society compared to Mr.Disney.

boughtmypoints
04-11-2007, 09:06 AM
GW,

The bigger of the ATP tournaments are gasping for air.

Indian Wells, conceivably the biggest tournament outside of the Slams, lurches from one financial crisis to another. If IMG had followed on from its success with Wimbledon and proven itself in the Desert, the tennis schedule would have been turned upside down.

Ironically, it is IMG's very success with Wimbledon, monetizing the cachet of a slam that makes it tough for the other non slams.

There's really no secret to having a big tournament : offer as much prize money as the competition, build better facilities and your "rep" will fall into place.

This is precisely how the Aussie halted its slide.

Instead of this carrot approach, the ATP seeks to rule by fiat.

Personally, whilst treasuring the traditions of Wimbledon and Roland Garros, I find the 4 Slam concept anachronistic.

There should be at least 1 slam on every inhabited continent. Have an Asian one rotating between Japan and China. An African one between North and South Africa. A South American one. Throw in an extra one for N America and one for Europe (Russia or Germany) and you have a schedule of 8 majors to be spaced throughout the year.

Oh, and who will implement this plan?

Only the ITF could pull this off, NEVER the ATP!

Saumon
04-11-2007, 09:13 AM
BTW is it just my memory playing tricks or some players had the project of creating a new association at the time Hewitt had issues with the ATP? :scratch:

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 09:13 AM
GW,

The bigger of the ATP tournaments are gasping for air.

Indian Wells, conceivably the biggest tournament outside of the Slams, lurches from one financial crisis to another. If IMG had followed on from its success with Wimbledon and proven itself in the Desert, the tennis schedule would have been turned upside down.

Ironically, it is IMG's very success with Wimbledon, monetizing the cachet of a slam that makes it tough for the other non slams.

There's really no secret to having a big tournament : offer as much prize money as the competition, build better facilities and your "rep" will fall into place.

This is precisely how the Aussie halted its slide.

Instead of this carrot approach, the ATP seeks to rule by fiat.

Personally, whilst treasuring the traditions of Wimbledon and Roland Garros, I find the 4 Slam concept anachronistic.

There should be at least 1 slam on every inhabited continent. Have an Asian one rotating between Japan and China. An African one between North and South Africa. A South American one. Throw in an extra one for N America and one for Europe (Russia or Germany) and you have a schedule of 8 majors to be spaced throughout the year.

Oh, and who will implement this plan?

Only the ITF could pull this off, NEVER the ATP!

The Aussie Open had to do that and if they didn't adapt, then the event would still have the poor status it used to have. They set the standard when it comes to facilities and organisation of Slams.

It would be great in theory to have Slams on every continent, but not practical in the near future. For that to happen, then the surface issues would come about, where they are placed in the calendar, how much lead in time do you have for these events. The training would be different and in theory players should be trying to peak 4 times a year for the Slams, but in reality now this is not the case and would be less likely if the above proposal was taken onboard.

The ITF have enough problems at the moment with Davis Cup and the fact that they don't distribute their cash to various federations in the best manner are things that need to be addressed first.

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 09:17 AM
BTW is it just my memory playing tricks or some players had the project of creating a new association at the time Hewitt had issues with the ATP? :scratch:

Jeff Tarango and Wayne Ferreira were behind it and both are quite bright individuals, a bit nutty and it was called the International Men's Tennis Association .

oz_boz
04-11-2007, 09:29 AM
Time to change the title of the thread, since they obviously just want to rescale the ranking (of course, slightly adjusted to give more weight to TMS, but not that much). Why that is, I don't have any idea - maybe they fear noone will ever beat Fed's ranking point record? Nah, they are probably not as interested as I am in numbers of that kind.

So, to summarise, these are the plans for 2009:

4 GS each worth 2000 pts.

8 Masters each worth 1000 pts (IW/Miami/Madrid?/Rome?/Canada/Cincy/Asia/Paris) which means 5 HC, 2 Clay, 1 Indoor.

10 “Open 500” each worth 500 pts (from the following):
2 demoted TMS + 8 of the 9 current ISGs Memphis/Rotterdam/Dubai/Acapulco/Barcelona/Stuttgart/Kitzbuhel/Tokyo/Vienna.

