PDA

View Full Version : Ivanovic and Radwanska also protesting against WTA Tournament Rules


youizahoe
Oct 21st, 2008, 07:29 PM
Unrest over 2009 WTA playing commitments

By Barry Wood

LINZ, Austria, Oct 21 (Reuters) - French Open champion Ana Ivanovic (http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/players/998/) and Polish number one Agnieszka Radwanska (http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/players/3928/;_ylt=Ahqenl81iAeEx1aGwtkDM1Mpv7YF) have called on their fellow players to band together and fight new rules that limit where they can play in 2009.

Although part of the WTA’s new Roadmap is designed to reduce the number of tournaments and shorten the season, it also dictates that top 10 players must compete in at least 10 of the 20 Premier events - previously known as Tier 1 and 2 tournaments - and the four grand slams. All of the top 10 players must play the tournaments held at Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid and Beijing.

“We do have our voice and we have to come together,” Ivanovic said at the Linz Open. “The changes were made in the middle of the season and when you’re playing grand slams you don’t really want to think about next year’s schedule.

“Many players probably didn’t look deep into it and kind of let it go, and all of a sudden you’re there with the change so it’s a little bit hard. We’re all in the same position so we have to talk more between us.

“I do believe it’s going to be a lot of tournaments we have to commit to and it’s maybe going to be a little bit harder in that sense. We don’t have much opportunity to choose, and at the end of the day it might be that we play more matches than we did in previous years.

“I think it’s good that tournaments will have guaranteed players and week after week have top players competing against each other. I think that’s good for women’s tennis. But on us individually it’s tough to say what impact it’s going to have.”

Radwanska is particularly unhappy that she will not be allowed to play the smaller tournaments, previously known as Tier 3 and 4 events and now re-named as the International series.

“After the new rules with the WTA I don’t want to be top 10 because the rules are so bad and everything is for the WTA,” she protested. “I cannot play the small tournaments and it’s quite bad. I hate these rules. I can play just two small tournaments a year.

“We’re all saying this, but the WTA is doing everything for themselves, for the sponsors, but they don’t realise we have to choose where we want to play and not want to play.” (Editing by Justin Palmer)

youizahoe
Oct 21st, 2008, 07:34 PM
Link : http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=AqjgoRUwou39Z.sOfI19ZYM4v7YF?slug=reu-womenlinz&prov=reuters&type=lgns

ElusiveChanteuse
Oct 21st, 2008, 07:42 PM
:spit: Aga :unsure: Top 10 player must live it to their expectation.:hug: 2 small tournaments is already enough for you.:shrug: Anyway, still love you :kiss:
Ana :worship:

ivanban
Oct 21st, 2008, 08:09 PM
Aga :lol: :spit: So....she don't want to play big tournys cause thinks it's too hard for her?!!! :help:

Being allowed to play 2 tournys of Tier3 and Tier4 category is quite enough for top10 player, right?!!! :shrug:

Shvedbarilescu
Oct 21st, 2008, 08:39 PM
Gee. I really would prefer it if Aga did only play two smaller level tournaments. Got to admit if Aga is only able to play two tournaments at below what is now called Tier I & II level I won't be upset. If it was O tournaments that would be different. I do think that the top players should be able to play down a couple times a year but two such tournaments seems about right to me. :shrug:

In The Zone
Oct 21st, 2008, 08:57 PM
Awh Aga. I understand her point but it comes off as .... :spit:

LCS
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:16 PM
:spit: Radwanksa. If you can't take the heat just stay out of the kitchen!

CooCooCachoo
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:26 PM
:rolls:

HenryMag.
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:31 PM
I think Aga is right. Maybe there are 3/4 small tourneys where she loves to play and now she just can play at 2. And I think the players should play wherever they want to do it.

laurie
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:34 PM
:spit: Radwanksa. If you can't take the heat just stay out of the kitchen!

This is exactly what I've been saying for a while. Next year there will be literally no hiding place as the top players will have to play eachother much more often than they would probably like. With the increase in prize money comes increase in responsibility.

At the same time, the top 10 can potentially become a closed shop with players outside finding it more difficult to get in than before (which I'm not sure is a good thing).

All of a sudden the players are seeing the real implications of the changes.

gumoll
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:37 PM
so far 3 top ten players are against?

Safina, Ivanovic and Radwanska...

:p

ViennaCalling
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:37 PM
I like Aga but you don´t belong in the Top 10 if you just want to play smaller tournaments where your opponents are ranked in the 20´s till 70´s :help: She is the opposite of Tamira who (dumb, dumb, dumb) even in the worst slump just plays Tier I and Tier II-tournaments (so did she in the first half of the season) and always lost in the first round there :o

Therefore this new rule is a good idea :yeah:

Shvedbarilescu
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:40 PM
This is exactly what I've been saying for a while. Next year there will be literally no hiding place as the top players will have to play eachother much more often than they would probably like. With the increase in prize money comes increase in responsibility.

