The root of all evil on the ATP tour: Prize and Appearance $ [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The root of all evil on the ATP tour: Prize and Appearance $

sawan66278
10-30-2006, 03:29 AM
I think I have discovered the root of two main problems on the men's tour today: the dearth of quality challengers to Roger's throne and the number of withdrawals by the top players in tourneys like Paris: MONEY!!!

Players today, by making it to the second, third, and quarters of tourneys, make as much or more than players ten years ago did winning tourneys. This has led to a decrease in desire among players for the ultimate prize. So what if I can't come beat Roger, I'm still banking...

This has also led to the huge # of pull-outs...why play, when I can make it to the semis next week and win a huge amount...

I think this is a sad but true reality...comments?

Action Jackson
10-30-2006, 03:33 AM
Wow, what a surprise that basic capitalism is in place with appearance money. It's not hard to work out, the bigger name, the more tickets sold, the more money generated. What are they going to pay them in ice cream or what?

sawan, it's pro sport so it stands to reason there is going to be money about. What do you think they should play for nothing? If you want to watch amateurs go to the park.

nobama
10-30-2006, 03:53 AM
Andy Roddick is currently 5th in the rankings. Ljubicic is 4th. Roddick made the semis in Paris last year. Ljubicic made the finals. So by not playing Roddick looses 225 ranking points, Ljubicic 350 ranking points. Players 3-6 in the rankings are so close that results in Paris and Shanghai will impact seedings for AO. I'm sure any of these guys would rather face a Federer or Nadal in the semis than the quarters. I don't think this has anything to do with money.

sawan66278
10-30-2006, 04:10 AM
Again, look at the years players like Lendl and Vilas had...the went from country to country...doing whatever they could to win...why? Because the money was not as huge as it is today...

I am not suggesting that players should play for free, etc. I am not trying to provide solutions, just making observations. Obviously, Humpty Dumpty cannot be put back together again. And with respect to Roddick and Lubo, I'm referring more to players from #6 to #30...like Gaudio, Robredo, and Fat Dave...

Have some honor...they fight in one match, then tank the next...Obviously, the $ is more important than the ranking, etc...

Action Jackson
10-30-2006, 04:15 AM
Players have tanked matches before and will do so in the future, the only way that would limit it is to make every tournament result count, but it doesn't work like that.

It's not the 70s anymore sawan get with the program, these guys played plenty of exhibitions then and got paid huge money to play there. There were WCT events which had plenty of money compared to tour events at the same.

It might be less cash then, but they weren't exactly poor.

Tennis Fool
10-30-2006, 04:17 AM
I want to make an association between the ATP tour and Starbucks but I'm not sure how :scratch:

Action Jackson
10-30-2006, 04:18 AM
I want to make an association between the ATP tour and Starbucks but I'm not sure how :scratch:

Try a corruption angle.

Tennis Fool
10-30-2006, 04:20 AM
Try a corruption angle.
Something about how everyone can get their coffee fix, but at what price :p

Action Jackson
10-30-2006, 04:21 AM
Something about how everyone can get their coffee fix, but at what price :p

Well as long as you are not Argentinian, then that could work.

Tennis Fool
10-30-2006, 04:23 AM
To be serious, does anyone know what the range for appearance fees are for top players? When did the era of AF begin?

To me, it seems like there is less tanking than there was 4-5 years ago. Kafelnikov springs to mind here.

The ATP said that having the MC in Shanghai was a mistake, becuase they took the money instead of looking what was best for the tournament. If anything, it starts with the ATP.

Action Jackson
10-30-2006, 04:28 AM
To be serious, does anyone know what the range for appearance fees are for top players? When did the era of AF begin?

To me, it seems like there is less tanking than there was 4-5 years ago. Kafelnikov springs to mind here.

The ATP said that having the MC in Shanghai was a mistake, becuase they took the money instead of looking what was best for the tournament. If anything, it starts with the ATP.

As for the fees the mid 70s when tennis was taking off and they had the boom globally.

Fees it depends on the event and it wouldn't surprise anywhere between 200-500K for the highest profile players. Agassi did it a few times as well, Shanghai and St Polten are the clearest examples, there have been many players who just took the cash and not bothered playing to their level.