“Open 250” each worth 250 points, unspecified number but will include a demoted ISG as well as the current IS.

Currently some ISGs are worth 300/250 points so they're going up, and ISs are worth between 175 - 225 so they go up too.

What this might do, with the increased prize money supposed to be on offer is put some of the smaller tourneys out of business. One way of decreasing the number on offer, but none of this addresses the main problem which is the PLACING OF THE GS AND TMS IN THE CALENDAR!!!!!

So what is the point of scaling up the ATP entry points? Now it seems that the winner of an AMS tournament would get 1000 points and the winner of a slam 2000 points. This is just multiplying by 2 the current entry points. What is next? "The Masters 100,000" sounds more rich :lol:

Imagine tennis in 50 years: The Masters 10^10^10^34! Cool.

t0x
04-11-2007, 09:39 AM
What the fuck is Mr Disney smoking?

RR was a shit idea...

This is an uber shit idea...

Seriously, I've never heard anything so ridiculous! Mr Disney, you can fuck up the sport in any way you want but...

THE 4 SLAMS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT TOURNAMENTS AND IT MUST STAY THAT WAY! DONT MESS WITH THEM!

Years of history could be going down the drain because of this shithead. This better be a late April fools joke... I can't express in words the thought of having Paris or Canada worth the same as USO or Wimbers... it's just madness.

The players should have a say in this though... and they will crucify him? Hopefully. If not, a bunch of us will have to protest in some way... handcuff ourselves to some place near ATPs head quarters or something... this CANNOT happen, it's BS!

yanchr
04-11-2007, 09:46 AM
I was simply astonished at the news--Wimbledon same points as Toronto :eek::eek::eek:

This guy is worse than all the clowns adding up in MTF...

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 09:47 AM
I was simply astonished at the news--Wimbledon same points as Toronto :eek::eek::eek:

This guy is worse than all the clowns adding up in MTF...

It won't happen, the Slams will still be double the points, but Disney is trying to con people.

leng jai
04-11-2007, 09:49 AM
They should just put MTF in charge of the ATP and the ITF.

aussie_fan
04-11-2007, 10:35 AM
So winning wimbledon is just as important as winning mardid

Oh dear :sad:

Dougie
04-11-2007, 10:54 AM
So winning wimbledon is just as important as winning mardid

Oh dear :sad:

Obviously points aren´t the only thing that determine "important".

nisha
04-11-2007, 11:37 AM
who has the power to sack that man? this is getting ridiculous!

pistolmarat
04-11-2007, 11:38 AM
the ATP announced it would elevate its Masters Series events on its new 2009 calendar to the same ranking-points status as the Australian Open, Roland Garros, the French Open and the US Open.
:lol:
well, I can't see IW, or Cincy being as magical as Wimbledon:(

Byrd
04-11-2007, 11:43 AM
De villiers the biggest dick to ever grace sports in general has just done it again, seriously whats next?Tennis players having to play tennis with cricket bats and the ballkids being pensioners.

Billabong
04-11-2007, 12:00 PM
Absolutely horrendous idea:o:banghead: Someone needs to kick DeVilliers out of here as soon as possible:eek:

Billabong
04-11-2007, 12:13 PM
Someone needs to erase that smile of Devilliers, he was obviously sent there to destroy the ATP tour:o

http://www.tennis-x.com/images/players/devilliers.jpg

boughtmypoints
04-11-2007, 12:22 PM
The ITF have enough problems at the moment with Davis Cup and the fact that they don't distribute their cash to various federations in the best manner are things that need to be addressed first.

You've hit the nail right on the head.

It will take a charismatic, ruthless ITF man to revamp the whole package, and sell it as a massive win win to all the stakeholders.

The present format of Davis Cup is 40 years past its sell by date. Make the finals every 4 years, with 3 annual tiers of qualifying. Give the world's best countries 2 years of rest!