At the same time, the top 10 can potentially become a closed shop with players outside finding it more difficult to get in than before (which I'm not sure is a good thing).

All of a sudden the players are seeing the real implications of the changes.

That is my concern too. We will see if it is justified next year I guess. :shrug:

gumoll
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:40 PM
I like Aga but you don´t belong in the Top 10 if you just want to play smaller tournaments where your opponents are ranked in the 20´s till 70´s :help: She is the opposite of Tamira who (dumb, dumb, dumb) even in the worst slump just plays Tier I and Tier II-tournaments (so did she in the first half of the season) and always lost in the first round there :o

Therefore this new rule is a good idea :yeah:

she was playing only one smaller tournament when she entered top 10 :shrug:

FORZA SARITA
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:42 PM
so Aga wants to lose tomorrow?:p

ViennaCalling
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:43 PM
she was playing only one smaller tournament when she entered top 10 :shrug:

Then forget what i said :tape:

Although there are not that many Tier III tournaments during the Hardcourt season :p


.

gumoll
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:46 PM
so Aga wants to lose tomorrow?:p
nope :p

Vincey!
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:46 PM
so far 3 top ten players are against?

Safina, Ivanovic and Radwanska...

:p

Wasn't Sharapova against those rules too, it was kinda the reason why she didn't want to make that photoshoot at Rome...Right??? I don'T remember though, but I'm pretty sure she was or would be against those rules :p

KBdoubleu
Oct 21st, 2008, 09:57 PM
Wasn't Sharapova against those rules too, it was kinda the reason why she didn't want to make that photoshoot at Rome...Right??? I don'T remember though, but I'm pretty sure she was or would be against those rules :p

Nope. Sharapova was "asked" to do a photoshoot/commercial before the Italian Open. Sharapova turned down the WTA because she didn't want the distraction before the tournament. The WTA then said they would fine her $300,000 is she didn't do the shoot. So she did the commercial, and had one of the smallest parts because she complained so her day was shortened in comparison to all the other top players.

Danči Dementia
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:01 PM
Aga :rolls:

LudwigDvorak
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:02 PM
I like the idea of the top ten becoming more exclusive, with the members of that ten meeting each other far more often. I do have plenty of issues with the schedule/calendar, but that basic premise is one that I fully support. I suppose they just aren't executing it well. Is it even possible to have players play whatever events they want and still have more meetings between the top ten?

woosey
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:05 PM
i can imagine that not being able to play more smaller tournaments can hurt someone who may be temporarily struggling with her game or at least trying to re-tune it.

i kinda also think it's unfortunate for smaller tournaments that may have been the beneficiaries of folks like venus turning up to play.

on the other hand, it's good that the top players will have to confront each other more often. at least if i go to a tournament, i'll pretty much be more assured that people will show up.

MarieC
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:05 PM
Aga's argument is kind of weak. She's basically saying that she rather beat players who aren't as good as her, and not challenge herself instead of playing top 10 players and improve her game. Kind of a pathetic argument or maybe she's just afraid of getting a constant beatdown from the top 10.

Ana of the other hand I believe if worried about the fatigue factor. She expressed on her site a month ago that she wan't happy with the schedule in Jan/Feb, and in May due to the mandtory conscutive tournaments

LCS
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:07 PM
This is exactly what I've been saying for a while. Next year there will be literally no hiding place as the top players will have to play eachother much more often than they would probably like. With the increase in prize money comes increase in responsibility.At the same time, the top 10 can potentially become a closed shop with players outside finding it more difficult to get in than before (which I'm not sure is a good thing).

All of a sudden the players are seeing the real implications of the changes.


:worship:

schorsch
Oct 21st, 2008, 10:38 PM
Well, even though Aga's pt is not that strong, there are plenty players out there who don't just go to minor tournaments, because they dont want to face top players or just coz they want to gain points, but because they like those tournaments and want to improve their games where it doesnt matter too much and where the possibility of playing more matches is higher. Plus it gives them more confidence and comfort to play their best in bigger tournaments and most of the time they are the kind of players who just love playing a lot of tennis.

Currently in the top10 Aga and Vera are the best examples for this. If they cant go to the other tournaments they might not do as well on the bigger stage as well...

The other example is just "liking" that tournament -> Sharapova and Birmingham for example. She just loves that tournament very very much. But for her two minor tournas are enough to cover that and maybe some other commitment that would go well for her sponsors, so that she could have that out of her way as well. (Just as an example)

Now there are two factors here that might be important:

-> If the bigger tournaments pay more money, invest in better facilities, do more for a good tourna etc -> they would love the idea of them being the main tournas that can have the biggest names, right? I mean, the near exclusivity of the top10 translates into $$$ for them especially when they all meet in the latter stages of the tournament and play some great matches.
If the minor tournaments got many of the top10 as well just like the main tournas, the main tourna directors would i guess feel hard done by.

