The 'ATP 500 Rule' should be cancelled [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The 'ATP 500 Rule' should be cancelled

Blackbriar
02-08-2011, 06:09 PM
The 'ATP 500 Rule' should be cancelled

This 500 rule is an a aberration, when the first 500 arrive, there are always players who are screwed over players who are heavily favored. All players between 25 and 30 have no other choice but to go to the 500, knowing they may face top 10 players on first round. So unless a (very rare) upset happens, they are out as soon as first round. They can have good draw too, but will have to face a seed on second round anyway, so winning 20 pts is not that interesting.

On the other hand players just below 30 can go freely to 250 events full of mugs, and are not really threaten until the QF. Worst, they even have BYE on first rounds! Meanings they just have to win one match to win 45 pts, while others must shake the Pillars of Sky just to gain as many points in 500 events!

an example:
Hewitt is ranked 67 and seeded 7 at San Jose:
1st round: Bjorn Phau (0)
2nd round: Alejandro Falla (20)

Bagdhatis ended the year in top 30, congrats to him. Sadly this is his prize:
1st round: Andy Murray (20)

Same amount of points, not exactly the same challenge if you ask me.

You can tell me some top 30 choose to go to 250 events too. That's their right, so far. But don't forget that sooner or later, they will have to play a 500 events. If Monfils wins 3 small events like San Jose this year, he will have to say bye-bye to his last 250 points as soon as he will have fulfilled his 4 'ATP 500 derogatory events'. And good luck winning more points! The only way is to reach a 500 final!

many top 30 players end the season with:
ATP 500 events:
90
90
45
45
best of other tournaments:
250
150

Don't you see something wrong?

n8
02-08-2011, 07:19 PM
I agree that it can be unfair. But even if you put fairness aside, the '500 rule' is still annoying because it makes ranking calculation too complicated in my opinion.

Arkulari
02-08-2011, 07:21 PM
I agree, it's a clownish rule and pretty stupid if you ask me, same as the mandatory MS rule, players should decide which tournaments they want to play :shrug:

shuhrat
02-08-2011, 07:29 PM
I agree that it can be unfair. But even if you put fairness aside, the '500 rule' is still annoying because it makes ranking calculation too complicated in my opinion.
+1 One of the most important reasons why they changed the system was making it easier for the casual fans to follow. And now with the Commitment/Non-commitment player or all the 500 rules, it's gotten even worse. :o

Blackbriar
02-08-2011, 07:43 PM
I think a certain amount of MS should be mandatory but not all of them. Players have to forfeit for very "strange" reasons to avoid some events.

oranges
02-08-2011, 07:57 PM
Definitely. IMO almost no freedom to schedule is the biggest issue, followed by advantage of being 31 rather than 30 at the end of the season. ATP not being able to follow its system says all that needs to be said about complications with rankings calculations.

Jomp1
02-08-2011, 08:19 PM
No. Sponsors and organizers spend a lot of money on these 500 and MS tournaments to give us quality tournaments. If players could go wherever they wanted despite ranking tennis would lose. I don't want to see top20 players cruise through MM tournaments where the fields are weak on a weekly basis just because they can.

I think a certain amount of MS should be mandatory but not all of them. Players have to forfeit for very "strange" reasons to avoid some events.

I can count the times this happen on my fingers, and it's exlusively top4 players doing it. If they don't wanna play then their loss. Players want to play the Masters tournaments, that's where the prestige, ranking points and money lies. Remember that Slams are not ATP-events.

Mjau!
02-08-2011, 08:59 PM
All mandatory rules should be cancelled. They are stupid? Let players schedule as they like.

Certinfy
02-08-2011, 09:00 PM
Totally agreed.

oranges
02-08-2011, 09:11 PM
No. Sponsors and organizers spend a lot of money on these 500 and MS tournaments to give us quality tournaments. If players could go wherever they wanted despite ranking tennis would lose. I don't want to see top20 players cruise through MM tournaments where the fields are weak on a weekly basis just because they can.


