2009 Rulebook [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

2009 Rulebook

sweetymessi
12-31-2008, 03:28 PM
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/2009_Rulebook.pdf

:wavey:

LinkMage
12-31-2008, 03:34 PM
IV. WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS
4.01 Barclays ATP World Tour Finals - Singles
A.Competition Format
The tournament shall be a singles round robin format with eight (8) players. There shall be two (2) groups of four (4) players each with eight (8) seeds to be determined by the South African Airways ATP Rankings on the Monday after the last ATP World Tour tournament of the calendar year. All matches shall be the best of three (3) tie-break sets, including the final. The round robin shall determine the four (4) players for the semifinals with the format thereafter being a single elimination competition.


What the fuck is this? This is bullshit! :mad:

biological
12-31-2008, 03:39 PM
What the fuck is this? This is bullshit! :mad:

seconded

habibko
12-31-2008, 04:51 PM
What the fuck is this? This is bullshit! :mad:

what? it was this way this year :shrug:

thanks for sharing :wavey:

LinkMage
12-31-2008, 04:57 PM
what? it was this way this year :shrug:

thanks for sharing :wavey:


So? Doesn't mean it's alright. I was hoping with all the :bs: about the new tour, they would fix this mistake. :shrug:

Matt01
12-31-2008, 05:02 PM
So? Doesn't mean it's alright. I was hoping with all the :bs: about the new tour, they would fix this mistake. :shrug:


It wasn't a mistake. Best of 3 final is fine :shrug:

scoobs
12-31-2008, 05:06 PM
3 sets or 5 it would be nice to have a competitive final. The last three have been fairly splat matches.

LinkMage
12-31-2008, 05:08 PM
It wasn't a mistake. Best of 3 final is fine :shrug:


No, it's fucking bullshit. Like how they got rid of best of 5 finals in AMS tournaments and introduced byes for the top 8 seeds. :fiery:

GlennMirnyi
12-31-2008, 05:10 PM
3-set finals = bullshit.

Winnipeg
12-31-2008, 05:13 PM
3-set finals = bullshit.

exactly!

oranges
12-31-2008, 05:27 PM
exactly!

+1

nobama
12-31-2008, 06:45 PM
So? Doesn't mean it's alright. I was hoping with all the :bs: about the new tour, they would fix this mistake. :shrug:You were expecting something different for '09? :confused:

Chip_s_m
12-31-2008, 06:55 PM
3 set finals make tennis more desirable for TV networks to cover since the length of the match is more predictable. Sure, a 5-set final might be more fun, but I've got no problem with 3-setters if it means better coverage, which ultimately means more money coming into tennis.

LinkMage
12-31-2008, 06:58 PM
For TV networks in the USA since most Americans have short attention spans, no wonder they watch that crap called American Football where play is stopped every 10 seconds. I never had any coverage problems when AMS events had best of 5 finals.

Chip_s_m
12-31-2008, 07:11 PM
For TV networks in the USA since most Americans have short attention spans, no wonder they watch that crap called American Football where play is stopped every 10 seconds. I never had any coverage problems when AMS events had best of 5 finals.

Play frequently stops in less than 10 seconds in a tennis match. Do you have a short attention span too?

It's about scheduling, and this problem exists for all TV networks, including those outside the US. If a long tennis match (or any program) ends up extending into another program, then the TV network doesn't make as much money. Therefore, TV networks aren't as willing to shell out as much money to broadcast events with indefinite lengths. It'll still get shown, but the tournament/ATP won't make as much money. It's actually pretty simple.

Henry Chinaski
12-31-2008, 07:17 PM
3 sets or 5 it would be nice to have a competitive final. The last three have been fairly splat matches.

?

Nalbandian - Tsonga was competitive, as was Murray v Simon. Murray v Djok was a tight one as well. That's 3 of the last 4 that would've justified a best of 5 match.

LinkMage
12-31-2008, 07:22 PM
Play frequently stops in less than 10 seconds in a tennis match. Do you have a short attention span too?


Good thing tennis resumes after some seconds, not 2 minutes like in American Football. Also good thing that shit called timeouts are not allowed.


It's about scheduling, and this problem exists for all TV networks, including those outside the US. If a long tennis match (or any program) ends up extending into another program, then the TV network doesn't make as much money. Therefore, TV networks aren't as willing to shell out as much money to broadcast events with indefinite lengths. It'll still get shown, but the tournament/ATP won't make as much money. It's actually pretty simple.