BUT - because there IS the type of player like Aga and Vera I think there should be some kind of clause for the top10 players that they could add more minor tournas as long as that doesnt interfere with their commitments as top players -> thus if they want to add a minor tournament to those 2 they can play they have to make sure they are gonna play at the bigger stage maybe the following week as well unless big injury prevents them from doing so. Also maybe the perfomance at that bigger stage might be weighed in. Like if you do well at three extra tournaments, but lose 1st round in a row on the bigger stage (especially when it looks like a tank everytime, or ret. or some big upsets), that the next time you'd have to play the bigger tournament only. Something like that. I dont know just to be able to juggle between the minor and bigger tournaments so that there is a balance of what the sponsors want and what the players want. In the end of the day it just simply CANT always be in favour of the player, we dont always get what we want in our jobs as well. Certain commitments and needs must be met, but the players have got to be protected as well, so something like what i described before as a compromise could maybe be figured out.

youizahoe
Oct 21st, 2008, 11:26 PM
Serena Venus Maria all don't agree with the new rules.

schorsch
Oct 21st, 2008, 11:32 PM
sources sylar?

p.s.
maybe you can rip open larry scott's head sometime soon so that we finally know what the heck goes on in there :p hopefully he doesnt have Claire's powers.

youizahoe
Oct 21st, 2008, 11:36 PM
sources sylar?

p.s.
maybe you can rip open larry scott's head sometime soon so that we finally know what the heck goes on in there :p hopefully he doesnt have Claire's powers.

Perhaps I'll find a tiny monkey in it, eating his own flees :p

I heard Serena and Venus saying they'd just boycot it if they were forced to play IW and they would even get the WTA in court to get their way.

Richie's
Oct 21st, 2008, 11:46 PM
these rules don't feet at all... for players like sharapova, ivanovic (and past henin) and some others... who choose 13-16 tournaments a year... it's a problem.... But i think the rules are fair...
I do not think that TOP 50 players and specially Top 10 and Top 20 want to miss a 4.5 million dollar tournaments... or 1 mil. or 2.2... In his way, there is room for youngest and low ranked players to earn more money from International tournaments and collect some titles...

Richie's
Oct 21st, 2008, 11:48 PM
I thhink Top playes will start losing their titles and money... that's why they "hate" the new rules... Don't wonna share titles and money???????

Slutiana
Oct 21st, 2008, 11:53 PM
The way Aga puts it is bad (:rolls:) but from the tournament's point of views, this is gonna fuck them up so badly. I.e Memphis Tier III which this year attracted Venus, Tati and Lindsay. They just won't survive without the big names.

starin
Oct 22nd, 2008, 12:41 AM
it's kinda ridiculous the restrictions. cuz all top players have a smaller tournament they love or would rather play as opposed to a bigger tournament. Makes sense for the tour but not for the top 10. I think this could lead to some really wonky ranking situations next year unless the points for the mandatory events for top 10 go up significantly higher.

anyways this has been discussed to death already. but interesting to hear players are not happy with the schedule.

goldenlox
Oct 22nd, 2008, 12:54 AM
These A tournaments are for more than the top 10. It's normal size fields. If a player has a real good week, they might lose in round 1 the next week and have Wednesday-Sunday off.
I'm interested to see how it plays out

DutchieGirl
Oct 22nd, 2008, 12:59 AM
:lol: Finally the players are waking up. ;)

sammy01
Oct 22nd, 2008, 01:36 AM
aga's point is very valid, she likes to play a lot of tennis and builds her confidence through winning a lot of matches, serena and venus are the opposite they like to be lightly raced. its these 2 groups that will suffer. as venus and serena will have to over play and aga, vera, jj who like match practice will have to play less.
to me it seems stupid to me to tell 'the players' who know themselves best how many tournaments to play and where!

the more i think about the calender the more i dislike it, it assumes every top 10 player has the same way of getting there and going about their career.

pov
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:09 AM
top 10 players must compete in at least 10 of the 20 Premier events - previously known as Tier 1 and 2 tournaments - and the four grand slams.
I support that completely. I can understand why players would complain as A/ maybe they do have smaller tournaments that they like and B/ as someone else posted - they won't be able to avoid top-level competition all the time.

pov
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:14 AM
the more i think about the calender the more i dislike it, it assumes every top 10 player has the same way of getting there and going about their career.
Give me a break! Every top-10 player is more than financially able to get to any tournament anywhere in lavish comfort. These players have been too coddled for too long. The standardization of the new calendar will make the rankings far more of an accurate gauge.

sammy01
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:24 AM
Give me a break! Every top-10 player is more than financially able to get to any tournament anywhere in lavish comfort. These players have been too coddled for too long. The standardization of the new calendar will make the rankings far more of an accurate gauge.