Top 10-15 will still mostly go to 500 due to both money and points, just as they did to gold series before, rather than some weaker ones.

Another thing, make Queens and Halle 500 whether they want to or not. It's ridiculous to get 250 points for the win there when the field is stronger than some 500. That would also alleviate some of the scheduling problems as it would count as one 500 played.

TommyCZE
02-08-2011, 10:51 PM
I agree as well, but u have one mistake in the first post. Its 45 points for R2 in 500s, not 20 as in 250s tourns. 500 tournaments are mostly entertaining, but its true that the players r 20-30 mostly suffer form that rule with not getting needed results in them. I mean the whole new structure of points is a rubbish. Its by far favored for the top players, big diferences between F, SF and earlier rounds. The previus structure of 1000-700-450 was a lot more competitive than present 1000-600-360. WTA went for that 2000-1400-900 in GS and so on and its better. And the groupings of masters, 500 and 250 is bad too, past model of 500Masters, 250, 175 events was fairer. Nowadays its better for playes ranked 70-100 to play challengers than 250s or try to Q to 500 or 1000.

n8
02-09-2011, 01:54 AM
I agree as well, but u have one mistake in the first post. Its 45 points for R2 in 500s, not 20 as in 250s tourns. 500 tournaments are mostly entertaining, but its true that the players r 20-30 mostly suffer form that rule with not getting needed results in them. I mean the whole new structure of points is a rubbish. Its by far favored for the top players, big diferences between F, SF and earlier rounds. The previus structure of 1000-700-450 was a lot more competitive than present 1000-600-360. WTA went for that 2000-1400-900 in GS and so on and its better. And the groupings of masters, 500 and 250 is bad too, past model of 500Masters, 250, 175 events was fairer. Nowadays its better for playes ranked 70-100 to play challengers than 250s or try to Q to 500 or 1000.

Depends on the draw size. Barcelona, Hamburg and Washington only give 20 points for first round wins because their draw size is greater than 32.

Pipsy
02-09-2011, 03:20 AM
While I agree that the 500 Rule is not completely fair or ideal and needs fine-tuning, I disagree with the following points:

+1 One of the most important reasons why they changed the system was making it easier for the casual fans to follow. And now with the Commitment/Non-commitment player or all the 500 rules, it's gotten even worse. :o

I think you could argue it is a lot clearer for the casual fans. Tournaments giving away 2000, 1000, 500 or 250 points makes complete sense to a most people. I'd argue once you get into the ins and outs of exactly how they need to structure their calendar in terms of how many of each they play, you're getting into a different kind of fan. The kind that most of us on here are, and we should be able to deal with it!

All mandatory rules should be cancelled. They are stupid? Let players schedule as they like.

Let us not forget that it is the job of ATP Tour professionals to play tennis. The fans pay money in advance to watch the players they think will be competing. If a player has a legitimate excuse for missing a tournament then so be it, there's already rules to allow that. Yes, it can make for a tough scedule but then the schedule should be changed, not the rules of mandatory participation. That's just my opinion...

duong
02-09-2011, 08:40 AM
Depends on the draw size. Barcelona, Hamburg and Washington only give 20 points for first round wins because their draw size is greater than 32.

yes but Hamburg and Washington draws are not that great, it's different for Barcelona.

duong
02-09-2011, 08:49 AM
No. Sponsors and organizers spend a lot of money on these 500 and MS tournaments to give us quality tournaments. If players could go wherever they wanted despite ranking tennis would lose. I don't want to see top20 players cruise through MM tournaments where the fields are weak on a weekly basis just because they can.

yes one has to remember that the ATP500-rule was introduced in compensation for a big increase in the prize money for these tournaments.

It's true that the ATP500 rule didn't change anything for the biggest ATP500 tournaments which are Dubai and Barcelona.

Rotterdam improved a little bit.

The improvement of the field was more obvious for Beijing and Basel.

