Poll: Should the grand slam finalists gain automatic entry into tennis masters cup? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Poll: Should the grand slam finalists gain automatic entry into tennis masters cup?

2003
11-04-2009, 02:45 AM
What do you guys think, should grand slam results be used to determine the field at the TMC?

In the extremely unlikely event of 8 different finalists in a calander year, thats the field right there.

If you only had 5 finalists, use agrigate semi finals/quarter finals, or if you still cant get the last couple resort to the rankings.

This system might help keep pushers like Simon, Mugray, Silly Dick and others out.

Granted the vast bulk of the GS finalists in a calander year do make the TMC anyway, but Tsonga only made it by a hair last year, Soderling might make it this year. Did Bagdahtis make it in 2006? Gonzo in 2007? Can't remember.

Because attacking tennis is what we want to see at TMC, use this system to keep the likes of pushers out.

Granted Murray might make the field anyway on agrigate semis or rankings or a fluke final like US OPEN 2008, but other pushers will be nulified.

Yay or Nay?

Action Jackson
11-04-2009, 02:56 AM
Bring back the Grand Slam Cup, nah they comprised and combined aspects into the TMC.

Learn some tennis history. Albert Costa and ToJo played at the Masters, while not being in the top 8, Costa got in because there is a place reserved for a GS winner outside of the top 8, whereas ToJo was an alternate in 2002.

Gaudio played in 2004 because of his RG win. As for GS finalists, that is too much.

gjr
11-04-2009, 03:34 AM
Slam winners I can understand but finalists, no thanks.

RafitoGoat
11-04-2009, 03:50 AM
I've seen several upsets happen in one side of a draw of grand slam and that is why the finalists not good idea.

fast_clay
11-04-2009, 10:20 AM
i think ivanisevic snuck in in 2001 on the back of the wimbledon win too...

finalists... no... they actually lost + should be able to build enough points on the back of that for a top 8 finish...

Action Jackson
11-04-2009, 10:22 AM
Yes, Goran did as well.

Frooty_Bazooty
11-04-2009, 10:23 AM
NOOOOOO, then we would have had Puerta and Verkerk in the TMC!

If you cant reach the top 8 when you have 1200 points to your name from the final, then you dont deserve to be in the TMC

Certinfy
11-04-2009, 10:27 AM
Na, i think it's good the way it is.

Echoes
11-04-2009, 10:55 AM
What ??? Is this a joke? :(

n8
11-04-2009, 11:03 AM
Currently, the highest ranked Grand Slam champion between 9 and 20 gets entry into the Masters Cup. In my opinion no such end notes should exist; it should just be the top ranked players. That said, I think the Masters Cup should have the top 10 instead of 8. There are ways to make a 10 player draw with 5 matches played by the winner but I won't delve into that here as it is not the subject of the forum.

fast_clay
11-04-2009, 11:54 AM
Currently, the highest ranked Grand Slam champion between 9 and 20 gets entry into the Masters Cup. In my opinion no such end notes should exist; it should just be the top ranked players. That said, I think the Masters Cup should have the top 10 instead of 8. There are ways to make a 10 player draw with 5 matches played by the winner but I won't delve into that here as it is not the subject of the forum.

yeah... after the GS Cup finished i thought the idea of a top 12 knockout tournament would be better... top 4 start at qfs... 5 sets... 2 matches a day OOP + doubles... days rest between matches... no win = no money, no points...

i like the 2 x 4 man event, but, the round robin format is a little bit mickey mouse in comparison with the balls-on-the-line knockout format... imo...

Everko
11-04-2009, 02:40 PM
It's a fabulous uidea. Making grand slam final>>>> winning mug 250 events

oranges
11-04-2009, 02:48 PM
It's a fabulous uidea. Making grand slam final>>>> winning mug 250 events

As always, you're making prefect sense. Those who end up in top 8 will surely be there based on 250 tournaments. Get your 500 points there, and you're all set for TMC

GlennMirnyi
11-04-2009, 02:49 PM
http://www.motifake.com/demotivational-poster/0903/double-facepalm-demotivational-poster-1238022040.jpg

Burrow
11-04-2009, 03:00 PM
NOOOOOO, then we would have had Puerta and Verkerk in the TMC!