As for playing surfaces. more grass and more clay!

gusman890
04-11-2007, 12:52 PM
Unless they build an island where the equador and the prime meridian meet, to host the YEC there. Its not gonna happen to rival a tournament of the GS.

ezekiel
04-11-2007, 01:10 PM
I am not convinced that masters and slams will be the same points wise but I don't believe that they 2x as better as they are right now, certainly Miami and IW together are worth more than 1 slam points wise. If the Masters are to be 1000 pts, then slams should be about 1500 pts

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 01:17 PM
You've hit the nail right on the head.

It will take a charismatic, ruthless ITF man to revamp the whole package, and sell it as a massive win win to all the stakeholders.

The present format of Davis Cup is 40 years past its sell by date. Make the finals every 4 years, with 3 annual tiers of qualifying. Give the world's best countries 2 years of rest!

As for playing surfaces. more grass and more clay!

Actually the problem with DC is that along with the Slams is the cashcow for the ITF. I don't believe in playing every 4 years at all. If they did that, then the smaller federations would even get less cash than they do now, so who is going to cover that for the loss of revenue that they miss out from hosting DC ties.

To solve this problem, the previous years finalists should get a bye into the quarter finals. Then the other 12 nations play off in that round and the 6 winners will join the quarter finalists. Then the QF and 1R losers would have to fight off with 12 other teams for those WG spots, so if the previous finalists lose in the QFs, that they have to fight for their place in the World Group.

Chris Seahorse
04-11-2007, 01:24 PM
Well his beloved RR went down the toilet, when he refused to listen to reason and even then he still can't admit he got it wrong.

Do you understand why I made that particular comment?

I think so. :) Something to do with the little Hitler syndrome. I certainly didn't have any problems with the comment at all. It made sense to me. But somehow the thought of him getting beaten up regularly brought a smile to my face, although I'm not someone who normally advocates violence. That's all. I'm sure you can understand why I made that comment too. ;)

Action Jackson
04-11-2007, 01:26 PM
I think so. :) Something to do with the little Hitler syndrome. I certainly didn't have any problems with the comment at all. It made sense to me. But somehow the thought of him getting beaten up regularly brought a smile to my face, although I'm not someone who normally advocates violence. That's all. I'm sure you can understand why I made that comment too. ;)

You nailed it, but he wants everyone to notice him and his big statements. He basically is saying a whole lot and not addressing the proper issues.

nicole_s
04-11-2007, 01:33 PM
this is sick!!!it's crazy to get the same points for wimbledon and some masters tournament :eek: now is the right time for players to speak out and stop this clown before he destroys tennis!

amierin
04-11-2007, 01:35 PM
Last night tennis.com was reporting that the Slams will now be worth 2,000 points. Some ATP flak sent out an e-mail saying that.

sodman12
04-11-2007, 02:27 PM
Wow, just... Wow. :o

Someone needs to stick a Federer stamp on de Villiers' ass and mail him back to where he came from - beyond the Ninth Circle.


Well said.

Why are they making changes can't they just leave it alone.

Margy
04-11-2007, 02:44 PM
Maybe I've missed it, but has anyone from the ATP given any reason whatsoever for messing with the points? All I've seen is the announcement that they are being changed. At least with the stupid RR (Ridiculous Rules) format that they tried, they had an idea that it would be welcomed by the fans and tourney organisers because it would guarantee top players at least 2 matches. But this whole points shake-up...what logical reason is Disney giving for doing it other than he's the boss so he can do whatever stupid thing he wants?

W!MBLEDON
04-11-2007, 04:29 PM
Last night tennis.com was reporting that the Slams will now be worth 2,000 points. Some ATP flak sent out an e-mail saying that.

What's the point of that if the ATP is looking to make the Masters Series specifically 'equal to Slams'? :confused:

That's stupid. You'd have Masters Series with 1,000 points for the winner, and Slams with 2,000 points — double the Masters Series points, which is what it already is now (1,000 for Slam winners and 500 for Masters Series)! Then you'd have the poor, smaller tournaments with 175 and 200 point rewards. THIS. IS. A. MISTAKE.