Deboogle!.
10-30-2006, 04:29 AM
To be serious, does anyone know what the range for appearance fees are for top players? When I went to Scottsdale a couple years ago (2004 I believe), there was an article about it in the newspaper. I distinctly remember what it said because I was so :eek: - it said Agassi got $300,000 (though he pulled out with the same sciatic injury that ended his career), Roddick got $150,000, and the other players all got a remaining $150,000 COMBINED. Granted the rest of the field was pretty weak, but it just really shocked me to see in black and white how much these small tourneys really need and rely on the one or two stars in their field that they're willing to throw THAT kind of money at them. And that was a couple years ago, I bet it's higher now for the top guys.

On the other hand, I've heard other tourneys are less, I think I read somewhere that Houston was more like $25,000-$50,000 for the top players (but I don't know how accurate that is)... it may be one of those things where some of the more established tourneys that have a group of players who really like and enjoy coming back every year are willing to take less money to play there.

In any case, appearance fees certainly appear to dictate a lot of what happens at the smaller events.

sawan66278
10-30-2006, 05:05 AM
The ATP is becoming much like the PGA tour...a bunch of fat cats who never win...cowering before the only one (in this case Tiger) who actually cares...At the end of the day, second, third, or a first round loss is okay...when the money is SO GOOD;)

TenHound
10-30-2006, 05:17 AM
I believe that appearance fees for Dubai (DoBuy) for top stars is 7 figures - but then that's a bloody corrupt hellhole, so that's not too surprising.

Bremen
10-30-2006, 05:28 AM
Dubuy is right. That place is beyond strange. They want the tallest building, the biggest shopping mall, artificial islands...there's an obsession with setting records that's kinda scary. Sorry to get so off topic.

R.Federer
10-30-2006, 06:03 AM
I think I have discovered the root of two main problems on the men's tour today: the dearth of quality challengers to Roger's throne and the number of withdrawals by the top players in tourneys like Paris: MONEY!!!
Your insight fails to explain what then keeps Roger hankering around the top. Why doesn't he just take the appearance money and run after R1?

Nevertheless, the top few are so rich that I don't think the marginal dollar means that much to them any more. I would bet a lot of money that Lleyton or Andy or Marat would sacrifice a lot of money to get a win over Roger.

Deboogle!.
10-30-2006, 06:09 AM
Your insight fails to explain what then keeps Roger hankering around the top. Why doesn't he just take the appearance money and run after R1?

Nevertheless, the top few are so rich that I don't think the marginal dollar means that much to them any more. I would bet a lot of money that Lleyton or Andy or Marat would sacrifice a lot of money to get a win over Roger.I completely agree. You look at any of these guys and they care about winning. The money is there, and they will follow it for the small events, but considering the slams and Masters tourneys don't give Appearance fee and they care more about winning those than anything. It's a combination of everything - when they can get the money of course they will, but these guys wouldn't be where they are if they didn't want to win and win for the sake of winning. :)

World Beater
10-30-2006, 06:31 AM
I completely agree. You look at any of these guys and they care about winning. The money is there, and they will follow it for the small events, but considering the slams and Masters tourneys don't give Appearance fee and they care more about winning those than anything. It's a combination of everything - when they can get the money of course they will, but these guys wouldn't be where they are if they didn't want to win and win for the sake of winning. :)

right...when you are in top 10...you really arent all that concerned about finances. in fact, many of them could just retire now, and enjoy life. no need to travel, work yourself to death etc. its about the prestige and love for the game...the desire to be the best.

the small tourneys inevitably have to pay the big bucks because they dont have the tradition or prestige that the big events have...also im sure a guy like roddick who probably gets offered a good sum to play in dubai refuses to do so. Or that other players wil play in their home events even if another one may present a higher monetary award

Boris Franz Ecker
10-30-2006, 06:59 AM
Players today, by making it to the second, third, and quarters of tourneys, make as much or more than players ten years ago did winning tourneys.

Wrong, prize money didn't really increase in last ten years apart from Grand Slam tournaments.

nobama
10-30-2006, 11:52 AM
Wrong, prize money didn't really increase in last ten years apart from Grand Slam tournaments.
And the tour doesn't have the grand slam cup anymore where the winner pocketed $2 million.

Dirk
10-30-2006, 12:42 PM
The events have to compete for the player pool so what else do they have but to offer them more money than some other event to get them there. I don't have a problem with it as long as the players getting it are trying to win the event like Roger does.

sawan66278
10-30-2006, 02:26 PM
R.Federer...why does Roger continue to stay at the top? Answer: Because he is a true champion...and drives to utilize his skills to the utmost..

