Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know a lot of people don't like the third place match at the World Cup. I don't know about you, but when we get to the last day of each slam, I wish there were more matches to watch. Do you think adding a third place match between two loser semi-finalists would be good for fans? I am sure they can add points for a win or more money to play the match and entertain the crowd. It might not mean a lot to the top 4, but for young guys who made it to the semis, that's another match at a slam and more experience. What do you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
First thing you have said I can agree with.

Preferably just before the Finals .. to get the crowd going !
I know tennis players just want to win the tournament, but it'd be great for the crowd, more money for players, ... I don't see why not. If people have time to watch Bahrami or those other doubles players play, why not a third place match? Not everyone will be hungry for it, but so what? I think coming third at Wimbledon is still a great accomplishment and whoever wins that match comes out with more confidence after a win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
No. There's doubles, junior singles and junior doubles matches that can be watched.
So for folks who love the Olympics tennis so much, I guess you don't want to see that bronze match either, right? :) I get it. There are doubles and junior singles. But they are not the same as two top players giving the crowd an "extra" match. Sort of like an appetizer before the main event.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
No. There's doubles, junior singles and junior doubles matches that can be watched.
I kind of agree about this (although I don't follow Junior matches) and it does kind of beat the elimination style of the game, although I think there are other "knockout ladder" sports that do have a 3rd Place Match due to them having medals given. However, an additional match does seem fun, and like a consolation match for those who lost before and was affected by a "bad draw". For me it means more main tour matches of course so I am OK with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I kind of agree about this (although I don't follow Junior matches) and it does kind of beat the elimination style of the game, although I think there are other "knockout ladder" sports that do have a 3rd Place Match due to them having medals given. However, an additional match does seem fun, and like a consolation match for those who lost before and was affected by a "bad draw". For me it means more main tour matches of course so I am OK with it.
I don't know about you, but I would have loved to see Dimitrov vs. Raonic here at Wimbledon. I mean, it's probably not going to happen. But one more match involving two top players at slams only wouldn't kill anybody, I don't think. I suppose organizers can always mess it up, so there is that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,211 Posts
There's one World Cup every four years, a chance for some of the squad players to get some playing time on the big stage and have a month off afterwards. It's a match where teams loosen up given they have little to play for and often provides end-to-end entertainment. I doubt a third place Slam match could recreate the same spirit. The players are mentally fatigued, quite probably physically fatigued, and have to return to the grind of training and the tour. Additionally, as a general rule, there isn't a cagey element of the tactics in a Slam final because you can't set out to contain your opponent same way you can in football. For these reasons, I don't think such a thing would really be popular among players, even if there were rankings points up for grabs. You mention the Olympic Bronze but it would be near impossible to invent a third place trophy and bestow upon it the same sort of prestige - i.e an Olympic medal is prestigious because it's an Olympic medal, not because it's about coming in the top three.

Do you envisage such an event being three or five sets?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
I don't know about you, but I would have loved to see Dimitrov vs. Raonic here at Wimbledon. I mean, it's probably not going to happen. But one more match involving two top players at slams only wouldn't kill anybody, I don't think. I suppose organizers can always mess it up, so there is that.
I would like that too! Just saying, that it beats the knockout style of "once you're out, you're out", in which a player was given another chance to play. Then again, the said could be said with dead rubbers on DC or WTF so I agree an additional incentive of points inbetween SF and F seems nice and to see if you could defeat the other potential finalist (that also lost).
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
There's one World Cup every four years, a chance for some of the squad players to get some playing time on the big stage and have a month off afterwards. It's a match where teams loosen up given they have little to play for and often provides end-to-end entertainment. I doubt a third place Slam match could recreate the same spirit. The players are mentally fatigued, quite probably fatigued, and have to return to the grind of training and the tour. Additionally, as a general rule, there isn't a cagey element of the tactics in a Slam final because you can't set out to contain your opponent same way you can in football. For these reasons, I don't think such a thing would really be popular among players, even if there were rankings points up for grabs. You mention the Olympic Bronze but it would be near impossible to invent a third place trophy and bestow upon it the same sort of prestige - i.e an Olympic medal is prestigious because it's an Olympic medal, not because it's about coming in the top three.