I WISH DE VILLAIN WOULD GO HIJACK SOME OTHER SPORT. :mad:

lordmanji
04-11-2007, 04:36 PM
the only good idea here is points for davis cup. raising masters series to that of grand slam status via points is the most idiotic thing ive ever heard of, second to round robin.

ASP0315
04-11-2007, 05:54 PM
terrible idea. :help:

R.Federer
04-11-2007, 06:04 PM
Posters who haven't read the whole thread may not realize that after about the third page, yesterday, there was an UPDATE from ATP that the Slams will get 2000 points or double that of the Masters.

This information is also availalble on tennis.com

W!MBLEDON
04-11-2007, 06:18 PM
And I repeat:

That's stupid. You'd have Masters Series with 1,000 points for the winner, and Slams with 2,000 points — double the Masters Series points, which is what it already is now (1,000 for Slam winners and 500 for Masters Series)! Then you'd have the poor, smaller tournaments with 175 and 200 point rewards. THIS. IS. A. MISTAKE.

R.Federer
04-11-2007, 06:19 PM
And I repeat:

That's stupid. You'd have Masters Series with 1,000 points for the winner, and Slams with 2,000 points — double the Masters Series points, which is what it already is now (1,000 for Slam winners and 500 for Masters Series)! Then you'd have the poor, smaller tournaments with 175 and 200 point rewards. THIS. IS. A. MISTAKE.

The Optionals (IS and ISG) are going up by more than the Slams and Masters are. Slams and Masters are 100% increase, IS/ISGs are 145% increase (on average). They are the ones which are now getting between 150-375 or so, and will get 500 points next year on, if the ATP gets its way.

W!MBLEDON
04-11-2007, 06:22 PM
I see. Thanks for clearing that up, but I still think this is a stupid idea. :\

missvarsha
04-11-2007, 07:31 PM
The Optionals (IS and ISG) are going up by more than the Slams and Masters are. Slams and Masters are 100% increase, IS/ISGs are 145% increase (on average). They are the ones which are now getting between 150-375 or so, and will get 500 points next year on, if the ATP gets its way.

If thats true then they are in effect devaluing the Grand Slams, AND the Masters Series in the rankings. Which goes against their stated goal.
Moreover, rather than encourage the "stars" to play, this will just further inflate the rankings of "non-stars" who will be able to score at the smaller tournaments.

I actually think the ATP rankings are the best they have been a while, both in terms of relative weights of events, and allowing for a balance between the premier events and optionals.

Merton
04-11-2007, 07:43 PM
The Optionals (IS and ISG) are going up by more than the Slams and Masters are. Slams and Masters are 100% increase, IS/ISGs are 145% increase (on average). They are the ones which are now getting between 150-375 or so, and will get 500 points next year on, if the ATP gets its way.

The net change is small though, especially since I assume (for the next 10-12 hours that is) that there will still be a cup of 5 best optionals. Overall, the entry points change looks cosmetic, it seems it was only made to allow the title "Masters 1000".

R.Federer
04-11-2007, 08:57 PM
The net change is small though, especially since I assume (for the next 10-12 hours that is) that there will still be a cup of 5 best optionals. Overall, the entry points change looks cosmetic, it seems it was only made to allow the title "Masters 1000".

It will help those who would do well in the optionals but don't go all the way or do well in Slams and TMS. Last year, a player like Blake or Ljubicic would have benefited a lot from this scheme. It would be enough to leapfrog a bit in the rankings/entry list as well for them.

Deboogle!.
04-11-2007, 09:02 PM
apologies if this was posted already...
=================================
ATP: Majors Will Continue To Outpoint Masters

By Tennis Week
04/12/2007

The four Grand Slam tournaments will retain exclusive status as tennis' elite events in prestige and ranking points. The ATP announced it will double ranking points awarded at its Masters Series events starting in 2009, but will also double the ranking points for the four majors, ensuring the Grand Slam events remain the most valuable tournaments in tennis.