I have been watching tennis for the last 25 years, and to be honest, many of today's players have the same level of skill of many of the players of previous eras...Certain days, they look incredible...However, when adversity hits, they crumble and give up...Fat Dave for example...You can say all you want about money not being a motivating factor for the top ten, but I believe it truly is...why do so many players claim Monte Carlo as the home (or other tax free havens)?

And I am referring more so even to the those out of the top 10...those between 10-25...like Gaudio and Ferrero...

They try and care...but to a point...but when push comes to shove, I really feel the money takes care of the pain that comes from defeat...

Just like the PGA tour...its much easier to simply claim that Tiger (Roger) is the best when you are banking so much even though you come in second...

star
10-30-2006, 02:33 PM
Wrong, prize money didn't really increase in last ten years apart from Grand Slam tournaments.

What about appearance fees? Have they increased in the last 10 years? Does anyone know?

I think that there are more endorsements now than there were say.. 20 years ago... for many players, and especially for the top players.

Aphex
10-30-2006, 02:41 PM
To be serious, does anyone know what the range for appearance fees are for top players? When did the era of AF begin?

To me, it seems like there is less tanking than there was 4-5 years ago. Kafelnikov springs to mind here.

The ATP said that having the MC in Shanghai was a mistake, becuase they took the money instead of looking what was best for the tournament. If anything, it starts with the ATP.
I think I read somewhere Agassi got about $250k for Stockholm Open 2004. John McEnroe (:tape: ) received about $125k this year. And I've read in a semi-serious Swedish tennis book gossip about seven figure numbers for Dubai. I don't know how true that is though.

Ernham
10-30-2006, 02:49 PM
I have already destilled down the prospects for the root of all evil on the tour to 3(or 4, depending on how good your eyes are) possibilities.

Satan versus Nalbandian IV versus Mr. Disney.
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/3048/maratnalbdisneyao6.jpg

Sjengster
10-30-2006, 03:17 PM
sawan's next brilliant theory: the ATP in concert with tournament directors is actually offering backhanders to players to go down to Federer. Oh yes, it's true! What, you think someone could generate an 87-5 season record just by their own good play? Wake up, people!

Sjengster
10-30-2006, 03:20 PM
The money goes into anonymous Swiss bank accounts - naturally enough, Swiss bankers know who they want dominating tennis. It all makes sense now!

kundalini
10-30-2006, 03:34 PM
I think I read somewhere Agassi got about $250k for Stockholm Open 2004. John McEnroe (:tape: ) received about $125k this year. And I've read in a semi-serious Swedish tennis book gossip about seven figure numbers for Dubai. I don't know how true that is though.

Last year Bangkok gave Federer $500K - the article is here somewhere on MTF in which the tournament director quoted all the appearance fees - I think Henman was going to get $100K but he withdrew injured prior to the event.

I would imagine that there is a real price war going on to get the likes of Federer and Nadal. As for the rest, well I doubt there's much interest in Davydenko, Ljubicic, Robredo etc.

Here's some extracts from the article:

BEC-Tero Entertainment is forking out more than Bt50 million in appearance fees to ensure some big names for September’s Thailand Open, which at Bt200 million is the most expensive tennis tournament ever held in Thailand........

Marcar revealed that Federer, was being paid between US$400,000 and $500,000 to make his second visit to the capital.

Safin’s rate was about $350,000 and Henman and Haas will pocket $100,000 each.

“We have to pay around $400,000-$500,000 for Federer alone. That does not include extra money we have to pay for him for each match he wins here,’’ Marcar said.

R.Federer
10-30-2006, 03:41 PM
And I've read in a semi-serious Swedish tennis book gossip about seven figure numbers for Dubai. I don't know how true that is though.
I would believe it readily. How else would a very new tournament in a (very rich) country with no real sporting (let alone tennis) tradition, far off from the prior tournament and the subsequent tournament, attract the top players?

uglyamerican
10-30-2006, 07:50 PM
I thought that the AF would be a lot higher than the number being discussed here.

This is an old and ridiculous sports theory: money makes everyone lazy. I apply the same logic to teachers, and am glad they don't make very much money.

sawan66278
10-31-2006, 04:18 AM
Its sad...but every time people think I am attacking Federer when talking about the competition on the ATP tour...sensitive, aren't we? What really bothers me is the fact that players like Fat Dave cannot even beat the Warinkas of the world...or win sets against them...

Appearance fees, I guess, buy a lot of donuts!!;)

R.Federer
10-31-2006, 05:23 AM
This is an old and ridiculous sports theory: money makes everyone lazy. I apply the same logic to teachers, and am glad they don't make very much money.