Do you envisage such an event being three or five sets?
I was thinking about this that there are practically 3 "earners" in an Olympic tournament, only that each of them have different values, while in other tournaments only one "earns" a prize -- a trophy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,101 Posts
There's one World Cup every four years, a chance for some of the squad players to get some playing time on the big stage and have a month off afterwards. It's a match where teams loosen up given they have little to play for and often provides end-to-end entertainment. I doubt a third place Slam match could recreate the same spirit. The players are mentally fatigued, quite probably fatigued, and have to return to the grind of training and the tour. Additionally, as a general rule, there isn't a cagey element of the tactics in a Slam final because you can't set out to contain your opponent same way you can in football. For these reasons, I don't think such a thing would really be popular among players, even if there were rankings points up for grabs. You mention the Olympic Bronze but it would be near impossible to invent a third place trophy and bestow upon it the same sort of prestige - i.e an Olympic medal is prestigious because it's an Olympic medal, not because it's about coming in the top three.

Do you envisage such an event being three or five sets?
I think it makes more sense when you have the added motivation of playing for your country etc... and it still feels a bit weird then honestly, the exception being the olympic bronze which has a level of prestige you can't duplicate by just adding a match to the end of a tennis tournament. Just my opinion but I don't think there's any need for it and not much interest in it, I don't think finishing 3rd/4th at Wimbledon would be any different to these guys than being semifinalists, and sticking in a match between two deflated, unmotivated players in the midst of all the intensity and pressure of the finals would be weird.

Basically agree with everything you said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,211 Posts
I was thinking about this that there are practically 3 "earners" in an Olympic tournament, only that each of them have different values, while in other tournaments only one "earns" a prize -- a trophy.
Yeah. I actually think to most Olympic athletes the difference between Bronze and Silver is pretty slim in terms of prestige - obviously depending to some extent on the individual sport. Actually in tennis/boxing for instance Bronze is almost preferable because you end with a win in your last match...
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
I think it makes more sense when you have the added motivation of playing for your country etc... and it still feels a bit weird then honestly, the exception being the olympic bronze which has a level of prestige you can't duplicate by just adding a match to the end of a tennis tournament. Just my opinion but I don't think there's any need for it and not much interest in it, I don't think finishing 3rd/4th at Wimbledon would be any different to these guys than being semifinalists, and sticking in a match between two deflated, unmotivated players in the midst of all the intensity and pressure of the finals would be weird.
I agree about also that the World Cup is a international tournament, not a professional one. It is pitting players of countries vs. countries, unlike professional leagues that could have players from different countries. Wonder if they could try it on Davis Cup?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,101 Posts
Re: davis cup, I mean it's a good idea, but it's already hard enough to get top players to play.

To me world cup 3rd place game still feels like a bit of an exhibition, like none of the top countries care about finishing 3rd, however it's not terrible. I think Olympics is a whole different ball game.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,063 Posts
Re: davis cup, I mean it's a good idea, but it's already hard enough to get top players to play.

To me world cup 3rd place game still feels like a bit of an exhibition, like none of the top countries care about finishing 3rd, however it's not terrible. I think Olympics is a whole different ball game.
Actually, it might be not bad to give the lower ranked players of that country additional points if they participate on the 3rd Place Rubbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
So for folks who love the Olympics tennis so much, I guess you don't want to see that bronze match either, right? :) I get it. There are doubles and junior singles. But they are not the same as two top players giving the crowd an "extra" match. Sort of like an appetizer before the main event.
The Olympics are different in that you actually play for something. In a slam event what would it be? an "I came 3rd" award. I can't see any player wanting to participate in that. If they lose a semi they want to get the hell out of there as soon as possible. Having watched the World Cup 3rd place play off match numerous times, both teams look like they would much rather be somewhere else. They score goals without celebrating, and they look like people who won the lottery but lost the tickets, being forced to stay an extra few days in a tournament they can no longer win and made to wallow in their own self pity rather than going home and getting their ego's masssaged.

"Look, i know you just missed out on playing in the final, you're probably devastated and you want to go bury your head in a vat of depression, but do you fancy playing another match just so the crowd can have more fun?"

Nah, never going to happen. It's also meaningless, i would struggle without looking online to remember who won the 3rd place play off in any World Cup, let alone the most recent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
581 Posts
Well, you have to give a number of ATP points worth for the players to fight for it.

Something in the lines of 720 points for the loser (which is what they currently get for making the semis) and in between semi and runner-up for the third place ( 1200 + 720 = 1920 / 2 = 960 points). That would be a match worth 240 ATP points, basically equivalent of a 250 title. I can see the likes of Dimitrov and Raonic fighting for that. Federer, Djokovic or Nadal would obviously have a harder time finding motivation. But I think it would be more interesting than the doubles final, and more interesting than the 3rd place match in a World Cup, which really is worth nothing.

I'm not sure about it, but they could give it a try and see if it works. I think I would watch.
 
1 - 20 of 69 Posts
Top