Yeah, I'm sure many people watch fishing, billiards, darts or poker which is what ESPN shows a lot these days. God forbid tennis cuts out these awesome "sports".

LinkMage
12-31-2008, 07:25 PM
?

Nalbandian - Tsonga was competitive, as was Murray v Simon. Murray v Djok was a tight one as well. That's 3 of the last 4 that would've justified a best of 5 match.


I think he was talking about the last 3 Masters Cup finals. It's not someones fault FedGod was on court in the 2006 and 2007 finals. :worship:

Henry Chinaski
12-31-2008, 07:27 PM
that makes more sense alright. my mistake.

oranges
12-31-2008, 07:55 PM
Well, shouldn't TV networks worry more about their viewers preferences than easier scheduling and should we boycott viewing 3-set finals to make it clear what that preference is? Besides, in this day and age, organizing a live stream really shouldn't be problem and ATP shouldn't have a problem raising as much money that way if the networks are not interested. Bottom line, lets keep it about tennis, not the interest of some dickhead who can't think of anything else but the numbers seen in various charts.

nobama
12-31-2008, 08:07 PM
Yeah, I'm sure many people watch fishing, billiards, darts or poker which is what ESPN shows a lot this days. God forbid tennis cuts out these awesome "sports".I wouldn't call them sports. :o But no doubt they're cheaper to show than tennis is.

Chip_s_m
12-31-2008, 08:23 PM
Good thing tennis resumes after some seconds, not 2 minutes like in American Football. Also good thing that shit called timeouts are not allowed.





Yeah, I'm sure many people watch fishing, billiards, darts or poker which is what ESPN shows a lot this days. God forbid tennis cuts out these awesome "sports".

I don't like American football much either, so I'm not going to try and defend it. I'm here to explain the reasoning behind implementing 3-set finals, which I did pretty clearly. Bashing American attention spans doesn't address that argument.

And for the record, I'm not talking about just ESPN, as I made clear (I hate those "sports" too). I'm talking about TV networks everywhere. All of them are willing to pay more to broadcast an event with a definite time limit, all else equal. You can come up with another smartass remark about Americans/American Sports/ESPN/Me to try and disprove my argument, but I'm going to stick to the relevant issue. :wavey:

amirbachar
12-31-2008, 11:07 PM
2008 top30 will only be accepted automatically for 500 events and not for the masters.
"E. Commitment Player Entry Exception – Top 30
Commitment players are automatically accepted into the main draw of all ATP World
Tour 500 events in which they have entered in a proper manner." (page 12)

Nathaliia
12-31-2008, 11:47 PM
3 set finals are for the ladies but then again, it's not like we have many men on the ATP Tour these days, and the ones who are real, are not reaching the finals ffs.

kiwi10is
01-01-2009, 02:15 PM
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/2009_Rulebook.pdf

:wavey:

The link doesn't work anymore :confused:

duong
01-01-2009, 04:56 PM
The link doesn't work anymore :confused:

I've downloaded it, but anyway it's only a first version so far, especially for the rankings,

because it's still not clear at all for the "best 4 ATP-500" and for the Davis Cup implications in the rankings.

For instance, for the best 4 ATP-500, they say "the best 4 in the calendar year" (which means from the 1st of january if I'm not wrong ?),

whereas for the Grand Slams and the Masters Series they say "in the ranking period" (whioch means the last 52 weeks).

Then has to be precised the way they calculate the rankiongs in the beginning of the year (I guess they relax the "4 ATP-500" rule and allow to count an ATP-250 tournament if the result of a "ATP-500" of the preceding year disappears from the rankings).

And they even didn't make it clear for the players who don't have to play 4 "ATP-500 tournaments" that they can count another tournament instead :rolleyes:

Deboogle!.
01-01-2009, 09:43 PM
IMO this rule is great :haha: :haha:
-------------

A player’s number of ATP World Tour Masters 1000 commitment tournaments shall be
reduced by one (1) tournament for reaching each of the following milestones:
1) 600 matches (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
2) 12 years of service
3) 31 years of age (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
If all three (3) conditions are met then the player has a complete exemption from the
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 player commitment.
The first Year of Service shall be the first calendar year in which a player has competed
in at least twelve (12) tournaments offering ranking points.