I think the prevailing notion on this thread is that it makes players complacent not lazy.

I think there is a grain of truth to this, at some level of players. The top guys, who are knocking on the doors of tennis immortality probably don't give a hoot about the cash. But those who figure they will never be that successful probably figure they may as well take all the money they can, perhaps win a few matches in the process, and run.

Sjengster
10-31-2006, 11:52 AM
Its sad...but every time people think I am attacking Federer when talking about the competition on the ATP tour...sensitive, aren't we? What really bothers me is the fact that players like Fat Dave cannot even beat the Warinkas of the world...or win sets against them...

Appearance fees, I guess, buy a lot of donuts!!;)

Just about every argument you make on this board comes back to attacking Federer in the end, so pull the other one mate.

We can devote an entire essay to Nalbandian's motivation or lack of on tour, but strangely enough he managed to win not just a couple, but three sets against Wawrinka twice in Grand Slams this year. :scratch: And why is it that Stan the Man is suddenly everyone's definition of a no-hoper, "the Wawrinkas of this world"? When he won Umag this year another poster said something to the effect of, "If he can win a title, that gives hope to everyone on the ATP...." Bizarre. And this recent loss was in Switzerland, lest we forget, so the home crowd surely played a part.

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-31-2006, 01:24 PM
Money is the root of all evil...not just in tennis.

Rogiman
10-31-2006, 01:28 PM
Money is the root of all evil...not just in tennis.What does it tell us about you? I thought you said you went to business school? ;)

blosson
10-31-2006, 01:46 PM
What about fooballers who get paid insane amounts of money, much more than "poor" tennis players?

vogus
10-31-2006, 03:09 PM
I think this is a sad but true reality...comments?




yeah, totally, they should abolish all appearance money and prize money and have the players just play for the love of the game. Now that's what tennis is about!

Moron. :o

Rafa = Fed Killa
10-31-2006, 04:47 PM
Originally Posted by Rafa = Fed Killa
Money is the root of all evil...not just in tennis.

Rogiman reply: What does it tell us about you? I thought you said you went to business school?

I am training to be evil :devil:
just like most other people in university (expect the bleeding heart artists) :D

sawan66278
10-31-2006, 06:00 PM
To begin, its a shame that people, rather than having a logical discourse, resort to name calling and complete sarcasm.

Second, Sjeng., I saw the match Fat Dave played against Wawrinka, and believe, me, it was a clear tank job on the part of Wawrinka. He did nothing really impressive, and put up no fight at all...much like he did against Roger in the second set in Madrid...I know, I'm just bashing Roger again:rolleyes:

Seriously, no one is saying the prize money needs to be reduced...but I am saying that it does lead to complaceny, as someone mentioned...Add this to the fact that there are so many tourneys where one can bank, and there you go...What I am saying is that there are only two players in today's game who really care about tennis immortality: Roger and Rafa...While the young guns might be headed in that direction (Gasquet, Bags, Djokovic)...the present crop of players in their prime are happy being the #3, $4, or #5 players in the world...

The old adage is that if you shoot for 100%, you'll likely reach 90%, 90%...likely 80%...These bozos: 75%...reaching 50%!

Pathetic...but I can tell you this, if the money were not so much, there would be one huge factor motivating them to greatness: $$$$$$$$:devil:

almouchie
12-07-2006, 05:40 PM
money , lots of spoils sports, any sports, actually spoils anything
in tennis, what i like most other than sports, its the individual out there, playing against another
one vs one
if u dont play u dont win u dont improve urs ranking & u dont win any money
that if ur were maybe outside the top 50 or so
but anywhere up from that, then every business related ad comes into play
adv, marketing, mananging & what not is the accpetalbe, as the player earn it one way or the other

but the one thing that bugs me most, is the appearance money,the player is getting paid to show up which is not right
u sign a 3 yrs deal to wear nike, that fine, they can pay u whatever obscene amount tiger gets
but for tournie to pay u to show up & most of the time, the players dont bother to do enough, & lose very early just stinks
some player get paid in appearance more than they do winning several tournies
that just blatant wrong
thou it doesnt seem to be changing any time soon

nobama
12-07-2006, 07:32 PM
How else do smaller tournaments attract big names if not for appearance fees? If they can find a way to increase prize money that would help. The winner in Vegas took home $52K. In golf a guy that finishes outside the top 10 will take home more than that. I don't have a problem with appearance fees, I just think they should be out in the open, not secret. If people want to do away with all that just have 9 mandatory AMS events (with increased prize money) and the slams and call it a season.

clandis
12-08-2006, 07:36 AM
I have already destilled down the prospects for the root of all evil on the tour to 3(or 4, depending on how good your eyes are) possibilities.