:confused: seriously what the hell did you read, cus it wasn't my post? what i mean is aga and vera probably have more top 10 wins this year than venus, aga and vera do this by playing more and giving themselves the best shot of beating the top players by being match tough and fit. venus likes to save herself so shes fresh when she takes on the top players.

you can't make these 2 different type of players have the same schedule as they will both suffer for different reasons. aga and vera won't be as confident or match tough, and venus will be over played and tierd.

as i said the top 10 players are their because they know themselves and how much they should or shouldn't play, to make them all play the same schedule and amount of events is stupid and counterproductive.

Wtrain
Oct 22nd, 2008, 05:56 AM
Give me a break! Every top-10 player is more than financially able to get to any tournament anywhere in lavish comfort. These players have been too coddled for too long. The standardization of the new calendar will make the rankings far more of an accurate gauge.

Some how I don't think that's what they mean....

DutchieGirl
Oct 22nd, 2008, 06:45 AM
Give me a break! Every top-10 player is more than financially able to get to any tournament anywhere in lavish comfort. These players have been too coddled for too long. The standardization of the new calendar will make the rankings far more of an accurate gauge.
:spit: He meant that players take different "routes" to get into the top 10 - nothing about money or mode of transport. :lol:

Shvedbarilescu
Oct 22nd, 2008, 07:49 AM
:confused: seriously what the hell did you read, cus it wasn't my post? what i mean is aga and vera probably have more top 10 wins this year than venus, aga and vera do this by playing more and giving themselves the best shot of beating the top players by being match tough and fit. venus likes to save herself so shes fresh when she takes on the top players.

you can't make these 2 different type of players have the same schedule as they will both suffer for different reasons. aga and vera won't be as confident or match tough, and venus will be over played and tierd.

as i said the top 10 players are their because they know themselves and how much they should or shouldn't play, to make them all play the same schedule and amount of events is stupid and counterproductive.

Great post.

CanadianBoy21
Oct 22nd, 2008, 08:09 AM
if the top ten just made a decision and say 'we are not playing until you change these rule', they would have sooo much impact... but two or three doesn't change ANYTHING. As it is, the WTA knows how to pull their strings, because the top ten will almost NEVER agree.

ivanban
Oct 22nd, 2008, 09:29 AM
what i mean is aga and vera probably have more top 10 wins this year than venus, aga and vera do this by playing more and giving themselves the best shot of beating the top players by being match tough and fit. venus likes to save herself so shes fresh when she takes on the top players.

Aga certainly didn't had those top10 wins at some weak Tier3 or Tier4 tournys

you can't make these 2 different type of players have the same schedule as they will both suffer for different reasons. aga and vera won't be as confident or match tough, and venus will be over played and tierd.

Idk what does Vera has to do with Aga. Bepa isn't afraid to play big tournys and, in fact, is doing quite good there. If someone isn't capable of doing good at big tournys then that someone don't deserve to be in top10.
If someone isn't capable to play more than 15 tournys per year, then he/she should maybe search for a new job. It's a bit ridiculous that someone who is considered as one of the best in some sport can't even sustain to play for half of the year :tape:

as i said the top 10 players are their because they know themselves and how much they should or shouldn't play, to make them all play the same schedule and amount of events is stupid and counterproductive.

This is sport, and their job is to play. If someone wants to rest more than to play, then he/she doesn't deserve to be in top10 or whatever :shrug:

DutchieGirl
Oct 22nd, 2008, 09:50 AM
Idk what does Vera has to do with Aga. Bepa isn't afraid to play big tournys and, in fact, is doing quite good there. If someone isn't capable of doing good at big tournys then that someone don't deserve to be in top10.
If someone isn't capable to play more than 15 tournys per year, then he/she should maybe search for a new job. It's a bit ridiculous that someone who is considered as one of the best in some sport can't even sustain to play for half of the year :tape:



I think he was pointing out that both Vera and Aga play LOTS of tourneys. Where did he actually say no one should play more tourneys? He was saying if players WANT to play more (and also if they want to play more smaller tourneys) then they should be allowed to, and being in the top 10 shouldn't restrict that, which is will do as of next year.

But he was also pointing out that there are some players ie Williams sisters who don't feel the NEED to play so many tourneys and don't feel the NEED to play "tune up" tourneys they feel they can go out and play and win without having to play some weeks before the big tourneys. I think you read what he said slightly off. He was just saying that the players should have the choice. ;)

Harvs
Oct 22nd, 2008, 09:54 AM
its shit... players should play where they want, when they want.