Washington, Memphis, Acapulco, Tokyo (all non-European tournaments), also Valencia, also improved but are maybe not (even more for Hamburg) where you would expect an ATP500 tournament to be.

duong
02-09-2011, 08:57 AM
About the "unfairness in ranking points", there are 4 very good ATP500 tournaments which are Barcelona, Rotterdam, Dubai and Beijing where the draws are great.

And there are other easier ones.

Basel in an intermediate position.

For the 4 or 5 biggest ATP500 tournaments, it's true that it can be tough and it's true that top30 players may be unhappy with a bad draw as you say.

But for other ATP500 tournaments it's easier.

And 45 points for a R16 are much more than 20 points for the same round in an ATP250 tournament.

See De Bakker and Tursunov : I'm sure they are quite happy with that ;)

Blackbriar
02-09-2011, 09:28 AM
Heroic run in Dubai 2008 ATP 500
an unseeded Lopez reached finals:
R32 Tipsarevic
R16 Berdych
QF Ferrer
SF Davydenko
F Roddick

Fluke run in Marseille 2008 ATP 250:
A 4th seed Murray wins the title:
R32 Huta Galung
R16 Wawrinka
QF Mahut
SF Mathieu
W Ancic

Lopez reward for his courageous run next to Murray's cakewalk? 50 points.

duong
02-09-2011, 09:34 AM
Heroic run in Dubai 2008 ATP 500
an unseeded Lopez reached finals:
R32 Tipsarevic
R16 Berdych
QF Ferrer
SF Davydenko
F Roddick

Fluke run in Marseille 2008 ATP 250:
A 4th seed Murray wins the title:
R32 Huta Galung
R16 Wawrinka
QF Mahut
SF Mathieu
W Ancic

Lopez reward for his courageous run next to Murray's cakewalk? 50 points.

In 2008 there was no "ATP500 tournaments" rule :lol:

What you proove here, as well as what Judio said, is that well, the tournaments in the same category may have different difficulties and there may be lucky and unlucky draws as well ... and that's always been the case ;)

I could say something more : compare Beijing (ATP500) and Shanghai (MS1000), especially in 2009 (Lopez is also concerned by the way ;)) : frankly speaking Shanghai gave twice many points but Beijing was not much worse.

Lopez
02-09-2011, 09:41 AM
Another thing, make Queens and Halle 500 whether they want to or not. It's ridiculous to get 250 points for the win there when the field is stronger than some 500. That would also alleviate some of the scheduling problems as it would count as one 500 played.

I agree in principle, but in practice it's difficult. 500-tournaments have to pay more money according to ATP rules.

Blackbriar
02-09-2011, 10:30 AM
I could say something more : compare Beijing (ATP500) and Shanghai (MS1000), especially in 2009 (Lopez is also concerned by the way ;)) : frankly speaking Shanghai gave twice many points but Beijing was not much worse.

It's completely different. MS are derogatory, you must play them if your ranking allows you to. There is no question about coming or not to a MS event, since you have no choice.

Coming to an ATP 500 with 5-6 top 10 players instead of an ATP 250 with 1 top 10 and 2 top 20 is absurd. The ONLY reason they do that is because they are FORCED to do that by the Rule of 500. Baghdatis would be seed n°3 at San Jose, and here he plays second seed on first round! It has nothing to do with luck, since he is no seed, he is no different than a WC.

There is NO WAY these guys would choose to come to a tourny knowing that they can logically lose on first round, instead of going to another one where they could reach semis without playing a top 30!!

It's just about sponsors and their gluttonery for money who created this second-rate MS events. Just ask 20-30 players what they think of this rule.

And please, watch the finals of the ATP 500 last year:
Acapulco - David Ferrer (top 20) d. Juan Carlos Ferrero (22) (seeds 3 & 4)
Barcelona - Fernando Verdasco (top 10) d. Robin Soderling (top 10)
Basel - Roger Federer (top 5) d. Novak Djokovic (top 5)
Beijing - Novak Djokovic (top 5) d. David Ferrer (top 10)
Dubai - Novak Djokovic (top 5) d. Mikhael Youzhny (top 15)
Hamburg - Andrei Golubev (82) d. Jurgen Melzer (top 15)(seed 3)
Memphis - Sam Querrey (31) d. John Isner (25) (seeds 5 & 8)
Rotterdam - Andy Murray (top 5) d. Rafael Nadal (n°1)
Tokyo - Rafael Nadal (n°1) d. Gael Monfils (top 15)(seed 2)
Valencia - David Ferrer (top 10) d. Marcel Granollers (LL)
Washington - David Nalbandian (+100) d. Marcos Baghdatis (26)(seed 8)

in green, top 10, in red, unseeded players.