Satan versus Nalbandian IV versus Mr. Disney.
http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/3048/maratnalbdisneyao6.jpg

:p :p :haha:

The Gucci one
12-09-2006, 02:19 AM
Money is the root of all evil...not just in tennis.

No you have that wrong religion is the root of more evil than money:sad:

R.Federer
12-09-2006, 02:45 AM
"Ladies and gentlemen, we are killing our game," he said.

"It is the economics of the madhouse that a player can receive more than three times the prize money not for winning a tournament but just for turning up."

And the rest of it :

Queen's chief issues cash warning
Rising appearance fees risk "squeezing the lifeblood" out of tennis, the tournament director of the Stella Artois event at Queen's has claimed.
Ian Wight told the Lawn Tennis Writers' Association annual dinner in London that guarantees being paid to players were getting out of control.

Wright admitted: "We are all guilty of putting self-interest ahead of the commercial future of tennis.

"Player appearance fees have reached levels that beggar belief."


We have to manage our tournaments better to improve the incentives and player commitment
ATP tour chairman Etienne de Villiers

Having persuaded world number two Rafael Nadal to commit to playing at Queen's for two years, Wight confessed he is as guilty as anyone else.

But told his audience of players, writers and tournament organisers that self-interest was threatening the long-term health of the sport.

"Ladies and gentlemen, we are killing our game," he said.

"It is the economics of the madhouse that a player can receive more than three times the prize money not for winning a tournament but just for turning up."

ATP tour chairman Etienne de Villiers was in the audience for the speech.

He said the issue of guaranteed payments should be addressed, but he felt Wight's concerns were over-stated.

"We have tracked guarantees as an overall percentage of prize money and they are regularly between 25 and 30%," he said.

"It is impossible to stop the practice in the same way you can't stop people opening the fridge to see what's inside

"We are introducing measures we hope will allow us to understand the practice better.

"Yes, we have to manage our tournaments better to improve the incentives and player commitment.

"Doing that, you will bring the situation involving guarantees back into some kind of equilibrium. What I must emphasise, though, is that this is not a huge crisis."

Story from BBC SPORT:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/sport2/hi/tennis/6213118.stm

sawan66278
12-09-2006, 05:09 AM
After reading the above post, I really feel somewhat validated.;)

Stensland
12-17-2012, 12:22 AM
http://www.tennis.com/news/2012/12/report-nadal-be-offered-12-million-play-vina-del-mar/45686/#.UM5lTXcndWo

Nadal to be offered $1.2 million to play Vina del Mar

yikes!

Alex999
12-17-2012, 01:37 AM
http://www.tennis.com/news/2012/12/report-nadal-be-offered-12-million-play-vina-del-mar/45686/#.UM5lTXcndWo

Nadal to be offered $1.2 million to play Vina del Mar

yikes!
and their total financial commitment is $450,000 (including total prize money $390,000). how can they afford to pay Nadal 1.2 million? It's a small 250 clay tournament.

SliceAce
12-17-2012, 08:43 AM
http://www.tennis.com/news/2012/12/report-nadal-be-offered-12-million-play-vina-del-mar/45686/#.UM5lTXcndWo

Nadal to be offered $1.2 million to play Vina del Mar

yikes!

And Nadal still has the reputation of being the common man and the humble hard worker while Federer has the reputation of elitism and high class lifestyle :help: They're all millionaires...

Nathaliia
01-11-2013, 10:42 AM
i think rafa is considering vina
http://www.latercera.com/noticia/deportes/2013/01/656-503033-9-agente-de-rafael-nadal-estamos-hablando-con-vina-del-mar.shtml

surely better option than australian open, in melbourne they prob dont give appearance fees

latso
01-11-2013, 12:03 PM
The appearance fees are important for the top players only for them to chose which of the few tourneys the said week they should play if they have planned to play this week at the first place.

Maybe in the current case, considering that Rafa hasn't made a dime for several months, he might be a bit more attracted to such an offer, but he wouldn't start there if some virus strikes, that's for sure.

duong
01-11-2013, 12:29 PM
I'm not surprised of that, but if he's in south America that early, he might also consider to play another tournament (Sao Paulo or Buenos-Aires) before Acapulco.

Chirag
01-11-2013, 12:52 PM
I hope he plays :p