DutchieGirl
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:00 AM
...;14288175']its shit... players should play where they want, when they want.
Amen. ;)

sammy01
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:00 AM
Aga certainly didn't had those top10 wins at some weak Tier3 or Tier4 tournys



Idk what does Vera has to do with Aga. Bepa isn't afraid to play big tournys and, in fact, is doing quite good there. If someone isn't capable of doing good at big tournys then that someone don't deserve to be in top10.
If someone isn't capable to play more than 15 tournys per year, then he/she should maybe search for a new job. It's a bit ridiculous that someone who is considered as one of the best in some sport can't even sustain to play for half of the year :tape:



This is sport, and their job is to play. If someone wants to rest more than to play, then he/she doesn't deserve to be in top10 or whatever :shrug:

why are people totaly missing the point. aga and vera play down a level somtimes because their on the fringe of the top and playing and winning some tier 3's is just what they need to keep up their momentum and match toughness. their schedules will never be the same as sharapova or venus as their different types of players and get to the top 10 by a different route. vera and aga are most dangerous when they have confidence from winning matches and having played a lot of tennis. venus and maria are best when they are lightly raced and physicaly not over worked. to make these 4 players have the same schedule is beyond stupid, as they all aren't the same type of player but the roadmap is lumping all top 10 players as the same.

DutchieGirl
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:03 AM
why are people totaly missing the point. aga and vera play down a level somtimes because their on the fringe of the top and playing and winning some tier 3's is just what they need to keep up their momentum and match toughness. their schedules will never be the same as sharapova or venus as their different types of players and get to the top 10 by a different route. vera and aga are most dangerous when they have confidence from winning matches and having played a lot of tennis. venus and maria are best when they are lightly raced and physicaly not over worked. to make these 4 players have the same schedule is beyond stupid, as they all aren't the same type of player but the roadmap is lumping all top 10 players as the same.
I get your point - it's a good one. ;)

ivanban
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:10 AM
why are people totaly missing the point. aga and vera play down a level somtimes because their on the fringe of the top and playing and winning some tier 3's is just what they need to keep up their momentum and match toughness. their schedules will never be the same as sharapova or venus as their different types of players and get to the top 10 by a different route. vera and aga are most dangerous when they have confidence from winning matches and having played a lot of tennis. venus and maria are best when they are lightly raced and physicaly not over worked. to make these 4 players have the same schedule is beyond stupid, as they all aren't the same type of player but the roadmap is lumping all top 10 players as the same.

Well yeah, I guess you're right.
But still, IMO top10 player shouldn't waste much energy for Tier3 tournys. Two of such tournys are quite enough, plus there are a lot of Tier1 and Tier2 tournys, so they can still play often if they want

Louis Cyphre
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:20 AM
I agree that these are reasonable arguments BUT in fact they take millions of $$$ every year and you have responsibilities after all. There is too much princess and far less professional tennis players in the Top10. You cannot expect someone to make a tournament , find sponsors that gives millions of $$$ , then people are buying tickets just to see the top players and then... Oooops , I broke my nail or I feel that i`m a little bit tired or some other stupid excuse just to withdraw in the last moment. Honey they give you millions , you have to give something to the people , sometimes its hard but that is why you take that money after all. Just do your job and stop acting like a little girls :kiss:

DutchieGirl
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:43 AM
I agree that these are reasonable arguments BUT in fact they take millions of $$$ every year and you have responsibilities after all. There is too much princess and far less professional tennis players in the Top10. You cannot expect someone to make a tournament , find sponsors that gives millions of $$$ , then people are buying tickets just to see the top players and then... Oooops , I broke my nail or I feel that i`m a little bit tired or some other stupid excuse just to withdraw in the last moment. Honey they give you millions , you have to give something to the people , sometimes its hard but that is why you take that money after all. Just do your job and stop acting like a little girls :kiss:
I don't think either of them said they didn't want to play the bigger tourneys. Aga just wanted to be able to play MORE THAN 2 smaller tourneys if she is in the top 10, and Ana was sceptical about the scheduling of the big tourneys. But these aren't the only issues, and some players just don't want to play certain tourneys.

I don't like mandatory tourneys at all, and I don't like having IW and Miami back to back mandatories, but you are right, that the girls need to stop pulling out at the last minute too.

Louis Cyphre
Oct 22nd, 2008, 10:53 AM
I don't think either of them said they didn't want to play the bigger tourneys. Aga just wanted to be able to play MORE THAN 2 smaller tourneys if she is in the top 10, and Ana was sceptical about the scheduling of the big tourneys. But these aren't the only issues, and some players just don't want to play certain tourneys.

I don't like mandatory tourneys at all, and I don't like having IW and Miami back to back mandatories, but you are right, that the girls need to stop pulling out at the last minute too.

I was speaking in general , not about Aga and Ana . I don't like mandatory tournaments too but since the girls are doing whatever they want without thinking about anything else expect themselves ... And again I`m speaking in general. I agree that sometimes a player is injured and can`t play but most of the times these are fake injuries and its not fair to the people who buy tickets and the people who give the money for the tournament.