---------------

So that means even top 10 players who've played over 600 matches by today only have to play 7 of the 9 instead of 8 of the 9 like everyone else? :haha: :haha: Does that mean Federer or Roddick or whoever could skip another 1000 event and not get a 0-pointer? Or are top 10 players still required? What a joke :lol:

Lee
01-01-2009, 10:14 PM
IMO this rule is great :haha: :haha:
-------------

A player’s number of ATP World Tour Masters 1000 commitment tournaments shall be
reduced by one (1) tournament for reaching each of the following milestones:
1) 600 matches (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
2) 12 years of service
3) 31 years of age (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
If all three (3) conditions are met then the player has a complete exemption from the
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 player commitment.
The first Year of Service shall be the first calendar year in which a player has competed
in at least twelve (12) tournaments offering ranking points.

---------------

So that means even top 10 players who've played over 600 matches by today only have to play 7 of the 9 instead of 8 of the 9 like everyone else? :haha: :haha: Does that mean Federer or Roddick or whoever could skip another 1000 event and not get a 0-pointer? Or are top 10 players still required? What a joke :lol:


:confused::confused::confused::confused:

I hate rule books :p

amirbachar
01-02-2009, 12:27 AM
IMO this rule is great :haha: :haha:
-------------

A player’s number of ATP World Tour Masters 1000 commitment tournaments shall be
reduced by one (1) tournament for reaching each of the following milestones:
1) 600 matches (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
2) 12 years of service
3) 31 years of age (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
If all three (3) conditions are met then the player has a complete exemption from the
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 player commitment.
The first Year of Service shall be the first calendar year in which a player has competed
in at least twelve (12) tournaments offering ranking points.

---------------

So that means even top 10 players who've played over 600 matches by today only have to play 7 of the 9 instead of 8 of the 9 like everyone else? :haha: :haha: Does that mean Federer or Roddick or whoever could skip another 1000 event and not get a 0-pointer? Or are top 10 players still required? What a joke :lol:

No, he will get a 0-pointer.
The commitment reduction is just for the bonus pool at the end of the year (2M$ for the year end no. 1 for example, but only if he played all 8 mandatory masters and YEC).

duong
01-02-2009, 07:43 AM
No, he will get a 0-pointer.
The commitment reduction is just for the bonus pool at the end of the year (2M$ for the year end no. 1 for example, but only if he played all 8 mandatory masters and YEC).

yes, I understood it the same way.

Deboogle!.
01-02-2009, 03:38 PM
No, he will get a 0-pointer.
The commitment reduction is just for the bonus pool at the end of the year (2M$ for the year end no. 1 for example, but only if he played all 8 mandatory masters and YEC).No, it has more consequences than that. Considering the very strict rules regarding suspension from your highest-point 1000 event the following year, and if you are injured you must go to the tourney within the first three days and all that stuff about missing a 1000 event without an excuse, it should let them out of this for one additional event. By my reading, it will allow guys who've played 600 matches (which at least 2 of the current top 10 have) to just willy-nilly miss another event and pay no consequences for it. And if you pull it out even further, it means a player like Santoro or Moya (assuming for a second they're ranked high enough to get into them all) has ZERO commitment to 1000 events! I understand the logic behind it - if you have given a lot of "service" to the tour, you should have fewer requirements, but so many other rules were put in place to get the top players at these 1000 events, and this just seems to be so counterintuitive to that and just a little bit arbitrary, especially the 600 match level, considering the guys in the top 10 who've reached that are only 26 and 27 years old and can surely play all 8 required events from a physical standpoint.

Jelena
01-02-2009, 03:48 PM
3-set finals = bullshit.
At least for TMS/AMS whatever they are called now and the wtf (WorldTourFinal) I agree completely

ZackBusner
01-02-2009, 04:44 PM
The rulebook still hasn't returned to the ATP website. :(

Could somebody who downloaded it send me a copy by mail? Or upload it somewhere? I know it's a lot of MB but I'm very curious and impatient :p

sweetymessi
01-02-2009, 05:18 PM
The rulebook still hasn't returned to the ATP website. :(

Could somebody who downloaded it send me a copy by mail? Or upload it somewhere? I know it's a lot of MB but I'm very curious and impatient :p

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/aboutatp/structure.asp

ZackBusner
01-02-2009, 05:19 PM
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/aboutatp/structure.asp

:wavey:
They have removed it. That's why I'm asking.
When I click on the rulebook link on that page it says "page not found" (http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/common/trackIt.asp?file=/en/players/2009_Rulebook.pdf)

Edit: Okay, now it works again, thanks anyway

greatkingrat
01-03-2009, 10:26 AM
I think the link may be case-sensitive

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/2009_rulebook.pdf works for me but
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/2009_Rulebook.pdf does not work.