ATP 500 winners are nearly the same than MS winners and top 10 win nearly all the time, with few top 20 in the mix.

duong
02-09-2011, 10:46 AM
Coming to an ATP 500 with 5-6 top 10 players instead of an ATP 250 with 1 top 10 and 2 top 20 is absurd. The ONLY reason they do that is because they are FORCED to do that by the Rule of 500. Baghdatis would be seed n°3 at San Jose, and here he plays second seed on first round! It has nothing to do with luck, since he is no seed, he is no different than a WC.


I understand what you say which is partly true, but it's more complicated than that : before the ATP500 rule, the draws in Rotterdam, Dubai and Barcelona, the toughest ATP500 tournaments now together with Beijing, nearly had the same difficulty.

The ATP500 rule may have an effect but not so much.

And the effect is stronger on easier ATP500 tournaments, where top30 players have not so much to complain about (esp as there are 45 points for a R16), than on tournaments like Rotterdam or Dubai.

See Dimitrov why he came to Rotterdam : it's in Europe, pleasant tournament, there's good money to get ... this existed before the ATP500 rule, this was why Rotterdam, Dubai and Barcelona had great draws already in the past.

The Queens and Halle also have great draws for other reason (Wimbledon's proximity especially, pleasant tournaments and also good money of course).

Blackbriar
02-09-2011, 11:07 AM
7/11 winners were top 10. i mean, Monfils goes to San Jose to win the title, Melzer goes to Rotterdam to win some match and fulfill his ATP 500 ratio.

duong
02-09-2011, 11:12 AM
7/11 winners were top 10. i mean, Monfils goes to San Jose to win the title, Melzer goes to Rotterdam to win some match and fulfill his ATP 500 ratio.

and because it gives twice as many points for the same round reached

By the way, if you looked at 2009, the winners of ATP500 tournaments were even better than in 2010.

Blackbriar
02-09-2011, 11:15 AM
ok, but why make it derogatory? Some players dont want to play in bigger fields, and prefer to fly under the radar. It should be their choice too, no?

duong
02-09-2011, 11:19 AM
ok, but why make it derogatory? Some players dont want to play in bigger fields, and prefer to fly under the radar. It should be their choice too, no?

the reason of the introduction of ATP500 rule is money and that's all.

The prize money increased and to let tournaments accept that, the ATP needed to ensure that top-players came there.

Hence the rule.

Hence the fact that the Queens and Halle stayed ATP250 tournament.

After then, like every rule, it has its bad consequences, but players are also concerned about good money :lol:

oranges
02-09-2011, 02:08 PM
I agree in principle, but in practice it's difficult. 500-tournaments have to pay more money according to ATP rules.

Yes, but I don't see how it's relevant here. The fact is Queens and Halle are not motivated to offer more money for the simple reason that they'll get the 500 field regardless because everyone will play either one or the other as warmup for Wimbledon. Present them with an option 'we want a 500 tournament in this week, either upgrade your status or we'll be forced to seek another venue'. Doubt they'd have any more difficulty turning a profit than any other 500 tournament.

n8
02-13-2011, 11:52 AM
The draw for ATP250 Marseille is better than ATP500 Memphis this week. A fair bit better too!

Hewitt =Legend
02-13-2011, 12:44 PM
The draw for ATP250 Marseille is better than ATP500 Memphis this week. A fair bit better too!

It always is. Just the same field from San Jose plus Roddick and a couple of guys who have travelled from Europe after Zagreb and Rotterdam.