But WTA didnt make things perfect ;) I remember Safina complaining that in Moscow only 2 players can participate and if these are Jankovic and Serena (for example) the other Russian players can`t participate in their home tournament ... And there is usually at least 5 Russian players in Top10. Which is ridiculous decision by WTA :help: Something is wrong with the rules but there must be some change

youizahoe
Oct 22nd, 2008, 11:55 AM
I think no matter how you view it, their reasons are valid, and the top players keep the smaller tournaments alive.

Who's gonna watch tennis of players that aren't near top level?

fester
Oct 22nd, 2008, 12:12 PM
The way Aga puts it is bad (:rolls:) but from the tournament's point of views, this is gonna fuck them up so badly. I.e Memphis Tier III which this year attracted Venus, Tati and Lindsay. They just won't survive without the big names.

The example you used with Memphis doesn’t work as there is no problem. Memphis can have all of the “top” players that you mentioned. Venus as a top 10 could play it as her international for that ½ of the year. Golovin and Davenport are not Top 20 so the rules won’t affect them. Most lower tier tournaments only have 1 top 10 player or 3 top 20 players maximum anyway.

InsideOut.
Oct 22nd, 2008, 12:35 PM
I think no matter how you view it, their reasons are valid, and the top players keep the smaller tournaments alive.

Who's gonna watch tennis of players that aren't near top level?

Exactly. This is definitely a reason top players should be able to play more smaller tournaments as well. You have big sponsors for big tournaments, but you're kiling off the smaller ones.

Ana :worship: Thought she would be an innocent good girl and stay quiet. :lol: Glad she decided to speak out. :)

CJ07
Oct 22nd, 2008, 02:02 PM
...;14288175']its shit... players should play where they want, when they want.
Free market baby

DA FOREHAND
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:35 PM
Aga's argument is kind of weak. She's basically saying that she rather beat players who aren't as good as her, and not challenge herself instead of playing top 10 players and improve her game. Kind of a pathetic argument or maybe she's just afraid of getting a constant beatdown from the top 10.

Ana of the other hand I believe if worried about the fatigue factor. She expressed on her site a month ago that she wan't happy with the schedule in Jan/Feb, and in May due to the mandtory conscutive tournaments

No that's not what she's basically saying! She plays for herself, and would like to play where she enjoys playing. Nothing wrong with that. She is hardly intimidated by top players; her toes were practically on the service line against Maria at the US Open.

With that said I think it's in the WTA's interest for the top player to meet more often, and as a fan we get to see more great matchups outside of the Grand Slam events.

AndreConrad
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:50 PM
I think Agnieszka's problem is that she has sentiment for some of the tournaments (including probably the one in Poland) and she's being told she will not be able to play them all.

TheBoiledEgg
Oct 22nd, 2008, 04:54 PM
next thing Larry Twat and co will think of is make the top ten players play home and away, and have pts for a win :lol:

Elwin.
Oct 22nd, 2008, 05:48 PM
Aga :weirdo: :haha:

When you're a top10 player you shouldn't play tier III/Tier IV tournaments. Aga is too good to play tier III and Tier IV's.
Her level is at the Tier I/II

Agata.
Oct 22nd, 2008, 06:00 PM
I think Agnieszka's problem is that she has sentiment for some of the tournaments (including probably the one in Poland) and she's being told she will not be able to play them all.

I agree, I think that she'd like to play in for example both Istanbul & Warsaw, she seems to like this tournaments, it's about good memories connected with them. I highly doubt Aga plays Tier III/IV tournament to get easy points, as Tomek said earlier, after getting to the Top10 she's only played one smaller tournament :yeah:

I also don't like the new rules, I wish to have some top players in Warsaw next year ;)

pov
Oct 22nd, 2008, 06:39 PM
:confused: seriously what the hell did you read, cus it wasn't my post? what i mean is aga and vera probably have more top 10 wins this year than venus, aga and vera do this by playing more and giving themselves the best shot of beating the top players by being match tough and fit. venus likes to save herself so shes fresh when she takes on the top players.

you can't make these 2 different type of players have the same schedule as they will both suffer for different reasons. aga and vera won't be as confident or match tough, and venus will be over played and tierd.

as i said the top 10 players are their because they know themselves and how much they should or shouldn't play, to make them all play the same schedule and amount of events is stupid and counterproductive.
Apologies for misinterpreting your post. I see your reasoning here and I don't think those points are the way to design a tour. Have a circuit, have players play mostly the same events and that's it.

terjw
Oct 22nd, 2008, 08:37 PM
I don't think either of them said they didn't want to play the bigger tourneys. Aga just wanted to be able to play MORE THAN 2 smaller tourneys if she is in the top 10, and Ana was sceptical about the scheduling of the big tourneys. But these aren't the only issues, and some players just don't want to play certain tourneys.