In 2009, Grand Slam champions will earn 2,000 ranking points, which will be double the 1,000 ranking points Masters Series tournament champions will receive.

"The ATP wishes to advise that reports circulating in some sections of the media reporting that from 2009 the Grand Slams will have the same points as ATP Masters events are completely incorrect," the ATP announced in a statement. "The ATP does intend to double the points scale for the Masters Events as part of its overall 2009 plan to best position and brand the ATP World Tour events. It will, however, double the points for a Grand Slam to maintain the current relationship between winners of a Slam and a Masters event — the correct figures to be awarded from the year 2009 are 2000 points for the winner of a Grand Slam and 1000 for a Masters tournament champion."

The ATP's announcement came in response to published reports that the ATP would award Masters Series champions and Grand Slam champions equal ranking points beginning in 2009.

"The Masters 1000 events will be worth the same amount of points as the Grand Slams," ATP spokesman Stephen Duckitt told Linda Pearce of The Age. " I haven't heard anything as to what the reaction from the Slams has been."

Characterizing the four majors as the cornerstones of the sport, ATP Chairman Etienne de Villiers said the ATP "would not do anything to diminish their status."

"It is regrettable that this has occurred at a time when the relationship between the Slams and the ATP has never been closer or better," said ATP Chairman and President de Villiers. "The ATP regards the Grand Slams as the pillars of the professional game and would not do anything to diminish their status."

The complete text of the ATP announcement is here:

"The ATP wishes to advise that reports circulating in some sections of the media reporting that from 2009 the Grand Slams will have the same points as ATP Masters events are completely incorrect. The ATP does intend to double the points scale for the Masters Events as part of its overall 2009 plan to best position and brand the ATP World Tour events. It will, however, double the points for a Grand Slam to maintain the current relationship between winners of a Slam and a Masters event -the correct figures to be awarded from the year 2009 are 2000 points for the winner of a Grand Slam and 1000 for a Masters tournament champion.

"It is regrettable that this has occurred at a time when the relationship between the Slams and the ATP has never been closer or better," said ATP Chairman and President, Etienne de Villiers. "The ATP regards the Grand Slams as the pillars of the professional game and would not do anything to diminish their status."

zicofirol
04-11-2007, 09:31 PM
Isn't part of "Brave New World" removing two TMS clay events from MS status and that is why MC and Hamburg are suing the ATP for racketeering?

clay courts would only lose 3% of their points, I think madrid will become a clay event also... Why arent you crying about how few grasscourt tournaments their are?

scoobs
04-11-2007, 09:55 PM
Good old ATP - I knew outsourcing their media & publicity to Laurel and Hardy Communications Inc would be a great idea.

This non-story became a story in the first place because of their own incompetence in breaking the original story.

greatkingrat
04-11-2007, 10:16 PM
The Optionals (IS and ISG) are going up by more than the Slams and Masters are. Slams and Masters are 100% increase, IS/ISGs are 145% increase (on average). They are the ones which are now getting between 150-375 or so, and will get 500 points next year on, if the ATP gets its way.

Not all optional tournaments are going to be 500 points - only the larger ones. So the tournaments currently at 250/300 points will increase to 500 while the smaller tournaments will be in the 300-400 range.

Basically nothing at all is being changed. The ATP just think that 1000pts for Masters Series sounds better for marketing purposes.

Via
04-11-2007, 11:23 PM
stupid idiots... who would tamper with business procedures just to make marketing easier? it should be the other way round.

casual fans won't be bothered with how many points players get by progressing in a tournament anyway. or try to add up points to monitor their rankings. or is this now another atp goal, to train them up in 'ranking points awareness'? it's much easier to promote big fat pay cheques.

ezekiel
04-12-2007, 12:53 AM
I think it's kind of a lot of numbers if slams get 2000 pts, don't you think ?
It would double current numbers and what's the point ?