If you cant reach the top 8 when you have 1200 points to your name from the final, then you dont deserve to be in the TMC

Puerta did get into the Masters Cup as an alternate cause so many people dropped out that year, luckily enough for Nalbandian.

Noleta
11-04-2009, 03:14 PM
http://i36.tinypic.com/2ngabuh.jpg

rocketassist
11-04-2009, 03:17 PM
What do you guys think, should grand slam results be used to determine the field at the TMC?

In the extremely unlikely event of 8 different finalists in a calander year, thats the field right there.

If you only had 5 finalists, use agrigate semi finals/quarter finals, or if you still cant get the last couple resort to the rankings.

This system might help keep pushers like Simon, Mugray, Silly Dick and others out.

Granted the vast bulk of the GS finalists in a calander year do make the TMC anyway, but Tsonga only made it by a hair last year, Soderling might make it this year. Did Bagdahtis make it in 2006? Gonzo in 2007? Can't remember.

Because attacking tennis is what we want to see at TMC, use this system to keep the likes of pushers out.

Granted Murray might make the field anyway on agrigate semis or rankings or a fluke final like US OPEN 2008, but other pushers will be nulified.

Yay or Nay?

http://icrontic.com/draco/images/news/2008/05/bad_fail.jpg

2003
11-16-2009, 10:41 PM
So it looks as though Soderling is going to sneak in just as Tsonga did last year.

So via my original idea the lineup might look more or less like this;

Federer
Nadal
Soderling
Roddick
Del Potro
Djokovic
Murray
Verdasco/Haas?

Final 3 would be determined by the rankings/performance at mickey mouse events/grand slam semis.

2008 TMC might have looked like this;

Tsonga
Djokovic
Federer
Nadal
Murray
Final 3 would be rather open. Roddick probably wouldn't have made it and rightly so, he had a diabodical year.

As you can see, the lineups ended up being virtually the same. Davydenko may or may not have made it in 2008 and he did do very well making the final, but was still well beaten by king Djoker.

No idea why the reaction to this idea was so filthy, I actually think you would get a very good field from it.

Your only going to have no more than 5 grand slam finalists in any given year, so you do get a good field choosing the final 3 based on grand slam semis/mickey mouse tourneys/ranking.

Goldenoldie
11-17-2009, 08:27 AM
I can imagine a scenario where for example a slam winner gets injured and misses half the season, so his ranking in November is outside the top 8, but he has returned to fitness. In this case he might be a bit unfortunate, but it's the luck of the draw.

In any event, the tickets for London are practically sold out, so it seems like the public are happy with the field as it is.

gusavo
11-17-2009, 08:43 PM
Granted Murray might make the field anyway on agrigate semis or rankings or a fluke final like US OPEN 2008, but other pushers will be nulified.

Yay or Nay?

lol pushers making less gs finals than the others... they play tennis all year around, its the same game

FlameOn
11-17-2009, 09:09 PM
No, it's not fair exactly. Soderling wasn't consistent enough over the whole year to qualify outright.

djb84xi
11-18-2009, 08:48 PM
That would be a crazy idea. It's just better to have the 8 best performers (in terms of points) play at the year end masters cup. Even if a guy is lucky enough to become a finalist at a grand slam, to guarantee him a spot at the year end masters cup is being WAY too generous. That player would need to have great results throughout the entire season, and have enough points to quality for the final event of the season.

http://static.visitlondon.com/assets/video/bigimage/barclays-atp-world-tour-finals.jpg

pesto
11-18-2009, 11:57 PM
Nah, then you make the whole post-USO season even more irrelevant.

When the indoor tourneys go a bit pear-shaped, one of the few points of interest remaining is watching the race for the last few spots in the WTF. They very often get decided in Paris.

And as you say, often the field would hardly change. I don't think the current system is broken - no fix required.

ForehandWinner
11-19-2009, 01:47 AM
No.

gulzhan
11-19-2009, 11:34 AM
I chose first part of the second option-- "No", but without the rest of it, i.e. "it's a stupid idea, you IDIOT" :lol:

Getta
11-20-2009, 05:55 PM
quite frankly an absurd idea.