I don't like mandatory tourneys at all, and I don't like having IW and Miami back to back mandatories, but you are right, that the girls need to stop pulling out at the last minute too.

Exactly - I'm with Aga and Ana and Dinara. In fact there should be no rules saying where a player can and can't play. You can't force a player to play anywhere anyway - so that doesn't work. And forbidding those players who support the tour the most from playing some tournaments they like hurts the tour, the tournament, the fans for no reason at all where there was no problem before.

Build up the prestige tournaments - ranking points etc - so that all the top players want to play there rather than telling them like schoolchildren they must play there. Then I totally agree that players should honour their committments and take responsibility not to pull out for phoney reasons like they do now.

Anyway let's get this right:

Larry Scott has now alienated not only those who play a light schedule but those who play a full schedule and are told they can't play some extra tournaments they like to play in.
He's alienated some smaller tournaments and fans there and told them they can't have a player that wants to play there.
He's effectively barred most if not all the top Russian players playing in their home tournament in Moscow.
When top players pull out of mandatory tournaments - he'll ban them from the next mandatory tournament so reducing that next tournament's appeal. :help:
And he's done all this withou consulting the players and getting their backing.Well done Larry :rolleyes: How to piss the whole tour off - even those who have supported the tour the most.

davidmario
Oct 22nd, 2008, 08:42 PM
aga is the martina müller of a higher level...

schorsch
Oct 22nd, 2008, 08:51 PM
aga is the martina müller of a higher level...

again i dont like aga, but even i think thats too mean a thing to say :tape:

ivanban
Oct 22nd, 2008, 09:38 PM
Anyway let's get this right:

Larry Scott has now alienated not only those who play a light schedule but those who play a full schedule and are told they can't play some extra tournaments they like to play in.
He's alienated some smaller tournaments and fans there and told them they can't have a player that wants to play there.
He's effectively barred most if not all the top Russian players playing in their home tournament in Moscow.
When top players pull out of mandatory tournaments - he'll ban them from the next mandatory tournament so reducing that next tournament's appeal. :help:
And he's done all this without consulting the players and getting their backing.Well done Larry :rolleyes: How to piss the whole tour off - even those who have supported the tour the most.

Didn't someone say that cause Moscow is played a week prior to YEC all players who want can play there?! :confused:

CloudAtlas
Oct 22nd, 2008, 09:48 PM
Isn't Moscow a premier series event next year? If so then what's the problem?

fufuqifuqishahah
Oct 23rd, 2008, 02:14 AM
they should be allowed to play FOUR (not just two) mickey mouse (tier 3 / 4) tournaments

fufuqifuqishahah
Oct 23rd, 2008, 02:37 AM
as i said the top 10 players are their because they know themselves and how much they should or shouldn't play, to make them all play the same schedule and amount of events is stupid and counterproductive.

they wouldn't be playing the same schedule. there are 20 premier tournaments (including beijing, madrid, iw, & miami) -> http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/2/global/pdfs/events/2009/TourCalendar.pdf. which means more options.

That means (provided that they have to play 10 premier tournaments), there would be an average of five top 10 players per premier tournament. if we exclude the mandatory tournaments, that's 6 premier tournaments out of 16. That would be an average of 3.75 top ten players per premier tournament, which is not that much.

however, it is still limiting, since they can only play two small tournaments and are forced to play 10 premier tournaments. now that i realize that players are forced to play 10 premier tournaments, I think top 10 players should be allowed to play a maximum of four to six smaller tournaments (earlier i said four), if they want to. That would equal 20 tournaments + YEC (if they make it) = 21. Any top ten player who wants to play more than 20 [21] tournaments (and there are a few that do), would have to play any of the ten remaining non-mandatory premier tournaments in which they did not play, which would raise the top ten player average in these tournaments. (Dinara, Jelena, Aga, and Vera right now are the top 10 players over 20 tournaments, with 21, 22, 23, and 24 respectively).

also, there is the question of whether 15 tournaments (10 premier tournaments + GS + YEC) is too many for top ten players. serena and venus currently have 13 (this will go up to 14 for Venus for YEC), maria has only 12 (but of course she is injured). So 15 is not too unrealistic.

i have a question. are the ranking points for all non-mandatory premier tournaments the same? and are the ranking points for all international tournaments the same too?

Robert-KimClijst
Oct 23rd, 2008, 03:06 AM
I don't necessarily like it... However, I think that it is nice that the WTA is trying something different and changing things up. We'll see how it goes. it's an experiment. We'd be complaining just as much if the WTA were doing nothing. Then players would be complaining about playing too much, too long of a schedule, etc. So we'll see. It may be a great decision and it may be a horrible idea. Either way, at least the WTA is trying to make things better. Players are always going to have something to complain about; it's not like this system was picture perfect.

Wiggly
Oct 23rd, 2008, 03:38 AM
I don't understand why the Tour is limitating the number of top players in one tournament. It makes no sense at all.