smucav
01-04-2009, 03:24 PM
IMO this rule is great :haha: :haha:
So that means even top 10 players who've played over 600 matches by today only have to play 7 of the 9 instead of 8 of the 9 like everyone else? :haha: :haha: Does that mean Federer or Roddick or whoever could skip another 1000 event and not get a 0-pointer? Or are top 10 players still required? What a joke :lol:No, it has more consequences than that. Considering the very strict rules regarding suspension from your highest-point 1000 event the following year, and if you are injured you must go to the tourney within the first three days and all that stuff about missing a 1000 event without an excuse, it should let them out of this for one additional event. By my reading, it will allow guys who've played 600 matches (which at least 2 of the current top 10 have) to just willy-nilly miss another event and pay no consequences for it. And if you pull it out even further, it means a player like Santoro or Moya (assuming for a second they're ranked high enough to get into them all) has ZERO commitment to 1000 events! I understand the logic behind it - if you have given a lot of "service" to the tour, you should have fewer requirements, but so many other rules were put in place to get the top players at these 1000 events, and this just seems to be so counterintuitive to that and just a little bit arbitrary, especially the 600 match level, considering the guys in the top 10 who've reached that are only 26 and 27 years old and can surely play all 8 required events from a physical standpoint.

Commitment players who qualify for an event reduction can withdraw (on time) from one 1000-level event w. no penalty (except a zero-pointer) & meet their player commitments for the year (providing that they meet the other aspects of the commitment).

pages 11-12

D.Commitment
The commitment for the commitment players is, the singles event of all ATP World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments for which he is accepted, the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals (if qualified as a direct acceptance or designated as the alternate) and four (4) ATP World Tour 500 tournaments, one (1) of which must be held following the US Open. For commitment and ranking purposes, the Monte Carlo Masters 1000 will be included in the minimum requirements for the 500 category. 2009 Davis Cup points may be counted as one (1) of four (4) in the ATP World Tour 500 category rankings, however, it shall not count towards the commitment requirement of a commitment player.

2) Players meeting criteria for a one (1) event reduction in their ATP World Tour Masters 1000 commitment.
a) Must play in seven (7) of the eight (8) mandatory ATP World Tour Masters 1000 events.
i) Not playing in one (1) event results in a 50% reduction of bonus.
ii) Not playing in two (2) events renders the player ineligible for the bonus.
b) And must play, if qualified, in the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals.
i) Not playing, if qualified, the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals renders the player ineligible for the bonus.
ii) A player who is otherwise qualified but does not play in the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals may receive 80% of earned bonus by appearing at the finals event to do promotional activities, as determined by the ATP.

(Note that this rule is in the commitment/bonus section of the rulebook, not the rankings section. Any direct-acceptance player who withdraws from a required event receives a zero-pointer. This rule has been in place since 2000.)

This rule only applies to 2009 commitment players. (The players you cited--Santoro & Moya--aren't 2009 commitment players so this rule has nothing to do w. them.) Only three players have qualified for one commitment reduction in 2009: Federer, Roddick, & Safin. All other players must play each mandatory event they are directly accepted to (unless legitimately injured).

TheBoiledEgg
01-04-2009, 06:25 PM
IMO this rule is great :haha: :haha:
-------------

A player’s number of ATP World Tour Masters 1000 commitment tournaments shall be
reduced by one (1) tournament for reaching each of the following milestones:
1) 600 matches (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
2) 12 years of service
3) 31 years of age (as of 1 January of the commitment year)
If all three (3) conditions are met then the player has a complete exemption from the
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 player commitment.
The first Year of Service shall be the first calendar year in which a player has competed
in at least twelve (12) tournaments offering ranking points.

---------------

So that means even top 10 players who've played over 600 matches by today only have to play 7 of the 9 instead of 8 of the 9 like everyone else? :haha: :haha: Does that mean Federer or Roddick or whoever could skip another 1000 event and not get a 0-pointer? Or are top 10 players still required? What a joke :lol:

why not give them a free airplane ticket for each tourn as well
its like an OAP bus-pass all those freebies for the OAP's

sweetymessi
12-23-2009, 04:42 PM
2010 Rulebook
Barclays ATP World Tour Finals - Singles

All matches shall be the best of three (3) tie-break sets, including the final.
:fiery:

Roddickominator
12-24-2009, 03:35 AM
Such crap. All finals should be 5-sets....especially the WTF Final.