Flibbertigibbet
04-12-2007, 01:13 AM
...So what's the point? To have a catchy name? Sorry, but I highly doubt if "Masters 1000" will attract any more fans to tennis. :lol:

cmurray
04-12-2007, 02:49 AM
Okay...add me to the list of people who are confused. What the hell good is it to double the points for masters events if the slams are going to be doubled too? It'll make not a whit of difference in terms of importance. I'm telling you, this guy is a bloody idiot.

cath777
04-12-2007, 03:01 AM
Am I missing something, but what about Challengers and Futures? Are the points for them changing too? Otherwise it seems to me that it's going to be harder for the up-and-comers to break through :shrug: Instead, all that's going to happen is players that are consistent in Slams and Masters are going to prevail. Should they just hand Federer the year end number one for the next five years and be done with it :shrug:

Action Jackson
04-12-2007, 06:43 AM
Am I missing something, but what about Challengers and Futures? Are the points for them changing too? Otherwise it seems to me that it's going to be harder for the up-and-comers to break through :shrug: Instead, all that's going to happen is players that are consistent in Slams and Masters are going to prevail. Should they just hand Federer the year end number one for the next five years and be done with it :shrug:

They don't care about Challengers and Futures.

TheHawk
04-12-2007, 07:56 AM
WHAT THE FUCK???

Toronto worthing as much as Wimbledon???
It's tougher to pick who will win Toronto than Wimbledon, so why not? :)

Agassi Aces
04-12-2007, 08:16 AM
The Slams need to be elevated above anything else...... they are the most historic tournaments in tennis, therefore more ranking points if you win one of them.

AnnaK_4ever
04-12-2007, 05:27 PM
Cronin:

While the Slams are the crown jewels of the sport, should they really be worth double the ATP's nine most important tournaments (including the Masters Cup)?

I say no, and in 2009 would like to see the tour offer MS winners 1,200 points for a win, because half the number points doesn't offer enough value to the tournaments and keeps them in a serf-like position.

That's not what the sport as a whole should be looking for. It should be searching for added value whenever it has an opportunity, and you can't tell me that Indian Wells or Miami doesn't have 60 percent of the value of the US Open, or that Rome doesn't have 60 percent of the value of Roland Garros. Moreover, if anyone in the sport is truly serious about developing recognizable warm-up series to the Slams – like the US Open Series – you can't tell me that adding to that brand with say, hugely important tournaments in Cincinnati, doesn't hold any merit.

The Slams are not the only important tournaments or competitions in the world and cannot be treated that way.

The Slams do not need much more added value, but tennis needs fans paying attention to at least another 10 tournaments a year. If the majors are going to state that the other tournaments really don't matter, then why should fans care? Half-as-valuable is a terrible advertisement. Sure, a 60 percent solution is no great shakes either, but it's an improvement and at least the winner gets close to the points earned by a Slam finalist. (Currently a Slam finalist get 700 points while a Masters Series winner gets only 500.)


:rolleyes:
So according to Cronin winning two Indian Wells titles is more important than winning a single US Open and being two-time Rome winner is better achievement than being one-time Roland Garros champion.
WOW!

R.Federer
04-12-2007, 06:11 PM
Cronin:



:rolleyes:
So according to Cronin winning two Indian Wells titles is more important than winning a single US Open and being two-time Rome winner is better achievement than being one-time Roland Garros champion.
WOW!

Well not that I support the Croney usually, but currently two Indian Wells are equal to a single USO title. And 3 Indian Wells titles are BETTER than a single Slam. So if the future point scheme is retarded, the current one does not lag far behind either.

El Legenda
04-12-2007, 06:22 PM
what this does, it makes the non AMS/GS worth less, unless they pick up their pts too, than we're back to where we're at today

you can win 2 tournys like Vienna and has same amount of pts as winner of AMS, in 2009, you will need 4 wins like that

MrExcel
04-21-2007, 12:33 PM
Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but does anyone know what the plans are on points for the Tennis Masters Cup?

Obviously it would make sense for these points to double too, as its currently half way between a Masters Event and a Grand Slam. But logic doesn't often come into it, and somehow you almost expect Mr. Disney to make it worth more or less!

Anyone have any info?