Mens Tennis Forums banner

Are tennis authorities guilty of negligence?


  • Total voters
    18
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,733 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Andy's announcement got me thinking. Are the players overworked? Is there too many hardcourt tournaments? Should breaks between matches be longer? I remember Djokovic has complained about this as well

If so, what can be done to remedy the situation? And would it actually happen knowing that it's all about money in the end?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,781 Posts
No, let’s stop acting like tennis is indentured servitude. The onus is on these guys to manage their schedule properly. There aren’t that many mandatory tournaments. Besides, at the end of the day they are only mandatory to the extent these players want to participate in the ATP, which itself is voluntary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,515 Posts
I agree with Darth Vaderer. It's tough at the top, but players today have many advantages that past generations lacked. And don't forget that Sampras retired at the age of 31, as did Boris Becker. (The previous British no. 1, Tim Henman, retired at 33.) It should also be borne in mind that Murray's hip problem was long-standing and was always going to limit his longevity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Tennis is one of the unique sports (along with golf and boxing) where the players are completely free to play when they want. Since there are no contracts, they have no legal obligations to play events.

Only with the Masters 1000 requirements, but even then they can be penalized for missing them rather than being banned/suspended.

A lot of the top guys also take on unnecessary exhibitions like the Laver Cup, Kooyong, Mubadala, etc. as well as lower-level tournaments with high appearance fees. Obviously they want to cash in on their abilities while they can, but the additional travel and matches don't help.

Federer just proved you can be #1 playing about two tournaments a month, which is hardly being overworked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,807 Posts
No of course not. If you want to make millions and be remembered in the history books, you have to be prepared to go through hell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
Tennis players complain way too much about everything that don't like...conditions they don't like, ball bounces, courts that don't suit them, injuries that know will happen etc...blah blah blah...tennis players need to take care of their own bodies and be more prepared...it's just part of being athlete, don't want to deal with that stuff...don't be an athlete....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,632 Posts
Federer just proved you can be #1 playing about two tournaments a month, which is hardly being overworked.
To be fair, he achieved #1 because the top wasn't really stacked and the only other contender also played a reduced schedule. In a proper world part time players shouldn't be holding top ranking positions.
That being said, it's players' responsibility to assess the state of their body and how far they can push it. Nobody forces them to overplay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,281 Posts
There is nothing wrong with the schedule at all seriously kinda annoying to hear players keep complaining about it as well. They choose their own schedule. No one is putting a gun to their head and forcing them to play so many tournaments. Only masters are mandatory, not sure about slams. And with Murray case for example, he could skip masters because the fine he would get from skipping masters is nothing to him
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
NFL players get concussions and are brain dead by 40 and have to play week in and week out.

Tennis players go on family trips and stay in their nice hotels and get to travel the world, without destroying their body.... or at least shouldn't be destroying their body...

Tennis, outside of Australian Open 2012 is not the hardest on the body, depending on your playstyle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
857 Posts
A player should play 18 tournaments in order to give themselves the best chance to have a higher ranking and therefore improve their position in the sport; obviously more tournaments than that if they aren't doing very well (lots of 1st/2nd rd losses)

For anyone wondering Murray entered 19 tournaments in 2016 (the year he became no.1) - three of which were the Davis Cup (2 out of 3 possible ties), the Olympics, and the ATP finals. Excluding the Olympics as it didn't give any ranking points, and the Hopman Cup (exhibition); Murray entered 17 countable tournaments - which is actually 2 less than he should have because the ATP finals is added onto your best of 18 (ie. you get 19 countable tournaments instead of 18). So Murray dropped 2 countable tournaments he should have entered, so that he could play the Hopman Cup and the Olympics. That's smart scheduling. Murray was punished for making 13 out of 14 finals from Madrid onwards; but he couldn't just not play in tournaments or he would have never been number one. He had to keep playing.

I think it might help if the ATP dropped the best-of system back down to the 14 best tournaments as then players won't feel as forced to enter so many tournaments as they currently do; Murray certainly would have dropped a few tournaments if it was only best of 14; however that goes against the commercial interests of the tournaments so it won't happen and people will keep blaming the players.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top