10-02-2009, 10:40 PM
They are set to be abondoned this season after the ATP implemented them for some 250 level tournaments. However, in a simlar fashion to what happened in Canada Masters this season - Top 8 reaching quarters - the semifinalists in K.L. this week are made up of seeds one to four.
The ATP i think will still offer byes to the top 8 seeds, but is it worth still offering the bye to the top 4 seeds at entry in MM level tourneys...? Has it worked and is it a good thing to see the top 20 condensed and playing one another from week to week...?
A pro for the byes would be to garauntee the later stages of these tournaments would be filled with the higher quality players... ie; 4 matches to win the title vs five, therefore less work + later starts in the week (potentially thursday).
A con for the byes is that there are less matches to promote for tournament organisers and maybe the fact the 250 level tournaments should be a level playing field so that the challenger level players be afforded an equal shot come the day of the final ie; 4 matches played by each finalist.
A very similar thread is here (http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=151663&highlight=28+draws).
ATP250 tournaments are not mandatory so I think there is no real argument for the extra rest 28 draws provide top players.
Masters Series are compulsary so I think there's a good reason to make them shorter for top seeds. Especially Cincinnati as it is immediately after Canada.
Also, byes in 32 draws make it so you can win a title in four matches. I personally believe this is too little (less wins required than Challengers and Futures).
10-03-2009, 10:26 AM
Definitely given the top players a significant advantage, just like the masters events. This week all the seeded players with byes made the semis - no upsets whatsoever.
Added to the new distribution of ranking points, the gulf between the top players and the journeymen has never been greater.
10-03-2009, 10:47 AM
I don't like how the ATP have grown more and more reluctant at the thought of upsets over the last years, and grant the top players all sorts of advantages in order to keep the ranking summit stagnant.
I don't mind having 32 seeds rather than 16 in slams, even though that step was taken for above mentioned reason.
BYEs suck, and it should definetely not be used in these small tournaments, where as many lower ranked players as possible should get chances.
In a way this is a consequence linked to the homogenization of the surfaces. As the same players go deep in tournaments week in and week out they are granted cons to not wear out completely.
I'm also against mandatory events. Every player should be able to schedule his year exactly the way he see fit.
Furthermore, bring back indoor carpet as a surface, have more grass tournaments, and make the clay season longer and not too tightly packed.
However, at the end of the day, there's way too much money at stake from all corners for any of these points to be heard. :lol:
10-03-2009, 10:51 AM
I'm tempted to vote who cares, just bring back five set finals simply because I care more about it, but I really dislikes byes anywhere. Arrange a better schedule and give players more latitude with their own scheduling, that's it, why would some need to win four or five matches for a title and others five or six.
10-03-2009, 10:52 AM
28 player draws is one of the biggest disgraces ever. Glad it's going.
They should make the clay TMS and Canada/Cincy 64 draws again and make all TMS finals 5 setter again (bar Can/Cin)
10-03-2009, 11:11 AM
5 set finals for TMS events and make sure they aren't back to back.
28 draws are a joke, as for being scrapped, lets see if they do it.
10-03-2009, 02:04 PM
No, get rid of them, give all players a fair chance at a Mickey Mouse title!