Put mandatory events avand a minimum of others tournaments you can enter and that's it. Maybe 5 International tournaments maximum (because Jelena would end up playing Doha and Bali:lol:).

Dawn Marie
Oct 23rd, 2008, 03:49 AM
Can someone tell me who is Larry Scott's boss? This guy has no vision and is destroying the confidence of these players.

joz
Oct 23rd, 2008, 04:16 AM
Sponsor guarantees/wishes cannot be ignored... they are as important as the top player's wishes!!!

DutchieGirl
Oct 23rd, 2008, 10:27 AM
Sponsor guarantees/wishes cannot be ignored... they are as important as the top player's wishes!!!
Yeah, and if the players don't play, then the sponsors are screwed too. ;)

ivanban
Oct 23rd, 2008, 12:13 PM
Yeah, and if the players don't play, then the sponsors are screwed too. ;)

Yeah, sponsors are real bastards. They provide millions of $$$ and players don't wanna play :rolleyes:

DutchieGirl
Oct 23rd, 2008, 12:28 PM
Yeah, sponsors are real bastards. They provide millions of $$$ and players don't wanna play :rolleyes:
Jesus christ trying reading my other posts in here.

I was making a slight joke - but it's true. If the players don't want to play and refuse to do so, then the sponsors are screwed. That's reality. Sorry if you don't like it. And I never said whether it was right or wrong either.

ivanban
Oct 23rd, 2008, 12:31 PM
Jesus christ trying reading my other posts in here.

I was making a slight joke - but it's true. If the players don't want to play and refuse to do so, then the sponsors are screwed. That's reality. Sorry if you don't like it. And I never said whether it was right or wrong either.

Sorry, my sarcasm-meter must be broken :lol:

DutchieGirl
Oct 23rd, 2008, 12:38 PM
Sorry, my sarcasm-meter must be broken :lol:
:lol: I'm seriously starting to think i'm gonna have to put in brackets (sarcasm) or (joke) after everything I wrote just so people don't get the wrong idea. ;)

*JR*
Oct 24th, 2008, 01:22 AM
Anyway let's get this right:

Larry Scott has now alienated not only those who play a light schedule but those who play a full schedule and are told they can't play some extra tournaments they like to play in.
He's alienated some smaller tournaments and fans there and told them they can't have a player that wants to play there.
He's effectively barred most if not all the top Russian players playing in their home tournament in Moscow.
When top players pull out of mandatory tournaments - he'll ban them from the next mandatory tournament so reducing that next tournament's appeal. :help:
And he's done all this withou consulting the players and getting their backing.Well done Larry :rolleyes: How to piss the whole tour off - even those who have supported the tour the most.
Larry Scott needs

http://www.ct.gov/dcf/lib/dcf/wmv/images/fire.jpg d

Serenita
Oct 24th, 2008, 03:08 AM
Larry Scott needs

http://www.ct.gov/dcf/lib/dcf/wmv/images/fire.jpg d
;)

Serenita
Oct 24th, 2008, 03:15 AM
Larry Scott needs

http://www.ct.gov/dcf/lib/dcf/wmv/images/fire.jpg d
;)

Shooter
Oct 24th, 2008, 06:53 AM
I think Aga is right. Maybe there are 3/4 small tourneys where she loves to play and now she just can play at 2. And I think the players should play wherever they want to do it.
I also think players should be allowed to play wherever they want. It's not good for the tour to force players to appear at certain events. They will appear, but with bad attitudes, which even inexperienced spectators can pick up on. What Aga should do is play exactly where she wants and take whatever point penalties come her way. So what if it keeps her out of the top 10? That's sort of what she wants anyway.

Shooter
Oct 24th, 2008, 06:57 AM
i kinda also think it's unfortunate for smaller tournaments that may have been the beneficiaries of folks like venus turning up to play. Of course it's bad for some of the small tournaments, particularly the small tournaments that are run well. How does a small tournament get bigger ? One way is by being run well enough to attract a strong draw. The incentive to run your tournament well has been taken away by these new WTA scheduling rules.

Malva
Oct 24th, 2008, 07:57 AM
Aga :weirdo: :haha:

When you're a top10 player you shouldn't play tier III/Tier IV tournaments. Aga is too good to play tier III and Tier IV's.
Her level is at the Tier I/II

For your information: she played only 1 (one) lower Tier tournament in the last 7 (seven) months.

I can't read her mind. I suppose she would like to play a tournament in her home country, and in addition a two, at most three, tournaments in places she particularly likes (for example because of good memories). In the past, she was sometimes disarmingly open about her preferences. I was, for example, astonished at her answer to a reporter's question in Paris: 'How did she like Roland Garros?'. Her answer was that RG was her least favorite of the four grand slams. Not very diplomatic, if sincere.

I suppose she is far from being alone in disliking some tournaments, and liking others.